Talk:To sell toys

Miscellaneous

If RiD/CR's getting kicked in the nuts for introducing 18 characters in four episodes, shouldn't someone tot up the number introduced in both the cartoon's MTMTE mini-series, and the opening issue of the Marvel comic? Because the number's more than 18... The Earthforce cycle hyping the Euro Classics probably deserves covering too, as does the proliferation of "classic" characters in later Marvel US issues due to the Action Masters (Prowl, Wheeljack, Shockwave, Starscream, Megatron, etc.)

For the exceptions section, some Marvel bits deserve a mention, surely? I'm thinking specifically of Ratchet managing to hang in there so many years after he was cancelled despite not having an Action Master or anything, and the rest of the Dinobots coming back late on and the introduction of Galvatron at such a late stage.

Cliffjumper 18:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think 18 characters in four episodes is particularly worth noting, so I'm with you on that one. I mean, the 2007 movie has 13 Transformers in it. Animated gave us ten Transformers (plus Sentinel and Magnus) in the first episode alone.

With regards to "exceptions", the notable thing about Dreamwave and IDW is that they had entire multi-issue series where none (or precious few) of the characters had extant toys. Whereas, yah, toward the end of Marvel's run, while there were a lot of major characters who hadn't had toys in a few years, the series still never went more than a year without introducing some new product. Still, it might be worth mentioning that under Furman, classic characters tended to stick around . . . JW 18:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

IMO this article's starting to get a bit long. Most of the individual paragraphs could stand to be pared down a little.

As for noting the Marvel exceptions, well.... the whole point of the article is "The fiction is under this bizarre mandate from Hasbro, which makes it do very strange things." It really doesn't make much sense to turn around and say "But once or twice, it DIDN'T do strange things!" Maybe a short note that Hasbro's mandate seems to have lightened during the Furman era, with character intros largely reduced to new guys simply popping up in the background? -- Repowers 18:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thing is, Furman didn't really use fewer current-toy guys than Budiansky. He used Grimlock a lot, but Grimlock had a Pretender toy and then an Actionmaster. Prowl and Wheeljack and Inferno showed up after the Unicron thing, but that's because they had new toys. --ItsWalky 18:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the reason for this myth is that the new toy issues are limited - 56 (Sports Car Patrol), 58 (Pretender Classics who were old characters), 60 (Rescue Patrol, Thunderwing, Decepticon 1989 Pretenders, Doubleheader, Autobot Double Targetmasters), 62 (Autobot 1988 Headmasters, Decepticon Double Targetmasters - all over a year later), 64 (Longtooth, Pincer), 67 (Monster Pretenders, Crossblades, Chainclaw) and 76 (Krok, Action Master Grimlock), which isn't that many compared to some of the worst deluges in the Budiansky era. So other than an issue focusing heavily on Cybertron and another in an alternate future the new characters tend to be a small handful each time and the Pretender Classics get a whole four part story arc to introduce them - something not seen since the earliest Budiansky days. And there are a lot of characters that Furman didn't introduce in the US comic, notably all the Micromasters bar the first five patrols.

Furman also introduced very few in the UK comic - other than Target: 2006 and a handful of stories where it's clear someone from Hasbro UK dumped a load of toys on his desk (Second Generation!, Worlds Apart!, Enemy Action!) most introductions are either one or two individual characters (e.g. City of Fear!, Out to Lunch!) or a piece designed to tie in forthcoming US stories (e.g. Prey!, The Big Shutdown!). Most introductions were left to the US comic. Timrollpickering 10:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

In general, I think this article needs to be heavily trimmed down -- it's much longer and more verbose than it needs to be to get the point across. This would be a good point to start (and we should note that Furman seems to have either shaken loose from the tightly controlling Hasbro directives that Budianski labored under, or else Furman interpreted them more freely: "Okay, I have to include the Action Master guys. Doesn't mean they have to DO anything beside stand around in the background."

Since 90% of TF fiction exists to sell toys, it's useless to point out EVERY SINGLE TIME a new toy shows up in a story; we should limit it to the times when it really, overtly forces the story to veer off in an otherwise random direction. The Pretenders' introduction is probably the best example of this. Series premiers shouldn't really count unless they're painfully flagrant; Armada frankly looked ridiculous when the "armies" on both sides consisted of a total of seven dudes. You have to have some characters to tell a story. -- Repowers 15:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, much like the Scale article, I think this one needs to be reconsidered in terms of the type of toy-selling influence, rather than just being this huge list of every time a TST effect happens. I think it breaks down pretty easily:

• bringing in large numbers of characters (TF #1, Headmasters),
• bringing in random/unrelated characters (Pretenders)
• forcing a small cast size (BW, early Armada)
• introdumps
• Gimmmicks (UT, Pretenders again)
• forcing the plot to veer off in strange directions (Pretenders yet again)
• Hi-then-dies (to avoid killing actual toy characters.)
• killing off lots of old characters (Aftermath, Underbase saga, Time Wars.)
• Dead guys brought back to life (Prime, Primal, Action Masters)
• new bodies for old guys (BW, UT) -- Repowers 15:10, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

2007 movie

Are IDW obliged to make movie comics? I was pretty sure it was mostly to make THEM money (In the Bookscan GN figures - linked in the "BOOK EM DANNO" item here - it's notable how the movie TPBs are around the #300 mark, whereas the IDWverse and Beast IDWars TPBs are nowhere to be seen. I mean, I saw movie & prequel TPBs in HMV beside the DVDs. Those are the only TPBs of any sort - Transformers or otherwise - I've ever seen in HMV).

And weren't Hasbro talking last year about becoming an IP-licensing company who made toys (in much the way Marvel Comics now makes most of its' money from areas other than comics) rather than a toy company that sometimes had licensed fiction made? - 82.10.138.152 18:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

"Are IDW obliged to make movie comics?" As the article says, we don't really know. It would certainly be my guess that they are.

"And weren't Hasbro talking last year about becoming an IP-licensing company who made toys?" I would be fascinated to hear more about this. Do you have a link? JW 18:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I *believe* I saw this in a news article (USA Today, maybe) the weekend the movie dropped, or thereabouts. -hx 21:26, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't know about the latter point, but Chris Ryall (IDW EiC) has said at the IDW forums that, although Hasbro needs to give the okay to any plans they make, they don't set any sort of quota that they must hit. They publish what they think they can sell. - SanityOrMadness 19:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Timelines Firestar/Flareup

Is that section actually relevant? To me it reads like "fan-turned-creator being over-cautious about not killing off a character who never even had a toy before". There's no explicit Hasbro mandate involved.--Nevermore 14:07, 10 October 2010 (EDT)

Prime

Is the very small cast of Decepticons in Prime because of "to sell toys" (even though they don't have toys yet) or is it more of a CGI thing? At first it was only Starscream, Soundwave, Megatron, and the Vehicons which seemed crazy small to me considering the Decepticons had the upper hand over the Autobots. - Starfield 19:22, 7 June 2011 (EDT)

"RID2015" and characters without media

Shouldn't there be mention of toys being made without appearances in the shows or comics? Also, thermidor has appeared in 5 episodes now, so is the point about him not appearing in the show still relevant? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Victinoko (talk • contribs){{#if:| {{{2}}}|}}.

Deathsaurus comic covers in 2022

The timeline for Haslab Deathsaurus (first designed the year before, when they got the final renders for Victory Saber) makes sense for his higher prominence in "War's End". Has the IDW team been specifically asked about this, and did they deny it? --Thylacine 2000 (talk) 21:36, 19 September 2023 (EDT)

As I previously stated, the timeline does not match up. Even if Deathsaurus was planned as a HasLab at the time (which he was not, as he was still planned as a retail figure for Evolution at the time according to the designers) his prevalence in Wars End was clearly an attempt to tie up a storyline that started in 2020 with Galaxies 5 and 6. His being featured on the covers is because he is the primary body Exarchon used in that comic. There's also the fact that the artists would have used a G1-based design if they were promoting the HasLab, not his IDW 2005 continuity design. Locoman agreed with me on Discord and gave permission to remove it, but Jacob got to it before I did. Paladin Denn (talk) 21:47, 19 September 2023 (EDT)

to my knowledge no, but Deathy first showed up in IDW2 WAAAAAAAAAAAY back in 2020, before HasLab VS was even a thing, and if he WAS meant to advertise the later HasLab toy his role wouldn't be as a two issue side comic villain who got norted by somebody else. Plus the whole thing of him not really looking like the HasLab in favor of the MTMTE vibe. McBaggins (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2023 (EDT)