Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)

"(WFC)" instead of "(Prime)" for characters that originated in this franchise?

If people are cool with the notion of WfC being its own franchise (and certainly I think with three forms of media, a logo/brand, a small line of toys, and arguably even multiple continuities, it counts), then our franchise-of-origin policy would dictate that we move pages like Optimus Prime (Prime) to "Optimus Prime (WFC)". It's been suggested that we should stick with "(Prime)" for all Aligned continuity family characters for the same reason that we favor "(SG)" over "(Timelines)": uniformity can be less confusing. But I think the SG situation was different, since the number of oddball articles was small and the franchise of origin wasn't obvious or intuitive. "(WFC)" would apply to a huge swath of articles, and it's crystal-clear which ones those are. So... any objections to the move? - Jackpot 12:37, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I think a better argument in favor of this would be for the fact that we use "G1" and "G2" for characters from the G1 Continuity Family depending on which portion of the franchise they debuted in, or "Armada", "Energon" and "Cybertron" for those characters from the Unicron Trilogy. That being said, though, I can't help but feel that having characters from the Prime show, where 99.999999% of their actions and personalities are established, as using (WFC) as a disambiguator, would be rather silly. --Detour 12:42, 28 February 2011 (EST)

Cryotek (RID) and Sideways (RID) are our precedents there. Choosing parantheticals based on which franchise "matters most to the character" is a slippery slope we've stayed away from in the past. - Jackpot 12:56, 28 February 2011 (EST)

Well there IS also the fact that video game tie-ins tend to use the qualifier from the franchise they tie in to, so we have Hailstorm (Armada) and not "Hailstorm (Transformers)", so I would treat WFC stuff same as that. --Detour 12:58, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I... can't quite tell what position you're going for with that one. I think you're saying that we should label WfC-game characters as "(Prime)" because the games "tie into" Prime the same way that the "Transformers" game tied into Armada. But that's not a good comparison: The "Transformers" game wasn't branded with any franchise at ALL, so we went with the one that it was clearly based on. The WfC games ARE branded with a franchise - WfC - so there's no need to look elsewhere.

And if you don't find that logic convincing, consider that lots of the WfC-game characters are also in Exodus, which is under the WfC franchise too. Plus there's the WfC comic, which also came out before Prime. So... yeah.

- Jackpot 13:46, 28 February 2011 (EST)

Why are we treating this video game as a separate franchise instead of as part of the Prime franchise? --Khajidha 19:08, 28 February 2011 (EST)

Because some people can't seem to accept they're the same franchise despite the aesthetic divergences. --Detour 19:12, 28 February 2011 (EST)

War for Cybertron really isn't a franchise. It's just a video game that has been released on multiple platforms, and each platform is a different game with the same concept. Sonic Unleashed did the same thing. Does that mean Sonic Unleashed is its own franchise? Then there's the book, and its only connection to WFC is that it says "official history of the war for Cybertron", and even then, it's really more of a Prime book. Sure, you may bring up the toys, but they were part of Generations, not branded as War for Cybertron. If it was a full toyline called "War for Cybertron", then I could understand, but it's not. --NCZ 19:19, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I am against using (WFC) unless there happens to be two undeniably different characters who happen to share the same name, one in the cartoon, one in WFC. And I'm not talking "oh they're both based on this G1 guy but look different", I mean FUNDAMENTALLY different. Otherwise, stick with "Prime" across the board, because this "aligned" crap is, well, crap. --M Sipher 19:25, 28 February 2011 (EST)

WFC isn't a franchise--it's the name of a very limited merchandising spinoff of TF:Prime. Do we call Hot Rod "Hot Rod (G1)" or "Hot Rod (TFTM)"? --Thylacine 2000 21:01, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I don't think that's a fair comparison because TF:TM is implicitly G1-branded by the nature of how franchises worked at the time (or didn't, I guess). Looking at this modern-day question, I would be more inclined toward your view if Hasbro had used Prime branding on any WfC products.

This does bring up a good point, though: How much product needs to exist before a thing is a "franchise"? I'm guessing my tipping point is different from yours. In another discussion, I made the comparison to Machine Wars, which is comparably scant in the other direction: a few toys, practically no fiction. It could be lumped into G2 (the "Generations" guidebook does just that) - it has G2 insignia on the packaging, and Megatron's bio makes a G2 reference - but it's branded differently, so we don't.

I don't know exactly where to draw the line. All I know is that the little constellation of media with "War for Cybertron" in its titles, all related to each other more clearly and obviously than to the Prime stuff, is enough for me. Varying mileages, I suppose.

- Jackpot 23:06, 28 February 2011 (EST)

United toys as G1 characters

I had considered putting that in the article when I wrote it, but I didn't because I couldn't find any direct proof of it. The closest thing I found was the last panel(s) of this manga, which shows "Cybertronian" Megs and Optimus fighting, mirrored against a pic of them fighting in their Henkei/United modern-day bodies, and bordered with drawings of guys like Drift, Scourge, and Lugnut. It definitely suggests G1 all around, but is that enough? Or is there more evidence I don't know about? - Jackpot 02:17, 14 March 2011 (EDT)

Don't have a link handy, but the United toy-commercials also feature the Cybertronian Prime, Megs, and Bumble "morphing" into their Earth-forms, definitely cementing Takara's stand that "These guys are the same guys." Now said commercial undoubtedly is more concerned with marketing to children than making continuity declarations, so I don't see that it holds much additional water, but it's there for consideration.. --Destrongerlupus 16:40, 31 March 2011 (EDT)

Thank you! I think it's strong enough to count, barring any contradictory United material. - Jackpot 21:28, 11 April 2011 (EDT)

The website is pretty clear in presenting the "Cybertron Mode" and "Earth Mode" toys as versions of the same character ans has a slide explaining the Cybertron Mode/Earth Mode distinction. —Interrobang 23:44, 11 April 2011 (EDT)

Yet another unique Cybertronian language (High Moon Studios)

According to this source, a Cybertron alphabet was created for the game. "High Moon Studios created a Cybertron alphabet and font for the game, and Hasbro happily signed off on it. Their source? They found one single frame in one episode of the Transformers cartoon that featured some glyph-like characters in a monument". Interestingly enough this font differs from that developed by Jim Sorenson using the same methods. The WFC language is noted by some as being far superior (as it is an officially developed language approved by Hasbro) in comparison to both his fan-made Autobot font and the live-action Cyberglyphics. It is translatable via the various unlockable concept art provided in-game and many of the display screens throughout the levels feature in-depth text revealing more of the background story.--RATCHATT 00:30, 24 July 2011 (EDT)

This is a franchise.

"Fall of Cybertron" is not. I vote we move FOC to be included in this franchise. --ItsWalky 15:58, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

But FOC is likely going to expand rapidly as the release date draws nearer, just as WFC did. Besides, we don't lump Armada/Energon/Cybertron together despite them all sharing the same characters/settings. Tom Servo the Great 16:02, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Again, we are not going to deal with hypotheticals. —Interrobang 16:12, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

"Likely going to expand"? {{#ifeq: Talk||}} --ItsWalky 16:15, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

OK, here's a questions- why do we count WFC and Prime as different franchises? Why don't we just put everything in the "Aligned" franchise? Tom Servo the Great 16:21, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Aligned isn't a franchise. It's a continuity family. --ItsWalky 16:47, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Part of the franchise confusion was also because I thought Exiles somehow tied into WFC, which was a stupid mistake on my part. But whatever, you run the site, so do as you like, I suppose. Tom Servo the Great 17:24, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

TF PRIME?

Does the WFC story tie in the transformers prime universe or not

Yes. -LV 19:31, 26 June 2013 (EDT)