Talk:Optimus Prime (G1)/toys
20TH/MP
It's a little detail, but the pic used for the 20TH Anniversary MasterPiece Convoy Optimus Prime is kind of wrong: I think it's a testshot model that has never been sold (battle damage with long stacks and wrong light's feet colors) Also, he is a lille misstransformed as the matrix "hidder" is on the wrong side.
- Its a stock photo of one of the longstack protos Hasbro keeps using for promotional images. I chose these photos because its hard to find stock photos of the actual product (I don't want to use somebody else's photos), and they're actually photographed pretty well, with no major posing or transformation problems aside from the bumper in his chest. --FFN 20:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- The errors should be noted, though, so we know we have to replace this photo eventually. --ItsWalky 20:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'd prefer a really good photo, since its the best toy he has, so might as well get the best pics possible. --FFN 20:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Do you think we could take a remy pic?
- I'd prefer a really good photo, since its the best toy he has, so might as well get the best pics possible. --FFN 20:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- The errors should be noted, though, so we know we have to replace this photo eventually. --ItsWalky 20:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
The text for the Masterpiece/20th Prime is a bit... um... --M Sipher 22:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Accurate?
- Abit what? I believe I wrote that at 4am. --FFN 10:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Classics
The entry for Classics Voyager Optimus Prime (and the matching entry at Ultra Magnus (G1)) claims that his two guns "can combine together to form a back-mounted shoulder weapon." I've never heard of Classics Prime having such a feature, at least not officially. Can somebody confirm or deny? --Andrusi 23:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's true - you leave the wind vane attached to his back, and you can then plug the smokestacks into that, and angle the whole shebang up over his shoulders to make a twin cannon. It's official an' in his instructions and stuff. - Chris McFeely 23:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- I never knew that. Cool. --Andrusi 04:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Flat character
I always thought so. Compared with Megatron, he had no charisma. He was wayyyy too honorable, level-headed, mature, just, wise, noble, etc.. *blech*71.34.68.213 21:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Prime wasn't evil enough for your tastes, but as far as I can tell that doesn't have anything to do with his toy... --Andrusi 23:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Merchandise
What about this guy? --Andrusi 14:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Revoltech
Shouldn't Revoltech be in merchandise? I moved it in that section, but someone else move it back in toys without explaining why.
- By what possible definition is a Revoltech action figure not a toy and a 3" Titanium figure a toy? --Rotty 20:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, but Titanium has transformable toys, at least. I think the best definition would be toys=sold directly by Hasbro/takara, that would make Revoltech a merchandise. But what about McDonald Toys, then? Anyway, even if the difference between Merchandise and toys became kind of blur for Mc Donald, Titanium, and Even Action Master, Revoltech is not sell directly by Takara/Hasbro, and neither does it transform. Which clearly set him in Merchandise at the same title than "Metal Force"--GUIGUI 21:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Um, wow. I know we have some idiosyncratic definitions on this Wiki (like "Comics-only character"), but I'd be very much against creating our own peculiar definition of TOY that's "sold by Takara/Hasbro". And "there's a toy that transforms in the package" as a definition would suddenly make 99% of my G.I. Joe collection not toys... --Rotty 21:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, but Titanium has transformable toys, at least. I think the best definition would be toys=sold directly by Hasbro/takara, that would make Revoltech a merchandise. But what about McDonald Toys, then? Anyway, even if the difference between Merchandise and toys became kind of blur for Mc Donald, Titanium, and Even Action Master, Revoltech is not sell directly by Takara/Hasbro, and neither does it transform. Which clearly set him in Merchandise at the same title than "Metal Force"--GUIGUI 21:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Titaniums are directly sold by Hasbro in the same way the Kenner-branded Beast Wars and Machine Wars were. Plus, most of the characters with 3" Titaniums I've seen have them under "merchandise". Puls, while the Action Master figures (usually) didn't transform, their weapons or vehicles did, and they were a mainline to boot. However, there's also guys like Enemy, who has a transforming toy, but said toy is bolted to a radio that keeps his legs pointed outward. --FortMax 21:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- ...In the Transformers line, Of course I don't know why I should even precise that. And I don't want to create my own definition of Merchandise/Toys differentiation, I want one to be officially created, by general consensus (unless there is already one? If so a link to it would be appreciated)! That's why I Talk about it in the Discussion part: What make a Merchandise and what make a Toy? And in which category should Revoltech be put?--GUIGUI 21:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
If we must have a clear criterion, I think "produced by Hasbro/Takara" may be the best we can do. And yes, that would mean moving most promotional toys like Happy Meals out of "toys" and into something else. Sadly, it would also affect toys made by GiG in Italy or by Estrela in Brazil, without some sort of concession. Those were at least the same molds, so, we could base it on who owned the rights to the tooling at the time the item was produced, since GiG and Estrela were licensing them but wouldn't have owned them. (Not who made the original tooling, since then toys like Omega Supreme and Roadbuster are out.)
- Hasbro owned the Bandai tooling used to filled out the line in 1985? --Rotty 21:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Whoops -- no, they didn't. Don't know why I even wrote that. So that idea's out completely then. --Steve-o 22:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Personally though I would rather not have a set rule for it, and instead decide things case by case. We could keep a list in the help pages of what items "count" as toys and what items don't. It's a subjective thing, but, I think we'll end up with the smallest number of silly categorizations that way. As Rotty says, I can't imagine any definition of the word "toy" that would exclude a Revoltech figure. They are nothing like Metalforce Prime. Metalforce is, IMO, very much in the "statue" area and not the "toy" area. A 3" Titanium is pretty much just a statue too, to me, but a SCF/HoC PVC figurine is moving closer to "toy".
--Steve-o 21:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I basically agree with Steve. The line between the two is fuzzy, but I feel that most everybody would agree with decisions, in this case, made somewhat arbitrarily. I don't think it's too hard to easily discern what was produced to be played with, and what was produced to be a display piece. --Sntint 21:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think we can come up with a pretty good definition in that toys are designed to be played with. You can say of them that they have a "play pattern", as I did at Multi-property brand. So figures that transform into something else are toys. If you play with them by having them interact with vehicles and accessories, also toys. Attacktix, Built to Rule, MyClone, Revoltech, those are also meant to be played with. There's really no way to play with 3" Titaniums, but it would be nice to keep Titanium Series entirely under Toys when the same character has both 6" and 3" figures. 3" Titaniums and SCFs are a gray area. --Rotty 21:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Notice that this "to be able to play with" distinction fall apart for softimus Prime and Optimash Prime, who are definitively done to play with. Yet, personally I would never move them in the toys Section.--GUIGUI 22:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- There's a point here, but I really think it needs to be a) signed and b) not phrased as threat of protest in order to weigh it against other opinions expressed. --Rotty 22:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I just Forgot to sign (happen from time to time, sorry) and there was absolutely no will of threat when I tipped it.--GUIGUI 22:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- There's a point here, but I really think it needs to be a) signed and b) not phrased as threat of protest in order to weigh it against other opinions expressed. --Rotty 22:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Notice that this "to be able to play with" distinction fall apart for softimus Prime and Optimash Prime, who are definitively done to play with. Yet, personally I would never move them in the toys Section.--GUIGUI 22:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think we can come up with a pretty good definition in that toys are designed to be played with. You can say of them that they have a "play pattern", as I did at Multi-property brand. So figures that transform into something else are toys. If you play with them by having them interact with vehicles and accessories, also toys. Attacktix, Built to Rule, MyClone, Revoltech, those are also meant to be played with. There's really no way to play with 3" Titaniums, but it would be nice to keep Titanium Series entirely under Toys when the same character has both 6" and 3" figures. 3" Titaniums and SCFs are a gray area. --Rotty 21:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if Hasbro and Takara have some exact standard by which they determine what's a toy and what's merchandise? Perhaps toys tend to belong to "lines" or assortments, whereas merchandise tends to be a one-off item? There is an assortment of Titaniums, there is certainly an assortment of actual main-line figures, but there is only one Optimash Prime? Certainly we cannot strictly use the amount of "one", but perhaps this is where we can be arbitrary, if not being wholly arbitrary? There are only two Softformers, only one Metalforce... I suppose Masterpiece now has enough items to be considered a line? --Sntint 22:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
