Talk:Transformers Animated (franchise)

Early Stuff

You know, I wasn't going to say anything, but you're getting a little too kneejerk about other people's kneejerk reactions. The list of previous series is fine and adaquately snarky, but is the "OMFG NAFF PASS END OF FRANCHISE SUX GONNA KILL TFS BARF CRAP" really needed? Just seems a bit more negatively charged than the wiki really needs.--UndeadScottsman 05:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

And I would have just edited it out, but I figured it would be more productive to discuss it first. 'Course, it seems Rotty took care of it anyway. :D--UndeadScottsman 06:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

This article should really be at Animated, shouldn't it? We don't have anything at Transformers Cybertron, Transformers Armada, etc. --ItsWalky 06:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I dunno. Considering the size of "Animated" compared to the REST of the logo... --M Sipher 06:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it should remain Transformers Animated. Just Animated is too confusing, and we can justifiably called it Transformers Animated by the logo. Go with the less confusing one. -Derik 06:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It's confusing ANYWAY, since we now have the term "Transformers Animated continuity" to refer to Transformers Animated and "Animated continuity" to refer to the G1 cartoons. -Rotty 06:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Well if we just went with Animated we'd have an article named Animated (cartoon). -Derik 07:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

And if this franchise gets a comic, we'll have the "Animated animated continuity" and the "Animated comics continuity." Heh. --KilMichaelMcC 09:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

And then if there's an official Flash animated comic strip, we'd have "animated continuity", "Animated animated continuity", "Animated comic continuity", and "animated comic continuity". -Rotty 09:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

TFA abbreviation?

I think, because of how common a word "animated" is and how many things on this Wiki it could refer to we should stick to the full "Transformers: Animated" to avoid confusion or weirdness. I'd also suggest the abreviation "TFA" to be its descriptor, thusly Optimus Prime (TFA).--ZacWilliam 11:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. I'd prefer to stick with Animated. We could always change other uses of the phrase "animated continuity" to "cartoon continuity" if it became too confusing. Which might be a good idea anyway, given the use of (cartoon) for article titles. At any rate, we've got quite a a bit of time before we'll actually need to start making articles about this franchise. --KilMichaelMcC 12:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I know it seems to be the way we're going, and so be it if so, but I want to state that, convention be damned, I really think refering to this continuity as JUST "Animated" is both counterintuitive and uneedingly confusing. There are times when breaking convention serves everyone better. The chategory "Animated characters" for instance is just screaming to be missunderstood. I just think the full Transformers: Animated, TF: Animated, or abreviating TFA would all be better choices. Just wanted to say it, however we finally choose to go.--ZacWilliam 03:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how "Transformers Animated characters" is any less confusing than "Animated characters" to a casual browser. It's not like that adjective narrows anything down on this wiki. --ItsWalky 04:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps not, but Transformers: Animated is considerably less confusing than either. -Derik 04:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Except the series isn't "Transformers: Animated". The press materials call it --and even THEY put it in quotes-- "Transformers Animated". --M Sipher 04:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

That's their problem. Why does that necessarily dictate our category names?

We use [[Category: Beast Wars]] and not [[Category: Beast Wars Transformers]] even though the latter is the name of the franchise. We adjusted it to fit our needs. -Derik 04:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I was going to abbreviate this series "AN," until I realized that talking about "AN episode" or "AN Optimus Prime" just makes you look like you're trying to be a hairsplitter. Transformers has been ruined, or at least my system of talking about it. --Thylacine 2000 15:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Worse what hapens when there are multiple and you have to talk about "an AN episode" or "An An Optimus" that's just plain aweful. That's why I'm saying "TFA" I mean "TFA Megatron" or a "TFA episode" works fine.--ZacWilliam 15:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You mean Transformers Armada Megatron or a Transformers Armada episode? --ItsWalky 16:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, if "Arm" and "UT" weren't pretty well established maybe, even so I'd call it the less confusing of the options other than just using the whole word as Derik says below, wich is slightly long to type, but IS plenty clear for a character tag I guess. --ZacWilliam 20:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

"Arm" is well-established? I've never SEEN it before! But I've seen TFA used for it plenty of times. But as Derik says, it's an irrelevant topic for the wiki, as nothing will have to abbreviate it. --ItsWalky 14:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

...how did this subject move to the disambig suffixes? Those will be (Animated). They're less prone to confusion than the categories and article titles. -Derik 16:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I move this discussion be shelved for a few months in the hopes that an appropriate nomenclature will arise in the fandom we can use. The series is slated for 2008, the scale of the changes we'll need to make this fall (if we choose to make changes) will still be manageable. -Derik 20:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Scale

Am I the only one who thinks there are going to be scale issues coming? -- SFH 22:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

How would you even define "scale issues" in relation to TFs. Nothing Transformers has EVER been in scale with anything else.--ZacWilliam 22:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe he's referrign to he fact that Ratchet seems to be exactly the same size in vehicle mode (which we will be able to see at some point) but it the size of Bulkhead's forearm in robot mode. -Derik 22:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

It's interesting, but given all the size changing in G1 between modes (and not even the really obvious stuff) it's never going to be enough to put even a dent in the vast and eldritch disregard the Transformers franchise has always held for scale.--ZacWilliam 22:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Sarcasm

Am I the only one who thinks the level of sarcasm on this page is a bit much. We get the point.

I kind of agree. The series isn't even out yet but already this page seems dated--it's like a time capsule to June. Lemme work on it. --Thylacine 2000 18:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a disservice to not note the FACT that vast swaths of fandom treated this series as Worse Than Hitler at first glance. --M Sipher 21:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It is noted, in the second paragraph commenting on the inital over reaction. But the rest is just...well, mean really. I din't like the designs when the image was released either, but I'm looking forward to the series now. It just seems to be kinda nasty at the basic heart of it all.

Anyone think we need a {{toosnarky}} template? There's a lot of snark sneaking into articles that ought not be as snarky lately. We're weed-whacking it back into place with relative ease at the moment- but I think that for a lot of new users, the discussions about de-snarking are relatively invisible, while the snark in articles is easy to see. This creates a positive feedback scenario, where they perceive forces only encouraging the addition of snark, and do not notice the need for its moderation.

I believe a de-snarking "It's been suggested this page has too much funny and it's interfering with the delivery of information" template would make the need for it not to get in the way of articles more visible to users, who otherwise only see the jokes. (While also articulating to the anti-humor assholes that we're okay with humor as long as it doesn't interfere with the delivery of information.) -Derik 00:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

but that doesn't point out something like "excessive sarcasm that just seems to be in for the wrong reasons". Which I think is the main problem. Funny good, gittery, bad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.18.160.11 (talk • contribs).

I'd proposed an "excessive sarcasm" template or somesuch before. I even have the image to use and quote...

"No, I mean take a submarine!"

(Yeah, the image is from a different episode and quote, but I don't care.) --M Sipher 00:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

File:Toosnarky1.jpg

Man, it's hard to find a good Nightbeat icon for that which doesn't need dialogue. --ItsWalky 00:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Well, I want to have a BW-based template in there SOMEWHERE... and Rattrap and sarcasm just GO together. Wanna make sure our templates have franchise variety. --M Sipher 00:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Is the Autobots always going to be the Civilian ground vehicle?

Is the Autobots(Automobile bots) going to be civilian ground vehicles like cars again, not anything flying nor military vehicles like C-17 Globemaster IIIs? Is the Decepticons going to be the military vehicles and flying vehicles like always? The Decepticons are known for their air power due to the Seekers. I hope you know it.

The Animated Autobots already have a non-civilian vehicle alt-mode: Ratchet (and the Dinobots aren't even vehicles). Police and Fire& Rescue vehicles are by definition not-civilian. There's only been a few time that the vehicular Autobots were all ground vehicles: G1 in 1984, RID prior to the release of Storm Jet (and all of Car Robots) Armada prior to the release of Jetfire, and Classics prior to the release of Jetfire. --FortMax 18:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

You didn't answer the Decepticon question! How the fuck am I going to know that the factions are going to be unbalanced. OH by the way, The funny Stays!

Why you didn't answer these questions?

Why you ignore these questions?

Well the main character Autobots are not warriors, just "repair-bots", so they're altmodes are simple ground based service vehicles. Probably there will be more military like ones in the future, like Sentinel Prime. -Hepathos 13:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Autobot is actually Automobilebots due to most of them are cars. Look at a list of Generation 1 Autobots to find out. Plus I see no animated Autobot that is at least Military! The Decepticons are always jets and Military vehicles like Devastator/Brawl. (Spearhead 03:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC))

Remember. The Autobots are usually vehicles that blend in the City like civilian cars or trucks. Optimus might not fly like Cybertron. Just hope Animated Autobots don't have any Autobot that flies like Jetfire or Skydive.(Soldier 79 03:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC))

Production info

Has there been any official announcement as to what companies are involved with Animated? There has not been, to my knowledge, any announcement of Studio 4C or the Answer Studio working on Animated, and may be false. Until such time it can be proven, we may wish to omit it, as it may possibly be erroneous.--Tekcorps 011:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Bumper Robinson

Is there any reason in particular why his name alone is linked off site to wikipedia?--Carrion 05:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

New Info

New trailer ahoy!

This brings up a good question, though: what should we do for the article regarding Animated All Spark? I mean, we don't know what it does this time around, nor do we know what it looks like, but it's obviously important, or else Megatron wouldn't have forced his way onto the ARK and gone Wayne Brady on Optimus's neck. Should we create the article now, or should we wait until we have some more info? - Cyberlink420 23:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, we DO know how the Animated AllSpark looks. It was in one of the cam videos of the first episode. It looks just like the Matrix. -84.3.88.25 23:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the movie Allspark with Matrix handles attached to it. --ItsWalky 00:22, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, the All Spark was kinda like the Creation Matrix, so I guess that means they're coming full circle. That, or they're running out of ideas. -- SFH 00:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Can someone link me to a video that features the All Spark so I can snag an image for the wiki? (I assume it's not the Comic Con trailer you're talking about...)- Cyberlink420 00:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Too low resolution to bother with. I wish we had never uploaded half of the Animated screencaps currently on the board, because they look awful. --FFN 01:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Well it's the best we've got at the moment. Once the show debuts, we can go on a mass-replacement spree, but for now, we're just going to have to make do with what's there... - Cyberlink420 04:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

A terrible image is often worse than no image. --ItsWalky 04:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

New cast members

Hey, anonymous IP guy, where'd you get the new casting info? Can it be verified? - RolonBolon 02:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I also want to know. Also, where the clearer screenshots are from. --ItsWalky 04:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Just adding a comment to point out we still need this, after a frickin' article's been created for Stromare and everything. - Chris McFeely 21:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Since G1?

Excuse me? Is someone ACTUALLY CLAIMING that the early G1 models aren't EVERY BIT as simple and two-dimensional as the Animated models are? the likes of goddman Ironhide are "classic mecha styling"? The hell? --M Sipher 15:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I've deleted that section. It was just one fan whining, as near as I could tell.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, I think a "fan reaction" section's okay to have, if only because it's a chance to point out that EVERY SINGLE SERIES EVER has been initially greeted as the harbinger of doom, only to be wildly cheered when previewed at BotCon or wherever, and then THOSE reactions all get gradually replaced by actual informed and widely variable opinions once people get to actually SEE the show.

....okay, maybe that's actually totally pointless. -- Repowers 16:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

We already have ruined forever as an article.--Rosicrucian^Talk 16:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Time to Split?

With episode lists showing up and the show starting to debut, IMO it's about time to split this into Transformers Animated (cartoon), Transformers Animated (toyline), and downsize this page to the main franchise article. I'd do it myself but I'm not sure what needs to be done with the articles that link here and I don't want to leave a bunch of bad links in my wake.

(The toyline does share the name of the television show, right?? Are there any comic books or other known media/merchandising in the works?) -- Repowers 19:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, now that we have an episode list I don't see any reason not to go full-bore on franchise-style articles with full navbars.

And yes, all the packaging shots we've seen so far say "Transformers Animated."--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, There is the cartoon, the toyline (Witch is called TF Animated, because it's a new trend among several toys and figures, the "Animated" figures. It means, they really cartoony looking, but in the good way), two books, and a comic made out of screencaps from the cartoon.

IDW's doing comics, but they're some sort of cine-manga. -Derik 21:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Colon or no colon?

There seems to be some inconsistancies about whether or not the title has a colon in it. The press releases I've seen don't, but the Cartoon Network site does have a colon on it.Thatother1dude 01:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)