Where are you getting this "nobody likes Ramjet" exactly? Nothing in the story gives me that impression in the least. He and Skywarp actually appear to be on friendly terms at the start of the issue as they fly around. And Skywarp, in his own way, warns him not to cross Megatron.Dominic wrote:Killing a guy nobody likes (Ramjet), when everybody else has something to worry about (war with the Autobots), is cheaper than killing multiple guys when everybody is kind of hurting for things to do. The purge would wind up being causing a new rift, effectively splitting the remaining faction into two.
You once again seem to be forgetting Megatron was leaving out the little detail that he was even in control of the nuke. For all we know only he and Tankor knew that, while the rest of the Decepticons would have been under the impression the humans alone were behind the attack. If this was maintained, it wouldn't cause a rift among the Decepticons at all, rather they would have been renewed in their rage against Earth. Megatron would only have everything to gain in that situation.It would be less a question of Megatron being able to afford the loss of the guys he would kill and more a question of being able to afford the political and morale costs, which could lead to more violence and dissent.
The Transformers are a highly advanced race of aliens. They themselves, in essence, being highly advance machines, it's understandable that they'd be capable of building highly advanced computer networks, possibly even capable of doing more than organic brains. And they don't exactly have a lot of experience with human physiology to be able to use Hunter in a productive way. From a sci-fi perspective, you have to come up with a plausible explanation of how this is made possible, even if it's just a vague theory. McCarthy just uses Hunter as a McGruffin, capable of doing this to further the story but offers no real explanations."Transformers" is soft sci-fi. Transformer brains are as complex and/or different from human brains as they need to be. Having some information about computers or human brains would help. But, past a certain point, it become impossible to define a fictional construct, especially one that is inherently unreal.
I really don't mind writers going into areas of technology, as long as they're able to come up with a plausible explanation or theory of how it could potentially work. The problem here is that McCarthy only goes half way, explaining they used the human headmaster but not how they could use him beyond just as a headmaster unit.Shockwave wrote:Which is an example of what Dom was saying about how writers really shouldn't go there since it then gets into the area of what technologically can or can't work. There's too many of us tech geeks out there to see through this kind of stuff and really McCarthy (look I remembered a writer's name!) shouldn't have gone there unless he has a second job doing computer tech support. He doesn't and it shows in the story with Sunstreaker.
See now, previously you've presenting your thoughts of an author having an "idea" as some point that they want to get across, in essence preaching a message. Now you're saying an idea is something else. So which is it?Dominic wrote:it is not a question of preaching a message. it is a question of the writer showing some understanding of an idea beyond comics/TFs/whatever being kewl.
Either way, you seem to be misunderstanding my point given you can seem to get past the "X is kewl" thing, when that isn't what I'm saying at all.
This is more along the lines of what I'm talking about, but rather than calling it "what the book/author has to say" or "understanding of an idea", I call that characterization, interesting plot, backstory, setting... you know, the most basic elements of good storytelling.Onslaught Six wrote:To the discussion on writers and what they have to say, I'm going to pick up an entirely different book: Atomic Robo! It's a book where a robot that Tesla built kicks the shit out of monsters and robots and stuff. What's the book got to say? Mostly, it's just a book where a cool character does cool things...but he does them in an interesting and well-done way. For example, there's subtle characterisation all throughout the book. And there's one issue where Robo answers a reporter about what the hardest part about being an immortal nuclear robot is, and he answers, "The hardest part is that I'm 83 years old. I do a great Jack Benny, but no one really gets it anymore."
Bob Skir actually states on the dvds that he was trying to push the mystical side of things so you could argue that he actually was trying to say something with BM. And as awesome as BM was, and to some extent that was a big part of what was awesome about it, it doesn't make a very good example of what I was talking about. Which is why I didn't use it as the example.