Hasbro Q&A round 14

[138 Scourge]

I dunno, the Dinobot thing would be pretty easy to explain. Autobot gets to Earth, figures he's got something to prove, wants to show he's pretty tough, he just decides "Screw a car, I'm scannin' a damn dinosaur!" Anyway, I do kind of like putting 'em in unexplored areas of new G1, it still brings in new characters but gives 'em a backdrop to work with. I still also kind of like the idea of "Just chuck 'em anywhere you need 'em", though.

Well, there's a continuity disparity between the cartoon - where Wheeljack and Ratchet create the Dinobots based on fossils - and the G1 comics - where the Dinobots are on the Ark and scan live dinosaurs who existed at the Savage Land. The problems with the former are that then you clearly don't have Wheeljack and Ratchet creating a whole bunch of other Dinobots after the first 5. The problems with the latter are that all of them would need to scan actual living dinos while training on Cybertron, and the only place to find them is in the Marvel universe's Savage Land.

Dinobot island? Or, I dunno, how hard can it be to use a picture of a dinosaur and say "I want THAT" instead of scanning a three-dimensional object? If it absolutely came to it, Grimstone could have just scanned Slag and said "Okay, now a little off the horns here, and add a couple over there". Or hit up one of those "Dinosaurs Alive" animatronic exhibits? I mean, if dude wanted a dino alt. mode bad enough, he could find it. Or, if the writer of this guy's entirely hypothetical fiction wants it bad enough, they could make it work.

[Dominic]

Well, there's a continuity disparity between the cartoon - where Wheeljack and Ratchet create the Dinobots based on fossils - and the G1 comics - where the Dinobots are on the Ark and scan live dinosaurs who existed at the Savage Land.

The thing is that the cartoons and comics were never meant to match up. In this case, the novel, the game and the cartoon were all meant to match up. And, the novel is not even consistent unto itself. It is already a train-wreck.

But that Energon Mega-Dinobot combiner was intended for Universe anyway.

The "Energon" Dinobiner came out when I was skipping much of the line. And, it actually made me glad I was largley skipping "Energon", as I did not feel obligated to look for or purchase it.

B) the fact that Hasbro sent out a fansite-wide correction about a different, but similar, answer says that the last round was written without intent to confuse, but just mistakes.

So, should we ask for a clarification on previous unclear answers? And, can we imagine how confusing Hasbro would be if they wanted to be?

Don't be so pedantic about it. BTW, MOTU and Armada were far from the only lines with pack-in comics, MASK was another one that springs to my mind, and there were tons in the '80s, back when you could just print 'em on pulp.

I think Scourge and Trekkie were talking about PCC having a bit more in the way of context though. Like I said, I am not wholly against pack-ins. But, they are a different degree of context than a cartoon or something.

Dom

[Shockwave]

No, I was actually saying that the pack ins could work for their only context. It actually did work for both He-Man and Armada for a while but their primary fiction came later.

[Onslaught Six]

I just jumped in to alert you guys to a correction that Hasbro just sent out regarding another site's answer:
http://www.tfviews.com/news/main/hasbro-q-and-a/1170

and surprisingly enough, I see it fits with the continued conversation we were having.

What was the false answer?

Anyway this argument is dumb. What are we arguing about exactly?

I think ShockTrek is placing more emphasis on the pack-in comics than is necessary.

[Shockwave]

I was just saying it would be a good idea. Then Dom started on something about context and other contexts... I dunno.

[Dominic]

There was initially some confusion about how "War for Cybertron", "Exodus", and "Prime" fit together. Hasbro UK said they did not fit together. Now, the official word is that they do.


Shockwave and I are going back and forth about PCC. The general premise, (and one I do not wholly disagree with), is that some kind of context would help PCC as a line. (I kind of like them being vague, but can see the objective merits to the argument for giving PCC more context.)

Shockwave is thinking that a pack-in comic could carry the line in terms of context. I am saying that a pack-in would not hurt things, but would not be enough to provide context for the line for the purposes of carrying PCC and giving people something to focus on. (At a basic level, in order to get the comics, somebody would have to buy the toys.)

[Shockwave]

Actually, I don't think any context is going to help the toys suck less

And I was just saying it would be a neat idea.

[Dominic]

I know Scourge has argued that context would help. And, I have heard it elsewhere.

Man, you really hate PCC.....

[138 Scourge]

Anyway this argument is dumb. What are we arguing about exactly?

Who's arguing?

[JediTricks]

Dinobot island? Or, I dunno, how hard can it be to use a picture of a dinosaur and say "I want THAT" instead of scanning a three-dimensional object? If it absolutely came to it, Grimstone could have just scanned Slag and said "Okay, now a little off the horns here, and add a couple over there". Or hit up one of those "Dinosaurs Alive" animatronic exhibits? I mean, if dude wanted a dino alt. mode bad enough, he could find it. Or, if the writer of this guy's entirely hypothetical fiction wants it bad enough, they could make it work.

Only the Savage Land definitely isn't Dinobot Island.

As for looking at a 2-dimensional image and recreating large-scale the way it moves, I don't buy it, there's no reference of width, there's a lot of technical details about the source's joints that wouldn't be evident either.

And the idea that TFs can just scan other TFs and use that as their template seems like a dangerous game, where you have Starscream transforming into Bumblebee or something of that nature. And aside from THAT, there's also the fact that you're suggesting that some TFs are merely posers.

So, should we ask for a clarification on previous unclear answers? And, can we imagine how confusing Hasbro would be if they wanted to be?

I have noticed a reticence from Hasbro about clarifications in Q&A, they seem to want to say their say and move on. We could try just to see what happens, but I wouldn't expect anything much from it.

I just jumped in to alert you guys to a correction that Hasbro just sent out regarding another site's answer:
http://www.tfviews.com/news/main/hasbro-q-and-a/1170

and surprisingly enough, I see it fits with the continued conversation we were having.

What was the false answer?

Anyway this argument is dumb. What are we arguing about exactly?

I think ShockTrek is placing more emphasis on the pack-in comics than is necessary.

I don't know, I stopped culling other sites' answers, and Hasbro says there was confusion from Hasbro UK, so it may not even have been part of our Q&A program. It's quite confusing.

We were arguing? I had no idea.