Questions for Hasbro, round 3

[JediTricks]

Ok, so we've gotten answers back:
http://www.tfviews.com/news/main/hasbro-q-and-a/410

I can't say I'm feeling it with these answers, it's almost like we're getting the preamble to the answers and then they just forgot to include the body. I may feel like this because the answers over at ActionFigs also just came in and look like that:
http://www.actionfigs.com/index.php?cat ... cleid=2471


BTW, the next round of questions is due May 4th.

[Onslaught Six]

They look fine to me. Hm.

Their Cheetor/Dinobot answer is inneresting, it seems like they're going the route of "Well, you guys hate it because you're grownups, but the kids probably like it." Unfortunately, this isn't true because Cheetor is just a shitty toy who is not selling. Dinobot is at least a decent toy underneath and the Henkei version shows that with the right colours, Dinobot becomes a cool toy. (It's not even that Hasbro Dinobot's colours are *different,* just that they plain out look like crap.) It's interesting, though, that they also say that the ultimate problem was trying to follow the original Cheetor and Dinobot designs.

[JediTricks]

They look fine to me. Hm.

Their Cheetor/Dinobot answer is inneresting, it seems like they're going the route of "Well, you guys hate it because you're grownups, but the kids probably like it." Unfortunately, this isn't true because Cheetor is just a shitty toy who is not selling. Dinobot is at least a decent toy underneath and the Henkei version shows that with the right colours, Dinobot becomes a cool toy. (It's not even that Hasbro Dinobot's colours are *different,* just that they plain out look like crap.) It's interesting, though, that they also say that the ultimate problem was trying to follow the original Cheetor and Dinobot designs.

I took the "kids" part as "we need to make toys safe and fun for kids", which would explain deficiencies in something that pops out easily, but it wouldn't explain ugly sculpting and designs that don't fit their tiny parts. Around here, Dinobot is pegwarming hard, and DvD's review points out that the alt mode neck is too short, the chest still has issues, and the tail is too long. I'd add that the bot mode doesn't hold together well, and the weapons suck. Coloring is the least of that figure's problems IMO.

[andersonh1]

TFviews.com: The use of a prefix “Autobot-” or “Decepticon-” in front of otherwise unobtainable character names is a great solution that allows a character to retain its original name in some form. I.e., since “Jazz” cannot be used on its own, “Autobot Jazz” is a good compromise. That being said, why is the approach used for some characters but not others? For example, why “Insecticon” rather than “Decepticon Shrapnel”, or “Tankor” instead of “Decepticon Octane”?
Hasbro: This is a great question that could take hours to explain, so here is the quick answer: We continually work with our legal team to protect our IP ["Intellectual Property" - Ed.] , including all of our names when possible. Sometimes this means that we are able to simply use Autobot or Decepticon in front of a well known name. However, in some instances, another entity might have that same name registered, thus preventing us from using it on a carry forward basis.

I was hoping for a specific detail or two. There's not much here that I couldn't have guessed on my own. The answer about Lockdown is a great example of what I'd have liked... a fairly detailed example of the thought process behind one of the names.

Ah well... at least they thought it was a great question.

[Onslaught Six]

AllSpark:
http://www.allspark.com/forums/index.ph ... opic=56302

No Hasbro Red Alert! Boo! At least it's not a Botcon exclusive, though.

Cybertron.ca:
http://www.cybertron.ca/boards/showthread.php?t=14099

They dodged the second question--it's clear they were asking about 'after' ROTF.

Seibertron:
http://www.seibertron.com/energonpub/vi ... =4&t=51204

No Drift (Good!), no news on Animated.

ActionFigureInsider:
http://www.actionfigureinsider.com/main/?p=2627

No Soundwave because of his altmode (As if that would really matter), Wheeljack may be on the slab soonish.

TFWiki:
http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Hasbro_Q%26A_March_2009:_Answers
(Which seems to have done my job of rounding these up for me...)

More BS on Dev's end. Bogus.

CoolToyReview:
http://www.cooltoyreview.com/story/fron ... 121347.asp

Whaaaat. You said it was budget concerns, you bastards.

That's all I feel like commenting on.

[Dominic]

First off, I want to say that this 3rd round of question was one of the best I have seen at any page. Kudos to everybody here.


Anderson beat me to the punch with his comments on Hasbro's Lockdown answer. That is exactly what we were looking for.

I am reading Hasbro's answer about tooling as "we really do not know". I get the feeling that the guys answering these questions really do not know how the factories operate. On the other hand, we can hope they pass the question along, and that molds will be better preserved.

I get the feeling our question on naming stumbled onto an area that was more complex than we may have anticipated. And, as a result, Hasbro gave us another "we do not know", or at least, "we do not understand well enough to be comfortable explaining it".

At least they did not ignore us totally.

I like how Hasbro's answer to JT's photo-shoppery question was pretty much, "because". (Well, it is an honest, if not wholly satisfying, answer.)

And, I get the feeling that they misread the question about Dinobot and Cheetor. They answered for somebody asking, "why did you make these toys?", when the question was more like, "why did you not make these toys better?"


Dom
-time to post round 4.

[onslaught86]

While I'm surprised there weren't many WHAT THE FUCK DEVASTATOR questions, I'm grievously disappointed that they do not plan a transforming version. Most unsatisfactory. They can and have done better.

Glad the mythology question gave us one of the better answers of this round of questions, and also pleased our questions hold the usual standard of not being crap when so many other questions are.

[Onslaught Six]

Mind, I'm not seeing as many repeat questions as I am with, say, the Joe Q&As. I think this is largely because we kind of have one central resource for stuff in the Wiki, which goes and posts all the questions to begin with so I'm assuming the other sites are 'checking' it and such.

It likely helps that we're a small community with a narrower pool of interests than, say, TFW, too.

[onslaught86]

If by 'narrower pool of interests' you mean we aren't dropkicks who ask ridiculous questions about upcoming product that we'll inevitably know the answer to in the long run anyway. I still see no point in asking that sort of thing.

Hmm, after that Takara designer interview I'm almost at a loss as to what we can ask Hasbro that they can conceivably answer. Most of my toy-related questions would be better directed at the engineers than the concept designers. But whatchagonnado.

[Dominic]

I suppose we could ask JT to ask Hasbro (on our behalf) if they could pass the questions along to relevant teams. (This would be a "hey, could ya do us a favor" more than an actual question for the Q&A.) I doubt much will come of it, but what harm is there in asking?