What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

The modern comics universe has had such a different take on G1, one that's significantly represented by the Generations toys, so they share a forum. A modern take on a Real Cybertronian Hero. Currently starring Generations toys, IDW "The Transformers" comics, MTMTE, TF vs GI Joe, and Windblade. Oh wait, and now Skybound, wheee!
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Tigermegatron »

WHAT ARTICULATED JOINTS DO YOU THINK ARE NECESSARY IN NEWER TF TOYS YOU BUY FROM STORES/SITES?

My 2 cents: IF IT'S NOT A MASTERPIECE TF,Universal Shoulders joints,Universal hips joints,Bending backward Knees & elbow joints. 360 degrees rotate joints in the thighs & arms. ball jointed head joint. rotate wrist joints. ankle joints that go up/down

WHAT ARTICULATED JOINTS DO YOU THINK ARE NOT NECESSARY & YOU CAN LIVE WITHOUT WHEN BUYING NEWER TF TOYS FROM STORES/SITES?

My 2 cents: IF IT'S NOT A MASTERPIECE TF,I don't need articulated fingers,a Sculpted closed or open hand is just fine. I don't need a waist joint. I don't need universal or ball jointed ankle joints,as long the ankle joints go up/down,I don't need them to also go side to side. while I like double joints in the elbows or knees,I don't deem them necessary. I don't need 2 rotate 360 degree joints in each leg or in each arm.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Onslaught Six »

I dig waist joints. Some form of head articulation is essential--I like to put my figures at an angle on my shelves, because this makes it easier to stand more figures together, and also makes them look more varied in the group. If everybody was standing head-on, it'd look bad.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Tigermegatron »

Onslaught Six wrote:I dig waist joints. Some form of head articulation is essential--I like to put my figures at an angle on my shelves, because this makes it easier to stand more figures together, and also makes them look more varied in the group. If everybody was standing head-on, it'd look bad.
I love the waist joint on Certain Newer TF toys. I just don't think every newer TF toy needs a waist joint. I view the waist joint as luxury not essential.

I think the Energon Megatron/Galvatron toys could have benefited from having a waist joint. mainly because the 1986 Galvatron toy had a waist joint.
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6216
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Shockwave »

I prefer as much as possible. And really with today's technology, not having more articulation is become less forgivable. One of the things I liked best about Alternators was the articulation. I can forgive some things though. I love the Classics seeker mold despite no rotating elbow, no wrist or waist articulation. But, that figure is from ~7 years ago. If it were a new mold today I would expect it to have those points.

I'm even more harsh on non TF toys. After getting a Darth Vader figure back in like, 2006 that had everything but his fingers articulated, complete with a three piece, movie accurate helmet and a head that moved independently of the lower helmet/moutpiece I now expect that of every figure made. Why? Because they can, therefore, they should. Nothing irritates me more than "staction figures" like what MacFarlane produces. Sure, the sculpts are beautiful, but they can't move for shit so why not just make frickin' statues?
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6439
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by andersonh1 »

The more articulation the better, though as someone who grew up with the original G1 figures, I can live with a lot less. Hot Rod had bendable elbows and nothing else, and I loved that figure. I did find the lack of posability a little irritating even back then though, so at a minimum: rotating head, shoulders and elbow joints, leg and knee joints, and probably some ankle movement to help with posing.
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
Posts: 3851
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by JediTricks »

- Head, swivel, and to be honest I really feel like this should be a ball joint, looking up and down adds a ton of personality to a figure.
- Shoulders, hinge and rotation aka universal joint, or ball joint since they do the same thing but some sculpts benefit while others don't.
- Elbows, hinged, minimum of 90 degrees forward movement.
- Above-elbow swivel, I don't care where in the bicep area but somewhere.
- Wrists, swivel.
- Hips, hinge and rotation or ball joint plus an above-knee swivel, and as much range as possible without looking bad for it.
- Knees, hinged, minimum of 75 degrees of backward movement.
- Ankles, something, I can usually make a figure look better with any kind of articulation here, even FOC Starscream's side-tilting ankles are better than nothing.

The only reason I didn't include waist is that it doesn't always look good on Transformers, and with enough hip range you can fake it. I like waist joints, but they're not necessary in this line IMO. MP should have this though, and a mid-torso joint if it can include it as well.

I'm ambivalent about finger articulation, even on MP. Thumb is kinda necessary to MP though, and fingers should at least move on the outer hinge as a block.

MP needs a second range of motion on wrists, inward and/or downward.

Double elbow or knee joints are fine if they work with the figure, but with TF that's not always the case. On MPs though I'd prefer the elbows and knees to have a higher range of motion, like 120 degrees or more.
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Tigermegatron »

I kinda wish with the MP TF toys Takara/Hasbro had a set of poseable fingers/fist then another extra set of sculpted pop on/off closed fist. sort of what other MP Robot toy lines SOMETIMES do in Japan. Because while I love poseable fingers,Sometimes their a royal pain the hold on to a weapon/gun. I really hate it when a weapon/gun is on a slant in the poseable fingers.

I suspose my preference for NON-MP TF toys is one closed molded fist on one arm & one sculpted open hand on the other arm. Example Classics 2.0 Deluxe Galvatron.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Onslaught Six »

Shockwave wrote:I love the Classics seeker mold despite...no wrist articulation.
Don't lie! That mould totally has wrists. It has those cool movey-inward wrists. Those are awesome, and way cooler than the standard wrist swivels, which are usually kind of worthless unless the dude has a sword or something.
After getting a Darth Vader figure back in like, 2006 that had everything but his fingers articulated, complete with a three piece, movie accurate helmet and a head that moved independently of the lower helmet/moutpiece I now expect that of every figure made. Why? Because they can, therefore, they should.
I have a middling interest in Marvel Universe, and there's a plethora of different articulation in that line. It's really weird, but I've gotten used to it.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by Tigermegatron »

Shockwave wrote: One of the things I liked best about Alternators was the articulation.
What? Do you even own or have you played with any TF Alternators/BT toys?

One of the many reasons some FANS hate Alternators is due to the missing joints & awful restricted range of movements joints in the majority of the toys. Like some of them barely being able to bend their knees. Others barely being able to walk forward/backward. Some having restricted movement in the splitting hips joints. most of the alternators do not have a waist joint.

The 1.0 Deluxe seeker mold has all the articulation that a average deluxe vehicle-bot should have. Deluxes are smaller & by default they have less parts/joints. Their are not that many deluxes with a rotate 360 degree waist joint. Like 06,said the toy does have wrist joints.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6439
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: What's articulated joints are necessary & not necessary?

Post by andersonh1 »

Tigermegatron wrote:What? Do you even own or have you played with any TF Alternators/BT toys?

One of the many reasons some FANS hate Alternators is due to the missing joints & awful restricted range of movements joints in the majority of the toys. Like some of them barely being able to bend their knees. Others barely being able to walk forward/backward. Some having restricted movement in the splitting hips joints. most of the alternators do not have a waist joint.
Not to speak for Shockwave, but I'm a FAN, and one who owns all but two of the Alternators. I'm missing Swerve and Rodimus. And as you can probably tell by the fact that I have so many, I LOVE the line. Yes, there are cases where articulation is more limited that I would prefer, but the primary focus of the Alternators was real-world vehicles with excellent details. That aspect of the line came first, with articulation as a secondary focus that had to give way sometimes to the necessity of making the transformation work within the parameters of the real-world vehicle in question.

As such, it's easy to forgive certain missing joints in that line, at least for me. And I had always thought the Alternators were fairly well-liked among the majority of fans.
Post Reply