is the hunt over?

[Dominic]

I saw this question in another group, and am wondering where others are in terms of the hobby?

For the last 7~8 years, especially the last ~5, Hasbro has been releasing good toys of the original characters, often specifically drawing form animation models.

There have been a few duds (such as "Legacy" Motormaster), and a few missing characters (mostly "somebody's obscure favorite"). But, for the most part, if your favorite character(s) were in the cartoon or comics before 1991, you probably have at least one good (or at least good-enough) toy representing them on your shelf.

Has anybody hit their "goal" yet?

[andersonh1]

I'm pretty opportunistic now in terms of collecting. The last real "I wish they'd make this figure" I wanted for years was a comic accurate Jhiaxus, and we finally got one. Other than that, I just get the occasional figure that appeals to me. The Studio Series have probably been my main purchases recently. I'd like to get the Titan class Omega Supreme, but given how much a figure of that size costs, I don't know if it will happen.

[Sparky Prime]

I've been sticking to the Beast Wars characters. Pretty happy they made all of the season 1 cast and Legacy TM2 Megatron and I also got the Studio Series RotB Maximals. My Legacy Tigerhawk was actually supposed to arrive today, but it got delayed at the last minute and now isn't arriving until next week apparently. Besides that, the only other figure they've (sort of) announced is Silverbolt. That's pretty much my goal at this point, unless they announce any additional BW figures.

[Dominic]

The Beast figures are sort of weird. They are the first time in a long time where "look the other way" is still somewhat acceptable.

"Beast Wars" is from the late 90s, the last time that toys were not assumed/required to look like the control art and animation models. Honey Bear and I marveled at figures that would be wholly unacceptable by today's standards, such as many of the Transmetals. (I happily bought Rampage in 1998. That figure would be unacceptable now.)

The only way to pull off certain characters is using facade parts that would normally be unacceptable (such as with Tarantulas, Blackarachnia or Dinobot). In the case of Dinobot, the results are stil bad. (That raptor mode is awful.) But, in other cases, such as Tarantulas, it is the only way to make the toy look right in both modes.

A surprising amount of those figures have reminded me why I liked BW. (And, you know how much I have soured on the best era over the last ~20 years.) My biggest gripe with the Target exclusive Blackarachnia (inspired by the original package-art) is that I do not have a good place to display it.

The Studio Series have probably been my main purchases recently. I'd like to get the Titan class Omega Supreme, but given how much a figure of that size costs, I don't know if it will happen.

I treat Studio and Legacy as basically the same line. ("Kingdoms" Cyclonus and "Legacy" Galvatron look more like aStudio-grade toys than "Studio Series" Scourge.)

Think twice about Omega Supreme. Besides the size and cost, that figure is over-engineered with facade parts and other problems that a toy that size really should not have.

[Sparky Prime]

Honey Bear and I marveled at figures that would be wholly unacceptable by today's standards, such as many of the Transmetals. (I happily bought Rampage in 1998. That figure would be unacceptable now.)

How so? The Transmetals are among the best figures of the Beast Wars line. I was never a big fan of Rampage personally... In-particular the tank treads can be a pain to deal with, but otherwise, it's alright. A few updates wouldn't hurt, but for a ~25 year old toy, it still holds up fairly well.

The only way to pull off certain characters is using facade parts that would normally be unacceptable (such as with Tarantulas, Blackarachnia or Dinobot). In the case of Dinobot, the results are stil bad. (That raptor mode is awful.) But, in other cases, such as Tarantulas, it is the only way to make the toy look right in both modes.

Blackarachnia and Tarantulas I think are the perfect examples of how to do it right. It actually doesn't feel like false parts on them to me, but in robot mode is more of a decorative element (like the face plate thing Cheetor and Tigatron have) and is hidden away in beast mode, making both modes look great. So while it may be situational, I'd agree in general, false parts tend to be pretty bad.

[Dominic]

The Transmetals are among the best figures of the Beast Wars line. I

Beast Wars was 25+ years ago.

The face-sculpts on many of the Transmetals are terrible. The articulation, while amazing for 1997 (better than many action figures for the time) has not aged well. (Much of it was stuff that Hasbro could have done in 1997, but nobody expected at the time.)

The season 1 characters were terrible in terms of screen-accuracy. Tarantulas, Dinobot and others break the laws of physics. (Tarantulas and Blackarachnia have different numbers of beast eyes between two modes.) Facade parts are necessary, which is why I am a little more forgiving on the beast characters than I would normally be.

(That being said, why the hell is the paint chipping off of my Tigatron?)

[Sparky Prime]

Beast Wars was 25+ years ago.

As I said, some updates wouldn't hurt, but just being older doesn't mean the original figures are "unacceptable now", or even that a newer version would necessarily be better. Take the PotP Evolution Optimal Optimus figure as an example. The 'evolution' gimmick alone was enough to make me skip that figure because of how it compromised the design, not to mention they removed the ground vehicle mode.

The face-sculpts on many of the Transmetals are terrible.

Room for some improvement on one or two of them perhaps (Cheetor's gnashed teeth expression in-particular), but I wouldn't say any of them are terrible.

The articulation, while amazing for 1997 (better than many action figures for the time) has not aged well. (Much of it was stuff that Hasbro could have done in 1997, but nobody expected at the time.)

Even by today's standards, they still have more than a fair range of articulation, on par with some modern day figures. Perhaps better in some cases.

The season 1 characters were terrible in terms of screen-accuracy. Tarantulas, Dinobot and others break the laws of physics. (Tarantulas and Blackarachnia have different numbers of beast eyes between two modes.) Facade parts are necessary, which is why I am a little more forgiving on the beast characters than I would normally be.

The season 1 characters are a whole different topic. The toys had already been developed, and the earliest animation models Mainframe created actually were modeled very closely after them, complete with the mutant heads and all. But, to my understanding, they would have been too complicated to fully animate at the time, so Mainframe had to make some changes to simplify them somewhat.

[Dominic]

As I said, some updates wouldn't hurt, but just being older doesn't mean the original figures are "unacceptable now", or even that a newer version would necessarily be better. Take the PotP Evolution Optimal Optimus figure as an example. The 'evolution' gimmick alone was enough to make me skip that figure because of how it compromised the design, not to mention they removed the ground vehicle mode.

The older figures are still "okay" because of when they were made. But, if a modern figure had those problems, it would not be okay.

I recall the Evolution Optimal Optimus (2018 I think it was). That was a uniquely bad toy. Stuff like that, or the "Masterpiece" (2013, maybe) Rodimus I generally ignore, just because they are so far out of bounds.

Room for some improvement on one or two of them perhaps (Cheetor's gnashed teeth expression in-particular), but I wouldn't say any of them are terrible.

I thought it was more of a mouth grill than teeth. But, it was awful. It looked bad then. But, standards were still much lower at the time. Rattrap was bad enough that I almost skipped that toy entirely, even using the lower standards of 1998. Rampage's crab legs were a problem. But, compared to the kibble issues on toys that were less than 5 years old at the time, they were acceptable.

In modern terms, I have significant buyer's remorse about "Legacy" Blitzwing. But, by 1998 standards, that toy would be amazing.

As for articulation, I am thinking of things like movable wrists, or Megatron's hip-fans. Those should have been movable in 1997.

The season 1 characters are a whole different topic. The toys had already been developed, and the earliest animation models Mainframe created actually were modeled very closely after them, complete with the mutant heads and all. But, to my understanding, they would have been too complicated to fully animate at the time, so Mainframe had to make some changes to simplify them somewhat.

Mainframe also made aesthetic cheats, which were acceptable at the time. (Dinobot is the most obvious example. But, most of the season 1 characters have this issue to some degree.)

[Sparky Prime]

The older figures are still "okay" because of when they were made. But, if a modern figure had those problems, it would not be okay.

Modern figures DO have those "problems", and are still okay. Legacy TM2 Megatron that came out a year or two ago? Not a good face sculpt. But I'm not going to label that entire line, or even that particular figure as "unacceptable" just because of that face sculpt. Could be a little better, but it's still a great figure. And again, the Beast Wars figures have largely aged extremely well, it's not simply a matter of when they were made that they are still okay today.

I recall the Evolution Optimal Optimus (2018 I think it was). That was a uniquely bad toy. Stuff like that, or the "Masterpiece" (2013, maybe) Rodimus I generally ignore, just because they are so far out of bounds.

You can't just ignore those figures exist, and you're side stepping the point I was making.

But, standards were still much lower at the time.

Standards were not "lower at the time", there is no set standard here. The difference is designing and engineering have continued to evolve since then, allowing for more complex and detailed figures.

Rattrap was bad enough that I almost skipped that toy entirely, even using the lower standards of 1998. Rampage's crab legs were a problem. But, compared to the kibble issues on toys that were less than 5 years old at the time, they were acceptable.

What didn't you like about Rattrap? How is Rampage's crab legs a problem?

As for articulation, I am thinking of things like movable wrists,

The brand new Legacy Tigerhawk figure I just got this week doesn't have moveable wrists.

or Megatron's hip-fans. Those should have been movable in 1997.

I'm not so sure about that. The engineering to pull that off may have added to the cost of the figure, and Hasbro was (and still is) pretty strict about keeping figures at certain price points.

Mainframe also made aesthetic cheats, which were acceptable at the time. (Dinobot is the most obvious example. But, most of the season 1 characters have this issue to some degree.)

Pretty much all animation makes aesthetic cheats, and is still as acceptable today as it was back then.

[Dominic]

You can't just ignore those figures exist, and you're side stepping the point I was making.

Those figures are outliers, and do not work as reference points.

The bad face-sculpts and lower articulation were more common in "Beast Wars". But, they were acceptable at the time because standards/expectations were lower.

Standards were not "lower at the time", there is no set standard here. The difference is designing and engineering have continued to evolve since then, allowing for more complex and detailed figures.

The design and engineering standards are why standards and expectations were lower.

Pretty much all animation makes aesthetic cheats, and is still as acceptable today as it was back then.

Starting with the "Unicron Trilogy", Hasbro was more careful about making sure that toys and animation models were consistent.