Hi again, another little poll here...

Do you prefer Transformers having sparks or not?

The concept of sparks, first appearing in Beast Wars, has become something of a staple of TF lore since and is prominent for example in the current IDW G1 continuity. It has some mystic properties and is something like a "soul" for Transformers, and has given rise to a number of related concepts such as spark siblings, sparkeaters, hot spots, etc and could be seen to have enriched TF mythology in many ways.

On one hand. On the other it makes Transformers a little less sci-fi and a little more fantasy in my opinion, and it complicates TF anatomy a bit... for example, for how long and how far can a transformer´s spark and brain module be apart for them to still stay alive?

In a way, it was simpler back in the day of the Marvel comic, when the mind and life of a Transformers was contained within a brain chip/module and that was it. It makes them feel more robotic in a way.

Now, what do YOU think, and why? Vote and reply!

 

In the G1 cartoon, they talk about something called 'Laser Cores' in very much the same way as modern TF fiction uses sparks. "Extinguish Optimus Prime's Laser Core, stuff like that.

Personally, I think 'Laser Core' is a much cooler term for the Transformers' central power source. I'm not really sure why 'Spark' caught on, of the two.

 

I feel like the spark gives the Transformers more life. As long as there's a co-dependency between the spark and the body, I don't think it's too ridiculous in this franchise of robots who turn into cars and planes and space dragons.

 

I don't want them to be too organic like having souls and kissing and stuff. I want them to be just sentient machines. But if they have sparks, I don't mind if it makes for an interesting story.

 

After thinking about, I think not having sparks is better in a way. It kills off the whole mythology and just makes them advanced AI - which is actually much less problematic when doing the storytelling. You can still leave some mythology intact - like who built them to begin with? You can ask the question and then never answer it.

 

I'd prefer for it to be their term for an intangible soul (which may or may not really exist) rather than a literal mystical energy ball.

 

Do soul really exist?

 

I never cared about the concept of the spark,that stuff was made up in beast wars and fans accepted it without question,never existed in either the marvel comic or cartoon,all I saw with the spark was a robot shell with a ball of light inside it.

 

I'd prefer if we could just do away with sparks. They're usually where all the excessive magic powers in Transformers spin off from. The concept also contradicts the idea of them having brain modules in their heads when you can move their mind and memories around with just the spark.

If we absolutely have to have sparks in Transformers I'd prefer if it was just the energy reactor supplying power to the brain, keeping it active to preserve consciousness. Like the human heart, basically. If the spark goes out and doesn't get jumpstarted right away, the brain loses power, shuts off, and the consciousness ends. If you restart the spark or transplant a new one you can get that character back, but there's the existential crisis of them being "[Character] II", a new mind with the old personality and memories in the same hardware. I think that would keep death relatively permanent yet leave a back door open where characters can come back if necessary, but not without great hesitation and ethical concern since it's a form of cloning the dead.

No. It's a metaphor for consciousness.

 

I personally like the idea of sparks, since it’s another differentiation between ourselves and them. We have no physical life-force, just an ethereal concept. It poses a lot of interesting philisophical questions; if we were to meet a species that has a tangible life-force, how would that change our definition of life?

 

Sparks

 

I like the idea of them having a soul. It doesn't really matter to me what they call it.

 

I like it since it is a something that is uniquely transformers and distinguishes transformers from other sci-fi

 

I don't think there's anything mystical about sparks.

Also technically sparks can't live at all without a body unless you're Starscream.

It also helps to differentiate actual Transformers from Drones because of course Drones have no Sparks. It only really gets complicated in Age of Extinction where some how Galvatron is alive but has no Spark. I still don't understand how that even works.

 

The concept of sparks is so uniquely and interestingly Transformers.

Again, it’s that single idea that distinguishes them as a living organism with a life force as opposed to Skynet and its terminators that are animated by programming/A.I.

 

I don't like the idea of a spark. Never have. I always like that they were just naturally evolving AI. It grounds the in reality. Are they alive? Do they count as life? That's what made them interesting.

The spark diminishes that to an extent.

 

Sparks aren't going away any time soon. I think it's more a matter of how they're applied in different continuities.

Let me propose an idea: the term "Spark" is a dated term for what most bots call the Laser Core, and is basically used interchangeably with it. Drawing from IDW, the Laser Core/Spark is comprised of Photonic Crystals, designed to store energy and information and acts as the central battery within a Cybertronian body. The Brain Module is the center of consciousness, also made of Photonic Crystal derived circuitry. Because of their shared composition, the close connection between the Laser Core and Brain Module cause some information leakage into each other.

 

If you'd read my post, I give my reasons why having a spark makes them more interesting than making them more closely conform with our current understanding of how life develops.

 

Pretty much all this. I like the concepts that were established originally as far as what "makes" a TF. Sparks and souls also sort of throw the entire premise of the Ark crash out the window as I can't see a soul battery for lack of a better term holding power for 4 million years. Though the '86 Movie kind of did the same thing by making the whole death thing a possibility. I would call back to the issue where Jazz is explaining to G. B. Blackrock repair possibilities and also noting Sunstreaker's unlikelihood of being repaired.

So are you basically trying to correct a poster's opinion? Because that's what it seems like.

 

Not exactly. I would like to promote debate, since our two viewpoints are polar opposites. I want to better understand why this guy thinks Transformers should be a life-form that evolved over time, like us, when in my opinion it's better that the Transformers are more alien to us.