The last thing I ordered from them took a week usually takes two. But that was right before they said orders will take longer.

 

We were adding to the discussion.  

 

LOL! Showing your age a little bit.

 

I never said you can't discuss, chill dude. Fwiw I think most FT transformations are utter dog turd (especially the stuff over the last few years) so, as I see it, you either are at peace with it because you like the end product or you aren't and you pass.

It's that simple.

 

Marsellus says chill those ####### out...

 

Dude, are you ok? Nothing anybody said necessitates that extreme a reaction.

 

I’m disputing your point of view, which inherently means I’m seeing it and pointing out the false claims of it.

You are confusing the design of the character, which is separate from the engineering of a specific toy of that character to bring that design to life. So not only is the logic behind your arguments bad but so is your understanding of the discussion.

MP Ironhide is the perfect example of your bad logic — that by parts connecting over one another (an engineering discussion not a character design discussion), the parts that comprise the transformation are part of the design of the character’s body part. Ironhide’s chest, from his design, is the front of the van. To pull their engineering off for the MP figure, Takara folds the top and side of the van inside the chest. By your logic, because the front of the van clips over the top and side, the top and side of the van are Ironhide’s chest. they aren’t. The front of the van is his chest and everything folded inside of it is simply how the body of the bot is engineered out of the alt mode to execute the design.

And it works in reverse, as MP Bumblebee and XTB Cliffjumper reflect by having the alt mode tops and windows being a shell that cover the chest of the bot that is also supposed to look like the car top and windows but aren’t actually part of the alt mode. By your logic the bot chests are actually the car top and windows because the shell that makes up the actual car top and windows connects over the chest. That’s utter nonsense and completely ignorant of what fake parts in transformations are which isn’t a new concept.

 

No one has ever won an argument on the internet. Neither of you are going to suddenly see this from the other’s point of view.

Back to Sheridan, that dude’s video was agony to watch BUT the transformation didn’t look too bad. It all seems to make sense and doesnt seem to have too many fiddly/linyuppy bits.

I cannot wait to get this in hand, call me cautiously optimistic

 

An argument is won based on the merits of the argument not whether the other arguer accepts it.

I agree, the transformation looked fine even if the person doing it seemed to struggle with it at points.

 

When doing a math proof, absolutely. Otherwise, I'm afraid that we are all fallible, mortal humans with emotions and preconceptions and an imperfect ability to convey thoughts from one person to another; the way an argument is presented has as much to do with it being accepted as the merits of the argument.

Frankly, whether or not the people involved have had their morning coffee probably has more to do with it than the merits of the argument.

Speaking of which, I should get some coffee.

EDIT: Oh, sorry, you mentioned that acceptance has nothing to do with winning an argument. I should have also said: I'm not sure that an argument is won if the other person isn't convinced. If at least someone - a bystander, maybe - isn't convinced.

Man, shoulda had that coffee first.

 

Math is not the only subject in which the truth of a matter can be established.

 

I'd say that's an exaggeration (I've lost plenty of internet arguments and I'd like to think I've won my fair share as well) but there are reasons for that perception. The anonymity coupled with the imprecision of text based communication seems to lend itself to misunderstandings and extreme reactions. In this case, it seems that each side is arguing against their perception of what the other has said rather than what each is actually trying to say. If, instead of mischaracterizing the other's side, each were to make a greater attempt to understand what the other is saying (I believe one party is more guilty than the other but, for the sake of not stirring things up further, I'll keep which one that is to myself) they'd probably see that there really isn't even an argument here because their opinions aren't as mutually exclusive at they've been portrayed.

 

The trapdoor is actually the back of the head. Neat. It's a fair trade off for the fake turret.

It's better than I thought. Bot mode is a bit too slim for my taste, and Wardog's alt mode is still the best one... But overall this looks like a solid release and the best g1 Warpath to date.

 

For sure!

But now, if we are to establish truth, let us define all the inputs and variables of our truth-finding expedition. What is "engineering"? What is "fake part"? What is "transformation"? Let's define these parts concretely and exhaustively, such that all involved agree to the starting terms. Then we can figure it out!

Until we do that, we're all just a buncha dopes shooting the breeze, not noble truth-seekers.

 

So... anyone got any comparison pics next to other FT products (that are out in the world) or Takara bots?

 

Yea, would have liked to see some articulation and size comparison!

 

What you are arguing, though, is that we are engaged in a semantic argument in which we are disagreeing on the definition of terms. That’s not the case.

the argument wasn’t that the chest wasn’t a fake part that was meant to look like it was the turret of the tank mode, the argument was that because the actual turret of the tank was hidden inside the chest, it was thus the chest.

beyond that, those are rudimentary and basic concepts in this hobby that have been used so frequently without confusion that there is no need to have to define them for this discussion or everytime a similar discussion takes place. Anyone confused or ignorant of them is the exception and needs to educate themselves before engaging in a discussion about them.

 

Are usually hate fake chests but here fin toys an excellent job because you can’t see it in either mode. I think we’re people say they don’t like fake Chesley mean like the Cliff jumper that came out and his entire fake car top became a backpack. This guy, on the other hand, hides the Shell in tank mode so you can’t even see it. I think are usually hate fake chests but here fin toys an excellent job because you can’t see it in either mode. I think we’re people say they don’t like fake chess they mean like the Cliff jumper that came out and his entire fake car top became a backpack. This guy, on the other hand, hides the shell in tank mode so you can’t even see it. I think That if you’re able to talk everything away in an elegant fashion it kind of makes the argument moot. Obviously the proportions on the cartoon in robot mode versus tank mode or different therefore Fanstoys found a very elegant way to account for both modes.

As with other discussions about not liking Fanstoys, I do think Fanstoys is my favorite third-party company and I always love how their figures look but I can’t say that I always enjoy transforming them. I haven’t really enjoyed Fanstoys transformation since the Dinobots. Rouge is so bad that I’m scared to ever change her back in the car mode because I may never get her back in the robot mode again. I had displayed her in car mode for months just changing her that one time and when I came back to move back to robot mode to store her I thought I would never figure it out. I actually wondered if I’d have to just get rid of her because I couldn’t figure out how to put her in a bot mode.

 

 

Dude, you already won. The other guy ragequit, deleted all his posts and, if his PM to me is to be believed has quit the site altogether. That's the definition of winning an internet argument. No need to keep going  

 

The figure looks great and I wasn’t even criticizing it. I was surprised at the fake turret chest because it was unexpected. I was disappointed years ago at such prominent fake parts, but, as my initial comment expressed, at this point I expect them, and when done well aren’t an issue for me. I think this is a figure in which it’s done exceptionally well.