Hello, I pretty much a newbie and don't have much Transformer toy. While discuss on some transformer topic Social media. At some point, it lead to this statement that i still can't help and question "What? How ? " till this day:

"Transformer Movie design is easier to make toy than G1 (or any cartoonish design for that matter)"

Of course, logically, i don't believe such a thing. I try to ask again, and get the same result with another collector. So to show how shock i am, i once again seek for the anwser: Do that even possible ?

The discussion go nowhere, Its become too vague. I give some mere evaluation from a rookie try proving such a thing is bullshit to more experiment, veteran collector, while they repeat their point. But if it is me, who some dumpass didn't know any better, enlighten me !



So it go like this if you interest to hear more:

• while i said movie design have a lot of Alt part to hide in Bot form. they said movie design is easier, 3d model is already made for the film. While G1 is hand draw, it harder to make the part in right length would fit both in Alt and Bot for
• While i ask then why g1 design in fact already have plenty model. There is even legend size that look close. While movie is hardly look close to their design. They answer it is because G1 have more fan, who willing to spend great amount to get the figure. A better risk to take.

Honestly they both sound bullshit.

• The first point, The movie's toy is nowhere near what it look in movie, so WTf they even on about ? For g1, that sound like someone making a custom part by part, because how it stop you to make a g1 3d model again ?
• The second: pretty sure there are 3a and other expensive movie figure, so that bullshit reason, Is it really that big risk when one design can look good in legend size, while the other is hardly close even in Voyager scale

 

Would depend on the figure, but broadly speaking...

My understanding is that the filmmakers generally didn't consider toy manufacturing when designing the robot modes, which forces the toy manufacturers to do their best approximation.

With G1, the cartoon designs were based on pre-existing toy figures, which should generally make it easier to bridge the gap.

 

Probably a case by case basis.

Both movie and G1 characters come in different sizes and designs.

A 1-step version of Barricade might be simpler to make than a deluxe version of the same character.

Movie characters might need more sculpting due to the Movie makers applying more details to promote realism.

The G1 toys weren't as simplistic or devoid of detail as the cartoon and comics suggest. Their animation models were simplified to make it easier to animate them.

 

More or less this...with a complication.

In G1, you have the pre-1986 toys that, as misterd said, were more detailed and not beholden to the animation. The animation adapted to the toy, not the other way around.

That changed with the 1986 movie and season 3 on. Once Hasbro ran out of Diaclone figures to release, they began designing the figures on their own to match their animation concepts. Suddenly, you have Kup with weird hingey arms and Blurr with weird skinny legs as the toy designers tried to adapt the animation design.

The films had the same challenges but even worse as the animation team seemed to be even more disconnected to the toy design team...at least in 2007, that is. I think things smoothed out by the time they got to DotM but some of those 2007 toys look pretty off.

So, in short, it's always easier to make toys first and then let the animation worry about adaptation than the reverse. Consider the recent Power Rangers movie Megazord...they clearly made the Megazord in a studio first and then let Bandai of America sweat over it.
This:

Equaled this?

 

Movie

 

Yeah.

It depends on the character.

That said, movie designs have so many moving parts that any toy will have to cheat somewhere. It's probably easier the fewer parts are visible between both modes.

Cartoon designs cheat by having parts change shape between modes so it takes a lot of cleverness to make the design have the correct proportions in both modes.

I think CERTAIN movie designs can basically all share the same handful of "cheats" so figuring out one approach allows you to copy it more.

Whereas cartoon designs require more individual attention for each design that isn't a recolor of another.

And let's also look at what passes for good now. WFC is better engineered than most of what preceded it if you set aside plastic quality or hollowness and just look at design.

But there are still compromises. The Hoist/Trailbreaker figures share engineering whereas the cartoon gave them different body types.

Even the MPs made the Datsuns share a body type when they had variation in the cartoon.

So I don't think either movie or cartoon can be done perfectly. What happens generally is they can learn from everything done before though -- and that's basically always going to run up against budget and using too many steps, resulting in breakage points.

And even if plastic quality goes down or figures get more hollow, there's a competing demand for more articulation, more accuracy, and doing it in 30 steps or fewer.

 

I would say movie is more difficult. The best evidence is 3rd Party Legends Scale. Magic Squares Optimus and New Age’s Megatron figures are literally pocket size MP figures.

Movie is popular in 3P too. Look at the millions of Bee movie Optimi figures. You would assume a company would attempt something. It’s just a lot of characters don’t have easy transitions. Especially in later movies.

 

Depends on the level of detail present in the toy. For MP, g1 is way harder to design.
For example, lets' compare MP movie ironhide and barricade to MP Optimus and megatron 2.0 3.0. MPM iron hide looks exactly like his cg model, likely because they already had relatively recent 3d cad files to work from. Translating 3d to, well, 3d plastic is a normal part of the design process. However, with MP optimus and megatron, you add another, harder step, translating an inconsistent 2d collection of drawings into a consistent 3 model that can transform into a equally consistent alternate mode. Obviously the mpm's also had to figure out transformation, but there's established 3d proportions of their alt modes and robot modes, the same cannot be said for

 

Really depends on the character. Megatron for example. I have MP36 and MPM8. The G1 version is much more complex because of their respective alt modes.

 

Movie designs have the advantage of having a 3D render to go off of. G1 designs were often highly simplified to the point of having little resemblance to what the character transformed into (eg: most wheels were gone or just black circles). So when designing a toy from the G1 cartoon, a lot of parts have to vanish, rendering a figure with lots of panel lines from all those hiding flaps.

 

Depend on the level of detail, yeah. Then we also need to pick a equal level for movie figure right ?
So, for G1, I don't know if they try to represent the same look in cartoon frame, while all the pose, angle it self is inconsistent to begin with. That would mean they are try and reached even HIGHER LEVEL here. Then can we even said that MPM are even reach the equal level of accurate, If they are possible easier to make ?

From what i see, MPM of Optimus really not that close at all. His body look fat and not that accurate. So he not even close to just the design alone.

And, if they are not, then there are quite number of LEGEND size figure of G1 already look accurate for me. But hardly any voyager, that look passable. Just only recently, we have more movie 3rd party figure. But again, they are at different price than these G1 legend class.
Also, with Bumblebee's design, we have a lot of figure that are quite close, it is clearly it is is a lot easier to make than bayfomer's design. And i think that is even prove one of my original point: "Movie have a lot more part to hide". Because Bumblebee's design keep a lot of vehicle part in bot mode just like G1

 

Movie you can cheat easier with because you can have "inside out" transformations (see most of Unique Toy's offerings) with details that look-kinda-sorta like the CGI but don't stand up to heavy scrutiny. Cartoon-style is harder because you can't cheat in either mode as easily.

One just has to compare the two MP Bumblebees and MP-10 vs MP-44 for how going super-duper cartoon style requires absolutely nuts engineering. And sure they could have done them both somewhat simpler, but it wouldn't have been as perfect.