That looks very intentional.

 

Sandstorm is very hard to make. Helicopter to dune buggy. Hard to imagine. But maybe it's possible. We saw Liketoys Broadside which is also hard to make but they did it. I would also like good Octane. Sorry but I don't like Stratotanker. Star Toys or FT should tackle him.

To me lips are good. They are nothing like on DS Blaster.

 

This was always a running joke in the UT Sworder thread at the time but I and I assume many others are thankful we have it and Fansproject Assaulter because for a long time coming those may be the only copies of Sandstorm and Broadside available. Sworder isn't so easy to get now so I should have no problem getting my money back if XTB or FT finally do these. I do think matching G1 will be VERY difficult if it is an open air roll cage cockpit for dune buggy but if it is below it is still difficult as hell. I don't think anyone wants it to look EXACTLY like that for a MP version.


UT did a very good job and failed on the mode that everyone that tries is going to fail on. The truth is someone is going to have to take liberties because the dune buggy as well as this character was an afterthought. Springer's car mode looked cool in the movie but when do we ever see this? This is one of the cases that shows the toon was mailed in at times and the character looks incomplete. I do think the bot and dune buggy look very congruent and make sense. It's just the chopper has no correlation. Hell, I cannot even trust this is the actual toon look of the dune buggy because I have seen the cockpit as a roll cage.

If you base your design on the G1 toon it leads you down a dark path of create tons of yellow folding, curved panels for chopper mode in the legs and back areas of the robot and dune buggy. At the expense of the buggy, Sworder forced the design to have the chopper be a complete mode and reuse those features for the buggy. Short of magic I think this will compromise whoever comes next as well. XTB and FT can certainly pull something off so we will see. iBot/Keith has teased Sandstorm and Broadside before but I will believe it when I see renders.

 

Actually I was "Lucky" enough acquire this figure back in 2017?? I believe at retail. Idk what the Ebay/Aftermarket price commands  

 

Sworder went on deep sale a few years ago. I picked one up from BBTS back in 2017 for US$60. He’s never been anything more than a shelf filler, but was decent enough for that price.

 

Sworder isn't a great figure, but it's decent enough considering how tricky Sandstorm is, even for a triple changer. I loved Sandstorm when I was a kid, and I am definitely hoping for a better version of the character to come out at some point, but you know what? I respect Unique Toys for trying even if it falls short of the mark, and if more companies had the balls to tackle lesser known and trickier characters like Sandstorm then maybe the MP market wouldn't feel so bloody stale.

 

On topic…
Someone said this is MMC… is that true?

 

No. Designer already said he’s starting a new company. MMC would have announced it under their brand if it was theirs.

 

I know why. There are two persons with similar names on Weibo: 钢铁星 and 鋼鐵星PSX. The later is associated with MMC.

 

Clearly 2 totally different names  

 

I mean... they are if you remember that different symbols mean different things, no matter the language. "Dog" and "Bag" are different words, despite the similarities between the first two "symbols" in use.

 

钢铁星 and 鋼鐵星

They are the same words, just that one is in Traditional Chinese.

 

They are actually the same words in Chinese. A probably better metaphor is: dog vs DOG.

 

Bah! These bally foreigners need to speak the King's English by jove! Harrumph, and so forth.

 

I only speak non-traditional English.

 

So one is just yelling his name?  

Or you're saying this isn't MMC, but it's mmc.

 

I would assume more color versus colour? Or cheque instead if check?

Or its own thing. Either way, it's apparently same but different.

 

Hmmm, I used a bad metaphor … Please see Pun-3x’s post, which is much better.

 

Traditional Chinese: The original, and a b*tch to write.
Simplified Chinese: Slightly less of a b*tch to write.

But yes they're the same. The best comparison to english speaking folks would be writing in old English font vs Comic sans

 

Is the best example not:

1 vs one, 2 vs two, etc?

So in an alternate universe I'm posting as fourtwofourninedavid, not 4249david...and so on?