|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 4, 2008 13:43:27 GMT -5
I just don't see the appeal of the CM version. It looks a little too "weak" in general to me. I'm sure it's fine structurally, I'm just talking about the look with the plastic, proportions, and colors. If the CM was version was a perfect transformation then I could see getting it over the Miraclehouse version, but where they are both parts-formers..mmm, Miraclehouse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primetoystore on Feb 6, 2008 23:05:58 GMT -5
Does anyone know the official Japanese release date for the Megahouse versions?
|
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 7, 2008 16:11:02 GMT -5
I just don't see the appeal of the CM version. It looks a little too "weak" in general to me. I'm sure it's fine structurally, I'm just talking about the look with the plastic, proportions, and colors. If the CM was version was a perfect transformation then I could see getting it over the Miraclehouse version, but where they are both parts-formers..mmm, Miraclehouse. According to reports, only the arm guns needs to be detached for transformation. Therefore, the CM's version is the only one with a perfect transformation. And to have metal. |
|
|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 7, 2008 19:31:32 GMT -5
I just don't see the appeal of the CM version. It looks a little too "weak" in general to me. I'm sure it's fine structurally, I'm just talking about the look with the plastic, proportions, and colors. If the CM was version was a perfect transformation then I could see getting it over the Miraclehouse version, but where they are both parts-formers..mmm, Miraclehouse. According to reports, only the arm guns needs to be detached for transformation. Therefore, the CM's version is the only one with a perfect transformation. And to have metal. I thought CM's Ride Armor would structurally be ok even though it looked weak, but so far just about everyone's review I've read of the CM version has said it has a lot of fiddly, stability issues and delicate points making it a not playable. In fact many people have stated that they plan to get the Megahouse version, hoping for a figure that works better as playable figure.. which of course leads to the whole issue of poorly done "perfect transformation". Unfortunately it seems CM's poorly implemented transformation makes it far from being a "perfect transformation". This has always been a problem with CM transformations generally. They often don't have the engineering abilities to accomplish what they set out to do. But I guess this doesn't mean the Megahouse will be better neccessarily, but my bet is that it will be a much more stable figure. |
|
|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 7, 2008 19:38:58 GMT -5
..and I'm thinking the Megahouse wheels might actually roll too.
|
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 7, 2008 20:10:37 GMT -5
This has always been a problem with CM transformations generally. They often don't have the engineering abilities to accomplish what they set out to do. Well, partsforming is even worse engineering if you ask me, it says the designers are unable to produce something that transforms from form A to form B without major cheats. I prefer a more delicate toy (I don't play with that stuff the way a kid would) that offers nice transformation solutions. I don't see anything impressive with the Megahouse version, it just looks nice. And looking nice is not enough for me, I need more out of my toys. |
|
|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 7, 2008 20:50:28 GMT -5
This has always been a problem with CM transformations generally. They often don't have the engineering abilities to accomplish what they set out to do. Well, partsforming is even worse engineering if you ask me, it says the designers are unable to produce something that transforms from form A to form B without major cheats. I prefer a more delicate toy (I don't play with that stuff the way a kid would) that offers nice transformation solutions. I don't see anything impressive with the Megahouse version, it just looks nice. And looking nice is not enough for me, I need more out of my toys. But is transforming worth making a figure fully or even partially defective? Perfect transformation is awesome, but I want the figure to work successfully and be able to hold itself together in it's respective modes. I'll let partsforming slide to some degree when it doesn't feel like it destroyed the integrity of the figure and the result is a better figure for doing so. In other words, did the end justify the means? Partsforming as cheating?..hmm, I know what you are saying. Think of it like this, if a figure that can't be moved around and hold itself together but has perfect transformation might not be cheating, but it dropped out of the race before it could even run. I mean what's worse than a figure that has such fragile parts in order to "perfectly transform" that it was a defective toy, straight up (CM's GGGG DX and Yamato's Megazone 23 Garland for example) and the company sells it like this knowing that it doesn't work. Well anyway, a lot people don't like this discussion, but either way you look at it, companies need to consider these issues. |
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 7, 2008 22:57:09 GMT -5
I wanna see for myself. I can't count how many reports I've read about toys breaking or not performing for various reasons only to find out it's never the case when I get them. For exemple : -Movie DLX '77 Bumblebee defective automorph : mine is fine -Movie Voyager Blackout defective automorph : mine is fine -Movie DLX Payload : balancing issues : I can pose mine with no problem -Movie DLX Barricade : hair trigger arm : mine is fine -Movie Leader Brawl : defective automorph : mine is fine -Masterpiece Voltron : paint chipping and breakage : mine is fine -Toynami Masterpiece Alpha : various QC problems : mine is fine -Masterpiece Megatron : parts flying off during transformation : never had that problem -Yamato Garland : breaking metal bars : mine is fine -Yamato YF-19 : breakage : mine is fine -Yamato SV-51 : floppyness : mine is fine And so on. I must be excessively lucky.  |
|
|
|
Post by Chen on Feb 8, 2008 16:53:16 GMT -5
So what's the deal are you getting two figures in a box or just one?
|
|
|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 8, 2008 17:54:49 GMT -5
I wanna see for myself. I can't count how many reports I've read about toys breaking or not performing for various reasons only to find out it's never the case when I get them. For exemple : -Movie DLX '77 Bumblebee defective automorph : mine is fine -Movie Voyager Blackout defective automorph : mine is fine -Movie DLX Payload : balancing issues : I can pose mine with no problem -Movie DLX Barricade : hair trigger arm : mine is fine -Movie Leader Brawl : defective automorph : mine is fine -Masterpiece Voltron : paint chipping and breakage : mine is fine -Toynami Masterpiece Alpha : various QC problems : mine is fine -Masterpiece Megatron : parts flying off during transformation : never had that problem -Yamato Garland : breaking metal bars : mine is fine -Yamato YF-19 : breakage : mine is fine -Yamato SV-51 : floppyness : mine is fine And so on. I must be excessively lucky. Maybe so, or it might be that you don't really mess around with your figures much, like you said (..you don't "play" with them). It's common for many collectors to transform figures once or twice and then they go on the shelf and that's about it. You can prevent even the weakest and worst designs from breaking simply by not messing around with them. In fact, I have a couple of figures that I don't mess around with because I can see from experience that these figures have engineering problems and I don't want them to break, so I simply leave them alone. As far as floppy and fiddly issues go, most figures will be relatively tight out of the box, but a poorly designed figure gets moved around or transformed half a dozen times and the joints are shot. I guess what I'm saying is that, yes you might be lucky, but when people report the problems they have with these figures it's because they are real problems that arise when the figures are handled in the prescribed manner that the figure is expected to be able to endure but can't. |
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 8, 2008 20:49:59 GMT -5
Oh, I transform them often, but I know how to handle them properly, unlike certain other fans that seem to be breaking their toys regularly. I remember seing a certain famous reviewer being VERY rough with his high-end toys, which was nonsense to me. That's like driving a Ferrari offroad.
That said, you also see that kind of behavior with regular toys. God, I can't count how many people tried to transform and broke '77 BB without first pushing the damn automorph button on the hood although it was in the instructions. Some people brag about not using instructions, yet they complain when they break their toys.
I don't consider CM's (or Yamato or SOC) toys "toys" as in "can be handled by a kid without fear of breakage". They're high-end transforming pieces mostly meant for display or to be carefully transformed/handled by adults with care. I don't think CM's intend their $200 toys to be bought by/for kids.
And I buy only one of each.
|
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 18, 2008 22:48:41 GMT -5
Got it today!    I love it! PROS -very intricate perfect transformation -tons of articulation -nicely detailed -die-cast (wheel rods + chest) -rubber tires -accessories (hands, gun, stick, spare parts) -despite the plastic being thin (by design, because of all the moving parts in such a tiny package), it doesn't look like it would break unless you force it -extra parts can be stored in the bike's 3 compartments CONS -windscreen broke off when I took the toy out of the box (nothing super glue could't fix in seconds) -the small size makes the transformation difficult with lots of small parts to move around -arm poseability is limited in combined mode -wheels don't roll in bike mode |
|
|
|
Post by goldenage on Feb 19, 2008 12:43:24 GMT -5
is that from toynami?
|
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 19, 2008 13:06:05 GMT -5
CM's (Brave Gokin series)
|
|
|
|
Post by nikodiablo on Feb 20, 2008 1:39:57 GMT -5
Hmm. The broken windshield was frequently reported - and the wheels in bike mode don't roll?
That's kind of strange... The rubber wheel is nice tho!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Zarak on Feb 22, 2008 6:37:54 GMT -5
for the mospeada valks are better the cms or the Aoshima?
|
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 22, 2008 11:35:33 GMT -5
There are no CM's valks (edit : yet, because one is coming)... Just Toynami and Aoshima (if you're talking about the masterpiece version). Apparently, the newer version (Aoshima) is as bad if not worse than the Toynami version. Although I have the Toynami version and it is just fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by xiombarg on Feb 23, 2008 0:22:59 GMT -5
Atom over at CollectionDX did a recent article from Toyfair and was able to handle a MH ride armor. He said it felt very sturdy and looked great. Toynami is going to distribute the MH Ride Armor here in the states, which means not only will it cost a fraction of what CM's Ride Armor costs, but the shipping will be minimal. Interesting article, check it out: www.collectiondx.com/node/2230 |
|
|
|
Post by megatroptimus on Feb 23, 2008 8:20:51 GMT -5
I'll probably get is as well... and hopefully the original version too.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilson on Feb 24, 2008 1:45:02 GMT -5
Atom over at CollectionDX did a recent article from Toyfair and was able to handle a MH ride armor. He said it felt very sturdy and looked great. Toynami is going to distribute the MH Ride Armor here in the states, which means not only will it cost a fraction of what CM's Ride Armor costs, but the shipping will be minimal. Interesting article, check it out: www.collectiondx.com/node/2230good to know that toynami will be distributing the MH riding Armor. i am trying really hard on not buying the CM riding armor. it's just too small for my tasts. i almost ordered it last nite. i don't know how long i can hold off from buying the CM riding armor. |
|
