Now i admit that i have not followed Energon or GF/Cybertron cartoons very closely... and I admit that i am a Dorky GeeWunner.... but....

 

Is it just me or do a LOT of the newer bots have "SUPERMAN" syndrome...

 

I mean i remember back in G1 it seemed like a lot of the bots had pretty average scores and often had some SUPER Ability.

 

But things like Strength 10 was reseved for the LEADERS and GINORMOUS bots...

Never would you see a mini- with something that high (save maybe BRAWN -but then his special power was being TOUGH)

 

Why should Optimus have a 9 or a 10 for speed hes a friggin truck - didnt that used to get reserved for like JETS?

 

The old bios often listed character flaws or weaknesses but i dont see them anymore...

 

or did i miss something?

 

Hunter

i've always been of the opinion that a scale which is 1-10 is too limited for the great variety of characters that are in a tf line. hasbro should make the scale 1-100 or start using decimal points. also, a 5 should rank as average and not low.

really....these bio cards are for little kids anyways, and arent even true to their anime counterpart, so who cares.

OOPS I thought i was in Toys.... sorry - can a mod move this to TOYS?

 

Hunter

They are intended for kids and should be taken with a grain of salt. That being said, I was thinking about it last night and came to the conclusion that there might be some merit to the numbers.

 

If you think about TFs in general, there must be tons of them (pun intended) that are rarely or never seen on screen. The ones that are featured in the show/comics/toys are there because they are special. Think military special forces. In energon (for whatever that is worth) Wing Saber is very weak as a bot until he gets upgraded by Primus, and then there are the Autobots that are essentially cannon fodder (sometimes refered to as minicons, sometimes not).

 

So maybe the numbers really are not as inflated when compared to all TFs, not just those with a toy and specs.

 

Just a thought ...

None the less the original Tech Specs felt more well rounded....

None the less the original Tech Specs felt more well rounded....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's 'cus Bob Budainsky wrote all of the original G1 tech specs & character bios... granted, after the line expanded some things didn't quite add up, but they could have always gone back and fixed that themselves (like DW sort of did with the MTMTE series, but they didn't utilize a numbers system for specs, just fixing Biography holes).  Bob wasn't around when they introduced G2, and they started using the specs he made with some slight variation, but when they started introducing the new characters and new variations of existing characters, everything pretty much went out the window at that point, and they've been fubar'd ever since (with some BW/BM exceptions, but very few).

 

Even though I didn't necessarily like Bob as a story writer, he was damn good at character development and created G1 pretty much himself by just looking at the Diaclone & Microman toys that Hasbro wanted to market, and creating complete personalities from said toys.  Hasbro needs someone with that kind of creativity to step into that role, but that's likely not going to happen.

i've always been of the opinion that a scale which is 1-10 is too limited for the great variety of characters that are in a tf line. hasbro should make the scale 1-100 or start using decimal points. also, a 5 should rank as average and not low.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They did that during the Transmetal 2 line, by using the decimal scale in factors of 0.1.  It was kinda messy.  They're using .5's again in Cybertron, though.

I'm still ticked off they spread the tecspecs across the entire back-card with Cybertron :tdown

So instead I'm clipping the front card instead  :roll

(at this point in time I don't have the room for boxes, besides I LOVE tearing the boxes apart) :mwahaha