To further add to my payload ire *I had to get out the door early this morning and didn't have time to add my reasoning* it's primarily the quality control of this guy that's appaling. I don't think there was many tfs this year that feel apart by looking at it funny.. and things that should be firmly attached even! It's not like he has head articulation or anything.. so why does his head unit keep popping off? It really kind of was a dissapointment.. a transformer with a unqiue altmode.. totally sucked ass. I'm not even miffed that he comes with a lance impaled through him 24/7.

 

Should of called him Movie Waspinator if his robot mode is a pile of scrap.. :tflaugh

I still say the biggest line flop were the Cyber Slammers.

 

And don't be giving me any of that "but it's for little kids" sh!t either...

 

I have some pre-school Transformers in my collection - some My First Transformers, 1-2-3 Transformers and Go-Bots (aka Transformers Big Adventures), and I appreciate them for what they are as Transformers for earlier infants. And in that context, they work fine - I really like the Go-Bots. Mototron's my favourite as he actually has an 'automorphing' gimmick - the head rises and falls into the body as you rotate the waist 180 degrees. So I do have appreciation for pre-school Transformers.

 

But even at that level I find Cyber Slammers to be quite insulting to the intelligence of pre-schoolers. Unless an infant is severely retarded with really fcuked up cognitive and gross motor-coordinative abilities, I cannot see any appeal in a Cyber Slammer for an infant. I can even appreciate the Fast Action Battlers better than Cyber Slammers. As sh!t as the FABs are, at least they still actually transform.

 

Get the fcuk out of here!

Get the fcuk out of here!

Gee, that looks familiar.

 

Oh, right

 

I think a comparison to Runabout and Runamok would be more accurate. Both they and the Cyberslammers have the same, self-transforming, action feature.

Get the fcuk out of here!

Gee, that looks familiar.

 

Oh, right

 

That Goldbug toy is from 1987. The Cyber Slammers, however, came out in 2007. I'm agreeing with Goki here. The FAB were perfect for the really little ones. The Cyber Slammers were just stupid.

I still say the biggest line flop were the Cyber Slammers.

 

And don't be giving me any of that "but it's for little kids" sh!t either...

 

I have some pre-school Transformers in my collection - some My First Transformers, 1-2-3 Transformers and Go-Bots (aka Transformers Big Adventures), and I appreciate them for what they are as Transformers for earlier infants. And in that context, they work fine - I really like the Go-Bots. Mototron's my favourite as he actually has an 'automorphing' gimmick - the head rises and falls into the body as you rotate the waist 180 degrees. So I do have appreciation for pre-school Transformers.

 

But even at that level I find Cyber Slammers to be quite insulting to the intelligence of pre-schoolers. Unless an infant is severely retarded with really fcuked up cognitive and gross motor-coordinative abilities, I cannot see any appeal in a Cyber Slammer for an infant. I can even appreciate the Fast Action Battlers better than Cyber Slammers. As sh!t as the FABs are, at least they still actually transform.

 

Get the fcuk out of here!

 

 

I guess most children are retarded then because non-transformable cars with similar motorized action are being sold by the gallon. Cyber Slammers are no different than Jumpstarters of Throttlebots, which sold well I'm sure.

 

And please stop implying that all FABs are easy to transform, some of them are as complex as regular deluxe figures (or even harder to transform than Voyager Megatron or Cybertron Vector Prime).

All the 2007 Transformers Movie toys except Leader class Optimus Prime, followed closely by any Optimus Prime repaint toys (i.e. iPod Optimus Prime, Classics Ultra Magnus, etc.)

Wait, what?

 

Did I just see Slaughtermaster insult every toy that WASN'T an Optimus Prime? Or is one of us misreading?

 

Back in 2005 I got him to admit Classics Optimus looked good. :tflaugh

 

I DENY!!!

 

2007 Movie Optimus Prime and Cybertron Optimus Prime (armored up mode) are the only Optimus Primes that I would leave intact and undamaged on my shelves.

 

Another 2007 TF toy flop I like to add is 3" Titaniums. I really don't see the point of these toys/chess pieces.

Cyber Slammers are waaaaay below the level of Throttlebots (and even Battlechargers!).

 

From Cliffbee.com's Cyber Slammer Autobot Ratchet review:

 

"I've seen some fans compare the CyberSlammers to the Throttlebots - but the latter have legs, and while they're short, they ensure that the Throttlebot robot forms are robots - despite the bad proportions. Ratchet's shape is so far from a humanoid robot it's not funny. The arms are simply the doors, and unlike the G1 equivalents (Throttlebots, Battlechargers), they don't lift out to the sides at all, so they're just noise rather than limbs. There's no gap and while they lift up, springs ensure they spring back down, so we can't even use the arms to help with a humanoid shape. He's leaning forward, which means that the robot elements under the cabin are facing towards the floor - and this robot mode needs all the help it can get already.

 

The gimmick doesn't really justify the exceptionally poor robot shape. The idea is that you push down the robot onto the base and it'll roll forward. Okay, so pushing him down does reform the vehicle mode as they planned - which is nice - but from a standing start he rolls maybe 60cm/2 feet. A little more if you push him along as you do it, but this isn't enough to really be spectacular. He's far less impressive than the Throttlebots in this regard and about as impressive as the Battlechargers (but sturdier). The gimmick is dumbed right down for a young audience (we're talking 3 year olds), but I still don't see why such a poor gimmick was implemented when a better gimmick such as a pullback motor would have worked better, and given Ratchet a better robot mode.

 

On the whole this is a disappointing robot mode. The gimmick just isn't that impressive - I can see kids becoming bored with it awfully quickly. I was about eight years old when the Throttlebots came out, and had hours of fun with them - I can't see today's kids really appreciating this concept. Judging by the slow movement of CyberSlammers in stores around here, I don't think they've been that successful. The robot mode looks awful, so it really needed the gimmick to work, which compounds the lame gimmick, really. "

I think a comparison to Runabout and Runamok would be more accurate. Both they and the Cyberslammers have the same, self-transforming, action feature.

Ah! Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't think about it.

All the 2007 Transformers Movie toys except Leader class Optimus Prime, followed closely by any Optimus Prime repaint toys (i.e. iPod Optimus Prime, Classics Ultra Magnus, etc.)

Wait, what?

 

Did I just see Slaughtermaster insult every toy that WASN'T an Optimus Prime? Or is one of us misreading?

 

Back in 2005 I got him to admit Classics Optimus looked good. :tflaugh

 

I DENY!!!

 

2007 Movie Optimus Prime and Cybertron Optimus Prime (armored up mode) are the only Optimus Primes that I would leave intact and undamaged on my shelves.

 

Another 2007 TF toy flop I like to add is 3" Titaniums. I really don't see the point of these toys/chess pieces.

I'll agree on one thing: Movie Optimus Prime is daaaaaaamn sexy.