Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Jesse James

Pages: 1 ... 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 [1297] 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 ... 1324
The Wookiee Arcade / Re: Jedi Knight 2 Outcast Help
« on: October 22, 2003, 04:55 PM »
I don't know that Jedi Outcast ever was released on Gamecube or not...  

I make it a rule to play FPS games on PC generally.  The format for using a gamepad and playing a FPS doesn't jive well with me (Though I used to love using a joystick and keyboard, but even that's faded IMO).

A good example of how mouse/keyboard is superior is the recent PC port of Halo.  The aiming/movement physics weren't really changed between the X-Box version and the PC port, and there's a VERY noticeable difference.  For PC users, it means the aiming in Halo is really simple.  They "dumb it down" (for lack of a better phrase), basically, for the consoles...  So now the PC version you just point guns in the general direction of enemies and can hit them.  There's little skill involved, and accuracy's all but forgotten.  

FPS's generally control better on PC though, and more "realistically", and with a little more skill involved.  Another good example of ports not translating well is the entire Medal of Honor series.  In PC, there's intense skill and speed involved in aiming...  It's a PC-based series actually.  But, the ports of MOH which just basically scripted a "new"/similar version of a game on the PC engine and ported it to the console's format has a really crappy aiming system that didn't translate well over to console.  Subsequently I give all the MOH console games pretty low ratings compared to Allied Assault, Spearhead, and Breakthrough.  

Of course, NONE of them are comparing to that last WW2 FPS game I played by the makers of Castle Wolfenstein...  Forget the title now all of a sudden but it's a REALLY intense game, and ran smooth as silk on my machine with pretty high graphics settings.

Anyway, back to the topic...

The PC version of Outcast is great, so I'd recommend nabbing it if you can Louie...  I don't think it was ported to the Cube, just X-Box...  But since we all have PC's it's still an option anyway. :)

The Original Trilogy / Re: TIE Fighters....
« on: October 17, 2003, 03:29 PM »
I agree Lando, it's pretty bogus...  A weak design at best.  I'm not sure what EU source came up with it originally actually.  The treads are fairly sturdy though...  As a land vehicle it was "possible", but as a tank/armor piece it looked fragile at best (And a terrible firing arc considering the weapns under the pod wouldn't be able to aim anywhere but where the tank itself was facing).

I saw a neat/accurate custom of one once that was to-scale and did the design some justice.  It's still a bogus EU vehicle that I sorta just disregard. :)

Episode 1 / Re: Begun, my Bonus Pit Droid collection has...
« on: October 16, 2003, 10:22 PM »
Yeah, these for JMP's would've just been a great offer I think...  One Pit Droid for every so many points (Make it a high # of points just to get rid of the points quickly, ya know?)

Of course, I'd take these any way I could get them...

And I agree, I wish I'd taken the opportunity to get these when they were like $15 a piece through online stores.  

The Original Trilogy / Re: TIE Fighters....
« on: October 16, 2003, 09:42 PM »
Hey Lando,

It's a tough one to catch, but watch the one TIE that nails an asteroid while chasing the Falcon.  It's a teeny tiny easteregg type thing, but a TIE Pilot is ejected (And on fire to boot) into space above the cockpit (Meaning he was propelled upward).

The EU's taken it a step further and pilots eject in the flight sim games pretty regularly...  I'd put it at about a 50% ratio actually...

After a hectic battle there's often multiple pilots floating in the dead of space, and the truly sadistic (Myself included) can buzz around and pick off survivors for target practice (A common thing in WW2 actually where pilots would exact revenge on ejected pilots parachuting to safety by strafing them).

It's tough to see in ESB, but it's there, trust me, and one of my more favore moments. :)

The Original Trilogy / TIE Fighters....
« on: October 16, 2003, 04:08 PM »
What's your favorite and why?  All EU choices (Including TIE uglies) are welcomed by the way.

I'm a TIE Defender kinda guy myself...  Power engines, shields, and a nice weapons array...  The optional beam weapons are a dandy addition as well, and help boost the vessel's speed.  

Rarity kind of makes it a unique one to me also.  Being that it never saw full production and only the handful in Thrawn/Zaarin's fleets ever saw combat, it makes it really a fun/unique vessel that the Alliance never did match.  

The great thing about that ship (And TIE Fighter the game in general) is that it wasn't free from harm.  The Defender, though superior, was easily shot down when a group of good A-Wingers or X-Wingers would gang up on it.  

So what's the one you dig the most and why?

Oh, and if I had to go wth a film TIE, I'd go with the Interceptor...  Just vicious looking.  I loved those when I was a kid. :)  Cobra flew mine of course though.  Their secret weapon against G.I. Joe I guess.


Here's a link for some fun too...  To help you with information on TIE Fighters with pictures...

The first is the Star Wars Tech Commentaries review of TIE Fighters (Hosted by

It's pretty decent and thorough but not everything at Tech Commentaries I agree with.  Some of it's too picky I think, and often times applies too much "Earth theory to Star Wars fact" as I like to put it.  It makes things less imaginative so I don't always agree.  It's good to read through though.

Aquatic Clone is a neat idea...  A red ARC is a nice idea too since I definitely liked the ARC sculpt.  They appear to have the colored markings to indicate rank as well so it could just be a higher (or lower) ranked ARC trooper perhaps.

Maximise the use of that sculpt I suppose.

Lando cranked out the ultimate army builder list though. :)  Great ideas I think.  

Saga '02-'04 / Re: RUMORS FOR 2004!!!!!!
« on: October 16, 2003, 03:52 PM »
I've kinda wanted a set of SW glasses for my place.  The one guy from the Pittsburgh SWC group I'm sure is gonna have those as his main drinking glasses, haha. :)  

The wave with Gold leader looks like a good one.  I hope the Han Endor is really something special though.  That last one from Saga was a real disappointment and I've been wanting one either with a coat molded on or a removeable (good) cloth coat for a while.

Good heads up mosnab, especially the fun news on those glasses for those into the odder collectibles.

Saga '02-'04 / Re: Talkin' about the toy business...
« on: October 16, 2003, 03:47 PM »
For Jimmy:

BUT when I need a therapist Jesse I'll get one...
In this hobby I have made a few very good friends...
That is good enough for me. I need not be a star and loved by all. That was never my intention.

See like I said I can stare that monster down. I'm much more in tune w/ the realization of me not making the world like/love me... Just don't try to psychoanalyze me thank you very much.

Well, you brought it up...  And it applies elsewhere, but I wouldn't call my words as attempted therapy, but rather advice...  Because around here, the actions that make one not so well-liked aren't going to be accepted like they may be at other sites.  So don't take it so much as me trying to analyze you, but me trying to make sure the warnings are clear as to how we operate here.

I guess people also can not see why we are getting such items as the TRU multipacks... Those are money makers for Hasbro any way you slice and dice it. The molds are all made therefore at this point those sets equal a pure cash cow.

I'm sure lots of people see why we're getting those...  I didn't know this was in dispute really.  They're cheap product for the shelves, I agree, and they're even selling fairly well it seems...  At least well enough to continue them for a little while.

Regardless of what one thinks this is a tough line for Hasbro and YES
LF is not that easy on their approvals. Some pieces may get brought back to them three times before they are ok to run w/...
I have a good friend that worked at LF and told me about some of how they work...

To my knowledge, a single product for 21st Century Toys saw near 10 revisits before it was finally approved...  The approval process is tough all over, not just at Hasbro.  It's short-sighted to think other companies don't have similar processes, even if they don't have a license really.  At least if the company cares somewhat about quality anyway.

As I mentioned over head for a company like Hasbro is much bigger than any of the smaller companies. Hasbro has different divisions around the world...

To me it's apples and oranges...

I'm sure to every company competing in the toy industry though, they aren't apples and oranges, and they realize that comparisons are part of competition.  You may not think so, but that's just the truth about the competing business world I've worked in.

Saturn compares itself to the big three.  Value Jet compares itself to American and USAir.  The generic brand soap at the store compares itself to Zest...  That's competition in business.

And yes, Hasbro's overhead is HUUUUUUUUGE.  We've gone over that.  It's a fact...  But to a small company like 21st Century, BBI, or Dragon, their overhead is EQUALLY huge.  It's maybe less on paper, but in relative terms they've got just as much overhead worry as Hasbro.  That is how things are analyzed and compared.  

Sure they're different companies, but they're in the same game, and they play by the same rules...  They're open to, and need to be compared as equally as possible, and when it boils down to it they're working in the same formats generally, and have strong relative similarities.

Saga '02-'04 / Re: Talkin' about the toy business...
« on: October 16, 2003, 03:36 PM »
For Nick:

I never said that other companies weren't paying licensing fees.  But, when the Star Wars license ticks in at half a billions dollars and 10% ownership in your company, that's a hefty cost.  The other licensing fees that the companies you're talking about  pale in comparison.

For the record, gross income for Hasbro last year was $2.8 billion in 2002.  Net earnings after costs and such came in at a whopping $107 million...  

Sure, $500 million isn't a small ammount of $, but for a multi-million dollar international company it's not some exporbitant fee either Nick.  

And like my point I was making, to a company like 21st Century that isn't publicly owned and who turn their profit around into the organization itself, a small license is equally as costly to them as a big license like Star Wars is to Hasbro.  

To think of this as apples and oranges isn't fair.  They're 2 companies competing in the same market.  One small company, and one large company, and both have overhead issues.  Who is the worse off company?  Considering Hasbro pulled in NET profits of $107 million while 21st Century still struggles financially but manages to put out superior product is proof positive that they have more cost issues they're working around than Hasbro.  Issues that have greater effect on the company as a whole.

Hasbro even took a surprising slump in gross profit for 2002 from $2.9 to $2.8 billion and STILL came out at $107 million in net profit.

You're leaving out a lot of other steps.  First Hasbro has to approve something at the departmental level.  Next, they no doubt have a corporate safety standards department that it has to go through.  These are after all approved for children what, ages 5 and up?  THEN, it proceeds to LFL.  Lucasfilm has been renowned for being sticklers for what will and will not go out.  This delays the process, and in the long run costs more money.

You're also leaving out a good many steps in the process as well Nick, and neglecting to point out that other companies have very similar and stringent approval processes.  The point is that just because Hasbro runs things past LFL at some point does not mean that other companies do not have their own approval channels they must run their product through.  

As per my example, 21st Century Toys runs their product past military/military history experts multiple times for evaluation and approval just as Hasbro has to pop their things off to LFL.  The difference here is that 21st has to pay their people for their work in approval and Hasbro does not.

Quite simply, EVERY toy company and brand has stringent approval processes.  G.I. Joe, Star Wars, X-Treme Detail, Elite Force, Barbie, etc...  They all go through strict approval processes within the organization and outside it as well.  

The fact is that the bottom line is the core fact.  Are the smaller companies having a harder time getting by?  Yes.  They have a smaller market share.  They're fundamentally smaller companies.  They have higher production costs because they can't manufacture in the quantity level that Hasbro does at a comparable expense level.  But, the core issue once again is the licensing.  Are any of these other companies able or willing to shell out the kind of capital needed to produce a viable line?  Are they able to stick it out to see an eventual profit?  Probably not.

And again, a license to any company a fraction the size of Hasbro is going to equal in cost the Star Wars license to Hasbro.  

21st Century pays a license out to Chrysler/Dodge for naming rights and product development rights.  Chrysler doesn't charge what LFL did obviously, but the license is still a HIGH cost to 21st Century Toys who struggle to get by and make any profit at all.  

Whereas Hasbro pays a $500 million dollar licensing fee, but this is a company still bringing in $107 million in profits in 2002 when they actually reported a SLUMP in projected sales!

Maybe that clarifies the point that licensing is MORE costly to the smaller company than it is to Hasbro, even though Hasbro's paying more actual cash out for a licensing agreement.  It's the companies size that makes Hasbro capable of bigger and better product, even with their obviously large licensing fee.

I've never disputed that the SW license cost a lot...  Obviously it does because only top toy manufacturers were even considered in the running because only companies like Mattel and Hasbro can afford it.  What's being neglected or not understood here is that the smaller companies have licenses to, and that they (in relation to Hasbro) have just as much at stake in their costs, even if they pay less on paper, they're just not big enough companies to truly compete.  Yet, they seem to actually STILL compete through stronger product.

GI Joe is an intellectual property that is wholly owned by Hasbro.  As a result, Hasbro does not have to factor in licensing payments in their costs.  Hasbro owns all the rights to GI Joe.  They're therefore able to spend more money on R&D, manufacturing, marketing and other costs because there isn't the looming spector of licensing.  And if they play smart businessmen in GI Joe and keep their costs down, they can get a much higher profit margin out of the GI Joe line because they have a dramatically lower overhead.

Yes, it is, I agree...  But, it's also a smaller product line than Star Wars...  An average year for Joe has been compared to a non-movie year for Star Wars.

And again, the licensing fees cannot possibly be the ONLY reason that Star Wars is not generating the profit that G.I. Joe is.  G.I. Joe is simply outperforming Star Wars as a "hot" toy line.  It sells well, it moves fast...  Sure its costs are lower, but that's not the point.  Star Wars is SUPPOSED to be doing better right now and it's not.  G.I. Joe is one of Hasbro's dominant product lines and it's beating Star Wars handily at retail.

The argument isn't does it cost less, it's does Star Wars compete with it and other "Smaller" lines, and the answer is no Star Wars isn't competing at retail like it should be.  

As I said, I don't even like the modern Joe stuff, but I cannot deny that they are racking up the sales and beating Star Wars.  That's just been the plain truth at the end of the business year these past several years now.

And I have to restate, I and just about any other business person would agree that half a billions dollars is not a small overhead variance.

That it is...  It's a ton of $, but for Hasbro to still crank out $107 million in profits renders the argument that the license is all that's holding Star Wars back completely moot and useless.  The license can be added to the bottom of the laundry list of reasons that Star Wars isn't the steamroller of a line it should be.  Just one factor in a huge corporation making bad decisions/mishandling a toy license.

Saga '02-'04 / Re: Talkin' about the toy business...
« on: October 16, 2003, 01:47 AM »
For Jimmy:

That's the whole morale of it all Jesse in a nutshell (and my point in the first place)... Life itself is far from perfect. I think that to trivialize something as minute as toys is just well...

The thing is Jimmy, morales to stories means that you are preaching, and preaching isn't something anyone asked for.  Sure life is not perfect...  I live it every day, but I also realize that this is just something to talk about.  It's nothing that makes me angry or ruins my day.

My posts maybe don't make you happy, and you take them too seriously, but to me I'm just talking toys and enjoying the hobby my own way.  I'm not asking for argument or anything, just fun talking and banter with the people I choose to associate with now that I'm cutting my time down at other forums and working with the people I get along with best, and enjoying the members of our forums who are a tight bunch and who enjoy the conversation.

Rebelscum was a place that had these kinds of "ties" that didn't allow opinions to go forth without criticism, and that's one reason why I don't frequent their saga topics much anymore.  

I believe you and I had this discussion before, did we not?  And didn't I make it abundantly clear that chastising people for NOT liking things isn't going to be tolerated around here?  I'm a lenient person but that's wearing off quickly.  The only two times I've had to bring this up have been with you, and I hope it's not necessary again.

I think I did mention that I do respect people's opinions... though people's constant negativity is a whole other thing... Again it's your choice and opinion... and it's also mine to comment on them.

You know how us "easily riled up" folk can get...

Jimmy, you can MENTION how much you respect other's opinions around here all you want, but it doesn't mean you actually do.  Any contradiction to you is met with replies of a less than friendly nature.  You don't like to be countered, and you don't like to be disagreed with.  That's glaringly apparant.

And you're wrong, it's not your right to comment on how  negative someone is...  It's your right to hang out, talk Star Wars (Good and bad) and enjoy yourself talking about the hobby you love, but if people don't like things or find flaws it's not your duty to tell them that they're being "too picky" or whatever euphamism you choose at the time.

We're here to have fun, and some of us have fun by talking about what could've been, or in many cases what SHOULD have been...  And those people aren't here to have you dictate to them that they're unrealistic and their opinions are somehow less valid than yours.

So, no, you don't respect people's opinions as much as you may think...  And that's where I've stepped in.

You also have to respect my opinions Jesse as I do yours... Is that correct Jesse?

Yes, and I have...  Your opinions on the line are often glowing, and sometimes they have excellent points.  I never have criticized your collecting methods.  

Just as I think my opinion is "the only" from a lot of what you haven written you feel the same about yours.

No, we're different here...  I don't think my opinion is the only one.  I know it's not.  I know that whatever I dislike about a figure that someone else may very well like it...  I know that some people think retail is more to blame than Hasbro but I feel Hasbro's more at fault for recent/current gluts of figures...  

And I know that you and I will disagree on the quality of the Star Wars line no matter how much we both say our argument.

What I also know is that you'll make unnecessary comments on people's collecting habits, or personality, because the arguments in various forums seem to make you upset to the point you feel like taking that last personal dig, and that won't be tolerated here at our forums.  

Like I said, I told you this before...  The only other time I've had to "pull rank" around here, and on the same topic.

As I have said elsewhere Jesse let's skip the melodrama... and theatrics...

No melodrama and theatrics here.  I'm telling you flat out how it is, and how it's going to be for the long haul.

The litigious society that has been created has made any form of criticism be it constructive or otherwise... slander, libel, etc...

Heaven forbid anyone dare step on anyone's toes in the times...

And this isn't applicable to this topic Jimmy.  We're here to discuss toys, not each other, and that's what this is all coming down to.  You have the choice to talk toys, but you're crossing some lines and you're getting this pointed out now.  

Everyone here is allowed to talk toys, to criticize Hasbro, to praise Hasbro, to enjoy the forums, and they're all open to being involved in deep discussions about the hobby, but nobody's allowed to openly criticize another individual here.

OK, Jesse since that seemed to touch a sore spot... forgive me.

There's been no sore spots touched.  I don't get angry over this site, I just do my job, and that's all I'm doing now...  I know you don't agree with this post, but it's needing said at this point, and you need to see that you have to truly respect everyone here, not just when you want to or when they're in agreement with you.

There is at the very least one mutual feeling we then share Jesse.

If there is some other insinuation hidden amongst this well... You're not telling me something I don't know. Difference is I can stare that monster in the face because I know he exists...

No insinuation to my post, but if you see something in it then perhaps you should do some self-evaluation about how you interact with people in this hobby.  Maybe it will enlighten you as to why there's a monster to stare at in the first place.

I guess in the end I'm just a sheep because in a year of 40+ figures I can find only a handful that are not really needed in the line IMHO.

You're whatever you think you are for liking most of the figures from the past year or whatever.  That's not my place to judge, and I honestly don't care.  If you liked every figure that came down the pike every year than more power to you I say.  Good for you because you're in a true blissful state with this line and the ammount of product coming out I'd think.

Or maybe I know they are just toys...
Nothing more... Nothing less...

Removable objects... at the end of the day.

Yes, they are just toys...  That's exactly why it's not worth letting people's criticisms of them irritate you to the point to the point of reprimanding in the forums here (or anywhere else).  They're just toys.  Enjoy the hobby like everyone else and if people collect or feel differently than you do, respect it and move along...

Picking it as the subject to discuss is going to get you nowhere around here though but in the doghouse because it's the type of behavior that EACH of the moderators here was quite happy to leave at other forums.

Hope this has been made abundantly clear at this point.

For Jimmy:

If I respond yet again to you Jesse you'll only go back to the same rhetoric that you have tried going back to in the first place... So like you said the point is moot...

I bow out gracefully you know more than I... etc... etc...
There Jesse I admit it...  

Well, yes I would go back to the same rhetoric considering it's been my experiences and research for my degrees, so there's no reason to deviate really.  

I'm sure you think you're right, as I do, and that's the nature of discussion and debate...  You don't like that people have differeing opinions though, that much I have noticed.

My one question is this... (and I'm fairly certain I'm not alone)

Why do you collect Star Wars?

Well, the individuals I choose to be friends with through the hobby know my likes of the hobby overall, but it's basically answered within your quote there.  I collect Star Wars because I like Star Wars.  

I collected the vintage figures since I was younger and previous to the modern line.  I started customizing them to flesh out the vintage line then with characters from my favorite films that hadn't been done.

Then the modern line came, and it's slowly evolved into some choice figures, but it's not quite the toy line it is capable of being so I voice my criticisms.

See, the thing about the hobby is that when you're involved in anything like this there's those who love it unconditionally as if it were their first born.  They take offense at criticisms to it like they work for Hasbro.

Not that I voice my criticisms at people to irritate them, they just get mad about it and take some personal offense to it.  I don't intend for that, but I'm not going to silence my opinions either.

There's plenty of things I praise in the modern line...  There's plenty that could use a little something extra though to make it truly "perfect" or even to make it great compared to other toy lines...  As such I like it to be the best it can be...  

That would be where my customizing habits come into play too...  Changing or fixing the things that sometimes seemed like they obviously should've been different in the first place...  It doesn't change that I want the best product from the line though.

Besides the constant badgering on this forum alone (nevermind all the others) you criticize and critique the line like no one else I have seen do before... and I have seen and known some very a**l retentive people.

Well, please refrain from belittling how people collect or what they do with their free time Jimmy.  I don't consider anything I do "badgering".  I'm here to talk toys.  If anything I gave some pretty good praise to the figures that are the topic of this particular conversation...  They're a series I like and it's good to see the line changing for the better as I see it.

You just don't agree with my opinions, but remember to respect them like you have to.  That's what the collecting community is about here, and while we're not as stringent and strict as other communities we're the place where all types of collectors are welcome.  I don't argue with you when you say you love everything that comes out generally, ya know?  

When I make criticisms I usually take time to mention the finer points of the product too, and keep things balanced.  That's how I do my reviews, and it's how I generally feel about any given figure.

I love the CT Stormtrooper for instance for its articulation and such, but loathe its lacking of wrist articulation and a working holster.  It has good qualities and bad...  It's not perfect like it could've been.

Truth be told but every time I see your sig line I just think... Why...

Believe me, you're not alone in having those feelings when you see certain names or sig lines.

You have every right to your opinion and I give you that... though it's constantly "these figures look good BUT..."  

Your respect for opinions is open to debate personally...  You don't like mine I know.  But what's the problem with "These look good but..."

Why would you want to read nothing but praise and people unwilling, or simply unable, to think outside the given product as to the "What could've been" for the figure or item?

Seems dull to me...  Lots of things can be improved...  I like reading what the various collectors honestly think, or what they'd like to see different/better in their eyes.

Some like a figure with no articulation, some like lots/more articulation.  Some like soft goods, some like molded capes and such.  

Discussion doesn't come from "That's nice" though.  It comes from "I don't agree, and think that could've been better if...." conversations.

They are toys again... Nothing more... Nothing less...
I know you could say well I should expect more for my money... or look at what BBI does... Well then someone could just as easily turn and say maybe your dollar is much better spent on Dragon, BBI, 21st Century, etc...

Indeed, they're just toys...  Toys I collect, and like to talk about.  Nothing more, nothing less, and no harm being done to any individual other than the seemingly easily riled up over my opinions on toys.  

My dollar is quite liberally spent on 21st, Dragon, and BBI as well, as they're all 3 lines that I collect a lot.  And they're all 3 lines that I can find fault with too...

-BBI Marines ditched the ankle articulation that made the 1st series so great, so the Marines aren't as nice I don't think.

-Battle of the Bulge U.S. soldiers from 21st are tough to find, if you can find them at all right now, and there's not as diverse a line-up of figures.

-Dragon needs to improve their articulation for me to buy them in large quantities...  I like having one 1:18 from them of each character but their stuff is all pre-posed (except for their 1:6 which cannot be beat by any 1:6 line IMO).

I love the lines for the good things they bring though, but I like talking about the good AND the bad things with my fellow collectors.  It's the complaints that keep the cogs in the wheels of advancement turning, not the "Wow, I love this" replies without any substance.

And not to be a smart a** but since you critique everything in the forums around the net maybe doing that in your own column on this page would serve a better purpose...

And that's a site issue/matter right now, not anything to do with your input or opinion and I'm sure anyone working for the site would share that with you just as I did...  My column will be continuing as we work to get the site going on all 12 cylinders, and right now my column is just one of the things we're improving/working at.

My input in the forums won't diminish any, even with regular updates of my toy reviews, so no need to fear me leaving anytime soon from these hallowed halls.

Afterall half my job is here to maintain the order and make sure people are abiding by the rules of the land.

For Matt:

Like I said in my first post about this wave they seem like some of the best likenesses.  I think the Kenobi is the best personally, but Elan's not too sloppy either, and a sharp figure unto itself.  The Bail Organa is a dull figure (All senators seem to be) but he's a good dull figure with lots style.  The gnashed knuckles are a neat touch considering the last scenes of AOTC.

The Kenobi's likeness rocks, but the whole sabre thing's a bit annoying.  I wonder if his hilt's removeable though?  If it is, that will be the best Obi for the AOTC line-up I do believe.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Xbox
« on: October 15, 2003, 11:36 PM »
That's a bummer about the XB Adam.  :(  My VCR just fizzled on me the other day when I was trying to get some information on a particular SW uniform and I don't know what's up with it.  It was fairly new too...  I'm irritated.

If I was in the middle of some gaming I'd be especially upset about the XB but I've heard on multiple occassions now of that platform giving out for some reason.  Strange.

Again... There is absolutely no way that Joe has strived as long as it has just on the support of children alone.
If there wasn't a very strong collector it'd have be done w/ by now.

First, I never said "Just" to anything in my justification of why it's a superior toy line to Star Wars...  I said they have both a strong adult and kid market.  

You may not believe that, but then again I don't think you believe much of anything you're told if you disagree with it so it's turning into a moot point.  My last report on the industry had findings that G.I. Joe was a balanced toy line with both adult and youth collectors that supported a line with no multi-media events, films, or anything more than comics really, to supply "interest" from outside demographics.

It was kids and adults combined that supported the line from its very birth in '64 to its current status in 2003.  I can tell you till I'm blue in the face that kids like it and you can deny it all day long.

When the annual Joe con is held kids are not the reason behind such an event... that is (more than) a predominant adult convention. Yes, during our younger days (we) the kids were strongly into that line because of the strong backing of the cartoon series... Now realize those kids of yesterday are now todays collectors buying up more Joes than any child anywhere.

The demographic at a convention is one single focus...  That's sort of a poor item to use as a basis for who's buying a toy line don't you think?

If I based who goes to sporting events on who I see lined up to get autographs at a team convention I'd have a pretty skewed view of the average "sports fan" for any given team.  

They're not the only people interested in the product is the point.  Kids aren't at conventions because kids aren't adults...  They can't drive.  They don't make reservations to meet at the next con.  They don't have jobs to buy hotel rooms and airfare...  

So that's a very poor analysis tool being used to figure out "who's into G.I. Joe" ya know?  Plus, half the guys at Joe conventions don't collect modern or even 1982-present items.  Half of them are there for the originals I'd wager...  They're not supporting ANYTHING G.I. Joe now, just G.I. Joe then...  That's entirely too small an event to gather hardcore Marketing information from.  

We also had less choice as children when we were young... and almost none when the line was introduced in '64. These days however there are more toys than we can think of... that are far more technological than we ever had. Kids are into whatever is hot... and in the kid world Joe isn't what I call hot... Not by far...

We did?  I don't know about you, but off the top of my  head I remember:

-G.I. Joe
-Star Wars
-Indiana Jones

If anything, the 80's was considered a toy revolution, and with the help of video game systems becoming more prevelant in the child's home, it made the toy industry more tenacious than it had ever been (And it's only gotten worse in the last decade +).

So far, the fact the sales #'s are so high for G.I. Joe just seems to reinfoce that they've got support from collectors OTHER than adults.  That's what logic would tell you.  If collectors kept things alive Star Wars would be in far better shape than it is right now itself.  It is in a slow/steady decline because of a lack of fresh/new collectors.  The films can be partly to blame for that, but the line itself isn't helping when it loses at at POP advertising to other lines that just grab a child's attention.

I won't argue with you that kids are picky and change their mind from day to day, but it doesn't mean they don't stick with some toy lines faithfully either.

For instance, POwer Rangers is STILL a strong toy line at retail.  It still makes lots of $, it has a hefty licensing fee, and it is funded almost exclusively by kids.  It's also got longevity on its side.  Not as long as G.I. Joe, but as long as the modern Star Wars line...  That's tough to choke down I'm sure.

As for my comment on Hasbro having a larger market that is meant in other ways than taken obviously.
They make far bigger production runs and much more product in a year than any of the smaller companies...
Does any of the se companies such as Dragon, BBI, etc make 40+ figures a year... not including accessories and other products for the line? I'm 95% sure they do not.

Where's your #'s that Hasbro's production runs are higher than BBI's or some other companies?  Just to make back the $ on molds tooled, it takes HUGE production runs for any given toy...  

Again, that's very short-sighted and I don't see anything to back this up with credence.  If anything, it's likely that these companies have to place orders near what Hasbro does for quantity.  21st Century has had retailers who bought exclusively from them and carried larger #'s of their product, so it seems to support that idea.

These smaller companies have the advantage that they can put a tad bit more time into the pieces they do release in a year span.

BBI's put out (in the last month+) about 16 figures, and 5 vehicles ranging from small to very large.  That's one month so far, and the next series is due out fairly soon...  So that doesn't really seem to follow this idea that these smaller companies aren't putting out effort to put LOTS of product on the shelves.

Plus, again, you're looking at a company a fraction the size of Hasbro, and who have a LOT less employees.  So even if they are putting out less product, on a relative scale they're putting out equal #'s in comparison to Hasbro who have a very large human capital base.

Do you really think their costs are higher? That is absolutely untrue... Their all around overhead is far less than that of Hasbro. Leaving out the expensive license that SW is...

At this point I do...  You don't know they don't either, so please stop speaking as if you do Jimmy.  You've done NOTHING to prove your point so far.

You don't have to accept the answers as correct, but don't feel it necessary to dismiss them as completely false either till you can scrounge up some information to the contrary besides what you think you know.  

This last quote personifies why this is a moot argument and will never be settled till someone can post sales sheets.  I can only speak from my experience of research in the industry, and actually being involved in production and the toy industry on some level beyond retail.  You can only speak from your experience or opinions as well, so it really renders this dead.

Hasbro has much more to lose money wise when a product fails... That is I think very obvious...

So a large company has more to lose money-wise than a small company?  So when the small company loses $ and files for bankruptcy because their profit is turned over into their capital they somehow have lost less than Hasbro would if they have a toy line that "tanks" financially?

Your logic escapes me there.

Star Wars has lost money in the last few years that is the truth... but that was due to a few reasons... Over production, lack of interest, and (yes you may not want to hear it but) the high licensing fees are just a few of those reasons.

I don't doubt it's a partial factor, never said it wasn't, but it's not THE factor which is what you two have been arguing...  It's the same old same old from some sources, "The licensing is killing SW".  

The licensing is such a small miniscule part of the modern line at this point (It WAS important when the deal was struck so many moons ago, but it's become a small part of the equation now because it's not an annual cost).  

I've never said it wasn't, I just said it's not the huge deal you and Nick seem to think it is so that your opinions on how other companies outperform Star Wars can be slightly more validated.  Unfortunately, that's not the case...  It's even LESS the case since the renegotiation of the contract  which was all because the license is a FAILING venture for Hasbro so far because it's not been competing well at retail.

If that means we get better figures, I'm happy as a clam.  But it's such a small part of the equation that it's not likely to be the deciding factor in whether or not we see vast improvements to make the line more competitive and do better at retail.

Hasbro paid out close to 600 million until E1 and then a 2.5% royalty and 10% of Hasbro. These numbers were renegotiated w/ the extension but still...

That's quite a taking...

And like I said, licenses aren't anything new to almost every toy company out there.  Bandai pays a  HUGE price for Power Rangers...  The small scale military companies pay out to multiple licenses and likenesses...  Even G.I. Joe has had to pay licensing rights and likeness rights over the years (not often, but sometimes...  And at the very least, to the toy's creator who made quite a living off the product name).  It's nothing new, and Star Wars has even had reductions in their fees.

My point was, and still is, that the licensing issue has such little impact on the cost issues of the line that it's not a valid argument to make as to why Hasbro cannot make Star Wars a more competitive line in quality overall.  

Here's a clip from a Reuters article in February of this year:

PAWTUCKET, R.I., Feb 13 (Reuters) - Hasbro Inc. (NYSE:HAS), the No. 2 U.S. toymaker, on Thursday said fourth-quarter earnings rose 19 percent, boosted by strong sales of its mainstay toys like GI Joe action figures and Play-doh.

The G.I. Joe line has been carrying a lot of Hasbro's profit increases lately, and it's just continuing as new product comes out.  Sad to say Star Wars isn't doing the same...  And I somehow doubt the license is all that's holding it back at this point.

Episode 1 / Re: Begun, my Bonus Pit Droid collection has...
« on: October 15, 2003, 09:41 PM »
I'd love these things loose, but I just cannot justify hunting t hem down and paying the high prices for them right  now.  A loose set would rock though.  Kind of like  how the novelty of a loose FF set is...  They're not common, and look neat all together.

I'll just have to be happy with my small set of extra's I have, and no Euro Bonus droids for now.

Clone Wars '03-'05 / Re: CW deluxe at TRU
« on: October 15, 2003, 09:32 PM »
I actually found every single wave of POTJ figures at K-Mart here locally.  I was very pleased with them during that era at least.

Mine have been getting Deluxe CW in as well, and are the only place I've seen a Clone 3-pack thus far...  Got the Clone Speederbikes (Original Saga and the CW version) there as well.  I've only seen the yellow and red clones there though.  No white, Green, or Blue to be had anywhere, nor Jedi 3-packs (Which I'm hearing the Jedi are a woe for many others beyond myself).

Pages: 1 ... 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 [1297] 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 ... 1324