PNSO: New for 2022

[Concavenator]

Also because EoFauna's Giga is better than any similarly priced PNSO figure

Really?   I'm not convinced, can you give examples?

I think Eofauna figures are superior to PNSO figures as well. Hopefully I won't be kicked out of the forum for saying this. My reasoning behind this claim?

Eofauna's scientific accuracy > PNSO's scientific accuracy (should I really explain this?)

Eofauna's paint app quality  = < PNSO's paint app quality (depending on the figure)

Eofauna's prices > PNSO's prices (in western countries).

I hate doing comparisons like these, because I am a big fan of both companies (but being a fan, in my case isn't blindly appauding everything that's released) but this is my opinion and it's every bit as valid as other people's opinions shared so far, specially because I always try to bring a reason as to why I think some way or another. I already elaborated the Eofauna - PNSO paint app comparison in my older posts, won't go through it again.

I also hate the bashing Safari is receiving in this thread. No wonder Doug wants to stay out of here too, I'm tempted as well.

@stargatedalek this quote of yours is looking very accurate:

Ironically, PNSO seems to have less fans (here) who care about accuracy than Safari does, and more who blindly follow them.

P.S. @Sim I also compared the PNSO Acro with Hartman's skeletal and the tail looks too short. The head looks too large as well, but in  some pics, like the one on the box, it looks better. Let's see how the final figure looks like. Hopefully it was the angle.

[Gwangi]

Considering this "Safari does not get an equal proportion of criticism" argument...I kinda have to agree with that. As a new collector (< 1 year) I have always found it strange that a new Safari figure which absolutely - and obviously - looks like an over saturated children's toy gets praise like it'd be some definitive figure of the species.
I kinda like Safari Ltd. as a toy company, like their vibe and range of species... but no matter the costs, not even 4 or 5 of their figures could be a substitute for a single, better made PNSO figure to me. Even Papo had managed to make better textures and paint schemes than Safari in my opinion.

I do believe that there is a bit of a Safari bias around here, particularly with the veteran collectors, but Safari has earned it. A decade ago we didn't have PNSO, GR Toys, Eofauna, Nanmu, or very many "high end" companies. Papo was the only company producing anything of that lifelike quality and it was mostly JP inspired stuff. Further back still, Safari was pretty much high end itself, one of very few companies producing toys with an eye towards accuracy. This hobby is not very old.

But I'm gonna have to challenge you on the "over saturated children's toy" bit. For one, they are children's toys. And believe it or not, some people like that toy aesthetic. Notice that the name of this place is the Dinosaur TOY forum, not model, or collectable, or statue. Toy. And look at the figures displayed on the banner too. Some people actually like to collect toys because they look like toys. As much as someone might snub their nose at me for collecting Mattel (or Safari) I collect them because they're exactly what I want, fun toys and action figures. I like oversaturated and bright colors. I like dinosaurs that remind me of my childhood toys and the colorful picture books I used to look at.

I believe the comparisons between PNSO and Safari need to stop. Saying that PNSO is better than Safari is like saying that Jurassic World is better than Primal because Primal is animated and Jurassic World is "live-action". Is live action better than animation? But since people are bent on comparing them, lets do it. Behold...

Safari Sauropelta ($13.99)


PNSO Sauropelta ($22.99)


Safari Pachyrhinosaurus ($12.99)


PNSO Pachyrhinosaurus ($22.99)


Now I'm not gonna say that the Safari toys are better than the PNSO toys. I like all of them, honestly. The PNSO toys should be better because of the higher price tag but I don't think that they're so drastically better that "4 or 5 of their figures could be a substitute for a single, better made PNSO figure."

[Flaffy]

Safari Sauropelta ($13.99)


PNSO Sauropelta ($22.99)

As a collector of everything ranging from Mattel toys, Safari and CollectA figures, and higher end models, I can attest that every company that I collect brings something unique to the table. I often have multiple representations of the same dinosaur but from different companies simply because I enjoy the different aesthetics of every single one.

It's almost like "niche partitioning"; While it's true that overlaps are inevitable, every figure has it's own place and purpose within my collection.


And good that you brought up the Safari Sauropelta. It's easily one of the strongest offerings in Safari's prehistoric lineup, and I am very glad to have it in my collection. And for me at least, I personally regard the Safari Sauropelta as the current definitive version of the species. The attention to detail in osteoderm morphology variability across the animal is immaculate; the head shape and posture lines up far better with the fossil material too when compared to PNSO's attempt.

[Mellow Stego]

Well I don't know about the rest of you, but that Acro looks great! I don't have to many carnivores in my collection, Pnso or other wise. But I think I'll add this one.

[KrazyKaprosuchus]

Honestly regardless of the bashing I quite like this Acro. Nice to finally have a good figure of it. I'll have to see how it compares to GR toys', but considering their t-rex, i'm a bit apprehensive... 

[Mellow Stego]

Honestly regardless of the bashing I quite like this Acro. Nice to finally have a good figure of it. I'll have to see how it compares to GR toys', but considering their t-rex, i'm a bit apprehensive... 

GR made a Trex?

[KrazyKaprosuchus]

GR made a Trex?

They're making one. Can be seen in the GR toys new for 2022 thread.

[acro-man]

My dream Acrocanthosaurus based on PNSO version, unfortunately stays in a dream.

[stargatedalek]

I still like all of those figures Gojiraguy listed more than the Eofauna Giga. Except for the Nanotyrannus. Maybe that's partly because I find all of those taxa more appealing than Giga.

Agreed (well, on the non-dinosaurs anyway, large theropods and ceratopsians are all rather meh to me these days). But looking at examples where an animal has been done by both companies, I almost always prefer the Safari (and when I don't, it's because the Safari has a base or a weird pose).

I have a lot of PNSO minis and they're great, but mostly they tend to do 1:35-1:45 ish large theropods, which is just a whole "genre" of figures that I have absolutely no interest in. Maybe if I had an interest in more of what they made I'd feel more invested in them as a company, but I can't help but feel their days of (with any meaningful frequency) making things I care about are behind them. They do a lot of different species but it feels like they're still lacking in variety despite that, as weird as it might sound.

[Leyster]

My dream Acrocanthosaurus based on PNSO version, unfortunately stays in a dream.

Great edit! If only.... this would've been an istant buy!

[Concavenator]

Safari Sauropelta ($13.99)


PNSO Sauropelta ($22.99)

Honestly, while I tend to prefer the newer PNSO figures to their Safari counterparts in most cases (I prefer the PNSO versions of Styracosaurus, Allosaurus, Yutyrannus), there are some cases in which I find some Safari figures superior to PNSO's versions (Sauropelta, Stegosaurus and Carnotaurus, for example).

[RobinGoodfellow]

..as I tried to say many times (even with visual proofs in the dino-photography thread, evidently without success), judging figure' proportions through promotional pictures is useless (without technical parameters).
But that is..
So I'd like to see first the figure in hands.
Then judging.


(  http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=3562.msg286680#msg286680  )

[SidB]

Most of us at some time or another have made the "rush to judgement." Let's hope that readers of this thread peruse @RobinGoodfellow 's post to be reminded that it doesn't make sense to get hyper over mere transitory appearances. We need to be more reserved and wait till we have the proper picture, so to speak. Reserving judgement until then is a virtue.

[Shadowknight1]

Most of us at some time or another have made the "rush to judgement." Let's hope that readers of this thread peruse @RobinGoodfellow 's post to be reminded that it doesn't make sense to get hyper over mere transitory appearances. We need to be more reserved and wait till we have the proper picture, so to speak. Reserving judgement until then is a virtue.

I certainly have.  There's a reason I used the Hasbro Vader helmet as an example earlier in the thread as the promotional shots kept me from purchasing it.  Of course now the only reason I don't have it is that I don't have room for it to be displayed properly.

[Sim]

Thoughts I have:

1. The PNSO Acrocanthosaurus might still have the first finger claw as the largest on each hand, the angle might be decieving.

2. The Eofauna Giganotosaurus is not great when it comes to accuracy.  I'm tired of saying why, long story short the head is messed up.

3. Safari's prehistoric figures usually look fine.  Reptiles can look "over saturated".

4. Having owned some Papo figures, their texture is nothing special in my opinion.  And I find their colour schemes forgettable.  @Stegotyranno420, I think after you have a Papo and PNSO figure you'll see the sculpt is better on the PNSO.

5. @Concavenator, Gojiraguy wasn't saying Eofauna figures are better than PNSO figures, they were saying the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is better than similarly priced PNSO figures.  I can see why someone might GENERALLY feel Eofauna figures are better than PNSO's.  But the Eofauna Giganotosaurus is inferior to many PNSO figures in terms of detail (why does it have lines over the antorbital fenestra?), colouration and accuracy.

6. @Gwangi's PNSO vs Safari comparisons are interesting.  The detail is very close between the two brands, but I find the Safari versions shown better.  The same could apply to Qianzhousaurus if PNSO's and Safari's were compared.  Regardless of which one thinks is better, if any, the quality of the aforementioned Safari and PNSO figures is very similar.

7.

Agreed (well, on the non-dinosaurs anyway, large theropods and ceratopsians are all rather meh to me these days). But looking at examples where an animal has been done by both companies, I almost always prefer the Safari (and when I don't, it's because the Safari has a base or a weird pose).

I have a lot of PNSO minis and they're great, but mostly they tend to do 1:35-1:45 ish large theropods, which is just a whole "genre" of figures that I have absolutely no interest in. Maybe if I had an interest in more of what they made I'd feel more invested in them as a company, but I can't help but feel their days of (with any meaningful frequency) making things I care about are behind them. They do a lot of different species but it feels like they're still lacking in variety despite that, as weird as it might sound.

I bolded relevant parts.  It's not weird to feel PNSO is lacking in variety despite making a lot of species, because it's true in their medium-sized figures.  In their medium-sized lines PNSO has mostly been making ceratopsids, tyrannosauroids, ornithopods, allosauroids and thyreophorans and barely anything else.  Want a nice dromaeosaurid from PNSO?  No chance since they've only made an inaccurate Microraptor that requires assembly.  But they've got eight different ceratopsids and a number of tyrannosaurids that look almost identical anatomically.  I also found it infuriating that in their huge line of minis, PNSO never made even one dromaeosaurid yet they made at least six ceratopsids.

[suspsy]

I'd buy any and all dromaeosaur miniatures if only PNSO made them. Same with ornithomimosaurs.

[Gwangi]

Yup, PNSO pumps out a lot of figures but they're all kind of same-same. Is it another negative nit-pick to ask for more diversity? Someone will let me know. All the theropods are large apex predators. No dromaeosaurs (Microraptor aside), therizinosaurs, alvarezsaurs, ornithomimosaurs, etc. And that's just theropods, but its a true statement for all the groups they cover. It's like PNSO has specialty with a specific set of animals and doesn't want to stray from it. They seem hesitant to tackle smaller genera, feathers, etc. Would love to see something like a Deinocheirus, Protoceratops, Scelidosaurus, Scutellosaurus, Dryosaurus, any dromaeosaur, etc. Or I dunno, some sauropods?

[Halichoeres]

For what it's worth, in 2021 PNSO had the most phylogenetically and temporally diverse lineup of any company, at least by a metric I invented (https://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=10016.0), but it's definitely true that they seem to do little clusters of closely related animals like ceratopsids, tyrannosaurs, and hadrosaurs.

On the subject of promo photo distortions, when the promo photos of the Atopodentatus were released I was sure the tail was too long and the head too large, but in hand it's one of their most well-proportioned figures. But they do often have parts that are outsized, like the too-small Tsintaosaurus head, the too-long Eurhinosaurus tail, and the overhyped but, yes, mildly oversized Corythosaurus head. PNSO and minor proportion problems go together like Papo and defecation poses.

[Shadowknight1]

I know it's a bipedal theropod, but I'd love a Dilophosaurus to come out from any major company.  I think the last major Dilo release that I know of was the Papo and, while not a bad looking figure in many respects(I love the colors in particular), the pose that they stuck it in is beyond terrible.

EDIT: Also, would love to have a Utahraptor that actually looks good so I can box up and hide the REBOR Wind Hunter...out of all the REBOR figures I have, it's probably the ugliest.

[Bread]

4. Having owned some Papo figures, their texture is nothing special in my opinion.  And I find their colour schemes forgettable.  @Stegotyranno420, I think after you have a Papo and PNSO figure you'll see the sculpt is better on the PNSO.

This 100%.
Papo is definitely one of the first to produce highly detailed affordable dinosaur toys/figures/models, but with today's standards, they are definitely below par with the variety of companies that produce this same if not better quality toys/figures/models.

Edit: Plus, their choices in proportions and looks of the model are lacking compared to PNSO. Sure PNSO gets some of the proportions wrong but Papo goes above and beyond the lack of prehistoric animal proportions concept.