CollectA - New for 2024

[SidB]

This one appears, on my screen at least, to be green, as opposed to the gray on the DTB image. Are there two colors?

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

The comparison pics of Dreadnoughtus and Ruyangosaurus make me want the former even more.

Indeed, good size too. Glad CollectA, HLG and PNSO are proving that the days of large sauropod figures are not behind us! (Mattel as well to some extent but they're an entirely different beast)

I wasn't super excited about the Dreadnoughtus, but somehow seeing it in hand, even in a video of lower quality than the press release photos, makes me like it more, lol. 

[Stuckasaurus (Dino Dad Reviews)]

I wasn't super excited about the Dreadnoughtus, but somehow seeing it in hand, even in a video of lower quality than the press release photos, makes me like it more, lol. 

lol, I just realized, the Dreadnoughtus is a pretty similar shade to Disneyland's trademark "Go Away Green", which is a shade specifically chosen because most people's brains are less likely to register it in the background, so they use it whenever they have a non-themed building they can't quite hide. I think the color must be why I wasn't super excited by it. As a former avid Disney-goer, I've been actively trained to ignore things in that shade of green. 

[SidB]

I'm glad that CollectA didn't go with the usual shade of gray used for the Ruyango and Mamamench.

[Concavenator]

Not much is known about derived titanosaurs, but one of them is that they possibly lacked forelimb claws, so it's a pity the Dreadnoughthus has them. Same goes for the PNSO Alamosaurus. Safari and HLG didn't make this mistake with their Malawisaurus and Ampelosaurus, respectively. That aside, this Dreadnoughtus is clearly better detailed than the Ruyangosaurus, which was already a really good figure.

Also I don't really get the burnout on Collecta's sauropods. They've only made 3 so far in the past 4 years and its something they obviously excel at. Its not like with pnso where they've been constantly pumping them out for the entire year. If they're a group you're not super invested in no worries, collecta always has a pretty diverse lineup.

I don't think our complaints specifically refer to CollectA releasing sauropods, it's what type of sauropods they're releasing. They've made a Mamenchisaurus hochuanensis. It's a distinctive-looking animal with good fossil remains, we may or may not be into it, but as a species, it's a good choice for a figure. Then we've got 2 giant titanosaurs. These animals aren't known from good remains, and knowing there are many prehistoric animals known from (sometimes really) good remains that have never been made and probably will never be, it personally strikes me as irrelevant that we get > 1 good representative of them. I agree with @Sim , releasing multiple figures of huge fragmentary titanosaurs is essentially releasing the same thing with different names. Not much different from releasing multiple figures of huge fragmentary carcharodontosaurids, except ones are herbivorous and the other carnivorous.

At the end of the day, I feel like the people who are into those titanosaurs like them by the sake of simply being big. As always happens in these cases, no matter how well-known certain taxa from a particular group are, if they're not the biggest members of the group they belong to, they're just not going to take the priority. Which is why, if the goal is to make big figures of big sauropod genera, there are other sauropods that are known from better material and so would be better choices, like Apatosaurus, Turiasaurus... people would also like them by virtue of being big. And you know, there is life beyond the huge too. Amargasaurus, Shunosaurus or Camarasaurus are all better choices than those titanosaurs too, for example, using fossil completeness as a criterion.

[TaranUlas]

As someone who really does like them, I also like them because these are the first figures for those genera. There's not really another Dreadnoughtus or Ruyangosaurus figure. By contrast, you have several Giganotosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus figures.

At least that's my take on it. They look quite good.

[TheCambrianCrusader]

Not much is known about derived titanosaurs, but one of them is that they possibly lacked forelimb claws, so it's a pity the Dreadnoughthus has them. Same goes for the PNSO Alamosaurus. Safari and HLG didn't make this mistake with their Malawisaurus and Ampelosaurus, respectively. That aside, this Dreadnoughtus is clearly better detailed than the Ruyangosaurus, which was already a really good figure.

Also I don't really get the burnout on Collecta's sauropods. They've only made 3 so far in the past 4 years and its something they obviously excel at. Its not like with pnso where they've been constantly pumping them out for the entire year. If they're a group you're not super invested in no worries, collecta always has a pretty diverse lineup.

I don't think our complaints specifically refer to CollectA releasing sauropods, it's what type of sauropods they're releasing. They've made a Mamenchisaurus hochuanensis. It's a distinctive-looking animal with good fossil remains, we may or may not be into it, but as a species, it's a good choice for a figure. Then we've got 2 giant titanosaurs. These animals aren't known from good remains, and knowing there are many prehistoric animals known from (sometimes really) good remains that have never been made and probably will never be, it personally strikes me as irrelevant that we get > 1 good representative of them. I agree with @Sim , releasing multiple figures of huge fragmentary titanosaurs is essentially releasing the same thing with different names. Not much different from releasing multiple figures of huge fragmentary carcharodontosaurids, except ones are herbivorous and the other carnivorous.

At the end of the day, I feel like the people who are into those titanosaurs like them by the sake of simply being big. As always happens in these cases, no matter how well-known certain taxa from a particular group are, if they're not the biggest members of the group they belong to, they're just not going to take the priority. Which is why, if the goal is to make big figures of big sauropod genera, there are other sauropods that are known from better material and so would be better choices, like Apatosaurus, Turiasaurus... people would also like them by virtue of being big. And you know, there is life beyond the huge too. Amargasaurus, Shunosaurus or Camarasaurus are all better choices than those titanosaurs too, for example, using fossil completeness as a criterion.

I think I understand what you're saying but I don't really agree. This is only the second Titanosaur they've released, Mamenchisaurus isn't even a Titanosaur. A macronarian maybe but its affinities seem to be unresolved atm. If they were to make a T. rex and then a Daspletosaurus the next year would you make the same argument? And fossil completeness while a good rule to follow should not be the only criterion to pick taxa from. Especially from Titanosaurs as they're notoriously fragmentary. If complete sauropods were the only ones we ever made we only ever get the same few genera, and well we've already got the lion's share of Apatosaurus and Amargasaurus figures (plus collecta already made a Brontosaurus and Bajadasaurus so your argument would just come right back for those two, a Turiasaurus would be neat tho). And by sauropod standards Dreadnoughtus is fairly well known, so then by that criterion it should qualify too. As the whole biggest of the big I mean yeah why shouldnt they get figures? Especially when we get so many figures of the same few megatheropods every year why shouldn't we get a few big titanosaurs especially after they've been ignored for decades? A couple Titanosaurs in a couple years won't hurt anybody. Iunno thats my two scents. Keep the big bois coming but I would kill for a Turiasaurus or Isisaurus.

Dunno if that came off as a little aggressive, reading tone through text is weird, but I like having debates.

[Jorgesaurus]

Brachiosaurus or Giraffatitan 2025 please

[Prehistory Resurrection]

[bmathison1972]

Brachiosaurus or Giraffatitan 2025 please

I don't have either of those genera yet, so I'd be happy for one as well

[suspsy]

I don't think any Brachiosaurus toy will surpass the second Carnegie Collection one, but Giraffatitan would be cool.

[Concavenator]

@TheCambrianCrusader No worries!

I knew that Mamenchisaurus isn't a titanosaur, I simply meant to express that I consider it to be a good choice for a figure, but not 2 huge titanosaurs. Yes, we've recently gotten quite a few figures of fragmentary theropods, so I can see your point: if we've gotten fragmentary theropods, why can't we also have fragmentary sauropods? But to be honest, I don't think either are good choices for the reason I said: other animals with better remains are yet to be made. Maybe I was exaggerating, this is their 2nd big titanosaur in a row, but I think one is enough for the reasons I already said.

About Apatosaurus, it's easily one of the most famous dinosaurs and when it comes to scientifically accurate figures, the most noteworthy one only came out this year (HLG's) and that figure has several inaccuracies. Amargasaurus has also had several figures released, but none of them are up-to-date to our current understanding of it (with a sailed neck). Personally, I'd rather have new excellent figures of these genera than first-time figures of fragmentary sauropods, but of course, this depends on who you ask. Dreadnoughtus is a better choice than Ruyangosaurus, though. And so is Patagotitan. But still, I am literally unable to tell any of these animals apart. I'd honestly have en easier time telling apart giganotosaurine carcharodontosaurids between each other, or a Gorgosaurus from an Albertosaurus, and that's saying something. If you told me the CollectA Ruyangosaurus is a Dreadnoughtus and the CollectA Dreadnoughtus is a Ruyangosaurus, how could I verify it?

The example you used with Tyrannosaurus and Daspletosaurus is not exactly the same. Both genera are known from good remains, so technically they are good choices for a figure... but that quality is lost the more often good figures of them are released. Usually, with one really good figure per species is enough, which those genera already have. So in this case I wouldn't say they're particularly good choices, especially Tyrannosaurus, of course. Don't know if you mentioned those two genera because they're (very?) similar, but I think some people exaggerate Tyrannosaurus and Daspletosaurus being that similar to each other. They certainly look alike, but at least myself, I definitely can tell them apart, which I can't for those massive titanosaurs. Nonetheless, just like in the case of titanosaurs, I would find additional figures of Tyrannosaurus and Daspletosaurus unneeded (which doesn't mean that if new figures of them are released and they're better than existing ones, I wouldn't go for them instead of the ones I'm currently planning to get). Knowing there are other animals known from good remains awaiting to get made, comparisons like these feel a bit pointless in my opinion.

Also, there are actually more sauropods with good remains than you might imagine! For example,  take a look at the species in @Sim 's list. And you know, sauropods aside there are basal sauropodomorphs too, which are tremendously overlooked. The competence of figures in this group is nonexistent. No, I'm not exaggerating. Plateosaurus, which is by far the most famous one and has excellent remains (and is also one of the most famous Triassic animals) currently doesn't even have an up-to-date figure, yet here we are getting shiny new figures of "Sinopliosaurus", Ceratosuchops, Saurophaganax, Zhuchengtyrannus, Mapusaurus and yes, also Ruyangosaurus, Alamosaurus...

[bmathison1972]

I don't think any Brachiosaurus toy will surpass the second Carnegie Collection one, but Giraffatitan would be cool.

maybe I should pursue Carnegie? I don't generally collect 'vintage' but if it's one of the best?

[Flaffy]

I don't think any Brachiosaurus toy will surpass the second Carnegie Collection one, but Giraffatitan would be cool.

maybe I should pursue Carnegie? I don't generally collect 'vintage' but if it's one of the best?

Good luck finding one. Carnegie Brachis (2012) go for a pretty penny nowadays.

[TheCambrianCrusader]

@Concavenator Ah I gocthu and yeah there are quite a few sauropods and definitely sauropodomorphs that deserve figures. Plateosaurus has always been at the top of my list for years, and Anchisaurus too for that matter. I guess I'm just happy that a pretty overlooked group is getting more attention, I just think its refreshing after dreaming of a giant Argentinosaurus figure for decades.

As for Apatosaurus the Haolongood figure looks pretty darn good to me. I know the skull isn't exactly spot on but its not far off either. I'm not someone who is always clamoring for 100% accuracy tho. Obviously if possible I would want it as accurate as possible but if there are some discrepancies here and there I don't mind. If I did I wouldn't be able to collect most non-dinosaur figures out there as most are either somewhat outdated or have some aspect incorrect so I'm happy with it being close enough. In that same vein the Safari Apato is still excellent barring the nostril position but I can easily excuse that. The sail reconstruction for Amargasaurus is pretty recent so give it some time, I wouldn't be surprised if Collecta comes out with a new one soon.

And yeah the Tyrannosaurus/Daspletosaurus comparison was mostly just due to how similar they are. Maybe Albertosaurus and Gorgosaurus would've been a better comparison. I do think however that the ease of being able to tell Tyranno and Daspleto apart is by just how popular and often they are reconstructed so their autapomorphies are more distinct to people. I'm sure the differences between Dreadnoughtus and Ruyangosaurus are distinct enough to know which is which its just those differences aren't as widely known.

[TheCambrianCrusader]

I don't think any Brachiosaurus toy will surpass the second Carnegie Collection one, but Giraffatitan would be cool.

maybe I should pursue Carnegie? I don't generally collect 'vintage' but if it's one of the best?

Oof good luck, I've been trying to complete the carnegie collection for a while now and that's become my white whale.
Its almost getting as bad as the Battat Diplodocus.

[bmathison1972]

I found it on eBay....for anywhere from $174-$400! Yikes! LOL

Someone is bound to make one soon, it's such an iconic dinosaur. I can wait.

[Gwangi]

I found it on eBay....for anywhere from $174-$400! Yikes! LOL

Someone is bound to make one soon, it's such an iconic dinosaur. I can wait.

I never got that Carnegie one but I do have the Wild Safari one and it's quite good. It's not perfect (it's from 2008) but I don't think it has any inaccuracies that the Carnegie one doesn't. Anyway, I like it and still display it, and it's still in production.

https://www.safariltd.com/products/wild-safari-dinosaurs-brachiosaurus-figurines-300229-html

[crazy8wizard]

The Wild Safari Brachiosaurus is great, but it's very clearly based on Brachiosaurus brancai, so in reality it's another Giraffatitan figure

[bmathison1972]

The Wild Safari Brachiosaurus is great, but it's very clearly based on Brachiosaurus brancai, so in reality it's another Giraffatitan figure

Interesting, because Safari's own site called it B. altithorax