HAOLONGGOOD - New For 2023

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

We need a Saurolophus Anguirostrus figure so bad, I'd also personally like a Barsboldia but that one probably wouldn't be as interesting to others.

[Faelrin]

@Concavenator An up to date Tenontosaurus would be much appreciated, especially with all the options out there for Acrocanthosaurus, Deinonychus, and Sauropelta.

[Concavenator]

@Sim I don't like the color scheme on the CollectA Iguanodon at all. I'd prefer it to be smaller, and the scaling to be subtler as well. That said, this is all subjective on my part and this has nothing to do with the quality of the figure. I'd definitely welcome a new Iguanodon by Haolonggood, Eofauna, or even a remake by PNSO, though. It's also an iconic animal, so it's one of those creatures that could be called "a safe bet".

@Faelrin Indeed, it seems Tenontosaurus is usually depicted/imagined as mere Deinonychus fodder, but it's actually a very peculiar animal. Its proportions are quite unusual, with that super long tail.

[EuropaSuchus]

We need a Saurolophus Anguirostrus figure so bad, I'd also personally like a Barsboldia but that one probably wouldn't be as interesting to others.

Barsboldia is a mess of a genus: it's both fragmentary and ambigious (some scientists even think it's a Saurolophus synonym), so I don't really think it would be good choice too.

But we are really in need of saurolophine figures, at least most iconic and popular ones: new Gryposaurus, Brachylophosaurus, Maiasaura, Prosaurolophus, Saurolophus and Edmontosaurus. Latter two should be made as both species, since they are pretty different both in size and proportions.

[Sim]

I agree Barsboldia shouldn't be made, it doesn't have a known appearance and could be just Saurolophus.  I also agree Saurolophus is much needed, both species being worthy of getting made into a figure.  If only one species was made, I'd prefer Saurolophus angustirostris.  I don't understand why Edmontosaurus gets requested so much, it has very good figures by Safari and CollectA which aren't perfect but it is also not lacking good representation.

[atrashbug]

Yahoo my first post on here after creepin around for years! Just wanted to chime in and say saurolophus would be incredible to finally get a beautiful figure of. Always wanted one and I can't think of a better company to put it out- fingers crossed for the future! Also I don't recall seeing anyone else say it but I'd love to see Haolonggood tackle a good corythosaurus eventually (but not too soon). I liked PNSO's a lot but the sculpt is so prone to stability issues it would be nice to see a newer take on it at a better price point. 

[Fembrogon]

I don't understand why Edmontosaurus gets requested so much, it has very good figures by Safari and CollectA which aren't perfect but it is also not lacking good representation.

I think it's specifically E. annectens people want to see, since both Safari and Collecta produced E. regalis.

I'll vouch for Tenontosaurus and Brachylophosaurus myself.

[TlatolophusJuanorum]

I don't understand why Edmontosaurus gets requested so much, it has very good figures by Safari and CollectA which aren't perfect but it is also not lacking good representation.

I think it's specifically E. annectens people want to see, since both Safari and Collecta produced E. regalis.

I'll vouch for Tenontosaurus and Brachylophosaurus myself.

Since E. annectens has one of the best fossil record with the Trachodon and Dakota mummies. CollectA's Edmontosaurus is more of a chimera, since it tracks both E. annectens soft tissue and E. regalis comb. But its paint application is far from good, the sculpt is nice.
I do not quite like Safari's oversized feet and style, with just a few exceptions, as their Ceratopsians.

[Bread]

I don't understand why Edmontosaurus gets requested so much, it has very good figures by Safari and CollectA which aren't perfect but it is also not lacking good representation.

I think it's specifically E. annectens people want to see, since both Safari and Collecta produced E. regalis.

I'll vouch for Tenontosaurus and Brachylophosaurus myself.

Since E. annectens has one of the best fossil record with the Trachodon and Dakota mummies. CollectA's Edmontosaurus is more of a chimera, since it tracks both E. annectens soft tissue and E. regalis comb. But its paint application is far from good, the sculpt is nice.
I do not quite like Safari's oversized feet and style, with just a few exceptions, as their Ceratopsians.

I too find the need for an Edmontosaurus annectens specifically since I find CollectA's and Safari's with too many issues, and personal nitpicks from own point of view.

For example, I feel like we need a large bull Edmontosaurus.

[Gwangi]

I'm not thrilled with any of the Edmontosaurus currently available either. CollectA's sculpt is really good but I don't care for the paintjob and I just don't like Safari's at all. I've tried to convince myself that they're acceptable but the heart wants what it wants. So I'll just keep patiently waiting for one I like, it will come along eventually. The same is true for other genera like Iguanodon and Spinosaurus. People complain that they're all made too often but if someone doesn't like what is available then it makes no difference if there are a dozen choices available or there are none.

For the most part I'm happy with any a company making any figure of a genus/species I don't already have. So I would welcome an Tsintaosaurus as an alternative to PNSO's. There are some genera on my wish list though, including many cited here. Saurolophus, Camptosaurus, Shantungosaurus, Maiasaura etc.

I guess I'm one of the only people satisfied with the PNSO Corythosaurus. Bobblehead and stability aside it's still one of my favorite PNSO figures.

[danmalcolm]

My PNSO Mandschurosaurus has been playing the part of Edmontosaurus in 1:30 for years.

[Georassic]

As well-understood as Brachylophosaurus is, it frustrates me that one or more the main figure lines haven't made one.

[Takama]

I rather have a Brachylophosaurus then a Edmontosaurus personally

[Concavenator]

Some people want to see Barsboldia because it was featured on Prehistoric Planet, but not all of the animals from the show would be good choices for a figure, some are quite fragmentary: Kaikaifilu, Barbaridactylus, Nanuqsaurus, Imperobator, Barsboldia itself... Others from the show have better remains and haven't been properly made yet, like Austroraptor.

Really any species with good fossil remains that doesn't have a good figure yet (or at least, readily available) would be a good choice. If aside from that, the animal is question is particularly requested/popular, then even better. This is why I think some of HLG's choices this year have been really brilliant: Apatosaurus, Pentaceratops, Edmontonia, Ouranosaurus...

Theoretically any species with good fossil remains could be a good choice too, although now one would have to consider how imperfect (if any) are the existing versions. For instance, the aforementioned Corythosaurus has PNSO's version already, but it can get better than that. If HLG releases a version that's better than it, it will not be an irrelevant release. But once you're making a figure of an animal with existing figures, you're inevitably getting into competition, which for other species currently doesn't exist (Brachylophosaurus, Maiasaura...)

I'd rather we got a Brachylophosaurus over an Edmontosaurus too, though as previously mentioned, Edmontosaurus annectens is a very important species in its own right and has great fossil remains, so it's a very good choice as well.

In any case, please, I hope Haolonggood stays away from fragmentary animals. There's no point, plenty of animals with good remains that should take the preference instead.

[Takama]

Yes,   please,   avoid fragmetarey animals.  Your Wuerhosaurus was one such example of an animal that you should of avoided due to how Fragmentery it is.

[DefinitelyNOTDilo]

Yes,   please,   avoid fragmetarey animals.  Your Wuerhosaurus was one such example of an animal that you should of avoided due to how Fragmentery it is.

To be honest I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Whether or not a species gets made shouldn't depend on the completeness of the material, but how unique and interesting the existing material is. Take Therizinosaurus for instance, it has around the same amount of material as wuerhosaurus, yet no one is saying companies should avoid it. Obviously if we only have something like a tooth it's probably best not to make a figure of it, but even things like megaraptorans are super fragmentary and yet many people (myself included) have been clamoring for a megaraptoran figure because the material we do have is really cool!

[Sim]

Is the CollectA Edmontosaurus's skin inaccurate for E. regalis or is it simply doing the sensible thing and filling gaps with the skin of E. annectens?  Also, I believe the neck skin on CollectA's Edmontosaurus is based on a E. regalis specimen.

[Takama]

Everyone remember CollectAs VERY FIRST Deinochirus model WAY back in 2012?   It was praised for what it was, but it really was nothing but an oversized Version of your Standard Ornithomimid. 

Then, the very next year.. a discovery was made that bite them in the rear. 

Thats why when i choose a animal for a companey to replicate, I try to choose from ones with the best remains possible. Most important feature needed is a Skull. If a genus currently LACKS one. Then i will not recomend it. There are some room for "leaps of Faith"  as i do remember when the Late Dan LoRusso (who sculpted for Battat) created his Terra Nashiungosaurus. He said he took a leap of faith, since most Therizinisaurs with decent skull material were similer enough, for him to sculpt it. (And he followed the same motto as me,  actaully he is where I got mine from)

But we also must consider that a skull is not all that matters to make a model sometimed,   some decent postcranial material is ideal as well.  Besides, Who the hell knew that Deinochirus had a Hump on its back all these decades?

[Concavenator]

To be honest I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Whether or not a species gets made shouldn't depend on the completeness of the material, but how unique and interesting the existing material is. Take Therizinosaurus for instance, it has around the same amount of material as wuerhosaurus, yet no one is saying companies should avoid it. Obviously if we only have something like a tooth it's probably best not to make a figure of it, but even things like megaraptorans are super fragmentary and yet many people (myself included) have been clamoring for a megaraptoran figure because the material we do have is really cool!

No one is saying Therizinosaurus should be avoided? Are you sure?  Well, I think it should. There are other therizinosaurs with better remains that would be better choices, and they are also interesting animals in their own right, like Segnosaurus (which Wild Past plans to release a figure of), Nothronychus... That said, yeah, I think a Therizinosaurus makes for a more interesting choice for a figure than other fragmentary taxa from groups with otherwise plenty of well-known members. On that note, I'd take a Therizinosaurus over a Zhuchengtyrannus or Wendiceratops anytime, but there are better choices among therizinosaurs. It's just the one that gets made the most often because it's the most popular, and it's the most popular because it's the biggest one, regardless of the completeness of its remains.

When megaraptorans are concerned, it's worth differentiating Megaraptor itself from the rest of its relatives. Megaraptor is somewhat unique despite its fragmentary status, with its long snout and distinctive forearms. We know best about Megaraptor as a juvenile, we don't know what the adult looked like. And this genus is the one we have the (relatively) best remains among its group, so all the other megaraptorans are worse choices and are basically depictions of Megaraptor under different names. Megaraptor is currently the one and only megaraptoran that should receive attention in figure form from its group, and HLG has done a great job with it already. But again, as I said with Therizinosaurus, considering that nowadays figures of Zhuchengtyrannus, the so-called "Sinopliosaurus", Saurophaganax, Ceratosuchops, Wendiceratops, Wuerhosaurus, etc. are being released, then sure, I agree a megaraptoran would be more interesting, but because these genera I mentioned come from groups with lots of well-known animals, so choosing to make fragmentary taxa from them feels very pointless. Especially when there are other members from those groups that have good fossil material and are still waiting to be made justice.

Figures like the HLG Wuerhosaurus are very nice, just as HLG also have very nice figures of dinosaurs we have a good knowledge of.

[Carnoking]

I prefer there to be some material to go off of (I'll echo the sentiment that extrapolating an entire animal from just a few teeth is a gamble of long odds) but as long as the presented model is well researched on the available remains, I won't get upset to see it turn out inaccurate a few years on.
In a science as fluid as Paleontology, I'm willing to grant some leeway to model makers. If anything the model itself could stand as a benchmark in our understanding of the animal at a given time, which I think has value in itself.
Of course, if a model comes out that doesn't look like it took into account the available research, then that's a different story.