What 2014 models will you get?

[Roselaar]

If my current financial situation holds, and and all of them, except for the Sideshows and the Schleichs (the latter which I will pick up eventually on flea markets and such, as I have most of the others I own, except for the few that really deserved to be bought at more prestigious venues).

Collecta and Papo take precedence though.

[Hermes888]

My list -

Papo: Dilophosaurus and Archaeopteryx
CollectA: Not really a big CollectA fan to be honest, they've improved a lot since they first started but I doubt that I'll buy any unless I see them in person
Carnegie: Tyrannosaurus
Safari: Pachyrhinosaurus, Suchomimus, Monolophosaurus, and ammonite
Schleich: Funny joke

Papo and Safari/Carnegie make up nearly all of my current collection at the moment, and I doubt that that will change in the future.

[Victorsaurus]

Aaah! There's so much good stuff here but New Zealand is still stuck in some illusion that only Schleich makes good dinosaur figures.
Well as long as my trusty Papo supplier doesn't fall into the Schleich trap I'd get all three of their offerings.
The rest I'll probably hope that somehow I'll be able to stumble upon them on the internet.

[Quen]

While I probably won't be getting them in 2014, the ones I plan to get are the Papo archaeopteryx and (I'm really surprised to be saying this) Schleich pentaceratops. Probably the Safari ammonite. Maybe the Collecta tyrannosaurus chick and saurophaganax.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

The Ammonite will look pretty cool next to a fossil of it..might get a few when I finally get around to making some marine reptiles.

[tyrantqueen]

I've changed my mind about the Papos, I won't be buying the Archaeopteryx. Not because I think it's badly sculpted or anything, but I'm not really interested in "monstrous" or JP styled depictions.

I really hope we see some new resin kits this year, too

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'd at least hold off any decisions on Papo til we see more, better pics.  I don't really see any monster or JP style to the Archeo ? It looks mostly based off a piece of paleo art.

[tyrantqueen]

I'd at least hold off any decisions on Papo til we see more, better pics.  I don't really see any monster or JP style to the Archeo ? It looks mostly based off a piece of paleo art.

Mostly the scaled face and generic dromaeosaurus head that gives me that feeling...it's not a bad model though, and much better than Bullyland's effort.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'd at least hold off any decisions on Papo til we see more, better pics.  I don't really see any monster or JP style to the Archeo ? It looks mostly based off a piece of paleo art.

Mostly the scaled face and generic dromaeosaurus head that gives me that feeling...it's not a bad model though, and much better than Bullyland's effort.

lol I have that one two..had to have an archeo pf some sort.   feathers could be added to the face I suppose with a bit of effort.  I'm still not 100% sure on the extent of feathering myself though..not enough to say it's wrong or inaccurate at the least.  The head itself..does have that generic feel..but maybe it's the pic. I'll try to hope for that.

[Dan]

I hope this means Papo will be getting a little more original, and Dr. Kirkland seems to like the Archaeopteryx. Not the most daring choice for a feathered theropod, but it's a good step forward for a company that used to just imitate movies. I like it.

I was tempted to answer the thread question with "All of them" just like Takama, but that might seem like a cruel thing for a retailer to say. 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I hope this means Papo will be getting a little more original, and Dr. Kirkland seems to like the Archaeopteryx. Not the most daring choice for a feathered theropod, but it's a good step forward for a company that used to just imitate movies. I like it.

I was tempted to answer the thread question with "All of them" just like Takama, but that might seem like a cruel thing for a retailer to say. 

Not that it isn't true right ? lol

[Pawnosuchus]

My choices are all tentative at this point but as of now I'm leaning towards-
Carnegie-T-Rex
Wild Safari-Pachy
                  Monolophosaurus
Collecta= Carcharodontosaurus
                Xenoceratops
                Gastonia
Papo-       Dilophosaurus
Bullyland- Lambeosaurus
I already have the Safari Suchomius. Couldn't wait to replace the old Green monstrostity.

[Concavenator]

I'll get the following ones  :

Carnegie Tyrannosaurus rex
Papo Dilophosaurus,Archaeopteryx and Baby Triceratops
Wild Safari Suchomimus and Pachyrhinosaurus
CollectA Deluxe Carcharodontosaurus,then I'll see 
Bullyland Lambeosaurus
Schleich Pentaceratops (maybe)

[tanystropheus]

I've changed my mind about the Papos, I won't be buying the Archaeopteryx. Not because I think it's badly sculpted or anything, but I'm not really interested in "monstrous" or JP styled depictions.

I really hope we see some new resin kits this year, too

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

[Concavenator]

I've changed my mind about the Papos, I won't be buying the Archaeopteryx. Not because I think it's badly sculpted or anything, but I'm not really interested in "monstrous" or JP styled depictions.

I really hope we see some new resin kits this year, too

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

If the Archaeopteryx had a furry neck and face,I doubt that criticism would've happened,really.

[tanystropheus]

I've changed my mind about the Papos, I won't be buying the Archaeopteryx. Not because I think it's badly sculpted or anything, but I'm not really interested in "monstrous" or JP styled depictions.

I really hope we see some new resin kits this year, too

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

If the Archaeopteryx had a furry neck and face,I doubt that criticism would've happened,really.

That's true, but there also happens to be quite a few popular depictions of scaly-headed Archaeopteryx in paleoart, so I don't understand the logic behind the criticism (some of these depictions have 'raptor' heads):


http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2009/11/02/2370804/archjura.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lUCSYF9g0t4/UlMljX97SYI/AAAAAAAADI4/No0dcclYLJA/s1600/Archae.jpg

http://i0.wp.com/listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/archaeopteryx.jpg?resize=550%2C442

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-10H_1Mv4G9k/TaybLBj_BeI/AAAAAAAAAKc/MybL-rON9yQ/s320/archaeopteryx1.jpg

http://www.solnhofen-fossilienatlas.de/fossilien/440reko_kopf.jpg

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/naturelibrary/images/ic/credit/640x395/a/ar/archaeopteryx/archaeopteryx_1.jpg

http://www.rmrp.info/images/jpg/archaeopteryx.png

I'm not sure how accurate the following information is...it is from the website:

http://oakleaf-management.co.uk/page_2688310.html

Interestingly, archaeopteryx had a scaly head instead of feathery, and had a large brain.

"...Or perhaps archaeopteryx is a dinosaur, and has started a new family. If this is so, then would it have belonged to the same family as yandangornis? This was a very bird-like dinosaur capable of flight, and its family has been put "intermediate" because it is unknown what its true family is. It is most likely to be a troodonid. Perhaps archaeopteryx belongs to the same family. But Yandangornis had a feathered head, which is unlike archaeopteryx. Let's just accept that archaeopteryx is a bird and belongs to the family "archaeopterygidae." The scaly head is strange for a bird, because no dino-bird, even sinosauropteryx, had a scaly head...."

[tyrantqueen]

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

I dunno...if Archy appeared in JP, I think they'd have to bite the bullet and give it feathers. A naked Archaeopteryx is ridiculous otherwise. It is known to the general public as the "first bird", after all.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

I dunno...if Archy appeared in JP, I think they'd have to bite the bullet and give it feathers. A naked Archaeopteryx is ridiculous otherwise. It is known to the general public as the "first bird", after all.

They probably just wouldn't use one.  But yeah it would need feathers..no way they could have a completely featherless version.

[Gwangi]

I've changed my mind about the Papos, I won't be buying the Archaeopteryx. Not because I think it's badly sculpted or anything, but I'm not really interested in "monstrous" or JP styled depictions.

I really hope we see some new resin kits this year, too

That Papo Archaeopteryx is as anti-JP as it gets, considering Jurassic World's vehemently anti-feathers stance.

If the Archaeopteryx had a furry neck and face,I doubt that criticism would've happened,really.

That's true, but there also happens to be quite a few popular depictions of scaly-headed Archaeopteryx in paleoart, so I don't understand the logic behind the criticism (some of these depictions have 'raptor' heads):


http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2009/11/02/2370804/archjura.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lUCSYF9g0t4/UlMljX97SYI/AAAAAAAADI4/No0dcclYLJA/s1600/Archae.jpg

http://i0.wp.com/listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/archaeopteryx.jpg?resize=550%2C442

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-10H_1Mv4G9k/TaybLBj_BeI/AAAAAAAAAKc/MybL-rON9yQ/s320/archaeopteryx1.jpg

http://www.solnhofen-fossilienatlas.de/fossilien/440reko_kopf.jpg

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/naturelibrary/images/ic/credit/640x395/a/ar/archaeopteryx/archaeopteryx_1.jpg

http://www.rmrp.info/images/jpg/archaeopteryx.png

I'm not sure how accurate the following information is...it is from the website:

http://oakleaf-management.co.uk/page_2688310.html

Interestingly, archaeopteryx had a scaly head instead of feathery, and had a large brain.

"...Or perhaps archaeopteryx is a dinosaur, and has started a new family. If this is so, then would it have belonged to the same family as yandangornis? This was a very bird-like dinosaur capable of flight, and its family has been put "intermediate" because it is unknown what its true family is. It is most likely to be a troodonid. Perhaps archaeopteryx belongs to the same family. But Yandangornis had a feathered head, which is unlike archaeopteryx. Let's just accept that archaeopteryx is a bird and belongs to the family "archaeopterygidae." The scaly head is strange for a bird, because no dino-bird, even sinosauropteryx, had a scaly head...."

All or at least most of those illustrations are outdated and/or inaccurate. Using those pictures as a defense is no better than saying there are plenty of tail dragging Tyrannosaurus illustrations as justification for a tail dragging model. Most modern paleoartists depict Archeopteryx as being a lot more bird-like. That article you shared also does not seem like a good source for information, looks like a high school project to me.
I like the Papo Archeopteryx, am thrilled that they made it and I think it is the best feathered dinosaur on the market (or it will be). I just would have preferred a less reptilian head is all.

[tyrantqueen]

Maybe if it was repainted so that the head was the same colour as the rest of the body, it might give the illusion of feathers. I know that's not an option for everyone, but just throwing it out there.