The Same Old Starting Lineup - Put Me In, Coach!

[smashtoad]

I am personally getting over figures of dromeosaurs, cerotopsians, sauropods, and theropods.  It seems as though anytime a new line starts, they start with the same animals. 

Andrewsarchus, euparkeria, erythrosuchus, doedicurus, the entelodonts, phorusrhacoids, et al...the list goes on and on.  So many cool creatures that get little love from the makers of larger, well-posed,  highly detailed figures.  I don't need articulation, just passion and style in the poses.  I was pumped silly about Papo's Tupuxuara until I found out it was the size of a hamster.

How about a muscle-bound bull elasmotherium, head turned, alert, as if he just heard something he may have to stomp into dust?  Or the same thing with Megaloceros?

I understand the allure of the giants, I really do, but Allosaurus?  Papo has pretty much smoked that one...done.  You're gonna be hard pressed to improve on that sculpt for $16.  Their running T-Rex?  Good luck making a larger, better looking T-Rex for $25.  And they both stand very well on their own, which is awesome.

I know lots of you guys collect all figures, no matter how simplistic they are.  I am just not a big collector.  I want my figures affordable, amazing, as large as possible, and on my shelf.

Anyway...just thinking out loud.  I know I'm probably in the minority on this.

I'd love to hear more obscure crazy critters others would like to see so I can Google them and check them out.

[Takama]

The public has no love for any ornithopods besides Parasaurolophus.       Rebor made a rarely made ornithopod for there line  but it's dead meat for the more Badass theropods.      That's a freaking disgrace to the family.

[smashtoad]

Yeah...herbivores don't get a lot of love unless they're really weird or can kick butt if threatened.  I kind of get it, but I'll bet a big bull Edmontosaurus didn't take a ton of crap.  I wonder how vigorously they defended their herd?  That'd be cool to know.

[CityRaptor]

It's kinda ironic, given how beloved horses, which are pretty much just mammalian knock-offs of Ornithopods, are.

As for the line-up: No mammals! Those things already the modern day animal market, despite there only being like 4000 species of them ( especiually looking at you, Equus and Homo ) , while there are around 10000 species of birds and reptiles each. 

[EarthboundEiniosaurus]

I'd love to see some truly amazing pterosaur figures, none that i can find really do them to much justice, with the best of the bunch in my opinion being the Papo Tupuxuara (even though it is naked) and the Capsule Q Pteranodon, but Pteranodon is such an overrepresented genus. I'd like to see a proper azhdarchid, anurognathid, or ctenochasmatoid, ideally in a grounded position. As for dinosaurs, coelophysoids beyond Dilophosaurus need some more love, along with heterodontosaurids and primitive ceratopsids. I'd like to see some enantiornithes or primitive avialans as well, that may be a bit of a fantasy though. With cenozoic life, any and all of the Australian pleistocene megafauna would be great, a Diprotodon from Papo would be amazing I think, and a dromornithid would be cool to see as well. A guy can only dream...

Thanks,

EarthboundEiniosaurus

[smashtoad]

I'd love to see some truly amazing pterosaur figures, none that i can find really do them to much justice, with the best of the bunch in my opinion being the Papo Tupuxuara (even though it is naked) and the Capsule Q Pteranodon, but Pteranodon is such an overrepresented genus. I'd like to see a proper azhdarchid, anurognathid, or ctenochasmatoid, ideally in a grounded position. As for dinosaurs, coelophysoids beyond Dilophosaurus need some more love, along with heterodontosaurids and primitive ceratopsids. I'd like to see some enantiornithes or primitive avialans as well, that may be a bit of a fantasy though. With cenozoic life, any and all of the Australian pleistocene megafauna would be great, a Diprotodon from Papo would be amazing I think, and a dromornithid would be cool to see as well. A guy can only dream...

Thanks,

EarthboundEiniosaurus

I gotta check out a couple of those, but I am so very down with the anurognathid...life size figures.  How awesome would that be?

[Sim]

The overrepresentation of certain prehistoric animal species/groups in models is something I've been thinking about for a while now.  I have some thoughts about this, which I'll share once I have a bit more time.

Rebor made a rarely made ornithopod for there line  but it's dead meat for the more Badass theropods.      That's a freaking disgrace to the family.

I thought what Rebor said about it when advertising it was very distasteful, e.g. "Rest in pieces", "That's the spirit".  Rebor doesn't seem to care much about prehistoric animals though, given how much they've altered the appearance of their dinosaurs from that of the real animals to try to make them more appealing, how they copy inaccurate JP franchise designs, and how all of their figures so far have been carnivores except for a baby Triceratops, a dead Triceratops and a dead Tenontosaurus.

[Sim]

Something I find can be frustrating is when certain species keep getting made into figures when there's already good versions of them, while other species continue to be ignored despite lacking a good figure version or even any figure version!  Tyrannosaurus is an interesting animal, but the constant disproportionate amount of attention it gets in figures, and almost everywhere that deals with dinosaurs, gets tiring and it gets to a point where it becomes boring too.  I would feel this way about any animal if it got so much attention, even my favourites.  It was very disappointing seeing Favorite exclude their Deinonychus from their new mini figure set while including three Tyrannosaurus - two of which are the same figure just with different colours!

I am personally getting over figures of dromeosaurs, cerotopsians, sauropods, and theropods.  It seems as though anytime a new line starts, they start with the same animals.

It's true many figures are made of members of those groups.   Although it tends to be the same few species, while many interesting ceratopsians, sauropods and theropods (dromaeosaurs are included in this group) get ignored.  Some of these also keep getting made into poor figures.  Dromaeosaurs are an example of this.  I can think of several great featherless dromaeosaur figures from the 90s. We now know dromaeosaurs were feathered like birds and consequently looked very different to these figures.  Despite this, good feathered dromaeosaur figures are seriously lacking.  There are so many figures labelled "Velociraptor", but most of them aren't actually of Velociraptor, but instead based on the JP characters which aren't good representations of any dromaeosaur.  So, there are almost no dromaeosaur figures that are adequate representations of the real animals.

If you're getting tired of figures of ceratopsians, sauropods and theropods in general though, I can understand that.  I personally don't like it when figure companies I like make similar relatives of species that are already a good figure in their line, instead of species that lack a good figure version and don't have a relative already in the line.

Andrewsarchus, euparkeria, erythrosuchus, doedicurus, the entelodonts, phorusrhacoids, et al...the list goes on and on.  So many cool creatures that get little love from the makers of larger, well-posed,  highly detailed figures.  I don't need articulation, just passion and style in the poses.  I was pumped silly about Papo's Tupuxuara until I found out it was the size of a hamster.

Despite being known only from the upper half of one skull, there's a number of Andrewsarchus figures.  CollectA is releasing one this year.  Safari has also made an Andrewsarchus, sculpted by Doug Watson.

I understand the allure of the giants, I really do, but Allosaurus?  Papo has pretty much smoked that one...done.  You're gonna be hard pressed to improve on that sculpt for $16.  Their running T-Rex?  Good luck making a larger, better looking T-Rex for $25.  And they both stand very well on their own, which is awesome.

The Papo running Tyrannosaurus has some good features, but looking like a real Tyrannosaurus isn't one of them.  It's not surprising since it was based on the Vastatosaurus (aka V. rex) from King Kong.  That's where its inaccurate and divisive tooth arrangement comes from.  Compared to a real Tyrannosaurus, its upper jaw is also much too deep, and its arms are over twice the length they should be.  Battat, Favorite, The Carnegie Collection, Safari and CollectA have all made one or more Tyrannosaurus figures that are good, modern representations of the real animal that satisfy different preferences and likes.  The Tyrannosaurus figures made by others like Papo and Rebor which don't look much like the real animal, are still liked and found satisfying by some as well.  Personally, I've reached a point of Tyrannosaurus fatigue, especially regarding new figures of it.  I'd much rather see figures made of almost any other prehistoric species, particularly ones that are known from good remains and don't have a good representation in figure form.

I'd love to hear more obscure crazy critters others would like to see so I can Google them and check them out.

I'll list some in a separate post!

[Gwangi]

I'm right there with you Smashtoad. I'm at the point where models of obscure animals are the most appealing to me. As much as I love the classic dinosaurs how many T. rex models do I really need on my shelf? I'm a casual collector who tries to keep their collection manageable. Why take up space with ANOTHER Triceratops when I don't have a Centrosaurus or Einiosaurus yet? The problem is, no one makes the later two. Unless a model is exceptional in some other way or truly unique, for those I'll make an exception. I may have a lot of T. rex models but I still don't have one with feathers, so for that I'll find space on my shelf. But yes, prehistoric life in general aside from Mesozoic reptiles and a few popular critters like Dimetrodon and the woolly mammoth are very poorly represented. That said, the market has a lot more to offer now than it ever did previously.

[Bucklander]

Wow! It's like y'all read my mind. Such pertinent comments. Couldn't agree more. Though I must say, before I continue, because I'd hate at some later point to be accused of lying, that I seem, since joining this forum, to have been bitten by a rather nasty bug. When I first began collecting, I sought one AND ONLY ONE figure for each genus (species when specific levels were recognized and available). Every time I bought a new, better figure of a genus, I gave away my now unneeded old figure. That worked fine for a time, but once I started checking out the various collections here (especially those of Bokisaurus and Postsaurischian) and seeing how much variation existed in a figure made by many different companies I changed my criteria and began just collecting everything I could get.

Now it seems, I have a very terrible disease. It completely rules my life. How much simpler had I stuck to my original plan. Anyway, I would gladly swap many of the T rex and Triceratops figures I have for unrepresented figures. To that end, eventually, I fear I shall have to start buying Shapeways but for the moment I'm still holding off.

Again, when I started collecting, I was surprised by the opposite - how many genera were/are available. The first time I ever learned of the existence of Safari (I live in Australia, we don't get Safari). Dimophodon, Rhamphorrhynchus, Kaprosuchus, Guanlong, Tylosaurus so many creatures I'd read about in books and had no idea existed as figures.

Now I have all those, I want more. And that's the point of this thread. Though Bullyland made a great Edaphosaurus, it's now very hard to find. Same with Playvision's Eobasilius (Uintatherium), though that's not such a great figure (personally, I prefer the Starlux). Why has no one ever made a dynamically posed Uintatherium? What an awesome (literally) beast! And Estemmenosuchus. Collecta could make amazing deluxe models of either of those two.

I have to go and wake up my daughter and attend to today's responsibilities, but just like someone else said above (was it Sim?) I'll get back to this thread with a list of creatures that I believe, really are crying out to be made into figures.

[Halichoeres]

I'd love to see some companies make more adventurous taxon choices, but it does seem like the old trifecta of Tyrannosaurs, Velociraptor, and Triceratops are the cash cows. Bullyland used to tackle weird and interesting animals, but it doesn't really seem to have rewarded them and I wonder if that's why this year they gave us more of the same--Tyrannosaurus and Liopleurodon.

Like Bucklander's former self, I typically only have one representative of a given genus, sometimes two. So I get most excited by a brand new species. In addition to more ornithopods as others have called for, I'd love to see more non-dinosaurs, such as:

Aspidorhynchus
Bawitius
Brochoadmones
Calcarichelys
Cotylorhynchus
Ctenochasma
Drepanosaurus
Docofossor
Enchodus
Estemmenosuchus
Lotosaurus
Nicrosaurus
Ornithoprion
Prionosuchus
Prognathodon
Repenomamus
Rhizodus
Shankouclava
Sharovipteryx
Stomatosuchus

And I've restrained myself on the fish, relatively speaking, because everyone here has heard my laments on their underrepresentation ad nauseam.

[Sim]

I have to go and wake up my daughter and attend to today's responsibilities, but just like someone else said above (was it Sim?) I'll get back to this thread with a list of creatures that I believe, really are crying out to be made into figures.

Yes, it was me.  My list is coming soon!  I look forward to seeing yours! 

I'd love to see some companies make more adventurous taxon choices, but it does seem like the old trifecta of Tyrannosaurs, Velociraptor, and Triceratops are the cash cows.

Hmm, I don't agree regarding Velociraptor.  Most figures labelled "Velociraptor" are JP/JP-inspired ones, and the JP franchise dromaeosaurs aren't based on Velociraptor at all, but Deinonychus.  If you use "Velociraptor" to refer to all figures labelled that, regardless of whether they even attempt to represent the small Mongolian dromaeosaur, then yeah Velociraptor's a cash cow.  Since right from the start when Michael Crichton created the JP Velociraptors, they never represented the real animal in any way, I personally feel all the JP and JP-inspired "Velociraptor" figures don't represent Velociraptor, and I think this matters in a thread about the representation of species in figures.

Velociraptor mongoliensis is my favourite dinosaur, and I'm sad there isn't a figure of it that's an adequate representation of it.    There's a few great featherless Velociraptor figures from before it was known it had feathers, like the ones Greg Wenzel sculpted for Safari.  Ever since it was discovered it had feathers though, the few that have been made just haven't done a satisfactory job.  There isn't a single one I've liked enough to want to get, and I've really tried to like them since they are of my favourite...

Safari, of all companies, even made their Wild Safari Velociraptor featherless, despite it coming out:
1. Over seven years after Sinornithosaurus and Microraptor fossils with feathers were found.
2. Two years after the fully feathered Carnegie Microraptor was released, which was sold by Safari.
3. And... a year after a Velociraptor with quill knobs was found.  Even if this specimen was found while the figure was being made, why was Safari making a featherless Velociraptor given the two points above, since they present themselves as being passionate about educational toys?

[AcroSauroTaurus]

I have to go and wake up my daughter and attend to today's responsibilities, but just like someone else said above (was it Sim?) I'll get back to this thread with a list of creatures that I believe, really are crying out to be made into figures.

Yes, it was me.  My list is coming soon!  I look forward to seeing yours! 

I'd love to see some companies make more adventurous taxon choices, but it does seem like the old trifecta of Tyrannosaurs, Velociraptor, and Triceratops are the cash cows.

Hmm, I don't agree regarding Velociraptor.  Most figures labelled "Velociraptor" are JP/JP-inspired ones, and the JP franchise dromaeosaurs aren't based on Velociraptor at all, but Deinonychus.  If you use "Velociraptor" to refer to all figures labelled that, regardless of whether they even attempt to represent the small Mongolian dromaeosaur, then yeah Velociraptor's a cash cow.  Since right from the start when Michael Crichton created the JP Velociraptors, they never represented the real animal in any way, I personally feel all the JP and JP-inspired "Velociraptor" figures don't represent Velociraptor, and I think this matters in a thread about the representation of species in figures.

Velociraptor mongoliensis is my favourite dinosaur, and I'm sad there isn't a figure of it that's an adequate representation of it.    There's a few great featherless Velociraptor figures from before it was known it had feathers, like the ones Greg Wenzel sculpted for Safari.  Ever since it was discovered it had feathers though, the few that have been made just haven't done a satisfactory job.  There isn't a single one I've liked enough to want to get, and I've really tried to like them since they are of my favourite...

Safari, of all companies, even made their Wild Safari Velociraptor featherless, despite it coming out:
1. Over seven years after Sinornithosaurus and Microraptor fossils with feathers were found.
2. Two years after the fully feathered Carnegie Microraptor was released, which was sold by Safari.
3. And... a year after a Velociraptor with quill knobs was found.  Even if this specimen was found while the figure was being made, why was Safari making a featherless Velociraptor given the two points above, since they present themselves as being passionate about educational toys?

Well, at least Papo will be making what will probably end up being the most accurate Velociraptor on the market... Wow, out of all the companies to make an accurate Velociraptor... it will be Papo.

[Viking Spawn]

Whatcha mean ya bored dwit me?! 

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I'd love to see some truly amazing pterosaur figures, none that i can find really do them to much justice, with the best of the bunch in my opinion being the Papo Tupuxuara (even though it is naked) and the Capsule Q Pteranodon, but Pteranodon is such an overrepresented genus. I'd like to see a proper azhdarchid, anurognathid, or ctenochasmatoid, ideally in a grounded position. As for dinosaurs, coelophysoids beyond Dilophosaurus need some more love, along with heterodontosaurids and primitive ceratopsids. I'd like to see some enantiornithes or primitive avialans as well, that may be a bit of a fantasy though. With cenozoic life, any and all of the Australian pleistocene megafauna would be great, a Diprotodon from Papo would be amazing I think, and a dromornithid would be cool to see as well. A guy can only dream...

Thanks,

EarthboundEiniosaurus

The CollectA Guidraco didn't even make the list?

I have to go and wake up my daughter and attend to today's responsibilities, but just like someone else said above (was it Sim?) I'll get back to this thread with a list of creatures that I believe, really are crying out to be made into figures.

Yes, it was me.  My list is coming soon!  I look forward to seeing yours! 

I'd love to see some companies make more adventurous taxon choices, but it does seem like the old trifecta of Tyrannosaurs, Velociraptor, and Triceratops are the cash cows.

Hmm, I don't agree regarding Velociraptor.  Most figures labelled "Velociraptor" are JP/JP-inspired ones, and the JP franchise dromaeosaurs aren't based on Velociraptor at all, but Deinonychus.  If you use "Velociraptor" to refer to all figures labelled that, regardless of whether they even attempt to represent the small Mongolian dromaeosaur, then yeah Velociraptor's a cash cow.  Since right from the start when Michael Crichton created the JP Velociraptors, they never represented the real animal in any way, I personally feel all the JP and JP-inspired "Velociraptor" figures don't represent Velociraptor, and I think this matters in a thread about the representation of species in figures.

Velociraptor mongoliensis is my favourite dinosaur, and I'm sad there isn't a figure of it that's an adequate representation of it.    There's a few great featherless Velociraptor figures from before it was known it had feathers, like the ones Greg Wenzel sculpted for Safari.  Ever since it was discovered it had feathers though, the few that have been made just haven't done a satisfactory job.  There isn't a single one I've liked enough to want to get, and I've really tried to like them since they are of my favourite...

Safari, of all companies, even made their Wild Safari Velociraptor featherless, despite it coming out:
1. Over seven years after Sinornithosaurus and Microraptor fossils with feathers were found.
2. Two years after the fully feathered Carnegie Microraptor was released, which was sold by Safari.
3. And... a year after a Velociraptor with quill knobs was found.  Even if this specimen was found while the figure was being made, why was Safari making a featherless Velociraptor given the two points above, since they present themselves as being passionate about educational toys?

Well, at least Papo will be making what will probably end up being the most accurate Velociraptor on the market... Wow, out of all the companies to make an accurate Velociraptor... it will be Papo.

I wouldn't go that far.  We aren't even sure it's a Velociraptor really as of yet. Seems have some Deinonychus tossed in if I recall a previous member discussion correctly.  Safari/Carnegie's though not as detailed as a Papo isn't that bad.

[Halichoeres]

I'd love to see some companies make more adventurous taxon choices, but it does seem like the old trifecta of Tyrannosaurs, Velociraptor, and Triceratops are the cash cows.

Hmm, I don't agree regarding Velociraptor.  Most figures labelled "Velociraptor" are JP/JP-inspired ones, and the JP franchise dromaeosaurs aren't based on Velociraptor at all, but Deinonychus.  If you use "Velociraptor" to refer to all figures labelled that, regardless of whether they even attempt to represent the small Mongolian dromaeosaur, then yeah Velociraptor's a cash cow.  Since right from the start when Michael Crichton created the JP Velociraptors, they never represented the real animal in any way, I personally feel all the JP and JP-inspired "Velociraptor" figures don't represent Velociraptor, and I think this matters in a thread about the representation of species in figures.

Velociraptor mongoliensis is my favourite dinosaur, and I'm sad there isn't a figure of it that's an adequate representation of it.    There's a few great featherless Velociraptor figures from before it was known it had feathers, like the ones Greg Wenzel sculpted for Safari.  Ever since it was discovered it had feathers though, the few that have been made just haven't done a satisfactory job.  There isn't a single one I've liked enough to want to get, and I've really tried to like them since they are of my favourite...

Safari, of all companies, even made their Wild Safari Velociraptor featherless, despite it coming out:
1. Over seven years after Sinornithosaurus and Microraptor fossils with feathers were found.
2. Two years after the fully feathered Carnegie Microraptor was released, which was sold by Safari.
3. And... a year after a Velociraptor with quill knobs was found.  Even if this specimen was found while the figure was being made, why was Safari making a featherless Velociraptor given the two points above, since they present themselves as being passionate about educational toys?

Well, yeah, the name alone is a cash cow. I'm sympathetic to the argument that most things called Velociraptor look like a naked some-other-dromaeosaur, but I guess to my mind that's a distinct, if related, problem. While we're on that subject, most of the Triceratops figures around have either the toes or the shoulder angle wrong, or both. And the most popular Tyrannosaurus figures have various flaws with the head sculpt, the arm orientation, or what-have-you, even leaving alone the feather argument. I'm just saying that these three are the animals most often attempted and sold, irrespective of accuracy.

[Sim]

Well, at least Papo will be making what will probably end up being the most accurate Velociraptor on the market... Wow, out of all the companies to make an accurate Velociraptor... it will be Papo.

That Papo figure turned out much better than I was expecting.  Its head doesn't look like a Velociraptor's head though, for example its upper jaw looks too deep.  I think the 2015 Carnegie Velociraptor is still the figure closest to a real Velociraptor.

Whatcha mean ya bored dwit me?! 

Hehe!    It's due to overexposure...  There's lots of good figures of you!

Well, yeah, the name alone is a cash cow. I'm sympathetic to the argument that most things called Velociraptor look like a naked some-other-dromaeosaur, but I guess to my mind that's a distinct, if related, problem. While we're on that subject, most of the Triceratops figures around have either the toes or the shoulder angle wrong, or both. And the most popular Tyrannosaurus figures have various flaws with the head sculpt, the arm orientation, or what-have-you, even leaving alone the feather argument. I'm just saying that these three are the animals most often attempted and sold, irrespective of accuracy.

The difference I find is Triceratops and Tyrannosaurus figures are intended to represent those animals to some extent.  The JP franchise Tyrannosaurus is stylised, but it's still based on Tyrannosaurus.  I think it shows in the figures.  Inaccurate Tyrannosaurus and especially Triceratops figures still bear some resemblance to the real animals.  With figures labelled "Velociraptor", the ones based on the JP franchise ones have no resemblance to real Velociraptor.  Inaccurate toes or shoulder angles on a Triceratops don't make it look very different.  Inaccurate Tyrannosaurus heads tend to be modified versions of a Tyrannosaurus head.  With JP/JP-inspired Velociraptors, the head doesn't look like the long, low and narrow head with an upturned snout of Velociraptor in any way.  Add to this that the JP franchise Velociraptors were never based on Velociraptor, and I don't feel I can agree that Velociraptor is among the animals most often attempted and sold irrespective of accuracy, since most of the figures are simply not of the animal.  They just use the animal's name because Michael Crichton thought "Velociraptor" sounded "more dramatic" than "Deinonychus".  I can agree figures labelled "Velociraptor" are among the most made prehistoric figures though!

What's strange though, is that it seems the JP franchise sometimes does treat their dromaeosaurs as Velociraptor and not Deinonychus, like in the JP novel they're said to be Velociraptor mongoliensis. On the Jurassic World website they're said to be from Mongolia (and a beyond impossible 5 metres long...).  Yet, the ones in the novels and films are based on Deinonychus.  The fact the JP franchise Velociraptors aren't good representations of Velociraptor, Deinonychus, or any other dromaeosaur (due to head shape, being featherless, pronated hands, etc.) and were never made accurate (e.g.: based on Deinonychus but called Velociraptor, made much bigger than Deinonychus), contributes to the bottom line for me, which is there's a lack of adequate dromaeosaur figures, including of Velociraptor and Deinonychus and I'd really like more to be made!

[Gwangi]

Aside from Papo, Schleich and various cheap Chinasaurs I don't think most Velociraptor toys are based on "Jurassic Park". We have Velociraptor models from CollectA, Bullyland, Safari, Carnegie, and Favorite to name a few and none of those look like JP raptors. They are all flawed in some way or another but like you said about Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops, they "are intended to represent those animals to some extent."

EDIT: Examples. I'm not saying these are accurate, but they're not JP inspired.

CollectA


Favorite


Carnegie


Safari




Bullyland

[AcroSauroTaurus]

Well, at least Papo will be making what will probably end up being the most accurate Velociraptor on the market... Wow, out of all the companies to make an accurate Velociraptor... it will be Papo.

That Papo figure turned out much better than I was expecting.  Its head doesn't look like a Velociraptor's head though, for example its upper jaw looks too deep.  I think the 2015 Carnegie Velociraptor is still the figure closest to a real Velociraptor.

Well, they probably modified the jaw so that it can have an articulated jaw. But thats just a guess.

[EarthboundEiniosaurus]

I'd love to see some truly amazing pterosaur figures, none that i can find really do them to much justice, with the best of the bunch in my opinion being the Papo Tupuxuara (even though it is naked) and the Capsule Q Pteranodon, but Pteranodon is such an overrepresented genus. I'd like to see a proper azhdarchid, anurognathid, or ctenochasmatoid, ideally in a grounded position. As for dinosaurs, coelophysoids beyond Dilophosaurus need some more love, along with heterodontosaurids and primitive ceratopsids. I'd like to see some enantiornithes or primitive avialans as well, that may be a bit of a fantasy though. With cenozoic life, any and all of the Australian pleistocene megafauna would be great, a Diprotodon from Papo would be amazing I think, and a dromornithid would be cool to see as well. A guy can only dream...

Thanks,

EarthboundEiniosaurus


The CollectA Guidraco didn't even make the list?

Whoops, sorry, I kind of forgot about that one, I don't own it yet and that list was kind of made up on the fly (I was in school at the time). Certainly a contender, and the quadrupedal pose is a real plus. The price is what's been keeping me away, maybe i'll pick it up sooner or later.

Thanks,

EarthboundEiniosaurus