Controversial opinions on dinosaur toys

[Stegotyranno420]

Look everyone,  this is from my own experiences based on what I learned and what I seen. I don't mean any harm.  In fact I even got a hate message from one of my friends though he later explained about it and apologized.  What I'm trying to say that theres a reason why t rex is so loved. I know I always sound rude, but that's because I am very straight forward, and it always seems like I say the wrong things.  I lost friends because I gave them honesty.  They hate me for my honesty and then when I resort to lying, they call me selfish liar.
I didnt even want to read all of these messages.  I already knew how it was gonna go. They were gonna say that I was wrong and I was mean and they have a different idea.
I know I'm still gonna get hate messages. When ever I try to be fun and nice some guy says"you talk to much" or "stop posting so much". You know why I talk here so much.  Because I have no one else to talk to in life.
After reading What some of you are doing that you are putting everything in the worst case scenario. You are making seem like I was saying that "oh t rex is best dinosaur for a lot of reasons,  and humans like carnivores,  and herbivores and dumb, and people who do not like t rex but obscure herbivores are liars" NO I wasnt. Why would I think Stegosaurus is more majestic and deadly than T rex. I was sharing MY ideas about t rex, based on MY experience. This is a opinions thread. I wanted to elaborate on the excellent quote of Carnokings post. Also I was talking about the average human when I said parts like "carnivores are more interesting to people than hervivores". Not everyone thinks that a house cat will be more dangerous and powerful than a hippo. But why are there so many more stories and movies of carnivores,  it's because on average they are more fun because they are seemingly more deadly.  Asking why do some of  like dangerous dinosaur media and merchandise is like asking why do we like rollercoaster , because they are thrilling.  Hopefully you understand

[Stegotyranno420]

P.s. I suggest we go back on topic.  This is bound to start a "fight" and we dont need anymore of them in our life. And I don't want to be known as the kid who is the reason why this thread is locked.

So anyone have a controversial opinion ?

[Lanthanotus]

Well, since this is about controversial opnions on toys I dare say that I do not like figures with multiple articulation points. While I like figures with a nice integrated artculation in the jaw, I find those likes as in the JP/JW franchise or the BotM line very unattractive, no matter how the sculpting is outside the articulation.

[stargatedalek]

I'd love to see articulated feathered dinosaurs with faux fur "shells" over their articulation to make it seamless. They might stick out stylistically though, so perhaps do smaller animals so people aren't expecting them to be in scale anyway.

[Stegotyranno420]

Well, since this is about controversial opnions on toys I dare say that I do not like figures with multiple articulation points. While I like figures with a nice integrated artculation in the jaw, I find those likes as in the JP/JW franchise or the BotM line very unattractive, no matter how the sculpting is outside the articulation.

same here, ditto

[Bread]

Well, since this is about controversial opnions on toys I dare say that I do not like figures with multiple articulation points. While I like figures with a nice integrated artculation in the jaw, I find those likes as in the JP/JW franchise or the BotM line very unattractive, no matter how the sculpting is outside the articulation.

You are not alone. I don't know how to explain it and it is probably just me, but articulated dinosaur/animal figures look out of place next to figures that have little to no articulation (the little articulation being the movable jaw on some figures). I was interested in the BOTM Tyrannosaur line but after looking through the BOTM raptors and ceratopsians I have lost interest due to how out of place they may seem like in my collection. No hate towards these figures, they are just not my in my range of collecting.

[Gwangi]

I tend to agree about the articulation. I can accept it with the Jurassic World toys because they're action figures, and quite clearly toys. But the combination of realism with articulation usually doesn't work for me, which is why I don't collect BotM. As is, my Mattel, Kenner, and Tyco toys are displayed on their own shelf and not mixed with the others. I don't have enough space, desire, or money to do the same for the BotM.

[Stegotyranno420]

Don't get me wrong, I love figures that can move, but I rather have realism and my wallet

[Faelrin]

You know I think I see what you guys are getting at with the articulation (or maybe I am off the mark, let me know).

I definitely have a huge amount of Jurassic World figures, and some Beasts of the Mesozoic, and I'm sure many of you are well aware that I enjoy articulation in figures.

Yet I do not and will not have them on display next to each other directly if I can avoid it (unfortunately can't do that now, as I am running out of space, so I have some stow-a ways from my Safari Ltd, etc, collection mixed in with my Beasts of the Mesozoic mostly). I honestly feel like they are almost entirely separate collections, despite all being mine, and in my room. Much like how I treat my amiibos as a separate collection from my prehistoric stuff (despite having to shelf right next to my Mattel's for example).

Like they just aesthetically do not mesh together. The only figures I guess are the exception to this are the minimal ones with articulated jaws I have, such as the Papo Allosaurus for example.

I guess I am a little bit more tolerable on the seams articulation causes though, because I'm so used to it, having grown up with toys like the Primal Rage ones, and the Jurassic Park ones, etc.

Edit: I also feel this way about displaying modern accurate and older inaccurate figures. I would want them separate because they often don't mesh well together aesthetically, but there are exceptions of course. I guess if I ever can get that cool new shelf display then maybe you all could get pictures of what I'm getting at someday.

[Stegotyranno420]

You know I think I see what you guys are getting at with the articulation (or maybe I am off the mark, let me know).

I definitely have a huge amount of Jurassic World figures, and some Beasts of the Mesozoic, and I'm sure many of you are well aware that I enjoy articulation in figures.

Yet I do not and will not have them on display next to each other directly if I can avoid it (unfortunately can't do that now, as I am running out of space, so I have some stow-a ways from my Safari Ltd, etc, collection mixed in with my Beasts of the Mesozoic mostly). I honestly feel like they are almost entirely separate collections, despite all being mine, and in my room. Much like how I treat my amiibos as a separate collection from my prehistoric stuff (despite having to shelf right next to my Mattel's for example).

Like they just aesthetically do not mesh together. The only figures I guess are the exception to this are the minimal ones with articulated jaws I have, such as the Papo Allosaurus for example.

I guess I am a little bit more tolerable on the seams articulation causes though, because I'm so used to it, having grown up with toys like the Primal Rage ones, and the Jurassic Park ones, etc.

I understand your point dude.
I also grew up on articulation, but for some reason I now find it strange. Only jaw articulation is fine

[ceratopsian]

The workings of aesthetics remain a mystery!  I personally don't care for jaw articulation at all.  If a model has an articulated jaw, that wouldn't put me off buying it - but I would much rather it wasn't there.  I think my brain sees a strange disjunct between one part of the model having articulation and the rest being static.  But I fully appreciate that other people really like those articulated jaws. 

In general I would say I don't like fully articulated models: I didn't find the BotM raptors appealing enough to buy any of the large ones, just a couple of environment packs.  So why then do I find the BotM Ceratopsians extraordinarily appealing, articulation, visible gaps and all?  (Of course, I have a special soft spot for this group of animals.)  Maybe the fact that they are quadrupeds makes a difference and I don't have to fiddle with posing rods.  Who knows? 

I will certainly display them as a "herd" - but I'm not especially worried by putting them with the rest of my collection.  After all, there are plenty of contrasts within my collection - everything from some old-fashioned Carnegie models (e.g. the Protoceratops nest) all the way through to modern resins with bases by artists like SenSen.  But I do try to group like styles together on my shelves.

[MLMjp]

I have a few controversial opinions to share:

-This one came to mind after reading some comments about PNSO Carnotarus. "The scales on this model are way too big, in real life they won't be visible". C´mon people, I am pretty sure a lot of figures who have scale detail (dont count life size or close to life size models) have their scales oversized. But by sculpting those individual scales a model can look fantastic (sometimes it doesn't coughcoughreborcoughcough) it would be extremely boring if all dinosaur models didn't have these "oversized scales" because that would mean that most of the sculpted detail on a lot of models would just be wrinkles, bumps and creases. Not like there is anything wrong with that but some variety in style is always appreciated.

I know it is not "realistic", but in my opinion, of all the "liberties" that you can take when making a dinosaur model, this one totally acceptable. It comes to me as nitpicking when someone points it out.

-Safari´s theropods, with the exception of the feathered ones, (such as the fantastic Deinonychus), have turned out rather...lacking in these past couple of years. The sculpts details are sometimes lost, certain areas are not that well defined, and the paint jobs could be improved. I dont blame Mr. Watson at all since I am pretty sure the original sculpts are amazing. I blame Safari for not being able to bring out their true potential.
The Allosaurus and Carnotarus were the first ones to have some issues, then the Qianzhousaurus and the last minute change of color of the Concavenator, and I just saw the Baryonyx in-hand pictures by @Loon http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=8972.msg277562#msg277562 

If that's not a downgrade then I dont know what it is...

[Bread]

I have a few controversial opinions to share:

-This one came to mind after reading some comments about PNSO Carnotarus. "The scales on this model are way too big, in real life they won't be visible". C´mon people, I am pretty sure a lot of figures who have scale detail (dont count life size or close to life size models) have their scales oversized. But by sculpting those individual scales a model can look fantastic (sometimes it doesn't coughcoughreborcoughcough) it would be extremely boring if all dinosaur model didn't have these "oversized scales" because that would mean that most of the sculpted detail on a lot of models would just be wrinkles, bumps and creases. Not like there is anything wrong with that but some variety in style is always appreciated.

I know it is not "realistic", but in my opinion, of all the "liberties" that you can take when making a dinosaur model, this one totally acceptable. It comes to me as nitpicking when someone points it out.

I agree with this completely. I understand when someone points it for accuracy purposes, but to say it ruins the figure, I disagree.

[stargatedalek]

For me the issue is more that there are ways to include the additional detail of oversized scales while also keeping them subtle so that they don't become visually distracting, the Safari Baryonyx mentioned for example has these same scales but they aren't jumping out at you like the PNSO theropods. When they are super visible and jarring is where it just feels unrealistic and silly to me.

[Flaffy]

For me the issue is more that there are ways to include the additional detail of oversized scales while also keeping them subtle so that they don't become visually distracting, the Safari Baryonyx mentioned for example has these same scales but they aren't jumping out at you like the PNSO theropods. When they are super visible and jarring is where it just feels unrealistic and silly to me.

I agree. The issue isn't exactly the oversized scales themselves. It's more so the execution that's bothering me.
The Rebor-like mentality of "overly exaggerated detail = a good figure" is my problem with the recent PNSO theropods.
When oversized scales are done in a more subtle and tasteful/skilled manner, it looks absolutely great. However, when the scales messily sculpted and are so exaggerated to the point where they look like tumours, it detracts from the overall look of the sculpt.

[Reuben03]

The big problem lies within the market demand, the "more detail means better" mindset where buyers look for scutes and spikes instead of what is realistic.
And it's terrible.

soooooo true!

[Gwangi]

I'm more excited about the Safari Daspletosaurus than PNSO's Winter Wilson.

[Dinoxels]

I'm more excited about the Safari Daspletosaurus than PNSO's Winter Wilson.

No, no, I agree.

[Stegotyranno420]

I'm more excited about the Safari Daspletosaurus than PNSO's Winter Wilson.

No, no, I agree.

I agree with the statement, even tho in my opinion Wilson is miles ahead of that Daspletosaurus

[Bread]

Honestly PNSO's new Wilson and Safari's Daspletosaurus are equal, for me at least. I would have preferred PNSO to release the Zhuchengtyrannus before the new Wilson, as well as Safari choosing a different Tyrannosaur, one that is not so similar to T. rex. However, I am happy with both and I think both are well executed figures.

A controversial opinion of mine is about lips. Unless the genus has proof of lips, the lack of lips does not bother me on a figure, specifically Tyrannosaurus. I'll leave it to the artist to decide if they want to include lips, based on findings/discoveries by paleontologist.