Controversial opinions on dinosaur toys

[Gwangi]

I hate the battat toys, mainly because they are lackluster in skin texture and overall sculpt(ceratosaurus and amargasaurus come to mind)
Same for Safari. 2017 was their best year...and they dropped. The allosaurus is subpar. The qianzhousaurus doesn't have teeth. Simply put, PNSO makes better dinosaurs. Safari is more scientifically sound but other than that...
Feel free to disagree.

To be fair, the Amargasaurus and Ceratosaurus are two of the weaker Battat toys. I don't like them either. But have you seen the Diplodocus? And you gotta keep in mind, these toys are from the 90's. Context matters. Battat dinosaurs were the best of their time. No one has yet made a better Ouranosaurus.

[stargatedalek]

I hate the battat toys, mainly because they are lackluster in skin texture and overall sculpt(ceratosaurus and amargasaurus come to mind)
Same for Safari. 2017 was their best year...and they dropped. The allosaurus is subpar. The qianzhousaurus doesn't have teeth. Simply put, PNSO makes better dinosaurs. Safari is more scientifically sound but other than that...
Feel free to disagree.

I will agree with all of that aside from PNSO doing better dinosaurs (better non-dinosaurs... maybe...) and the Qianzhousaurus teeth, which is not an agree or disagree topic, as that's a point of scientific accuracy. Like it or not (and feel free not to!), that's just how they are supposed to look.

The teeth of the PNSO Qianzhousaurus not only look larger because it doesn't have oral tissues, but the teeth themselves are too long and depicted hanging out by their roots.

[Bread]

I hate the battat toys, mainly because they are lackluster in skin texture and overall sculpt(ceratosaurus and amargasaurus come to mind)
Same for Safari. 2017 was their best year...and they dropped. The allosaurus is subpar. The qianzhousaurus doesn't have teeth. Simply put, PNSO makes better dinosaurs. Safari is more scientifically sound but other than that...
Feel free to disagree.

I don't hate battat figures, but I do dislike them, so you are absolutely not alone on not finding them appealing.

I think the comparison of PNSO and Safari seems a little unfair. Yes I do find PNSO more attractive given they are more expensive. I mean you are paying most of the time $30+ on PNSO figures, you would expect great detailing and life-like appearance. However, of course PNSO has a lot of accuracy flaws, one of their biggest issues in my opinion. Safari has great depictions and seems to be more accurate plus more affordable, most figures costing $15.

I like both companies and I don't see it as fair to compare them. Though these are opinions and that's what this thread and forum share amongst members.

[Python]

I think the comparison of PNSO and Safari seems a little unfair. Yes I do find PNSO more attractive given they are more expensive. I mean you are paying most of the time $30+ on PNSO figures, you would expect great detailing and life-like appearance. However, of course PNSO has a lot of accuracy flaws, one of their biggest issues in my opinion. Safari has great depictions and seems to be more accurate plus more affordable, most figures costing $15.

Wise words. This perfectly explains why I prefer Safari over PNSO, as recently, PNSO has been becoming more like the really expensive companies I don't buy from, like Nanmu or Sideshow. Safari and PNSO have both put out their fair share of nice figures.

[Fembrogon]

I think the Battat figures are old enough now to warrant a bit of retro aesthetic, much like the Carnegie and Wild Safari figures of that time. Obviously that won't matter if your're strictly going for state-of-the art renditions, but I appreciate their quality for the time, and I'm even a little nostalgic for it, having grown up on the Safari contemporaries. The four new Battat sculpts that got released retain this older aesthetic, and I personally like that simplicity a lot.

I'm curious, though, @GiganotosaurusFan: what exactly do you find so subpar about Safari's current Allosaurus? I can't think of anything I found particularly worse about it than any other recent theropods in Safari's line.

[Shonisaurus]

I really like the pteranodon from Collecta 2022 but I don't like the tassel of the original tail, a personal interpretation of the Collecta company but not shared by me.

On the other hand, I like the ancient paleoartistic representation of the tsintaosaurus more than the current one. I love very much the unicorn that represented the tsintaosaurus according to the old interpretation and whose scientific advances have thrown overboard, the tsintaosaurus being a prehistoric animal, in this case a lambeosaurine hadrosaurid less interesting than its retro images that I loved before.

[GiganotosaurusFan]

@Fembrogon Sorry for not clarifying.
I think that the allosaurus:
1: Does not have teeth elongated enough. Maybe it's my eyes going wrong, but I think a middle ground between the PNSO allosaurus and this one will be sufficient.
2: Blunted stuff(detail work not sufficient, inferior to baryonyx)
3: Honestly, I don't think that it is generally appealing. Something else is nagging at me...big feet? Rictus?
Around the same as Safari's last Allosaurus.
My opinions are reeallly unpopular... blep
I don't hate the Battat line, I misspoke. There are simply just some that are worse than the others(and the plastic seems really off). The diplo is a masterpiece.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

@GiganotosaurusFan the teeth of theropods are far smaller in life than they appear on the skeleton as the teeth fall out of their sockets.

[Carnoking]

It is easy to put Battat on a pedestal given how desirable the pieces have become. I know I've done it but yes, there are some obvious stinkers in there, especially when compared to contemporary works. That being said, there are definitely a bunch of them that were far ahead of their time and are yet to be  surpassed in my view. Even standouts that may have been eclipsed in modern times still have the added edge of still being noteworthy nearly 30 years later.

In many ways, I think Safari Ltd. is a contemporary version of Battat. The figures have that same hand-sculpted feel with vibrant but largely simple color schemes, and both lines put a lot of emphasis on making sure they offer up-to-date scientific interpretations of the animals they're sculpting. This helps to ensure that even if they don't have the most life-like presentation, they're still cutting edge.

I won't claim to love everything Safari has made, and I will admit that as my collections from other brands have grown my Safari shelf has largely shrunk, but like Battat I do feel there are some objective beauties Safari has produced that have yet to be outdone, even if they're not the most "realistic".

[GiganotosaurusFan]

Ok!
Agreed with what you just said. Safari did make some really nice toys.
@Gothmog the Baryonyx Interesting. Did not know that. But thanks for letting me know!

[Fembrogon]

@Fembrogon Sorry for not clarifying.
I think that the allosaurus:
1: Does not have teeth elongated enough. Maybe it's my eyes going wrong, but I think a middle ground between the PNSO allosaurus and this one will be sufficient.
2: Blunted stuff(detail work not sufficient, inferior to baryonyx)
3: Honestly, I don't think that it is generally appealing. Something else is nagging at me...big feet? Rictus?
Around the same as Safari's last Allosaurus.

The "blunted" criticism I kind of get; Safari seems to waffle between how pointy they're willing to let their models' teeth and claws be.
The teeth, however, likely look small because the model features lips. A LOT of artwork and toys like to bare dino's teeth; but if theropods had lips to protect the teeth in real life, those lips and gums would likely obscure the teeth more than we're used to.
I used to really like the 2007 Allosaurus (I still appreciate it), but I think the current Allo has a much more thorough depiction of anatomy and musculature that looks a lot more natural to my eyes. I get why it would throw some people off, though; there's plenty about this figure that's simply different from what we're used to seeing in Allosaurus toys.

[GojiraGuy1954]

I like Safari's allo. I think it has some proportional issues, though. It's very wide like a Tyrannosaur when Allosaurus is much thinner than that

[SidB]

I like Safari's allo. I think it has some proportional issues, though. It's very wide like a Tyrannosaur when Allosaurus is much thinner than that

I feel the same about the Safari Carno, great sculpt, but is it too bulky?

[Bread]

I like Safari's allo. I think it has some proportional issues, though. It's very wide like a Tyrannosaur when Allosaurus is much thinner than that

I feel the same about the Safari Carno, great sculpt, but is it too bulky?

I've seen mixed reviews on it. I've seen arguments that its not too bulky and I have seen opinions that it is way too bulky where the CollectA Carno has the better proportions. Never can find a definitive argument. Plus, with the new skin impressions of Carnotaurus, both are now inaccurate I guess.

[Dinoguy2]

I like Safari's allo. I think it has some proportional issues, though. It's very wide like a Tyrannosaur when Allosaurus is much thinner than that

I feel the same about the Safari Carno, great sculpt, but is it too bulky?

I've seen mixed reviews on it. I've seen arguments that its not too bulky and I have seen opinions that it is way too bulky where the CollectA Carno has the better proportions. Never can find a definitive argument. Plus, with the new skin impressions of Carnotaurus, both are now inaccurate I guess.

The CollectA Carno is so skinny there isn't even room in the leg for a realistically proportioned cnemial crest, let alone the muscles that would have attached to it. The Safari version isn't perfect (neck a little short), but I don't think bulk is its problem.

[Python]

Ok here's my controversial opinion. I would buy a knockoff of a prehistoric animal figure if I couldn't justify making a purchase for the real thing. With things like Collecta and Safari Ltd, I'm not as cheap as I can usually find them, but things like the Colorata Prehistoric Marine Life set, I found some knockoffs on Amazon and got them. They were surprisingly well made and the Cameroceras was closer to 1:40 than the actual figure.









I don't believe I'm doing anybody dirty like this, and I'm still getting the same creatures. The Anomalocaris, Opabinia, and Olenoides are clearly designed after the Favorite models. I would never try to build an entire collection of knockoffs, as the actual versions are most of the time better, but I would do this once in a while so I'd save money and get the species I'm after.

[Fembrogon]

I can't blame you; it's frustrating when certain products feel nigh impossible to obtain reasonably, especially when they're unique on the market. Ideally, in this day and age, there would be more options for companies to market their products internationally; or hey, those companies making the effort to knockoff other brands could try a little harder to make something new themselves. Even MPC in the old days produced several completely unique molds alongside their Marx imitations.

[Bread]

P @Python I also purchased those knockoffs from Amazon. Honestly they are pretty good and I would definitely recommend them to anyone who can't purchase the originals.

I certainly try to avoid knockoffs, but as you and @Fembrogon stated, sometimes acquiring the original comes with a challenge. Challenges consisting of cost, shipping, or limited stock. As an alternative knockoffs like these play a key role in collections.

[Skorpio V.]

I think many DTF members, including myself, are very partial to Safari's sculpts because there's someone behind them who's connected with us and is a part of our community. I adore and appreciate Doug Watson wholly, though I feel like if Safari had unveiled the Papo Amargasaurus as his own then maybe it would have received less scathing criticisms.

[stargatedalek]

I think knock-offs that meaningfully alter the originals are always a different story than getting them purely to save money. Even if it's just a change in size. Same for buying knock-offs of out of production models due to limited availability. I've done this a few times because I wanted things for heavy customization or for parts.

It's buying KO's of widely and currently available things that I'm not so fond of, such as those Favorite bootlegs....

Only the Cephalaspis(?), sea scorpion and Orthocone are Colorata based ones, the others are unedited carbon copies of Favorite Kinto figures.