Articulation in toys (continued from the Picture thread)

[LordGigaIce]

It's funny, because some people are like "Kids don't care about posability! Hey, kids, you don't care if your fighting robot toys can't shoot at each other unless you pick them up and point their feet at the enemy, right?" "We--" "See? They don't care."

I always wonder if the people who said that stuff were ever kids themselves because while I'm almost 40 these days () I very much remember thinking it would be neat if my toys that couldn't pose that well could do it as well as those that could.

I mean my dudes had to be able to pull of sick moves as they were terrorizing my little sister's My Little Ponies, right?

 

[Gizmoboy]

I always wonder if the people who said that stuff were ever kids themselves because while I'm almost 40 these days () I very much remember thinking it would be neat if my toys that couldn't pose that well could do it as well as those that could.

I mean my dudes had to be able to pull of sick moves as they were terrorizing my little sister's My Little Ponies, right?

Completely agree with this. I always wished my Transformers were as poseable as my GI Joes back in the 80's. It didn't make me like them any less, but I vividly remember that.

 

[Donocropolis]

I happily played with even the brick-iest of Transformers, but I was always especially fond of the ones that had more points of articulation than the others. Heck, I remember being super impressed that my Quake could aim his gun both up-and-down as well as side-to-side (kinda).

 

[Sabrblade]

Since I got started with Beast Wars, I was already spoiled by used to my figures having full articulation. So, when I first got to experience any G1 figures, I was like "These things have less joints than a Power Rangers megazord!"

 

[Shadewing]

I always wonder if the people who said that stuff were ever kids themselves because while I'm almost 40 these days () I very much remember thinking it would be neat if my toys that couldn't pose that well could do it as well as those that could.

I mean my dudes had to be able to pull of sick moves as they were terrorizing my little sister's My Little Ponies, right?

As a kid I only ever cared if they didn't have: shoulders and neck OR waist swivel. They needed to be able to point their weapons at the rival faction and look around. They were warriors, not yoga instructors. Hips were also sometimes important since they might occasionally need to sit down. Even nowadays I've a similar mindset. I like a baseline articulation (Head, Shoulders, Elbow, Hips, Knees), but stuff like Gamer Megs/Flame's hindered knees doesn't bother me. I don't care if joins can do 360 rotations or not, I'm not all that bothered if they are missing joints, like with the core Dinobots. I still really don't care if they're super posable or not, except in rare cases where the character is. Spider-Man for example is character the moves around a lot and is very agile and acrobatic, its core to his character, so I want a toy of him to be super poseable to get him into some of his classic poses. But someone like Ironman doesn't, he mostly just needs some basic articulation to look good in some standing or flying poses and be able to blast people with hand lasers, he doesn't need to get into the kinda poses Spider-Man would.

 

[LordGigaIce]

Since I got started with Beast Wars, I was already spoiled by used to my figures having full articulation. So, when I first got to experience any G1 figures, I was like "These things have less joints than a Power Rangers megazord!"

I've come around on older toys a lot recently, and I think being used to Power Rangers Megazords not having a lot of articulation helped.
I've collected a lot of old Brave stuff over the past few years and a smattering of G1 figures. They have their charms despite being bricks, and I'm happy I can appreciate them for what they are now.

But the crowd that claims articulation doesn't matter to kids and snidely referring to the articulation packed into present day Gen stuff as if it's a bad thing just seems nuts to me.

 

[Sabrblade]

Spider-Man for example is character the moves around a lot and is very agile and acrobatic, its core to his character, so I want a toy of him to be super poseable to get him into some of his classic poses. But someone like Ironman doesn't, he mostly just needs some basic articulation to look good in some standing or flying poses and be able to blast people with hand lasers, he doesn't need to get into the kinda poses Spider-Man would.

But what if it's Peter Parker wearing the Iron Man suit?

 

[Shadewing]

But what if it's Peter Parker wearing the Iron Man suit?

Then, considering he's wearing very bulky armor, is defined by Ironman rules, since that is different then something like the Iron Spider suit, which is a Starktech Spider-man suit built for Spider-man's skill sets.

 

[LordGigaIce]

me. I don't care if joins can do 360 rotations or not

I don't need that level of articulation either and I roll my eyes at reviewers who come down hard on a figure because it can't do the Van Dam or if it doesn't have toe joints.

On the other hand I find the argument some people have been peddling since RiD '15 and seemingly picking up steam lately in some corners of the fandom that articulation isn't important or that it's Actually Bad kind of silly. Like I remember having the Cyberjets and wishing as a kid that Starscream could pose like them. So I don't buy that it's not important.

Honestly? I think as long as a figure is at like... Cybertron levels of possibility then you've got all you need. Anything else is gravy, but gravy isn't a bad thing either.

 

[The Mighty Mollusk]

I remember some of my G1 faves including Hun-Grr and Scattershot just because their legs could move.

I also remember my Hun-Grr claiming Nautilator as an extra limb because I didn't have Sinnertwin, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[lastmaximal]

Articulation opinions can be funny to read because the "they don't need to do yoga" argument formulation is predictably reliable enough to put on a bingo card, when what people are actually more likely to be looking for is the ability to take a few stances that are not standing firmly at attention. Running, turning, jumping. I doubt many are contorting their figures into pretzels (outside of transforming them), but even the simple Dreamwave Wallet Theft stock pose calls for more joint range than most G1 guys had.

I don't get the "articulation doesn't matter to kids"; I'm sure play value comes in many forms to kids, but growing up the one thing I kept wanting more of from toys of any genre/property was better articulation. And I'm sure there are enough then-kids that felt that way too.

But yeah, some articulation demands are just gravy and for Transformers especially I don't see the lack of them as a dealbreaker. Ankle tilts, while very appreciated, never diminished older figures that lacked them; I can handle toys never having articulated fingers since most people just use those to Super Originally and Cleverly have their toys throwing up middle fingers anyway. Ab crunches I coulf definitely do with more of in real life; TF toys don't miss much without them. Double-jointing for elbows and knees can be nice, but it's fine if those are singles.

I'm generally happy with a ball jointed neck for expressiveness, universal joints or equivalents for shoulders and hips, preferably bicep and thigh swivels as well (not a dealbreaker without, but these are good to have), single elbow and knee, wrist swivels (or whatever doesn't result in bicep curl arms). Ankles and/or toes are a bonus (but I like that ankle tilts have become a standard, for stability).

 

[Dake]

I agree the "kids don't care about articulation" statement that has even come from toymakers has never made sense to me. Kids will play with what you give them, but I'd wager if you lined up action figures of varying levels of articulation that otherwise looked the same, they'd probably lean towards more vs less. That being said, there is a diminishing point of return where something can become too finnicky. Super-articulation is worthless if it can't stand under it's own weight, or joints become so fragile that they snap.

Unsurprisingly, it needs to all work together. Ankles are great, but if hips and knees are loose, then they become problematic. A nice ab-crunch can be dynamic unless it's too floppy to hold itself upright.

 

[Blot]

straxus is pretty good although I do wish his face was sculpted to look angrier or something. The bicep treads are also annoyingly big and don’t lock in like Galvatron’s.
View attachment 24039

I like how his head sculpt actually has recessed pits for eyes and then the insides painted black. That was a nice attention to detail I wouldn't have expected them to do but it really gets the face looking right.

 

[Gizmoboy]

Starting this topic for us to continue this great subject.

 

[Gizmoboy]

I ended up just moving all the topic to this new thread. I hope everyone is cool with that.

 

[Shadewing]

Kids will play with what you give them, but I'd wager if you lined up action figures of varying levels of articulation that otherwise looked the same, they'd probably lean towards more vs less.

Clearly we need a mythbusters level of experiment setting this all up and testing every single variable till all scientific routes are exhausted.

 

[Donocropolis]

I officially volunteer as a kid tasked with playing with Transformers.

Is this a paid position?

Heck, who am I kidding. I'll do it for free.

 

[Haywire]

Growing up, I mostly had Gobots, and most of those had a better range of articulation than the very few Transformers I had, but where I really remember articulation being a thing was with GI Joes; the 3-3/4" o-ring figures had so much more range of motion and poseability than contemporary Star Wars or Indiana Jones figures of the day, that I don't recall ever asking for figures with only 5 PoAs, they just seemed like inferior toys by comparison.

And, I think the articulation on o-ring Joes is probably my sweet spot for articulation; I find the modern era Joes to be too jointed and fiddly. So, head pivot, waist swivel, shoulder and elbow movement, legs and knees. On Transformers, hand swivels if possible, but that's pretty much it. Cyberjets, like Hooligan, and Armada Deluxe Prime, and Cybertron Downshift are probably all examples of Transformers that I consider to have the right amount of articulation and still make good toys.

 

[CoffeeHorse]

I was a kid who didn't care that much about articulation. I just cared how it felt to transform something back and forth.

But I didn't have friends to play with. So things just had to be fun to play with by myself.

 

[LordGigaIce]

I think a lot of it is people trying to take shots at the current crop of Studio Series and Generations offerings.

I saw more than a few people take the position that figures of random toy only characters from RiD '15 gimmick lines were good despite being as articulated as G1 offerings, with snide remarks about whatever Generations was doing being "articulation heavy," which I think may have came from frustrations over "G1 with knees."

The fandom over on Discord seems to have a vocal subsection of fans who won't stop championing G1 and Armada, claiming current Generations offerings are subpar "slop." "Slop" being a common term that group uses.

And when the articulation of newer Gens figures is pointed out they dismiss modern articulation as either pointless or silly to want in the first place.

Ultimately it seems like a very toxic outgrowth of one of this fandom's most toxic topics, the aesthetic debates.