|
Post by Griffin on Dec 14, 2011 1:04:36 GMT
I agree with Horridus, Sbell and Seijun here. Yeah sure there is a lot we don't know about how long extinct animals looked but there are still some things that can't really change if restorations are to be accurate. So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy.
And the whole "If you are collecting accurate figures the number of figures you should own is 0"....OH SNAP! No foolin, Sherlock! Of course we will continue to discover new things about dinosaurs in the future but as of now there are definite most accurate figures and there is nothing wrong with collecting those. And in the future when they may not be considered accurate anymore by modern standards they can still be a nice homage to how scientists used to view them. (I think I briefly touched on this when I reviewed the collecta dracorex for this site) Its why an old Carnegie Deinonychus for instance gets my respect more than a modern Papo dino.
Sure, yes if you like the look of the papo dinosaurs thats great for you. They look cool nobody can argue that. But do most of them go along with science? No.
|
|
|
Post by tanystropheus on Dec 14, 2011 1:31:16 GMT
Am I the only person here that would like Papo to follow a bimodal approach to dinosaur marketing?? In other words, I would like Papo to continue to produce dinosaur models based on films (notably, Jurassic Park), and also release scientific representations from time to time (e.g Styracosaurus, Pachy). From a professional standpoint, the problem of critiquing the Papo T-rex based on scientific merits is that it tends to violate the concept of validity. A test is considered valid if it measures what it is supposed to measure. Did Papo intend to release a completely accurate representation with the T-rex? No. For avid gamers, I can give you an analogy of sorts. Would it be acceptable for a hardcore JRPG fan (who happens to despise fighting games, btw) to condemn the upcoming Soul Caliber 5 or Tekken v.s Street Fighter? Well, the rater is free to state what they want, but it wouldn't necessarily convey a balanced message to the intended audience. Likewise, the attributes of the Papo T-rex "should" naturally be compared with respect to the obvious sources of inspiration (e.g Peter Jackson, Stan Winston). Yes, we can observe and take note of inaccuracies or accuracies (for the sake of curiosity, paleontological inquiry, etc.), but the figure should not be condemned scientifically, due to the aforementioned conceptual framework of testing validity.
Furthermore, were longer arm T-rex representations found in the Jurassic Park movies or thematic illustrations? Indeed. Here are some notable examples of longer arms: www.wired.com/images_blogs/underwire/2009/09/t-rex-maquette-jurassic-park-670.jpgwww.icollector.com/images/1202/18870/18870_0768_2_lg.jpgimageshack.us/photo/my-images/401/ref13tl2.jpg/sr=1
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 1:40:55 GMT
I agree with Horridus, Sbell and Seijun here. Yeah sure there is a lot we don't know about how long extinct animals looked but there are still some things that can't really change if restorations are to be accurate. So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy. And the whole "If you are collecting accurate figures the number of figures you should own is 0"....OH SNAP! No foolin, Sherlock! Of course we will continue to discover new things about dinosaurs in the future but as of now there are definite most accurate figures and there is nothing wrong with collecting those. And in the future when they may not be considered accurate anymore by modern standards they can still be a nice homage to how scientists used to view them. (I think I briefly touched on this when I reviewed the collecta dracorex for this site) Its why an old Carnegie Deinonychus for instance gets my respect more than a modern Papo dino. Sure, yes if you like the look of the papo dinosaurs thats great for you. They look cool nobody can argue that. But do most of them go along with science? No. Ok, but that is my point. I do not believe Papo has any interest--NONE--In making their figures "go along with science". The criticism of the arms only really matters if the company were to claim they did their best to make it as accurate to the real animal as possible. They are distinctly NOT saying that. Unlike that new Mojo Rex, where they did try to claim an attempt at accuracy. So for me, THAT figure is a fail. Not because it is ugly or wrong. But because it is SO wrong, whern it is claimed to be an attempt at right. The Papo is just what it is. No claims of "bettering" their figure's accuracy or any of that. Can ya dig the difference I am proposing? I am like all of you. I would love for Papo to present us with a Rex like this, only a little more "real". Sure. But, that is just not what they are marketing, apparently.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 1:45:24 GMT
The other thing with the arms, is that i think it is similar to the phenomenon of pyramid crests. Those did not used to be as prevalent til JP came along. Now it seems to be a competition to see who's Rex can look more "wicked". Not really based on science one way or the other. It is just more of an "accepted" look artistically right now. Ya know? On a totally different tact, I keep seeing the mapusaurus or whatever being criticized for being green. Aside from being a bit cliched, why is this a problem? Is being green just horrible? I don't quite see the problem.. ?
|
|
|
Post by Seijun on Dec 14, 2011 1:57:48 GMT
I think most of us already accept that Papo isn't trying (or claiming) to make accurate figures, but for those of us who like accurate figures, we will end up judging toys based on that criteria regardless of what the companies intentions were. We may have to agree to disagree, but I don't see anything wrong with doing that. It doesn't hurt anyone, it doesn't affect Papo. No one has to buy it or even look at it if they don't want to, and no one is stopping the people who do like it from getting one and loving it
|
|
|
Post by fooman666 on Dec 14, 2011 2:52:23 GMT
ok, come on, this arguing has to stop. everyone needs to accept that different people have different opinions and we need to leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by lucidstillness on Dec 14, 2011 3:44:24 GMT
Now watch a new tyrannosaurid be discovered that makes the Papo one accurate, lol!
"Scientists also believe this creature was capable of breathing fire."
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Dec 14, 2011 4:14:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Dec 14, 2011 4:18:52 GMT
I agree with Horridus, Sbell and Seijun here. Yeah sure there is a lot we don't know about how long extinct animals looked but there are still some things that can't really change if restorations are to be accurate. So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy. And the whole "If you are collecting accurate figures the number of figures you should own is 0"....OH SNAP! No foolin, Sherlock! Of course we will continue to discover new things about dinosaurs in the future but as of now there are definite most accurate figures and there is nothing wrong with collecting those. And in the future when they may not be considered accurate anymore by modern standards they can still be a nice homage to how scientists used to view them. (I think I briefly touched on this when I reviewed the collecta dracorex for this site) Its why an old Carnegie Deinonychus for instance gets my respect more than a modern Papo dino. Sure, yes if you like the look of the papo dinosaurs thats great for you. They look cool nobody can argue that. But do most of them go along with science? No. Ok, but that is my point. I do not believe Papo has any interest--NONE--In making their figures "go along with science". The criticism of the arms only really matters if the company were to claim they did their best to make it as accurate to the real animal as possible. They are distinctly NOT saying that. Unlike that new Mojo Rex, where they did try to claim an attempt at accuracy. So for me, THAT figure is a fail. Not because it is ugly or wrong. But because it is SO wrong, whern it is claimed to be an attempt at right. The Papo is just what it is. No claims of "bettering" their figure's accuracy or any of that. Can ya dig the difference I am proposing? I am like all of you. I would love for Papo to present us with a Rex like this, only a little more "real". Sure. But, that is just not what they are marketing, apparently. Please go back and read what I wrote again more carefully. Actually I'll just make it easier for you. "So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy." I'm more arguing against people who try to defend papo as being scientifically accurate with the "nobody ever saw a living t. rex so anything goes wee!" line rather than attacking Papo itself. In the past (before you joined I think) I actually made the same point you just made in that papo isn't trying to be scientifically accurate.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 4:18:59 GMT
Ok. 2 questions. Doesn't it take quite a while to design and prep a figure? Despite how they look, there really isn't a way for Papo to have got hold of the WS Rex, and had their "copy" ready by end of year, is there?
And I will ask again, why is being green a bad thing for a figure? I keep seeing that comment...
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 4:22:59 GMT
Ok, but that is my point. I do not believe Papo has any interest--NONE--In making their figures "go along with science". The criticism of the arms only really matters if the company were to claim they did their best to make it as accurate to the real animal as possible. They are distinctly NOT saying that. Unlike that new Mojo Rex, where they did try to claim an attempt at accuracy. So for me, THAT figure is a fail. Not because it is ugly or wrong. But because it is SO wrong, whern it is claimed to be an attempt at right. The Papo is just what it is. No claims of "bettering" their figure's accuracy or any of that. Can ya dig the difference I am proposing? I am like all of you. I would love for Papo to present us with a Rex like this, only a little more "real". Sure. But, that is just not what they are marketing, apparently. Go back and read what I wrote again more carefully. Actually I'll just make it easier for you. "So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy." I'm more arguing against people who try to defend papo as being scientifically accurate rather than Papo itself. Kinda feeling a bit of sarcasm there...if so, I don't appreciate, as i have been totally respectful of anyone posting here. Perhaps I am just too sensitive. Perhaps Sbell is right to leave this conversation, for fear of horses being continuously being beaten to death, and all that. I tried. It's not fun now, so I'm out too, for now.
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Dec 14, 2011 4:24:14 GMT
Go back and read what I wrote again more carefully. Actually I'll just make it easier for you. "So no, the arms on this papo rex are inexcusable if its to be looked at from the point of view of someone looking for scientific accuracy." I'm more arguing against people who try to defend papo as being scientifically accurate rather than Papo itself. Kinda feeling a bit of sarcasm there...if so, I don't appreciate, as i have been totally respectful of anyone posting here. Perhaps I am just too sensitive. Perhaps Sbell is right to leave this conversation, for fear of horses being continuously being beaten to death, and all that. I tried. It's not fun now, so I'm out too, for now. What sarcasm? I was just telling you that if you read into what I said more carefully you would see we are pretty much on the same side of the debate. Its a forum...about dinosaur toys. Don't take it too seriously but at the same time where else can we have a debate about this? Or should we all just not comment?
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 4:45:28 GMT
No, it's fine. But i am starting to sense a mass deletion of off topic posts. Perhaps a thread somewhere about the "merits" of various toys? Cause you all know we have strayed to far about this here. **you know it**
|
|
|
Post by pylraster on Dec 14, 2011 4:52:17 GMT
Come on guys, we're not in JPtoys. Besides its Christmas season. We can discuss T.Rex is a more constructive manner. But there's no denying that the figure is good, scientific accuracy aside. If anything, we should be thankful Papo released a T.Rex in a non-tripod pose.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Dec 14, 2011 5:22:14 GMT
Question...does it stand on it's own?
I dunno how to explain it. But for me, this Rex, and Carnegie's forthcoming Brachio are the only 'must have" figs this so far for me. For totally different reasons, I guess. Strange. I wonder if Papo will release anything else. When they did the Allo, that was that year's only fig, yes?
|
|
|
Post by sepp on Dec 14, 2011 5:22:55 GMT
Amanda, there is really no reason for the mods to go and delete off topic posts unless they break the forum rules - if it becomes too much of a problem, we will simply ask for the discussion to go back on topic. And at this point, I do think we need to go back on topic here and try to go easy with the arguing! But to answer your question, people tend to be sick of green dinosaur models just because it is one of the cop-out failsafe colours that dinosaur toys, models and restorations tend to be, or at least they used to. Brown is also a notable culprit. The majority of us here enjoy brightly and uniquely coloured dinosaurs, so a flat green paintjob is usually a letdown especially if it is painted on a nicely done new sculpt.
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Dec 14, 2011 5:32:07 GMT
;D So, what other new dino figures do we have left? Come on, let go back on topic, shall we?
|
|
|
Post by Trexroarr on Dec 14, 2011 5:35:51 GMT
(I'm gonna attempt to get this thread back on topic...)
Besides the Tylosaurus and new T-Rex, do you guys think that Papo will release any other new Prehistoric figures? If so, what?
Also, are we definitely only getting one Carnegie this year, or has that not been confirmed yet?
|
|
|
Post by bokisaurus on Dec 14, 2011 5:38:47 GMT
(I'm gonna attempt to get this thread back on topic...) Besides the Tylosaurus and new T-Rex, do you guys think that Papo will release any other new Prehistoric figures? If so, what? Also, are we definitely only getting one Carnegie this year, or has that not been confirmed yet? Who knows about Papo, they are not good at announcement at all And as far as I know, and I think it's been confirmed that yes, only one Carnegie figure next year, the Brachi
|
|
|
Post by Seijun on Dec 14, 2011 6:05:23 GMT
I don't like green because.. I just don't like green!
|
|