|
|
Post by nobs on Jan 28, 2008 19:21:43 GMT
The topic of repaints was brought up in the other thread for new releases. This is a thread to piggy back on that. Who else thought that the "male" oviraptor from 2007 was a complete cop-out for new figures? I was terribly dissapointed that they basically re-did the same figure they did a year or 2 earlier, but this time added a few feathers....I wonder if they just augumented the old mold, or if there are 2 of them alltogether  Im also of the opinion that the stegosaurids and ceratopsians are not strongly represented in this line. They have retired all their ceratopsians (minus triceratops). Thats Protoceratops, Psticasaurus, and most recently styracosaurs (which is beyond me why they chose it, but hey Im not in charge) I could think of several species of other dinosaurs I would like to see added to this line (or surprised they havent made it in yet) what are some of your thoughts on dinosaurs that should be added? forgive the spelling, some of these names are tough! |
|
|
|
Post by EmperorDinobot on Jan 28, 2008 23:23:30 GMT
They've been lazy. They must be punished!
Well, no.
I agree, they have mostly given us theropods and stuff. I actually believe we need more hadrosaurs in the line. Maybe Lambeosaurus, or...something not even Safari has offered us. I think we need more thyreophorans, Saichania, a new Euplocephalus, or even Sauropelta, and some stegosaurs as well. The thing with Stegosaurs is that...Stegosaurus is pretty much the best known and most complete Stegosaur, so you can't go wrong with it. But I would most certainly welcome a new mold, or other well known stegosaurs such as Tuojiangosaurus or Kentrosaurus.
As for Ceratopians, I'd love to see a Pachyrhinosaurus, or just a Centrosaurus. I was really excited when the newer Triceratops came out. It's one of their best molds ever.
For theropoda, well...we've seen enough, quite honestly. They've produced a member of every family...EXCEPT Ornithomimosauria...Would a Struthiomimus hurt?
|
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Jan 29, 2008 3:35:11 GMT
I think they need to think outside the box a little bit, they keep producing standard dinosaurs and prehistoric creatures. I'd love to see more Cambrian, Ordovician, Permian and Triassic fauna. The repaints are unnecessary IMHO. It's horrible to see a feathered Oviraptor, but our plesiosaurologist will surely think otherwise ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by EmperorDinobot on Jan 29, 2008 8:04:57 GMT
The new Oviraptor would appeal to me more if I hadn't bought the older one...
I'm still going for it. It's technically a new mold.
|
|
|
|
Post by nobs on Jan 29, 2008 17:34:21 GMT
Emperor and Tomhet, I agree 100% with you.
I also belive the non-dinosaur figures that companies put out add a great sence of flavor to the line. For example, the Dunkleosteus from wild safari in 2007, is a phenominal figure, and its what made me decide to start collecting that line in particular too.
Id also like to see a good prehistoric mammel line from carnegie, but since wild safari already has one, I doubt that they do.
I wonder how its decided which animals will be added every year.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmperorDinobot on Jan 30, 2008 20:45:30 GMT
Who needs flavor when you got thyreophorans...
And centrosaurines...
And coelophysioids...
I'd like to see more Pterosaurus. I wouldn't buy any of those...so called Mmmmamals you speak of.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Jan 31, 2008 2:36:25 GMT
Emperor and Tomhet, I agree 100% with you. I also belive the non-dinosaur figures that companies put out add a great sence of flavor to the line. For example, the Dunkleosteus from wild safari in 2007, is a phenominal figure, and its what made me decide to start collecting that line in particular too. Id also like to see a good prehistoric mammel line from carnegie, but since wild safari already has one, I doubt that they do. I wonder how its decided which animals will be added every year. Yeah, the Dunkleosteus was a great addition. I would definitely buy the mammals, I'm already trying to locate the Safari Andrewsarchus ;D |
|
brad
Junior Member
Posts: 83 
|
Post by brad on May 10, 2008 15:21:21 GMT
Who else thought that the "male" oviraptor from 2007 was a complete cop-out for new figures? I was terribly dissapointed that they basically re-did the same figure they did a year or 2 earlier, but this time added a few feathers.... I'm disappointed that the new Oviraptor isn't any more accurate than the old one! Most glaringly they have the primary feathers coming off the third digit of the hand, rather than the second as in birds and other winged maniraptors. Why would the condition in Oviraptor not be homologous? They should have done some more research before rushing out another inaccurate feathered dinosaur. I'll stick with the old Oviraptor- I can easier belive that it lost its wing feathers than reoriented them to an anatomically unlikely position! Im also of the opinion that the stegosaurids and ceratopsians are not strongly represented in this line. They have retired all their ceratopsians (minus triceratops). Thats Protoceratops, Psticasaurus, and most recently styracosaurs (which is beyond me why they chose it, but hey Im not in charge) I could think of several species of other dinosaurs I would like to see added to this line (or surprised they havent made it in yet) what are some of your thoughts on dinosaurs that should be added? The old Protoceratops was pretty lame, I could never bring myself to buy it. They should bring it back as a larger figure, approximately to scale with the Velociraptor and Oviraptor figures. The most neglected toy dinosaurs are probably the earlier ornithischians like Lesothosaurus, Heterodontosaurus, Scelidosaurus, etc. I'd buy all of those if they were well done. |
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on May 10, 2008 15:34:42 GMT
Agreed on the Scelidosaurus front - I'd love to see one of those critters in toy form.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on May 10, 2008 15:50:53 GMT
^^^ You are aware of the fact that there is an Invicta Scelidosaurus, right? ;D
|
|
brad
Junior Member
Posts: 83
|
Post by brad on May 10, 2008 15:52:40 GMT
The Invicta Scelidosaurus is ugly and outdated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on May 10, 2008 15:53:43 GMT
^^^ You are aware of the fact that there is an Invicta Scelidosaurus, right? ;D  it actually skipped my mind. I must be punished! To be fair, its not really what I have in mind, rather out of date - the sprawling little beastie. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on May 10, 2008 15:59:42 GMT
^^^ You are aware of the fact that there is an Invicta Scelidosaurus, right? ;D it actually skipped my mind. I must be punished! To be fair, its not really what I have in mind, rather out of date - the sprawling little beastie. ;D Yeah, it's in the process of being squashed  I'm still pretty fond of it, it's a very unique sculpt. |
|
it actually skipped my mind. I must be punished!
I'm still pretty fond of it, it's a very unique sculpt.