56 replies to this topic

[TheHSBR]

simply put...i'd pass

[Artistix]

Playmates should stick to Ninja Turtles & Smurfs.

[knightone]

As far as the role-play toys go, I say don't mess with a good thing. DST has it right as the emphasis should be on accuracy and not interactivity. The reason? Only a small sliver of Trek fans care to buy action figures. However, a much larger wedge of fans will buy replicas, however only a small section of that wedge can or will pay for a EFX level prop and an even smaller section can pay double or triple that for a hand made replica. So the role-play toys should stay where they are and how they are. If you can put in interactivity and not interfere with accuracy, fine, but don't ask to sacrifice what works for something that, more than likely, still won't be enough to push the line.

If you're thinking about a line aimed specifically for kids, I'll take a pass as well. I've seen some of the interactive toys and some of the "action feature" toys in the kids' aisles. They're not that great or exciting nor do they make for a good looking figure or toy either as they usually interfere with the sculpt. Even if the features were to appeal to me, I still have serious doubts about whether Star Trek can appeal to kids of today and their sensibilities. At least enough to either make them beg their parents to spend their money or plop down their allowances for Trek based toys. It's hard enough to get life-long adult Star Trek fans to spend their money on this stuff much less a younger generation with completely different styles and tastes.

[VulcanFanatic]

I would be interested in seeing what Playmates would put out. I would prefer a return to playsets akin to the TNG playsets they put out rather than the style they released for ST2009.

[bgiles73]

I would be in for a collaboration between DST and Playmates. While I bought most of DST's 7" Star Trek figures, they really don't match my collecting habits. I have always prefered 3 3/4" scaled figures. That was the one thing Playmates got right in 2009. Maybe if they would have stuck with that scale alone and made it better, we might have got more out of the line. As it was, too much product was out at one time. Too much product without enough diversity to keep it interesting. The Academy uniform figures weren't really what was going to keep the kids going back for more! Now orbital jump-suits, those would have been flying off the shelves! If Playmates will take this into better consideration for the next go round, I'd be all for them getting the license. If they screw up this next time it will probably be the final nail in any Star Trek toyline's coffin.

[Tortle]

A DST/Playmates partnership might be cool, but I'm just not sure if Playmates has what it takes to make a decent toy line anymore. It's not only the Trek '09 line, but that Terminator line was all kinds of suck. And the 200x Ninja Turtles line was decent, but not noteworthy. I think whatever creative team made Playmates great in the 90s is probably long gone.

Not to be a negative nancy, but I'm starting to wonder if the Star Trek property can sell toys anymore. The 2009 line was such a flop that Wave 2 was cancelled. The DST figures are crazy awesome, but still have trouble finding retailers and buyers. Maybe the Trek property mainly appeals to older fans who are largely not action figure collectors... in contrast to something like Star Wars that appeals both to kids and action figure collectors. Keep in mind I'm a huge fan of Trek toys, as is everyone here (otherwise we wouldn't really be here, would we?). But judging from the action figure sales, it appears that we're in the minority.

That said, I'd be interested in seeing what DST/Playmates would produce. I do think it would be better than the Playmates 2009 line and I'd probably snatch it up, but I just don't know if it would be good enough for kids and AF collectors to jump on board. It's too bad, but I'll just drown my sorrows in 90's Playmates figures.

[The_Donster]

I'd pass, simple based on their recent figures alone.

[A Chimpanzee & 2 Trainees]

Playmates figures don't do anything for me. Even given all their current and past problems, I still like the AA/DST line. I plan to continue collecting them as long as they come out, but when the line is done, so am I, at least for a while. I have no real interest in another line right now... except for those kick-butt SciFi Metropolis heads/figures!!! I love those sculpts... My Spock and McCoy are so lonely without Kirk...

[VulcanFanatic]

I'd pass, simple based on their recent figures alone.

So if playmates showed some outstanding figures in 2012 that would be released along with the new movie, you would pass on them just because the 2009 figures were lackluster? Isnt that a bit anal?

[JMW326]

So if playmates showed some outstanding figures in 2012 that would be released along with the new movie, you would pass on them just because the 2009 figures were lackluster? Isnt that a bit anal?

IT'S A TRAP!!!

[FHC]

LOL!

[knightone]

So if playmates showed some outstanding figures in 2012 that would be released along with the new movie, you would pass on them just because the 2009 figures were lackluster? Isnt that a bit anal?

They would have to be the most amazing thing since sliced bread. It would surprise me if they were considering how poorly done Playmates toys have been in general. I never even liked their 90's line. Lack of articulation and that shiny finish never impressed me. I know people love the variety that line had, but flooding the market with all sorts of crap doesn't impress me either. I rather have a few well done figures than a few hundred figures that I could take or leave (and not give a darn if I just left them). I admit I loved their ships and role-play at the time, but seeing what DST has done with ships and role-play in recent years, the Playmates versions look like complete hell. So, considering I didn't even like their 90's line, how do you think I felt about the recent flop of a movie line? It would take a miracle of biblical proportions for Playmates to present anything even close to outstanding in the near future (or ever, IMHO).

[TheHSBR]

They would have to be pretty spectacular especially if they are planning mutiple waves and build features because we all got burned on the last run. Every time I look at my unoppened bridge playset I get very angry because I dropped at least $40 to buy two in anticipation of have a full bridge (one that I could customize with depth). Im also able to hold grudges for a long time. However, one way to get me to think about it is collaborating with DST. Outside of that I havent seen much stuff that I like from playmates and I cant trust that what they say they will produce, they actually will.

[bgiles73]

My thought is that what Hasbro offers in their Star Wars line is what I want to see for Star Trek. I don't care if it's Hasbro, Playmates, DST, Mattel or some newcomer. I want a 3 3/4" line with the same quality that Hasbro has with the current Vintage Original Trilogy Collection. The 7" lines AA/DST produced were nice but I've run out of space, the economy and price of oil pretty much did the rest. I'm finding it hard to get excited for anything new in the 7" scale. That said, I loved the hell out of my new Romulans! I think its time we moved on to a scale that will be more economicaly feasible for DST. The collective effort of DST and Playmates combined also sounds like that would also be best for both companies, provided CBS still wants to deal with these two companies. I think the whole toy industry could really use some kind of economic stimulus package! It's not just Star trek that isn't selling.

[Fat Valentino]

I think your idea to have a "Plug and Play" style USB connection on the tricorders, phasers and communicators is brilliant. I also agree that good quality playsets and vehicles are as important for Star Trek as they are for Star Wars. Bring on the 13 inch ST:09 Starfleet Shuttle!

[Alex]

Playmates should stick to Ninja Turtles & Smurfs.

Agreed Artistix; the TMNT line is one thing that Playmates has always done correctly, and even their modern line contains "throwbacks" to the "classic" line from the '90s cartoon. From the people I know who like the Smurf's line, I've heard that it's pretty good as well.

simply put...i'd pass

As would I; fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Remember, Playmates had the Trek license, and they dropped it when they hit a rough spot. Paramount didn't yank it in the late '90s; Playmates dropped it because it wasn't profitable for them. Granted, it "wasn't profitable" because Playmates ran it into a ditch by making figures less articulate than in the past, randomly switching scales, and of course, the infamous 1701 debacle, which was the wrong idea at the wrong time.

The 2009 line was suppose to prove that Playmates had "changed" and was better than they were in the late-90s when it proved the exact opposite. The 12" line looked awesome, but I knew that they weren't going to complete it so I didn't touch it, and then Playmates didn't complete it. Yes this is probably a self-fulfilling prophecy, but a line like this needs to be completed from day one to get fans to invest, or its just going to tank.

The 6" line was about what I expected from Playmates in terms of quality, but the scale was a stupid idea. Had the 6" line been a 7" line, I'd have picked it up; it would have matched up in scale to my DST line, and and I could've justified the purchase since I already have an incentive in the form of collecting a 7" line. Had it been a 4.5" line that was compatible with the old Playmates line, I'd have picked it up as well, again, I have an investment in the 4.5" scale, and an incentive to pick up more Trek figures in said scale. I have no real incentive to grab 6" figures though; they're too small to display next to DST's 7" figures, too large for the 4.5" figures' playsets, and the only other Trek figures that I'm aware of in the 6" scale are the ones from the Playmates "First Contact" line.

The 3.75" scale was abominable in my eyes, it lacked articulation, was half-complete, and had a half-complete bridge "playset" (and I use that term loosely) to match the half-complete line; Playmates should have been contractually required to release Wave 2 at a loss if only for the fact that Wave 1 sales might have increased had they done so. Having no 3.75" Trek figures in my collection, I had no interest in this line until Wave 2 came out, which it obviously never did.

Playmates couldn't even get the ship right in 2009; it was the first time I've ever willingly passed on a toy starship, and I did so because Playmates' ship was absolutely horrendous; the two battery compartments are unforgivable, as is the level of text on the ship itself. (DST gets a pass with the Enterprise-D because of Saucer Separation; throw two battery compartments on a ship without it and I'd be equally critical.) The sad thing is that for $25 you could have what Playmates put out, and for $35 you could have a DST 1701 of far superior quality; it's not like Playmates couldn't make a better ship; they just didn't.

The only way you could get me to invest in a Playmates line would be if DST sculpted it to match their 7" scale and redid the ships and Tek to bring them up to par with the DST releases. If Playmates simply slapped "distributed by Playmates" on what was essentially a DST toy and handled getting DST into "big box" retailers, I'd be all for it; if DST added a 3.75" line, I probably wouldn't be interested, but some people would be. A 4.5" line would get my attention though, as would a 7" line. However, in this scenario the line is really a DST line, with Playmates effectively handling distribution and possibly manufacturing/quality control.

Now if Playmates really did put out a DST-quality line on there own, in a scale that I care about, I'd give it a try. As it stands though, I have absolutely no confidence in Playmates Toys' ability to handle Trek properly.

The Van Citters interview that 1701 is so fond of posting notes that we've seen the "latest update from" DST (emphasis mine; note the word is latest, not last,) but goes on to talk about Playmates ending with "I don't think we will see anything new from Playmates," which Trek movie follow-ups with "in 2010." It's possible that Van Citters meant "in 2010" and that Playmates kept their license for the 2012 movie, whether we like it or not, but it's also possible that Trekmovie thought Van Citters meant "in 2010" when he meant for the foreseeable future instead. I should point out that the interview is from March, and pre-dates the announcement of DST's new Enterprise-E among other things.

In short, Playmates would need a miracle or drastic change in their handling of Trek to make me believe that their line is worth sinking my money into again. I was willing to give them a chance in 2009, and they really let me down; I expected better, plain and simple.