[Snowflakian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kylactus

I was not referring to the impossible to find MI line, or the discontinued Avengers Assemble line, I was referring to the ever abundant 5 poa, not particularly well sculpted, ASM2, IM3, Avengers Assemble (5POA). Perhaps Hasbro's assumption is that everyone is broke, so they have decided to only make the "economy" level figures widely available. But I for one would rather pay more for a figure I want than pay anything for something I don't.
In short, in the military I too had to choke down many an unpleasant meal, but if you poo on a plate do not expect me to eat it, I'm not that hungry. wile were stretching this analogy lets not forget, If we don't eat what they are dishing out, they don't eat either. were there bread and butter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trebleshot

You exaggerate. Hasbro has not gone back to pre-1980's toy designs with MU/MI. For one, toys like that in the 70's did not have knees or elbows. Now if you're only referring to the movie lines' "basic" figures, then yes they are similar to what we had back in the day. But they are also meant to be an economy-level alternative (i.e. cheap, affordable toys for kids).

It's not like Hasbro decided, "Hey, kids don't need action figures with joints; let's get rid of them. Then it costs us less to make and we can get even more money! And those stupid fanboys will bitch about it but they'll buy 'em anyway 'cause they're all OCD and $#!t. Schadenfreude FTW!"

(That was complete sarcasm and not a direct quote. Also, when I was growing up, I was taught to eat what was put in front of me or I didn't eat.)

There are all kinds of legitimate reasons for what Hasbro has done and is doing - a lot of which can be found somewhere in this very thread, if one were to go searching for them (Snowflakian discusses one just above this post).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowflakian

It's a balancing issue.
The MU standard will come back. It's a matter of cutting back now to come back around later with the good again.

The thing with Marvel movies in particular is that there's only so many times you can come out with the same characters over and over again. So with GOTG for example, the focus this time is more on the ships because of it being an untested property. If the movie proves successful, the sequel will then get a better toyline more in line to what we expect from them.

The same can be said of other properties that'll come back around again later. Like with how close Ant-man is to Avengers: AOU, they might be able to get his figure into there.

My question though is more towards how are they going to get Strange, Deathlok, and other side characters like that into the movie-verse standard lines. Strange and Ant-man aren't properties that could singularly hold their own lines unless they dabble into the comic figures arena with them. Even then, it'll have to be expanded more so with side stuff like Satana, Sons of Midnight, etc.

They've gotta find a way to balance the releases though overall to get product out that sells, but also still leave room for product later to sell too. It's a matter of finding the best path to continuously make money, but also cut corners where needed and able to. This allows them to push the figure budget better for the future endeavors without having to repack the same figures over and over and over again.

So around AOU, we should see the return of the MU standard in the movie lines. After that, we should start seeing even more better implementations of the lines all around. This right now is just a recuperative lull on our wallets with all the other great things coming out from them via Transformers and their other brands. When that settles, we'll see the Marvel side rev right back up. Especially once we find out if GOTG is as profitable as Marvel hopes it will be.

There's also keeping in mind that while hasbro does repack old figures. Another method to make customers rebuy a figure they've already bought is by adding more articulation to it.

There's also the fact that retailers as a whole want the cheaper value lines. It's a whole cost vs what the majority of customers will buy etc dynamic. So essentially your "eating" metaphor is what needs to play out.