JoeCanuck
General Section => General Joe Talk => Topic started by: JoeIndex on July 10, 2006, 11:17:02 PM
-
I had a conversation with Mike T. a while back about the vehicles for the line and how they've always seems to be more like playable model kits than traditional toys. Until recent years, the vehicles almost always came like any model kits, with parts and pieces attached to sprues that you cut off and then you piece your vehicle together, apply whatever decals to them that you want, and/or apply finishing paint applications. They're really just very sturdy model kits, like the current playable Gundam model kits.
G.I. Joe's long been a line that advocates putting your personal touches on the items (there's something in a pamphlet telling kids to touch up their figures) and the vehicles are no exception. They have a ton of detail that's ripe for painting. Anyway, I digress...
So, thoughts?
-
I'd say sturdy model kits. It's one of my memories of Joes in the 80s, assembling the vehicles. I can recall putting together the SHARC and the AWE Striker and having a blast. I actually really appreciated how Hasbro continued the trend from 1997-2001, especially after getting the vehicles spoon-fed to us in recent years.
The only thing I didn't like about assembling Joe vehicles was the stickers; I don't have the completely still hands necessary for detail work like that :?
-
I don't know. I've put together a few traditional models in my day, mostly Star Trek vehicles, and I'd say GI Joe vehicles are very different. Even the Warhammer 40 000 vehicles with working parts don't compare to the interactivity of something as small as a Ferret or as big as the Terrordrome.
When I pick up a model, it's delicate and usually doesn't offer much more in hand than it does on display. But when I pick up a vehicle, the imagination comes alive. Piling figures onto every foot peg and behind every gun, just driving it along the floor. There's so much more excitement.
So I disagree. Vehicles are better.
-
Ah, but have you ever tried things like the Gundam model kits? Those are very much like Joe vehicles in that they are more play toy than model.
I think the fact that they made the vehicles as sturdy as they did is more a plus and a benefit to Hasbro's design team than anything.
-
I don't know. I've put together a few traditional models in my day, mostly Star Trek vehicles, and I'd say GI Joe vehicles are very different. Even the Warhammer 40 000 vehicles with working parts don't compare to the interactivity of something as small as a Ferret or as big as the Terrordrome.
When I pick up a model, it's delicate and usually doesn't offer much more in hand than it does on display. But when I pick up a vehicle, the imagination comes alive. Piling figures onto every foot peg and behind every gun, just driving it along the floor. There's so much more excitement.
So I disagree. Vehicles are better.
Scramble, I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. So ignore the rest of this if I've misunderstood you.
Of course the Joe vehicles are toys, since they are part of a toyline and were sold in the Joe toy section (except the R/C Crossfire) and not the model car section.
BUT...
They were special toys, and much more like very sturdy model kits than standard toys: they were not assembled, you had to cut stuff off of sprues (the frames that held all the parts), you had to put stickers on. This is all "model kit" activity.
So yes, the Joe vehicles were technically not models because they were sold as toys and were not nearly as fragile as a regular model kit (which are 99% of the time for display only). But because of how we built them ourselves as kids, they can easily be classified as very sturdy, snap-together, playable model kits. I think this is what JoeIndex is saying.
-
They were special toys, and much more like very sturdy model kits than standard toys: they were not assembled, you had to cut stuff off of sprues (the frames that held all the parts), you had to put stickers on. This is all "model kit" activity.
So yes, the Joe vehicles were technically not models because they were sold as toys and were not nearly as fragile as a regular model kit (which are 99% of the time for display only). But because of how we built them ourselves as kids, they can easily be classified as very sturdy, snap-together, playable model kits. I think this is what JoeIndex is saying.
That's exactly what I was saying. Thank you. :)
-
But because of how we built them ourselves as kids, they can easily be classified as very sturdy, snap-together, playable model kits. I think this is what JoeIndex is saying.
I agree as well with this assessment. At least I didn't have to paint them.
-
But because of how we built them ourselves as kids, they can easily be classified as very sturdy, snap-together, playable model kits. I think this is what JoeIndex is saying.
I agree as well with this assessment. At least I didn't have to paint them.
Or soak the decals in some liquid adhesive.
-
I hated having to soak decals - one of the main reasons why I never really like model building. All of the really amazing models always seemed to require some ungodly method of putting stickers on.