Wow..just wow.

As catch-alls, I like Generations 1, 2, and 3. As far as selling them, use the marketing phrase if you want to maximize eyes (25th, rise of cobra, etc) Searching on eBay for a "roadblock" is almost hopeless and it'll just get worse.

But Spin's right, as usual: they're toys.

An aside: I get angry about language for a living but getting fussy about what you call a plastic man on an auction site is silly.

I felt the same way about the term "New Sculpt" since it's now "old sculpt". but it also clearly defines that era.

I think modern era works, as - even if another engineering change is made in the future, this style still shows how the figures moved into the modern era of construction. When I add tags to gallery submissions, I usually add 25thanniversary and modernera both.

_________________

I hate seeing "ME" or "modern era" typed. It actually pulls me right out of the post. Someone can be talking about pretty much anything new and when I see "ME" it makes the whole post seem short-sighted. So unless the post is coming from someone who I have seen posting for a while (and have a better understanding of that person) I tend to expect nonsense. It is so clearly a term with an expiration date that I can't understand why anyone would want to use it.

Is it really even all that descriptive? Here is just one example of a modern era Joe:
http://www.hasbro.com/shop/details.cfm?R=B24008CE-5056-900B-1019-7ED14838D691:en_US

Nicely put.

_________________

Reading through all the responses it appears "25th Era" works the best for the majority. The body type changed with the 25th anniversary figures and until it changes significantly again we could probably continue calling it "25th Era."

_________________

I'll just leave this here - http://yojoe.com/reviews/editorial/namingissues.shtml

That was really well written, and I agree with many of his points. I guess there would need to be agreement on whether we're talking about the sculpt, or the time period in which it came out. Or both?

_________________

From that article:


Yeah, good idea. What's wrong with throwing some efficient brevity in the mix, too?

The 'Generations' concept is short-sighted. How many Generations do we think these toys will last? Will anyone be able to remember the diffs between Generations 5 and 8 when we're into Generation 12?

Imho, you name them after what's already there in your face, their shortest common abbreviations.

RAH - the Real American Hero era/generation/run/period/whatever

JvC - that whole long pile of stank that was the t-crotch GI Joe vs COBRA stuff to the last final gasps shoved off onto the DTC site. It was all the same stuff from the same general mindset of the same team of guys at Hasbro.

25A - You don't even need the Anni or the th. And so big-booty deal if the specific day you're talking/typing on isn't the literal 25th Anniversary of the Day GI Joe was Reborn? It's the engineering style that debuted with the 25th Anniversary year. So what if it's actually the 32nd Anniversary? When I'm talking about the merits of product from the JvC line versus that of the RAH or 25A lines, *everybody* knows exactly what I'm talking about.

There's 26 letters in the alphabet and I'm sure we'll be able to come up with handy 3-letter identifiers for all the lines to come as well.

_________________

Also, it's what every other fandom does. Every last one of these is instantly identifiable and discernable from its fellows: ANH, ESB, ROTJ, TPM, AOTC, ROTS, TOC, POTF, POTF2, TCW, VOTC, TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, MU, DCU, MLB, NFL, NBA, PGA, NRA, ad infinitum, ad nauseum...

_________________

This has been my attitude exactly. As well as the comments showing that the 82-94 figs are all referred to as RAH, even though their construction improved as well as the 25th design.

_________________

Yes, it is. And everyone pretty much knows what you would be referring to, no matter how much some may pretend otherwise.

_________________

This would seem to dictate each sub-class be used though - 25A, ROC, POC, 30A, etc... also, the focus on 25A is itself a focus on the labeling of the card, not so much on the figure itself. If the same construction style is still employed 10 years from now, are we still going to want to call them 25A stylings? I think it is just as flawed as "modern era".

I do agree with the overall intent of your post though. Short and Sweet is the way to go.

_________________

You know, this would work for me, like people have mentioned already

G1 - ARAH
G2 - JvC, Spytroops, VvV
G3 - 25th, Resolute, ROC, POC, Renegades, 30th

_________________

*All* of the acronyms are just derivations of the card labeling. The source of the acronym is irrelevant to its typographical efficiency and clarity of 'era'. All of those sub-divisions are fine if you're having a discussion about the varying card art/labeling. For the varying engineering era/formats, all you need is three labels (so far).


Again, the card labeling at the time of the engineering format's introduction is irrelevant. RAH is only called that because of the 'Real American Hero' header under the GI Joe name, as a way to distinguish the li'l figs line from the earlier Joe figs. For a discussion about eras and periods and formats, '25A' just means 'the engineering format introduced with the 25th Anniversary', not 'the specific product items released during the 25th Anniversary'. How anal should the 25 be applied? Is stuff that ran off the line on the actual 25th anniversary day more worthy of the label or more valuable? What about stuff still on the pegs in 25A packaging even tho it's no longer that year?

The year is irrelevant, either that of when the format was introduced or of when the discussion is happening. All that's necessary is a short identifier for one era of format to distinguish it from others. If I were to say, 'Give a representative example of a RAH fig, a JvC fig, and a 25A fig', everybody would be able to do that and I doubt anyone would have any figs of great disagreement about how they'd be sorted.

_________________