I generally don't care too much about articulation on figures. But with the upcoming Retaliation drivers figures' lack of articulation, I can't really understand it. GI Joe always used its additional articulation as a selling point over other figures. Remember the big introduction of Swivel Arm Battle Grip?

BTW, if the figures are already out and actually have the correct articulation, please correct me.

My point of this thread isn't to rant about it (I think another thread covered that), but rather to see if anyone actually knows a legitimate reason for the change.

Does taking away the articulation really save that much money for Hasbro? There's a story that Hasbro didn't put any paint applications on Snake-Eyes back in '82 as a last minute cost-cutting move. Would it have been cheaper for them today to release the drivers with limited paint applications instead of removing articulation? Has Hasbro made any comment about the lack of articulation?

Despite the limited articulation, Clutch and Swamp Viper look to be two of the few Retaliation figures I'm really looking forward to purchasing.

Less articulation means less parts. Less parts means less tooling (the biggest cost of new figures) and less production time. Less production time means less overall cost. So yes less articulation does mean less cost.

As for paint applications, they have been cutting those on drivers for a while now. POC Clutch was very bland in the color department for example especially in comparison to the single carded POC and 30th figures. Same with 30th Ace who was just mainly molded in color and thrown in the box.

But no it wouldn't have been cheaper to cut out paint applications because the tooling and labor to assemble the figures is costs more than a paint mask.

_________________

You forgot one line: Less articulation means less interest which means less collectors buying them.

This post would be really odd without the use of the word "less".

_________________

Maybe we can replace the word ''less'' with the word ''banana''. Then we would have:

''Banana articulation means banana parts. Banana parts means banana tooling (the biggest cost of new figures) and banana production time. Banana production time means banana overall cost. So yes banana articulation does mean banana cost.''

and

''Banana articulation means banana interest which means banana collectors buying them''



OB

_________________

_________________

Well, we can only take Hasbro at their word, but according to Derryl DePriest at Toy Fair, using tooling with less parts (meaning less articulation) does indeed save money over simply using less paint apps or re-using old tooling.

One of the interesting balancing points that folks haven't noticed is that because these drivers have less articulation, the vehicles are trending a bit larger than they might have previously, all while keeping pricing consistent. Working with budgets in these things (especially considering licensing for film stuff via Paramount) is always a challenge, and sure, DePriest could have been covering for himself, but I got the impression that yes, reducing articulation absolutely saves them money, and that's the entire reason for the change.

_________________

What's all this about the drivers not having articulation? Is it LESS articulation? NO articulation?

_________________

I hate to correct people, but I think you meant to say "banana"...

It does make sense, cost-wise. I wonder if the two alternatives would better received or not - no figure with the vehicles at all (if it's not a true Joe figure then don't bother theory, and shave a buck or two off the price as a result); or go with the usual/normal articulated figure (but charge the vehicle price plus a full figure price).

_________________

I do find the whole argument about "I'd rather have no figure than this figure" somewhat humorous, because really if your stance is that vehement, why not just set the subpar figure aside? I think the retail cost shaving at this point is about as trim as it's going to get, I'm not sure they could really save another buck by not including a figure at all.

Besides there are those pesky kids who probably want an actual "driver" to drive their vehicles, and don't necessarily care if they can bend ankles, knees, or elbows.

_________________

Stoopid kids ruining my toys.

_________________

Much less articulation. Hips, shoulders, neck, that's about it.

_________________

I don't need wrist swivel or ankle bend on every single figure.

I do, however, think that there should be some basic consistency when it comes to elbow, shoulder, knee, and hip motion.

If giving up ankle and wrist will still allow the others for all the other figures, then I'd gladly give that up.

_________________

Another thought is that if no drivers included at all then the o-ring collectors could buy the vehicles without worrying what to do with the figures...But I'm not one of those... I LOVE GI Joe figures in the 1:18th scale period.

_________________

Says the guy who has stated on a number of occasions that the Retaliation figures are crap.

I don't give a fig about vehicle driver articulation. Especially if it's like Snake-Eyes and the Ninja Tank, or something. However, Clutch deserves better.

_________________

Really?

I said that, specifically?

And if I did, I can't change my views and opinions or maybe even mellow a bit?

_________________