GO-BOTS by IDW

[RavenHawk]

I have to admit that I'm not a big fan of Tom Scioli's stuff. I respect that his style is essentially a direct homage to Jack Kirby, but my experience with his work is limited to the IDW Transformers vs. G.I. Joe, and that did absolutely nothing for me (sad to say, I significantly preferred essentially all of the previous Transformers vs. G.I. Joe series to what little I read of his, even the Deamwave and Devil's Due ones).

That said, this looks like it might be a good fit for him:

http://www.idwpublishing.com/product/go-bots-1/

There's a free preview there too. I think it fits him better artistically, though I wish he wouldn't insist on doing his own lettering, and that the overall product didn't look quite so fanzine, but I guess this is IDW's idea of '80s retro.

 

[mikeszekely]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

I have to admit that I'm not a big fan of Tom Scioli's stuff. I respect that his style is essentially a direct homage to Jack Kirby, but my experience with his work is limited to the IDW Transformers vs. G.I. Joe, and that did absolutely nothing for me (sad to say, I significantly preferred essentially all of the previous Transformers vs. G.I. Joe series to what little I read of his, even the Deamwave and Devil's Due ones).

That said, this looks like it might be a good fit for him:

http://www.idwpublishing.com/product/go-bots-1/

There's a free preview there too. I think it fits him better artistically, though I wish he wouldn't insist on doing his own lettering, and that the overall product didn't look quite so fanzine, but I guess this is IDW's idea of '80s retro.

 

I agree about Scioli's work... when I first saw that IDW was releasing this I had to double-check that it was actually something new and no a reprint of something from the '80s.  And while I get that's an intentional thing on Scioli's part, I'd rather my robots come from the expressive work of Alex Milne or Nick Roche.

That said, I'm still going to check it out.  The world needs more Gobots, and I need something to read between now and the IDW Transformers reboot.

[Sandman]

When i first looked at his Tf vs Gijoe, i was like "WTF". But suprisingly i really enjoyed that series. I agree his work has a fanzine feel to it but i'm ok with it. I don't think i would like him doing the main TF series but for something like TF vs Gijoe aand now Gobots, i think he's a good fit for it.

[RavenHawk]

20 minutes ago, mikeszekely said:

And while I get that's an intentional thing on Scioli's part, I'd rather my robots come from the expressive work of Alex Milne or Nick Roche.

Haven't read the TF books in a few years, but definitely always enjoyed Alex Milne's stuff. Solid art, and he seemed to genuinely think his designs through for transformability.

[JB0]

Thoughts, based on the preview pages:

1. The oldschool comic book art is amusing, but it could get old fast. But at least they committed to it completely and colored the between-panel whitespace so the pages appear yellowed.

2. Did they just completely change the Go-Bots origin story like it ain't nothin'? I get that with Hasbro owning both brands and IDW publishing both comics, there's a desire to differentiate them so they aren't both "multimode alien robots from a wrecked machine planet" stories. But they just wrote the Go-Bots as tools without free will. I think this was a concerted effort to see how annoyed they could make people in five pages, in which case MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

3. Space shuttle exploring a distant galaxy? Dammit, can we get past this whole "galaxies are like planets, and visiting one is a trivial effort" thing? It was stupid even in the 80s.

[tekering]

2 hours ago, JB0 said:

Dammit, can we get past this whole "galaxies are like planets, and visiting one is a trivial effort" thing? It was stupid even in the 80s.

Not nearly as stupid as "you get to your destination and your car walks along with you."  

[JB0]

10 hours ago, tekering said:

Not nearly as stupid as "you get to your destination and your car walks along with you."  

Disagree. The scale of the galactic stupidity is massive.

[RavenHawk]

On 11/22/2018 at 2:35 AM, JB0 said:

Thoughts, based on the preview pages:

1. The oldschool comic book art is amusing, but it could get old fast. But at least they committed to it completely and colored the between-panel whitespace so the pages appear yellowed.

2. Did they just completely change the Go-Bots origin story like it ain't nothin'? I get that with Hasbro owning both brands and IDW publishing both comics, there's a desire to differentiate them so they aren't both "multimode alien robots from a wrecked machine planet" stories. But they just wrote the Go-Bots as tools without free will. I think this was a concerted effort to see how annoyed they could make people in five pages, in which case MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

3. Space shuttle exploring a distant galaxy? Dammit, can we get past this whole "galaxies are like planets, and visiting one is a trivial effort" thing? It was stupid even in the 80s.

1. I get WHY they did the yellowed whitespace, but I still don't like it. For the money that these issues cost, I guess I want my retro still feeling new, as weird as that may sound.

2. IDW did the same thing with Transformers. It worked out for them in the end, but, as I recall, it took a long time for fans to get onboard.

3. Yeah, that's a bit of a pet peeve for me, too.

 

On 11/22/2018 at 5:02 AM, tekering said:

Not nearly as stupid as "you get to your destination and your car walks along with you."  

That didn't really bother me. I mean, it bothered me in the "that is stupid and makes no sense if you think about it for more than a split second, and actually makes things worse" way, but it didn't bother me from the "this is aimed at kids" point of view. I guess we'll see whether they can figure out if their target audience is adults with nostalgia, or bringing in new kids to read comics.

[Salamander]

On 11/22/2018 at 11:35 AM, JB0 said:

2. Did they just completely change the Go-Bots origin story like it ain't nothin'? I get that with Hasbro owning both brands and IDW publishing both comics, there's a desire to differentiate them so they aren't both "multimode alien robots from a wrecked machine planet" stories. But they just wrote the Go-Bots as tools without free will. I think this was a concerted effort to see how annoyed they could make people in five pages, in which case MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

I do hope they realise that although Hasbro owns both brands, they do not own the looks of the characters (Hanna Barbera changed versions excluded) since those rights lay with Bandai and Ashi Pro. And with Bandai relaunching Machine Robo (which the Gobots toys were based on) this might end up getting ugly...

[JB0]

I don't think anyone actually owns the looks, aside from the cartoon versions. Generally speaking you can't patent a look, you can't copyright physical objects, and I'm pretty sure Bandai didn't trademark the designs and then maintain those trademarks to the present day(as opposed to Gundam, where Bandai has every trademark they can think of).

The same reason Hasbro can't stop all the "third-party" Transformer toys is the reason Bandai can't stop this.

 

In short, this had to go through Hasbro's legal department, and they know what they're doing.

[RavenHawk]

1 minute ago, JB0 said:

I don't think anyone actually owns the looks, aside from the cartoon versions. Generally speaking you can't patent a look, you can't copyright physical objects, and I'm pretty sure Bandai didn't trademark the designs and then maintain those trademarks to the present day(as opposed to Gundam, where Bandai has every trademark they can think of).

The same reason Hasbro can't stop all the "third-party" Transformer toys is the reason Bandai can't stop this.

 

In short, this had to go through Hasbro's legal department, and they know what they're doing.

With no disrespect, I disagree with you. You can copyright physical objects. Copyrights apply to statues and to architecture, among other things.

So, the original creators would have copyright ownership related to their designs, which were likely assigned to Bandai or are theirs as work-for-hire.

There were utility and design patents (I remember seeing the Bike Robo/Cy-Kill patent). Of course, those have long since expired, but copyrights would still be live. The copyrights would cover creative aspects which are separable from functional ones, which could get complicated.

In my opinion, Hasbro COULD stop a lot of the "third party" toys that are out there. There are registered trademarks likely being infringed, common-law trademark rights arguably being infringed, and copyrights (as these toys would likely be largely considered to be derivative works). This doesn't apply to ALL "third party" toys, of course, but I think it does to a lot of them. As an example, I think that the Toyworld Whiskey Jack is arguably clearly infringing, while Trace and Grindrod are not.

Why doesn't Hasbro pursue these companies? Maybe they don't want the bad press, maybe they think it isn't financially worth it, or maybe they think they fill a niche that is good for overall business.

As for Go-Bots, I'm pretty sure that Hasbro maintains trademark rights to the character names (thus the various Go-Bot named minicons over the years), and probably owns the rights to the purely cartoon looks of characters, but who knows beyond that?

Just my opinions, anyway.

[JB0]

Hasbro definitely DOESN'T own the cartoon Go-Bots. Those are Hanna-Barbara's, and their Facebook team actually got in trouble for using some Go-Bots cartoon screenshots at one point.

 

[SMS007]

As I understand the current situation, Bandai owns the original Machine Robo / GoBots toy designs, and since the Challenge of the GoBots cartoon used very toy-accurate animation models, Hasbro does not own those. However, Hasbro has built a closer relationship with Bandai as of late, as evidenced by Hasbro's acquisition of North American rights to Power Rangers. I suspect those closer ties are what has allowed Hasbro licensee IDW Publishing to use the original designs in one comic series.

1 hour ago, JB0 said:

Hasbro definitely DOESN'T own the cartoon Go-Bots. Those are Hanna-Barbara's, and their Facebook team actually got in trouble for using some Go-Bots cartoon screenshots at one point.

Do you have proof that licensee Fun Publications literally got in trouble with Hasbro over that?

The way I figured it, Fun Publications redid their GoBots illustrations to avoid advertising Bandai-owned IP per good business loyalty principles. Given Hasbro's actively non-interventionist policy with the proliferation of 3P figures, I seriously doubt they cared about one illustration on one obscure Facebook page. Said Facebook pages, Ask Vector Prime and Renegade Rhetoric, used plenty of Challenge of the GoBots screenshots not involving toy-based models.

Edited November 25, 2018 by SMS007

[JB0]

My understanding is they used ONE screenshot from the cartoon, and swapped it out due to legal issues.

 

And Bandai doesn't own any part of the Hanna-Barbera cartoon, as I understand things. If they did, WB would be crediting them on the current DVDs as a legal necessity, and they don't seem to be.

[mikeszekely]

I think the reason the Gobots haven't really experience the same revival as the Transformers is because sussing out who owns what is a much thornier issue.  I mean, regarding Transformers, it was my understanding that Takara owned most of the toys, Hasbro owned the fiction, and they've maintained a happy relationship because Takara continues to allow Hasbro to use their toy designs (old and new) while Hasbro lets them use the Transformers brand in Japan (as well as distribute other Hasbro properties, like Star Wars, there).  And eventually Hasbro bought up the rights to the old Sunbow cartoons featuring their properties, so everything is neatly under one roof.

With Gobots it's a lot messier.  Tonka licensed the toys from Bandai, and Hasbro bought Tonka.  Hasbro owns Tonka's IP now, which includes the names and fiction behind the Gobots... except that Warner Bros owns Hanna-Barbera's library, including AFAIK The Challenge of the Gobots.  This could have something to do with why IDW changed the Gobots origin (although, given how different their "G1" Transformers were, it could be a creative decision).  And while I have no idea what kind of relationship Bandai and Tonka might have enjoyed, I understand they see Hasbro as a major rival.  A rival that developed their own fiction for the Machine Robo toys and doesn't seem particularly interested in Gobots, and there's absolutely no question Bandai still owns the toy designs.  Effectively, that means that if Hasbro wants a Gobots toy and a new fiction to sell that toyline that they're basically starting from scratch.  I mean, they can have a character named Leader-1 who turns into a jet and is the leader of the Guardians... as long as they don't reference anything from the original cartoon and Leader-1 doesn't look like Eagle Robo.

Which begs the question, how did IDW launch a new Gobots comic book with characters that do look like Machine Robo?  It's interesting that the inside cover says "...Go-Bots and all related characters and trademarks of Hasbro and are used with permission" but doesn't mention Bandai.  And yet, not only do Leader-1 and Cy-Kill have their toy-style Machine Robo faces, Crasher is white and blue ala Porsche Robo instead of black and red like Gobots release.  Although Bandai is uncredited, that strongly suggests to me that they did in fact get Bandai on board.  I mean, if they didn't there'd be no reason not to make her red and black, to say nothing of risking legal issues with Bandai.

[SMS007]

On 11/22/2018 at 5:35 AM, JB0 said:

2. Did they just completely change the Go-Bots origin story like it ain't nothin'? I get that with Hasbro owning both brands and IDW publishing both comics, there's a desire to differentiate them so they aren't both "multimode alien robots from a wrecked machine planet" stories. But they just wrote the Go-Bots as tools without free will. I think this was a concerted effort to see how annoyed they could make people in five pages, in which case MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

Arguably, no. The 1980s European branch of GoBots, Robo Machines, had a tie-in comic using the backstory of GoBots as constructed artificial lifeforms.

[Mazinger]

I had always thought that the honors started out as organic beings who gradually replaced parts of their  bodies until they were all robot. Then again I didn’t place that close attention. 

[tekering]

I assume "the honors" go to auto-correct for that typo...?  

[Mazinger]

Haha, yeah. Meant Gobots. 

[JB0]

The Honors of the Go-Bots.

[JetJockey]

Maybe it's just me. But when I was a kid, I always thought the Go Bots were very generic compared to the Transformers. Both in look and transforming complexities. The only one I own is Psycho because I like the car mode. I still don't like the robot mode.

[JB0]

'S just you.

 

Screwhead was awesome, Pathfinder was too cool for words, Bugbite was the only VW Bug robot toy you needed, Stacks was ...

Umm, Stacks was...

Errr...

...

Okay, you can't win 'em all.  Stacks was pretty awful.

[renegadeleader1]

6 hours ago, JB0 said:

'S just you.

 

Screwhead was awesome, Pathfinder was too cool for words, Bugbite was the only VW Bug robot toy you needed, Stacks was ...

Umm, Stacks was...

Errr...

...

Okay, you can't win 'em all.  Stacks was pretty awful.

Road Ranger... What you get when you ask your mom for Optimus Prime and all she can remember is its that red and blue semi truck that transforms into a robot.

[RavenHawk]

10 hours ago, JetJockey said:

Maybe it's just me. But when I was a kid, I always thought the Go Bots were very generic compared to the Transformers. Both in look and transforming complexities. The only one I own is Psycho because I like the car mode. I still don't like the robot mode.

I had mostly Go-Bots as a kid because that's what we could afford, though I eventually got some Transformers too. Actually, let me clarify: I had a few Transformers, a few Go-Bots, and then a bunch of knockoffs of both, but mainly knockoffs of Go-Bots (like an unbranded Jeeper Creeper, an unbranded Block Head, etc.).

I loved those figures. The size was perfect for taking a few with you in the car as a kid, the vehicle modes had a lot more realism and detail than the handful of Transformers that I had (except for Trailbreaker... I'll always love that one), and some, like Jeeper Creeper, actually had a lot of detail to the robot modes, too.

[SMS007]

10 hours ago, JetJockey said:

Maybe it's just me. But when I was a kid, I always thought the Go Bots were very generic compared to the Transformers. Both in look and transforming complexities. The only one I own is Psycho because I like the car mode. I still don't like the robot mode.

I feel like this is a common criticism by fans when citing reasons that led to Transformers defeating GoBots in the Western market.

[Mazinger]

2 hours ago, SMS007 said:

I feel like this is a common criticism by fans when citing reasons that led to Transformers defeating GoBots in the Western market.

I certainly had this impression and I had plenty of both growing up. The larger delux gobots were interesting, but the extent of transformation on the smaller one was always so simple, just flip legs out and twist the arms down. 

The cartoon was also nowhere near as interesting to me. It sort of felt like it was transformers made for younger children.

The Netflix “Toys that made us” episode on transformers does an interesting dive into this subject.

 

[Chronocidal]

In terms of transforming toys, I think I had one of each growing up, both a Ramjet, and a Spay-C.  Well, plus a Matchbox re-boxing of a Bandai Miria Joke Machine.   The transformations and vehicle modes of both the VF-1 and shuttle blew Ramjet clean out of the water, and neither of them used part-swapping.

My interest in aircraft at that age generally turned me away from most of the Transformers I saw, just because I always considered the robot as a secondary feature.

[mikeszekely]

5 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I had mostly Go-Bots as a kid because that's what we could afford, though I eventually got some Transformers too. Actually, let me clarify: I had a few Transformers, a few Go-Bots, and then a bunch of knockoffs of both, but mainly knockoffs of Go-Bots (like an unbranded Jeeper Creeper, an unbranded Block Head, etc.).

I loved those figures. The size was perfect for taking a few with you in the car as a kid, the vehicle modes had a lot more realism and detail than the handful of Transformers that I had (except for Trailbreaker... I'll always love that one), and some, like Jeeper Creeper, actually had a lot of detail to the robot modes, too.

I'm in the same boat. Most of my Transformers as a kid were either mini bots or came after the '86 movie, because my parents just couldn't afford Transformers.

And yeah, Transformers were often bigger and had more involved transformations... But I'm not sure there was much more payoff in the way of articulation, and the Gobots toys looked a lot closer to the cartoon. Honestly, I think Transformers beat Gobots because Hasbro put more time and money into developing the brand than Tonka did.

[RavenHawk]

1 hour ago, mikeszekely said:

And yeah, Transformers were often bigger and had more involved transformations... But I'm not sure there was much more payoff in the way of articulation, and the Gobots toys looked a lot closer to the cartoon. Honestly, I think Transformers beat Gobots because Hasbro put more time and money into developing the brand than Tonka did.

I agree. I think it mostly really came down to the cartoon, as a marketing/branding tool. Transformers was a cartoon that I loved as a kid and loved watching again on DVD with my own kids years later.

Even when Transformers episodes were objectively childish and silly, they still felt like the creators were trying to tell a real story, and I think kids pick up on that. There was also at least some continuity between episodes.

Go-Bots, on the other hand, had Scooby-Doo level animation (without the fun of Scooby-Doo), and told much more simplistic stories with characters that were very one-sided (even compared to Transformers). I watched the cartoon because it was transforming robots, and not out of any love for the storylines... and never rewatched with my kids.

[JetJockey]

9 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I had mostly Go-Bots as a kid because that's what we could afford, though I eventually got some Transformers too. Actually, let me clarify: I had a few Transformers, a few Go-Bots, and then a bunch of knockoffs of both, but mainly knockoffs of Go-Bots (like an unbranded Jeeper Creeper, an unbranded Block Head, etc.).

I loved those figures. The size was perfect for taking a few with you in the car as a kid, the vehicle modes had a lot more realism and detail than the handful of Transformers that I had (except for Trailbreaker... I'll always love that one), and some, like Jeeper Creeper, actually had a lot of detail to the robot modes, too.

 

8 hours ago, SMS007 said:

I feel like this is a common criticism by fans when citing reasons that led to Transformers defeating GoBots in the Western market.

 

I think for both of these shows and many others I happened to see the toys first before watching the TV show. Weekday cartoons were either on early morning or late in the afternoon. I was getting ready for school and usually getting up late so that meant no early morning cartoons. And school ended at around 3PM I think. And home was a ways away so I couldn't get back in time for cartoons between the 3PM to 4 or so hours.

 

I thought the Psycho car was cool because it was a futuristic design. It even says "Future Machine" on the car. But I remember that motorcycle and a few others as not that exciting. My first Transformer was Sunstreaker and I remember not liking that his hands were separate. But still the feel and packaging was better. I think all the other Transformers I purchased afterwards were all better. I don't remember the pricing but I don't think it was crazy high for Transformers. I would guess higher than G.I. Joe figure pricing but lower than G.I. Joe vehicle pricing. Perhaps Optimus and a few rare bigger Transformers were more than a G.I. Joe vehicle.

[Salamander]

On 11/25/2018 at 12:24 AM, JB0 said:

I don't think anyone actually owns the looks, aside from the cartoon versions. Generally speaking you can't patent a look, you can't copyright physical objects, and I'm pretty sure Bandai didn't trademark the designs and then maintain those trademarks to the present day(as opposed to Gundam, where Bandai has every trademark they can think of).

The same reason Hasbro can't stop all the "third-party" Transformer toys is the reason Bandai can't stop this.

 

In short, this had to go through Hasbro's legal department, and they know what they're doing.

Some of the copyrights and trademarks have not yet lapsed, because they were renewed in the 1990s in Europe, and for Machine Robo they've been used time and again in Asia since 2001. So this comic is pretty much America-only...

On 11/25/2018 at 4:52 PM, JB0 said:

And Bandai doesn't own any part of the Hanna-Barbera cartoon, as I understand things. If they did, WB would be crediting them on the current DVDs as a legal necessity, and they don't seem to be.

Now that depends on the jurisdiction, because the situation is different in Europe. In Europe, Bandai marketed most of Robo Machine and later Challenge of the Gobots including Rocklords and various Tonka-designed toys, and in some countries the cartoon was dubbed with some modifications. France also got Machine Robo Revenge of Cronos, renamed "Revenge of the Gobots", with Gobot names somewhat randomly distributed among the characters. The video tape I own of that show credits  Hanna-Barbera/Tonka and Bandai...

On 11/27/2018 at 5:05 AM, JetJockey said:

I thought the Psycho car was cool because it was a futuristic design. It even says "Future Machine" on the car. But I remember that motorcycle and a few others as not that exciting.

Infodump: It says "Future Machine" because that was its Robo Machine name (which is also the only European release of Psycho that ever was). Future Machine is a modified release (neutered launcher but still includes missiles in early versions) of the Japanese Psychoroid version, which was not exactly a Machine Robo toy but tied into the Cobra anime. Robo Machine is Bandai's attempt at marketing Machine Robo (the original Popy version, not Revenge of Cronos) in Europe, starting 1983. The early DX Robo Machine boxes are literally almost exactly the same as the early DX Machine Robo boxes, just with translated text.

That said, some of the later Gobots designs, both Super Gobots and regular ones, are pretty complex, blowing away most pre-Beast Wars Transformers...

 

Edited December 1, 2018 by Salamander
More info