>>11796867
>Why the fuck doesn't Playmates give their toys modern articulation?
Because they'll successfully sell it to nostalgia-junkies who want new versions of the figures in the same way they were 25 years ago.

Does it matter? Now that they don't have the TMNT license anymore they're going to finally fold in a year or two.

>>11796867
We'll buy it anyway. They're one of the cheapest toylines in the market too, next to Jakks' lines

>>11796867
>Picrel's arms are forever locked in awkward positions just like the vintage toys
Huh? It clearly has double-jointed elbows.

>>11796867
Normally I'd think it's reasonable because Playmates is trying their hardest to strike a balance between being affordable($10-12), being a decent 5'' size, and having decent, not great paint. $18 for this is indeed egregious though, and I can only imagine itd because of the licensing.
Still I think most Playmates stuff is decent for the price, if not collector's level, but that's not their goal.

>>11796867
I was really hoping the anon(s) claim this was AI slop were true, because the thought that Playmates is so incompetent as to roll out something that looks like 2005 engineering in the year 2026 is just depressing.

>>11796900
no, no we won't.

>>11796903
yes but it can't go left and right you complete fucking brownoid
>>11796890
Here's hoping they belly up soon.

>>11796867
It's for kids

>>11796911
kids will. kids still play with toys in addition to phones

>>11796909
Even the godzilla figures were 15 a pop. Is the hasbro tax really bumping these upto 18?

They're for children, and the less articulated they are the cheaper they go for.

>>11796867
I actually enjoyed playmates figures having that older articulation pattern still. I hate modern articulation cuts most of the time and i feel like in some lines like TVC the characters are almost overly articulated to the point it hinders the figure from both playability and inhibits them aesthetically as TVC figures look horrible sometimes because of the way the articulation is designed for those figures

I am still glad playmates toys is losing the TMNT license because of all the figures ive wanted over the years that playmates needlessly cancelled for now good reason, fuck em to bankruptcy.

>>11797188
>TVC
wut

>>11797298
nta, but the Star Wars Vintage Collection

>>11797186
Ah yes those kids that grew up on a defunct 40 years IP that is only being held up by fat old men.

>>11796924
>>11796942
>>11797186
Do kids even care about Ninja Turtles these days? Feels like the brand in general peaked around 1991, then faded out in 93-94 when Power Rangers hit the scene, then had a shot in the arm in 2003, then faded out again, then another shot in the arm in 2012, then everything they tired after that didn't seem to hold kids attention for long before getting abandoned.
I'll be impressed if anyone can reply without resorting to childish insults.

>>11798308
Alot of the 20 somethings ive talked too at various places still love 2012 turtles and unfortunately rise of the tmnt is very popular with that age group too. I mostly see women as fans of rise however so its probably a fujoshi thing with them.
T. Elder zoomer born in 96

>>11798491
Rise is still the best TMNT ever, at least for having the best animation

>>11798578
Having good animation while the characters, designs, and story suck doesnt make a show good, its still shit at the end of the day. Just look at crap like arcane, god tier animation but the plot and its characters were fucking ass. Also ive seen people say thundercats roar has good animation but when the character designs and art style of the show fucking suck the animation is worthless, such is also the case with rise of the tmnt.