>Diamond Select>McFarlane Toys>BST AXN>JazwaresOne, why have so many companies made Avatar lines that died so quickly the last few years?Two, which ones scale best with Marvel Legends?
The Avatar lines are so short lived because Avatar came out 20 years ago and ended in 2008. Its audience stopped giving a shit about avatar way long ago, so it can't sustain a toyline.And Mattel and Jazwares made a 1:12 line.They're kinda shit in terms of likeness though.McFarlane's has the best sculpts (painted/cover art style), but they're non-scale. One is ~1:10 scale and another ~1:16 scale.BST/Loyal Subjects has the second best sculpts (animated style), but only for some of them. They're roughly 1:15 scale.
>>11887453Jazwares is probably your best option, they have decent articulation and are OK scale-wise. I'd avoid McFarlane, pointlessly oversized (Todd does not understand scale) and covered in lumpy paint.
>>11887553>The Avatar lines are so short lived because Avatar came out 20 years ago and ended in 2008. Its audience stopped giving a shit about avatar way long ago, so it can't sustain a toyline.I don't know about that. The cartoon remains one of the most streamed animated shows on Netflix. The series has lived on through comics, novels, the movie which got kind of fucked by the leak, the recent fighting game, etc. Even the live action got a shitload of attention when it first debuted though viewership fell off hard by season 2 because it wasn't well received.The problem imo is that every single one of these lines had problems that were off-putting even to big fans of the franchise like me.>DST's were brittle, odd-looking and used versions of the characters that didn't match>McFarlane's 7" line was too damn big even with his own figures and only released three characters, the 5" line had extremely limited articulation>BST AXN were in a weird scale, looked cheap, and had lots of QC issues>The likeness on the Jazwares figures isn't great and they look a bit cheap as well, but might end up the best we've gotten so farI was so tired of disappointing ATLA lines, I ended up going with the Gallery Select statues and even then I got screwed because DST went bankrupt before they could release Sokka.
>>11887588>>11887641And it looks like Jazwares only did a few of the characters. That kinda sucks.
>>11887641This right here, the show itself is still massively popular to the point where you still see tons of people cosplaying characters at cons. It's a timeless and well crafted story that those who grew up with it can share with their own kids and is always highly recommended for people looking for good action stories. The reasons why all those toylines failed is because each one was absolute junk. Now, that's judging them by modern standards, as if they came out fifteen years ago or so, they'd be acceptable for kids toys. But for adult collectors who want good representations of their favorite characters in toy form, those figures are hot trash. We need Max Factory, or Figuarts or Yamaguchi to take a crack at this series. The west was never good at making decent figures of well animated action characters.
>>11887808They've actually got quite a few coming up, at least for the 6" line. Book 3 Sokka, Katara, Toph, Azula, and for the first time of any line except the Pops, Suki. Toph is next up I think since she was in package at Toyfair.
>>11887976Katara looks like she's from robot chicken
>>11887641>I don't know about that. The cartoon remains one of the most streamed animated shows on Netflix. I know you don't know about that, because how many people watch it on netflix? Oh right, undisclosed numbers, due to streaming services being embarassed of actual number of viewers.They can claim it's totally popular, but popular in relative to what? They could have 60,000 viewers and be right that it's popular, because the next most popular show has 50,000 viewers. When Avatar was first airing, it used to get millions of viewers, boasting upwards of 10 million.Normal books only need to tell 10k to appear on the best sellers lists. The comics sell 20k-30k. That's not a lot compared to how many viewers the show used to have.Netflix can advertise and market their live action shit all they want, but who actually watches it? They can generate a ton of hype by having weekly articles on mainstream media and social media buzzing about their casting, but when the show actually comes out, nobody is talking about that shit like when millions of people actually used to watch it. And streaming shows generally get season 2 approved based on assumed popularity or maybe just likes and views on trailers (who actually knows in the age of streaming, because they're too afraid of disclosing their metrics).Anyway, tons of people remember Avatar. Tons of people used to be fans. Not a lot of people bother to watch the new shit or buy new shit.And this is why the toylines bomb, becasue it's not popular anymore. A kids toyline needs to sell hundreds of thousands of toys every month or so to make the license worth it. It doesn't even have enough interest to sell mid-tens of thousands to make the collector lines worth it either.There are worse toys out there that generate more sales, just because they're popular. So you can't say it's because how they look.
Just like the Netflix series, it seems like hype for the series spikes early then dies quick every time they bring it back into the limelight.
>this show is totally popular guys its talked about a lot online!that doesnt mean anything
>Subjectanon has found the threadSorry boys, pack it up. The retard who's proud of eating mystery meat is here again.
>>11888048Is that someone who talks about subjects?
>>11887976Are these still coming?
>>11888145I doubt it. Many stores got rid of the ATLA pegs recently and none of those or Toph also shown off have been released since Zuko in November.
>>11888145no, americans hate toys its why toys r us died there dont you know
>>11888026Anon, you typed all these words without doing a 5 second search...>Netflix's live-action adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender opened its first season with a massive 21.2 million views in its first four daysSo, literally twice the viewership of the cartoon initially before the LA turned out to be underwhelming and even then in S2 three years later when expectations were lowered it had 8.7 million views in the first four days. The cartoon is still getting unique viewers in the low millions on Netflix. Despite being leaked months ago the movie was #1 on Paramount + for weeks beating out the Sheridan shows, Star Trek, South Park, etc. Books and comics have been on life support for years so not sure why you'd expect them to have even a fraction of the viewership of the shows.To try to pretend it's not still popular is absurd. How much of that popularity's with children rather than nostalgic gen z-millennials who may not be interested in toys is another matter. All that aside, if most of the toys are so bad that even the people who love the franchise won't buy them, why would anyone?
>>11888208>Netflix's live-action adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender opened its first season with a massive 21.2 million views in its first four days>21.2 million viewsLeft out an important part>IN THE WORLDand the second part is also pretty dishonest > first four daysBack when Avatar was first showing, Nielsen was only tracking viewers in the United States and most only reporting on the first showing. In addition, they were tracking VIEWERS, not "views."If you tallied up reshowings of the episodes, there's tens of millions in just the United States for its first week (which Nickelodead did report on back then but no one really cared since only first showing ratings was all that mattered back then) but again, that's "viewers" not "views." So who knows how many of those 21.2 million views were actually re-views by the same viewer. And again, that's 21.2 million views WORLDWIDE, which is actually pretty insignificant. NEvermind Netflix counts views if someone leaves the cursor or selector long enough to start showing automatically. So someone can "view" Avatar 5 times in a single day if Netflix kept Avatar on the main section of the app>To try to pretend it's not still popular is absurdI think it's relative. For Netflix, it might be the greatest moment of their life, but for Nickelodean in 2008, those are cancellation numbers. So to me, if it's not as popular as it was when it was running on basic cable, it's not popular. Again, if something is popular, toylines can sustain themselves on the popularity of the series, not the quality of the product. Why do you think Mattel was able to profit off their crummy DC toys for so long?I mean, think about it for two seconds. If Netflix's POS were actually popular, why isn't everyone announcing live action toylines? Things that are popular gets products because companies know that there's enough of an audience to get money out of them. No one is merching Netflix's shit for a good reason.
I mainly got the simple McFarlane ones, since they scale well with He-Mans. BST AXN are frustrating, since they have the number of joints, but most of them are subpar if not useless.
>>11888226You've got something of a point as far as Netflix's viewership numbers for the live action, but you're also downplaying it. For one, Netflix hasn't done the 2 minutes = a view for years now and I sincerely doubt enough people are rewatching it to have a significant impact. For another, it hit the top 10 in 92 countries staying there for 6 weeks and got the #1 spot in 76 of them.It was initially more viewed than the One Piece live action that does have multiple companies making toys for it because it was much better received, ended up blowing up later from good word of mouth, and mostly maintained its viewership for the 2nd season compared to Avatar's which couldn't even retain 50%. The point being the fans were ready to support it, but the difference between creator involvement and the creators leaving because of creative differences was evident.Since you mentioned Mattel's DC line, I'm obviously not claiming it's on that level of popularity. ATLA's a multi-million dollar franchise. DC, Marvel, Star Wars, etc. are multi-billion dollar ones. Still, it could be said DST and the McFarlane 5" both finished their lines by making the only 8 characters that are safe bets and simply didn't want to take risks on Suki, Ty Lee, Mai, Jet, and so on. But the fact is we've never actually had an Avatar line even as good as DCUC and that's a low bar.
>>11888247I feel like these had the most potential. They looked good, especially for $10. If they had more articulation, been better scaled with each other, and had softer skirts/robes to let you hit bending poses I'd have been okay paying $15-20.
>>11888048>>11888058After all these years i still don't know who the fuck subjectanon is
>>11888434>you're also downplaying it.IT's hard not to be REALISTIC (not downplaying at all) it when all streaming services need to be dishonest about their numbers and the way they track things. If they were getting basic cable-tier ratings, they'd wouldn't be trying so hard to obfuscate their numbers.>I sincerely doubt enough people are rewatching it to have a significant impact.ooof. you have no idea how often people rewatch shit. it's probably the oinly reason why netflix creates shows despite horrible viewer count and high cost of productions. Because people re-re-re-rewatch shit so often, it keeps them renewing their subscriptions and netflix wants to retain what they rewatch.>It was initially more viewed> initiallyKeyword here and did you notice that avatar was approved for new seasons almost right away, based on those initial numbers? They don't wait to see how many people keep watching the subsequent episodes (again, probably because they care about people rewatching shit and not just one and done views). And by hyping up the INITIAL numbers, they hope to get the sheep who are fooled by marketing to also watch Avatar. Gotta keep up that fake positiviity, because it works>The point being the fans were ready to support it,The point being is that it's NOT as popular as the basic cable show was, not about potential and former fans count for shit. Hence the toylines bombing.>I'm obviously not claiming it's on that level of popularity.I made the point in bringing up DC, not that it's on that level of popularity, but the fact that anything popular will sell to the fanbase, shitty or not.>Avatar line even as good as DCUCoooooof.... there literally was. see pic here >>11887553 ... but i guess you're talking about "omg so much selection" which is a very bad way of saying "good." Long lasting ≠ goodI should note Mattel gave up on Avatar in its first season, before it actually got popular>>11888525are you reeling in the years?
>>11888247kek, professor's assistant KataraI guess she can help bloodbend out any clots if Mosquitor gets gummed up
>>11888247Is that the BST AXN Katara? Got any Marvel Legends or Star Wars Black Label you can pose her with, please?
>>11887859The problem with imports for Avatar is the series is extremely unpopular in Asia. That's why all we've ever gotten from them is a few nendoroids. On the domestic side, I think someone like Jada or even Hasbro if they brought their A game could do it justice. Should at least be better than anything we've gotten so far.>>11888145It's possible. The 4.5" line just released Sokka and Katara a few months ago.
>>11888636Man, you've really got a hard-on against streaming. Frankly, comparing current streaming viewers to pre-streaming cable viewers is flawed in the first place since the entire landscape of television has changed. Regardless, you can usually find some form of viewership numbers for the big hits. Stuff like Reacher, Wednesday, Stranger Things, Sheridan shows, Mando, etc. do much better than the majority of cable shows.People rewatch good stuff eventually, yeah. But hardly anyone is going to be rewatching a show poorly received by the fans within four days and I'm not sure why you're insisting the few lunatics that did would have any notable effect on the numbers. The live action was always planned around three seasons for the three books, so of course a streaming service with 300 million subscribers would renew it when it was still in their top 10 over a month later. Anyway, that's the last I'll say about the LA because I don't care enough about it to defend it like this.>I made the point in bringing up DC, not that it's on that level of popularity, but the fact that anything popular will sell to the fanbase, shitty or not.The problem is you're comparing something popular to one of the most popular and financially successful media franchises on earth. Besides, you're acting like DC hasn't had their share of toy lines that failed, especially toward DCC/DCD's end. And most of those looked FAR better than anything we've gotten from Avatar.>oooooof.... there literally was. see pic here >>11887553Dude, I had those toys as a kid. Even back then they weren't great. The likenesses were mostly off except for some like Bumi, the rubber outfits deteriorated, and yes, them not making any female characters or Iroh was a HUGE problem. Best thing they had going for them were the effects and weapons. I don't even like Mattel's DC figures, but to try to put them on the same tier is wild.
>>11889054>and yes, them not making any female characters or Iroh was a HUGE problemIt was so fucking baffling to me that Mattel made three versions of Aang, three versions of Zuko, two versions of fucking AVATAR ROKU, and King Bumi, but couldn't be arsed to make a figure of Azula, arguably the main villain of the show.
>>11889054>Frankly, comparing current streaming viewers to pre-streaming cable viewers is flawed in the first place since the entire landscape of television has changedIT doesn't matter, because we're talking about popularity and how merch sells regardless of the quality.Avatar is nowhere close to being as popular as it was 20 years ago. Whether the media itself is shit or the delivery of the media, it doesn't matter.>etc. do much better than the majority of cable shows.I won't disagree, but we don't exactly know how popular they actually are, due to streaming services being afraid of showing the actual numbers. And this is besides the point, because it has nothing to do with Avatar not being popular anymore.>The problem is... IT's an example. I can use Teen Titans, Ben 10, Fortnite, and other shitty toylines too, that sold much better, not because of their quality, but because they're based on popular series.>but to try to put them on the same tier is wild.You're right, because at least the Avatar toys used unique molds for their characters, instead of Mattel's lazyass approach of re-re-re-re-re-re-reusing Superman body and giving it to everyone else. So Avatar is on a higher tier of effort than Mattel's DC lines
>>11889112To be fair, Azula only appeared at the end of S1 when Mattel was releasing the toys. But they definitely wouldn't have made her or Toph since they never gave us Katara. Their Naruto line pissed me off for the same reason with the total lack of Sakura or other kunoichi and they covered the whole of pre-shippuden.>>11889244This conversation started because you said its audience stopped giving a shit and I disagreed. But I even mentioned in my second post it's probably more nostalgic adults rather than toy buying children. Of course a cartoon-based children's toyline will struggle when there's no ongoing cartoon. Meanwhile, most adult collectors aren't going to buy toys as flawed as what we've gotten so far.>I can use Teen Titans, Ben 10, Fortnite,All very successful IPs with cancelled toy lines of their own, disproving that popularity alone is enough. Ben 10 in particular was literally designed to sell toys to the point that the shows' budget was dependent on their success so they went much harder marketing them. When Omniverse's toy sales began to plummet, they cancelled it.>instead of Mattel's lazyass approach of re-re-re-re-re-re-reusing Superman body and giving it to everyone elseAnd in the few figures we got the Avatar line released 2-5 variants of half the characters. It only would've gotten worse if they did books 2-3. I don't hold either line in high regard, though, so it's whatever.At this point, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Pre-2020, I might have agreed since it still had the taint of the movie and Korra never had the same impact, but after its resurgence on Netflix during the pandemic it's definitely considered popular again.
>>11889693>This conversation started because you said its audience stopped giving a shit and I disagreed.Again, they stopped giving a shit 20 years ago. It hasn't been popular since, hence the toylines bombing.>All very successful IPs with cancelled toy lines of their ownthey all lasted years longer than Avatar, because they were popular.Obviously, hype dies down after time. Look at Fortnite, which had huge sales for the first year and then slowly petered out.Most series aren't evergreen properties like Spiderman or Batman. Even shit like HeMan and Tranformers eventually died out. And unlike Avatar, Transformers was revived to be even bigger than it was before. >At this pointAll your points have been ignorant views and retarded concessions, spending most your time defending an unpopular live action series, that actually proved my point that it's unpopular.pic of a horrid shitty line that kept going just because DC is popular and fanboys who are willing to eat shit just because Mattel formed the shit to resemble their favorite characters
>>11889717I don't have a dog in this fight, but the other guy is acting pretty cordial while you're being a dickwad so fuck you, buddy.
>>11887976>Toph is next up I think since she was in package at Toyfair.Which Toyfair?
>>11887986It's because of that mouth showing her teeth.
