|
|
Post by 10incher on Aug 17, 2012 8:58:37 GMT -6
Been thinking about this for awhile, but was wondering if maybe we should create a Neo-Classic section?
I've never really thought of vintage as defined speficically by year, and still consider lines as Toxic Crusaders and Bucky Ohare as vintage. It is more of a combination of year and style I would think.
Neo Classic would probably include POTF2, Spawn, Toybiz Marvel, BATS, Trek Playmates and a bunch others up to somewhere in the early 2000's. Still have a bit of looking into lines to define this section (especially where it would end). These lines aredefinatly not Modern (where some threads are placed now), and don't quite fit into vintage (where most threafs are). LMK what you guys think?
|
|
|
|
Post by rocklord74 on Aug 17, 2012 9:28:04 GMT -6
I say keep it vintage, I hate even seeing that new crap. The figure guide isn't even finished yet picture-wise. I have pics to help get it closer but that issue was never brought up to my knowledge for help to complete it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rawlin on Aug 17, 2012 9:46:22 GMT -6
Do you mean like another section on the forum for 90s lines?
|
|
|
|
Post by 10incher on Aug 17, 2012 21:31:03 GMT -6
Sorry, I should clarify, I meant a seperate section in the forums. Would have many 90s lines and some early 2000's lines. I always kinda knew what would fit into this category for the early stuff, but not quite sure where the cutoff would between this category and modern?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjayberry on Aug 18, 2012 1:12:20 GMT -6
I think determining a cut-off would be next to impossible. In my mind "vintage" always kind of means toys from my childhood which I consider ending right around fifth grade. So 1993 or 94 for me but if I was 29 instead of 30 that would include so much more.
One solution is a decade by decade forum but my concern there is it would start to clutter the boards.
|
|
|
|
Post by rawlin on Aug 18, 2012 6:13:50 GMT -6
I can't see a reason not to have another category  |
|
|
|
Post by figurecollector on Aug 18, 2012 7:22:10 GMT -6
The problems with going by decades is that the manufacturers did not comply in making toys along that criteria. You are going to have items manufactured, for example, 1988 - 1992 which would be difficult to split. You would not want to talk about 1988 and 1989 versions in one area and 1990 - 1992 versions in another. Then you would have items like Joes that span several decades.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjayberry on Aug 18, 2012 13:00:38 GMT -6
I'd always just go with the starting date of the toyline, which only presents a problem with say TMNT when it started in the late 80's but went well onwards well into the mid 90s. Lines like this woul present the only real obstacle because in my mind anything with that Playmates feel is a 90's toy.
I tend to see things a bit of an odd way though. For example I love 70's horror movies a decade that ended for me some time in the early 80's not at the stroke of midnight Dec. 31 1979 if that makes sense.
|
|
