Timeline Hub

GradoNite said:
No way they are using universal streams numbers again
Click to expand...
Well, this comic and the toy was created in conjunction eith Yolopark, which has the Transformers license, and Botcon, which once had the Transformers license and BotCon fiction was where the universal stream numbers came from.

Pro Bot said:
Well, I can include the movie universe page as a branch to my Bayverse timeline. Dropkick is killed in both Bumblebee and this comic so it really makes no difference, you have to accept that in the comics, Cliffjumper or Dropkick were killed off and then somehow returned. Seeing as how the G1 and Prime continuities featured are branches, stands to reason that this is a branch of the Bayverse from the events of Bumblebee in 1987.
Click to expand...
According to the writer, he choose to set it in the Bayverse comic universe instead of the actual Bumblebee universe because he didn't want to mess with the universe of an ongoing fiction.

I personally see this as canon to the Bayverse comic universe, which I see as separate from the Bumblebee movie universe. Alsox the 1987 thing comes from the creator (you can see the year and what I talked about above in the TFWiki link I sent).

Pro Bot said:
View attachment 3650
Lol, they mixed up the reality designations. The Malgus reality depicts the scene from Bumblebee, which means it should be Tyran.


For comparison.
Click to expand...

The word ballons are all messed up. I suppose the comic may have been completely produced by Yolopark, which is an action figure company at the core from what I know and not a comic publisher. I guess they just didn't have enough experience editing a comic.
 
Megatron said:
so this story is Marvel USA Cliff that wants to save all the Cliffs in the multiverse?
Click to expand...
Apparently, the backstory is that the character is not an actual Cliffjumper but a Decepticon named Ladybug. She is from a universe where Cliffjumpers are mass-produced bots, and people referred to her as a Cliffjumper as well instead of Ladybug due to her resemblance to them. Eventually, she embraced that identity and wanted to become the number one Cliffjumper in existence.
 
BB10 said:
Well, this comic and the toy was created in conjunction eith Yolopark, which has the Transformers license, and Botcon, which once had the Transformers license and BotCon fiction was where the universal stream numbers came from.


According to the writer, he choose to set it in the Bayverse comic universe instead of the actual Bumblebee universe because he didn't want to mess with the universe of an ongoing fiction.

I personally see this as canon to the Bayverse comic universe, which I see as separate from the Bumblebee movie universe. Alsox the 1987 thing comes from the creator (you can see the year and what I talked about above in the TFWiki link I sent).


The word ballons are all messed up. I suppose the comic may have been completely produced by Yolopark, which is an action figure company at the core from what I know and not a comic publisher. I guess they just didn't have enough experience editing a comic.
Click to expand...
also this comic must be set pre-shroud.
 
"Tyran 207.28 Gamma is the IDW Movieverse comics, also first mentioned in The Complete AllSpark Almanac. Pete was very careful about not touching the Bumblebee movie proper, so in this case it is a different reality than the one that actually featured the death in question of this Cliffjumper that Lady Cliffjumper is preventing."

That's all that's mentioned here. I mean, they used the designations for the other realities and those have to be seen as branches, so I don't really think it interrupts Bumblebee. It's very clearly using Bumblebee in the same context that the other timelines are in that it's what happened prior to the timeline alterations.
 
Pro Bot said:
"Tyran 207.28 Gamma is the IDW Movieverse comics, also first mentioned in The Complete AllSpark Almanac. Pete was very careful about not touching the Bumblebee movie proper, so in this case it is a different reality than the one that actually featured the death in question of this Cliffjumper that Lady Cliffjumper is preventing."

That's all that's mentioned here. I mean, they used the designations for the other realities and those have to be seen as branches, so I don't really think it interrupts Bumblebee. It's very clearly using Bumblebee in the same context that the other timelines are in that it's what happened prior to the timeline alterations.
Click to expand...
If you see the comics and the movies as one timeline, then I can understand seeing it as a branch.

IMO, BB movies and the Bayverse comics are a different continuity.

Also, remember that the BB movie CJ died in 1987, but the Bayverse comics had him alive in 2007. So, from that point of view, this new CJ comic would fit better with the OG Bayverse comics.
 
BB10 said:
If you see the comics and the movies as one timeline, then I can understand seeing it as a branch.

IMO, BB movies are a different continuity.

Also, remember that the BB movie CJ died in 1987, but the Bayverse comics had him alive in 2007. So, from that point of view, this new CJ comic would fit better with the OG Bayverse comics.
Click to expand...
Dropkick is killed in this comic and he's alive in the Bayverse comics too, so it doesn't work either way. You have to accept that offscreen events happened to allow characters to be alive later on regardless of if this is a branch or the main timeline.

I figure that taking the comic at face value in that it shows the exact events from Bumblebee makes the most sense.
 
BB10 said:
If you see the comics and the movies as one timeline, then I can understand seeing it as a branch.

IMO, BB movies and the Bayverse comics are a different continuity.

Also, remember that the BB movie CJ died in 1987, but the Bayverse comics had him alive in 2007. So, from that point of view, this new CJ comic would fit better with the OG Bayverse comics.
Click to expand...
are we forgetting that Barricade just respawned?
 
Pro Bot said:
Cybertronians are getting revived all the time. I know it's not a very great explanation, "oh they just got better", but it's a pretty regular occurrence in Transformers.
Click to expand...
Ik the Hasbroverse even had the CR Chambers, what I said was to support you actually, rather than disclosing what you said.
 
Megatron said:
are we forgetting that Barricade just respawned?
Click to expand...
Yeah but we didn't see Barricade really die in DOTM, (if you are talking about the 2007 comic adaptation, that is not canon), while Cliffjumper was cut in half, which seems like a more final death. Sometimes, in the movies, Transformers can survive as a head but even CJ's brain is in two pieces now.

Pro Bot said:
Dropkick is killed in this comic and he's alive in the Bayverse comics too, so it doesn't work either way. You have to accept that offscreen events happened to allow characters to be alive later on regardless of if this is a branch or the main timeline.

I figure that taking the comic at face value in that it shows the exact events from Bumblebee makes the most sense.
Click to expand...
It may not be the same exact Dropkick and instead could be a name reuse (as the 2007 version is not an established character and connections between the two are largely tenious) but Cliffjumper should to be the same guy (as he is a classic established character, and they even went out of their way to make him resemble Bumblebee in both 2007 and the BB movie.

In the end, if one tries hard enough, they could explain any inconsistencies but looking at it at face value, the BB movies and the older comics have yet to establish any continuity between each other. The closest is the Bumblebee movie prequel comic, but that was a prequel to an earlier version of the film.
 
I will mention that the Bumblebee prequel comic does establish a continuity between The Last Knight and the comics, though.

Bumblebee also establishes a continuity with the Bay films, which are connected to the comics. It's not a crazy leap really.
 
BB10 said:
In the end, if one tries hard enough, they could explain any inconsistencies but looking at it at face value, the BB movies and the older comics have yet to establish any continuity between each other. The closest is the Bumblebee movie prequel comic, but that was a prequel to an earlier version of the film.
Click to expand...
I get what you mean, but if we're looking at this comic at face value, the events of Bumblebee take place in the IDW Bayverse and the events of this comic branch off. That's what happens with the other realities featured.

They show the exact same scene with the exact same designs and it's in the exact same year. It's an explicit Bumblebee connection.
 
Pro Bot said:
I get what you mean, but if we're looking at this comic at face value, the events of Bumblebee take place in the IDW Bayverse and the events of this comic branch off. That's what happens with the other realities featured.

They show the exact same scene with the exact same designs and it's in the exact same year. It's an explicit Bumblebee connection.
Click to expand...
Like that TFWiki article said, the writer explicitly used the Gamma (comic) designation, and not Delta (live action) to not mess with the movie canon. The creator statements give further context to things which were already implied in the comic (Gamma-Delta distinction).

But no such context exists in between the Bay comics and the BB movies, not in the movies or in creator statements. I would say that is the difference.
 
I mean even the ROTB director said that he only took the first three Bay movies as semi-canon, and the BB movie director implied he doesn't really care about the previous film continuity and the story he tells is more important. If even the OG movies are of dubious canonicity to the BB movies, it is safe to assume the Bay comics are not even in consideration.
 
BB10 said:
Like that TFWiki article said, the writer explicitly used the Gamma (comic) designation, and not Delta (live action) to not mess with the movie canon. The creator statements give further context to things which were already implied in the comic (Gamma-Delta distinction).

But no such context exists in between the Bay comics and the BB movies, not in the movies or in creator statements. I would say that is the difference.
Click to expand...
tbh the reality designations are a bit weird as they separated the Cybertron games from the Prime cartoon and WfC is even in the primax cluster. So uhhhhh they aren't reliable.
 
Megatron said:
tbh the reality designations are a bit weird as they separated the Cybertron games from the Prime cartoon and WfC is even in the primax cluster. So uhhhhh they aren't reliable.
Click to expand...
I agree they aren't too reliable (the writers say that the streams don't equate to universes, so it's really confusing). However, in this case, the Cliffjumper comic writer said he used the Gamma designation for a reason. According to the TFWiki link, the writer said he made sure to only use "dead continuities", as in the ones not in use, and refrained from using the active ones, such as the BB movieverse.

Also, about that Primax WFC game thing, apparently the WFC game was duplicated in the Primax cluster. So, the WFC game is meant to be both Primax and Uniend.
 
BB10 said:
Like that TFWiki article said, the writer explicitly used the Gamma (comic) designation, and not Delta (live action) to not mess with the movie canon. The creator statements give further context to things which were already implied in the comic (Gamma-Delta distinction).
Click to expand...
That's not what it says exactly, though.

These are out-of-context anecdotes written by the poster on the wiki, not quotes from the writer.
Tyran 207.28 Gamma is the IDW Movieverse comics, also first mentioned in The Complete AllSpark Almanac. Pete was very careful about not touching the Bumblebee movie proper, so in this case it is a different reality than the one that actually featured the death in question of this Cliffjumper that Lady Cliffjumper is preventing.
Click to expand...
Nothing written in this comic affects anything Hasbro is currently working on. These old continuities mean a lot to us fans, but to Hasbro they are considered dead continuities at this point, meaning this comic was able to freely play around with them like this. Back during the Fun Pub years, they couldn't touch the main continuities of the time (save for Animated which they only did in direct collaboration with Marty Isenberg and Derrick J. Wyatt, and only after that cartoon was fully over). But now, "What's it matter at this point?" Current Hasbro doesn't care, so it's whatever.
Click to expand...
Nowhere does it explicitly say that they used the designation of the IDW comics to distance from Bumblebee. That's inferred from a second-hand account. That interpretation is something you might think based on what someone said about what someone else said.

What we see in the comic, more importantly, is:
1. All realities are the same designation as the continuities that they branch from.

2. The Bayverse should, as a result, be a branched timeline from the original continuity.

3. It branches, very specifically, from the events of the Bumblebee movie. This isn't really arguable, it's what the comic literally shows us. The writer even pretty much confirms as much by saying it's in 1987.

4. The designations are based on medium rather than universe, so really, the "Gamma" part doesn't make it a separate universe to Bumblebee.

I personally just find the reading that it is the same universe as Bumblebee and they're branching off from it more consistent with the story. Even if not, it still implies that the exact same events from Bumblebee were happening no matter what reading you ascribe to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top