Originally posted by Brendocon
Technically, they are the same Transformer. They're just characterised differently.
Only if people can agree on what constitutes the basis which is then characterised differently... ie, what a 'Transformer' is.
In the case of 'G1', the so-called TF Bible notes (or the tech-specs) could be taken as a basis. However, it's hard to argue that PM Optimus (comics) retains anything apart from the name—he's a clone, and an erratic one at that. In that vein, each 'incarnation' of other characters in other continuities becomes a distinct 'Transformer' if they deviate sufficiently from a gobbet of original characterisation. They also have life events which specifically clash with other continuities—not different characterisation, but different timelines.
It's an interesting question... particularly when you have multiple Megatrons
and multiple Galvatrons running around, even within the same continuity.
Thus, the
only demonstrable commonality between, say, US cartoon and US comic Ratbat is that they were based on the same toy—which is problematic considering that Arcee didn't have a toy for anything to be based on. There were design notes from somewhere, presumably, but the disparate events portrayed in those two continuities rule out their being the same Transformer, even if they were founded on one set of source material.
I think it's only the first few people who weren't entirely clear on continuity... I think Aero Blade, mark and fort_max are all cartoon-oriented, and several other people have produced a mix.
![[The Transformers Archive - an international fan site]](/common/skin/cardbackwide/tfarchive.png)
