4683 Cossack Warrior - UPDATE !!

[Gepetto]

Well he doesn't have a bow and he is rather colorful so he must be a Cossack or something like that.



Gepetto

[CountBogro]

Perhaps he left his bow in his other suit ? ?

[Martin Milner]

I see what you mean Gordon, but how many Mongol warriors can dye their clothes blue? Animal skins and leather are the order of the day there.

Once again Playmo seem to have produced an attractive figure, but got a bit mixed up between cultures and colours.

A Mongol horde would make a great opponent for the Crusaders.

[Indianna]

No, to get replacements of course.   

Yes playmofire in case that did not satisfy you appetite you can order more 

Of course, that explains it!   

[cachalote]

to totally know if the figure is a cossack or a mongol, we have to ask timotheos to decide. 
his expertise in geographically analizing boxes' backgrounds has no match in this forum. 
the same can be said about his sensibility for "racial" analysis. 

[Gustavo]

I see what you mean Gordon, but how many Mongol warriors can dye their clothes blue? Animal skins and leather are the order of the day there.

Once again Playmo seem to have produced an attractive figure, but got a bit mixed up between cultures and colours.

A Mongol horde would make a great opponent for the Crusaders.

Like the mistake of the Masai warrior? (which brings white leopard skin, when there aren't white leopards in Africa ...)

(I think the Cossack may be a bit worse ... The Masai case might have been a lapse of some kind ...)

Our designers at gB should be a bit more careful about distinguishing fantasy and history. It's very important to distinguish these two kinds of reality, in children's educational toys, otherwise it looses its (traditional) character.

I don't find it bad that there are dragons, winged warriors, mermaids, and men+dinosaurs. Even so, I do like some coherence. (Considering that children put their toys in a same play, and keep them all together in the same box ... well, I did had two buckets full of tiny pieces ... but (addult) collectors don't.)

(It's, therefore, really bad to have XVth-century-style sailors together with XVIIIth-century-style. It makes confusion in the minds of kids. It's my opinion. I should say I'm not a psychiatrist or psyco-analyst, but I believe some of them might agree with me ...)

I think you are right, Rasputin, I have not seen that before.  Also, is that warning message on the back of the box new?  I don't remember that before but I don't have any similar boxes handy at the moment to check.

I had to go a lot behind, so as to find this thread ... By then, I possibly had about 300 messages, Now I have about 600!

http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2436.msg27350#msg27350
http://www.playmofriends.com/forum/index.php?topic=2436.msg27344#msg27344

If I'm not mistaken, this Cossack is from the same days


blackhair
Gus

[LHAAP]

And is that something new on the specials "PLAYMO®"

No, that isn't new. I have the same "PLAYMO" on a pirate ghost 4671 box.

[Rasputin]

Silly me , i got so used to our target "pals" which later were just "Playmobil" that i forgot to look more closly at the actual "special" boxes 

[Martin Milner]

Like the mistake of the Masai warrior? (which brings white leopard skin, when there aren't white leopards in Africa ...)

(I think the Cossack may be a bit worse ... The Masai case might have been a lapse of some kind ...)

Our designers at gB should be a bit more careful about distinguishing fantasy and history. It's very important to distinguish these two kinds of reality, in children's educational toys, otherwise it looses its (traditional) character.

I don't find it bad that there are dragons, winged warriors, mermaids, and men+dinosaurs. Even so, I do like some coherence. (Considering that children put their toys in a same play, and keep them all together in the same box ... well, I did had two buckets full of tiny pieces ... but (addult) collectors don't.)

(It's, therefore, really bad to have XVth-century-style sailors together with XVIIIth-century-style. It makes confusion in the minds of kids. It's my opinion. I should say I'm not a psychiatrist or psyco-analyst, but I believe some of them might agree with me ...)

Exactly Gus, and I think you spotted that Masai Leopardskin mistake first.

I have no problem with the Fantasy themes as themes, not everyone has to like everything, though it is a shame they are going more for big lump of plastic buildings, and less for adaptable buildings. Yet when they produce a klicky which is clearly supposed to be based on real world current or historical fact, it'd be nice if they got the details right. I'd then have more confidence that the designers actually refer to original source material, and not just their own vague memories and Hollywood.

[playmofire]

when they produce a klicky which is clearly supposed to be based on real world current or historical fact, it'd be nice if they got the details right. I'd then have more confidence that the designers actually refer to original source material, and not just their own vague memories and Hollywood.

At one time they did refer to source material, indeed to the original wherever possible.  New wild animals would be researched by visiting safari parks, for example, new fire engines would be developed in consultation with fire brigades.  Maybe this still goes on, but maybe with rising costs there is more reference done via secondary sources, books, videos, the internet.  I think, too, new designers are coming in  who maybe have less experience of the world and less appreciation of the role of detail and accuracy - you can have too little detail, you can have too much detail and you can have wrong detail!  What should be aimed for in a toy is just enough accurate detail to say clearly what the item represents and to encourage the comparative imagination (e.g. "That's just like on the fire engine I saw last week"), while leaving room for the imagination to "see" the missing detail in the overall item.  Striking the right balance on detail what Playmobil have been good at in the past and hopefully will continue to be good at in the future.  (Another toy firm which achieved this was Tomica in their Dandy range of cars and lorries in the 1970s - as one dealer said to me, "You get the impression that the designer kept looking at the mock-up and eventually reached the point where it was decided that further detail would spoil the result.")