ewilen

Storage space. Stinginess. I'm sure I could "afford" all the valks I want (which is more than I have but fewer than the totality of what's available, even from Yamato), but I would feel silly paying full price for each and every one. So far, the only items I've bought retail are my 1/48 Hikaru 1A and FAST packs; the rest are all secondhand deals.

I can't speak generally to MI's quality, but the version of M0 vol. 2 that I got from them was pretty bad. It's the one with bad subtitles (I could live with that) and video that breaks up/de-interlaces during fast movement (i.e. fight scenes--intolerable). Read the reviews carefully--the one review of the M0 boot I found at import-anime mentioned the poor video in the text but still inexplicably gave a high numerical score to the video.

I would like to think it comes from common sense Since you're in the minority here, it's a most-uncommon kind of common sense I'll add that, depending on what the creators of M0 think their target audience is, common sense would say that the VF-0 has to be a prototype of the VF-1 (or as Mike says, a production version of a test aircraft in the VF-1 program). Because I'm sure that all this stuff from the Chronology is just too obscure for 90%+ of the people watching M0. What I would expect of the average viewer is that they've seen most of the previous series/OVAs/movies, but they haven't paid attention to details of the Chronology. (Is there even a comprehensive Chronology easily available in Japanese, or would they have to dig through back issues of magazines to compile it?) From this perspective, the expectation in a prequel is that the VF-0 is a predecessor, slightly less advanced, of the VF-1. An important "hook" of the story is, basically, revelling in the evolution of the variable fighter concept and watching pilots adjust to it. A convoluted explanation of the VF-0 as being a parallel to the VF-1, even superior in ways, just won't be satisfying to that 90%+, even if it's explained to them. Which, incidentally, it hasn't been. You'd think that if the VF-0 contained technology more advanced than a VF-1, we'd hear about it early on just so people would get it straight. And there'd also likely be something about it when Roy is talking to the engineer--something about, "You can't have the fusion engines right now, but as a tradeoff you'll get the SW-AG armor that's not going to be in the VF-1."

Be that as it may, and admittedly in a small way, Animeigo dropped the ball on this one. How much trouble would it have been to use the material off the LD? Or even videotapes, if necessary for the first airing opening? Even if it couldn't be brought up to the quality of the transfers from film, I'm sure all Macross afficionados would have preferred to have the "special" material included.

Hm. I wonder if they've done anything about the "chin". In the first photos shown here, it projected too far for my tastes and looked like a goatee. These latest pics don't bother me so much, so either I'm getting used to it, or they've fixed it, or the angle just doesn't show it well enough.

Aegis, your strongest argument comes from the chronology. The fact that there are a couple dozen VF-0's doesn't impress me, though. First of all, if it seems strange to have 24+ VF-1 "prototypes", it's also strange to have 24+ "test beds for advanced technology beyond the VF-1". BTW, I put "prototype" in quotes because as you state, the VF-0 is too different from a VF-1. (For that matter, if it was a prototype, why isn't it a YF?) I think the VF-0 is a "proof of concept" design originally intended to be built in small numbers while the VF-1 engines were being developed; when the VF-1 program stalled, additional aircraft were built. Another possibility, which makes the VF-0 more of a parallel program, is that there was no VF-0 originally planned, but it was developed in a crash program when the UN caught wind of the SV development program and realized it needed a fallback in case the VF-1 wasn't ready due to the engine problems. But this doesn't agree with the Compendium, which calls the VF-0 a "trial production model and testbed for advanced jet engines and Overtechnology designed for future variable fighters." In the past, you've argued that the "future variable fighters" means fighters after the VF-1, and you may be right, but I'm more inclined to agree with Radd.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...gory=16487&rd=1 Description claims it's a model kit, but the size is too big for a 1/72. Based on that and comparing details, I think it's a repainted Matchbox/HG/Exo-Squad Officer's Battle Pod. Nothing wrong with that! But he even insisted it was a model when I emailed him.

I'd like custom titles back because they let you add some text to go with your avatar, but ugh, please, no built-in "cliques", no factions, no ranks. You want to know how many times someone has posted--it's already there. JsArclight is right--"ranks" will just encourage spamming. FWIW, I'd just as soon do away with sigs...

I once took a ruler to one in battroid and calculated it as being 1/120. But at the time, I was measuring to the top of the head, not to the top of the lasers, which I think is the correct measuring point for comparing "height overall". It's probably really about 1/110 to 1/115. I think if it was closer to 1/144, the 1/100 parts for the "ultimate banpresto" custom wouldn't fit on it, or they'd look terrible in any case.

Aegis is resurrecting a thread on the old boards, which began with people asking if the VF-0 looked more advanced than the VF-1 and segued into an argument over whether the VF-0 is supposed to be a prototype for the VF-1 that was pressed into service, or a test bed for advanced (post-VF-1 production) technology. Aegis's argument rests mainly on the fact that the dates in the official Chronology don't match up well with M0 if the VF-0 is supposed to be a VF-1 prototype. This new material reinforces his case, but it doesn't really add anything new since we already knew what the "old" official line was on VF-1 development. The counterargument, I think, remains the same: Kawamori and/or the official M0 site have called the the VF-0 a "prototype" ("predecessor"?) to the VF-1 Valkyrie. We can hope this will all be cleared up by the last episode. Personally, I think the existing timeline will be revised and the Valkyrie development story will be "officially" fleshed out by Macross Zero. But Aegis could be right, especially since the whole M0 story is supposed to be a "top secret", which would explain some of the discrepancies with existing material.

My impression is that Macs are crap for games because almost nobody writes games for Macs. And that's all. Oni, for example, is great on the Mac, although you do need a two-button input device--for which you can use an ultra-cheap two-button mouse. I got one for free (after rebate) at OfficeMax. No Mac driver for it, so it's a one-button mouse as far as the Finder is concerned, but Oni correctly recognizes the second button. (And probably would recognize the third, scroll wheel, button, but I never use that in Oni.) If you want a fully-usable two-button mouse for the Mac, it's not much more expensive. Another datapoint, American McGee's Alice drags just enough on my home G3/400 to be less-than-fun, but I can tell it would be fine on a G4/733 like I have at work (just haven't tried it). The keyboards all have the basically same keys, so I suspect your reaction is due to unfamiliarity. Regarding multiplayer, quote from the page I linked: Regarding Mac availablity, same site, dated 9/23/03 I don't know what kind of Mac HW will be required/recommended for Halo, but I'm sure we'll have a good idea of how it performs once it's released.

Isn't multiplayer handled by the dedicated server mentioned on this page? http://halo.bungie.net/ (October 2 news)

Hm, this may be the straw that makes me forget about ever getting an Xbox (I can get a cheap PC for gaming or upgrade my Mac to a G5) and acquire a PS2 for BC and the new Macross game.

Kanata67, that Glaug image is enough to scare small children. Good work!

I have kind of a crazy question. Does American law fully respect all the distinctions of Japanese copyright law? Let's take as given that TP only has rights to the animation of SDF Macross, while BW has rights to the designs and the right to produce derivatives--in Japan. Now, this would imply that TP could only sell HG an exclusive license to use SDF Macross, the animation. That much translates cleanly into American law. But does the separation of "right of authorship" translate? Is it possible that under American law, HG's possession (effectively) of rights to the SDF Macross animation carries an implied right to make merchandise and derivatives--possibly even an exclusive right? (This note on American copyright law says that copyright owners have exclusive rights to derivatives. There must be an international treaty relating to this. Hm...checking the Berne Convention...nothing certain so far, but articles 6bis and 12 might give BW the right to pull the plug on Robotech:

I had Hiriyu's idea, so I voted "sell".

I've finished scanning the pages from This is Animation 11 that look most promising. I also took the liberty of uploading the scans made by TheLoneWolf and posted in the "Zentradi boycott" thread. For those unfamiliar with that discussion, it segued into a debate on when, exactly, the creators of Macross (Kawamori, et. al.) decided that DYRL was a movie in the Macross universe. Most believe that this decision was a retcon introduced in 1994 without precedent or foreshadowing. Keith argued that the decision had been made much earlier, and that this could be deduced from cues in DYRL and Flashback 2012. Various circumstantial evidence was brought forward, but nothing concrete. While no one's mind was changed, we agreed that it would useful to attempt translation of various promising "primary sources", in the hope of discovering concrete evidence bearing on the debate and generally adding to the amount of original Macross information available in English. JsArclight has generously taken it upon himself to bankroll at least some of the translation. All the scans can be accessed from this page. If you have any comments or translations, please PM or email me. (Also, if TheLoneWolf would prefer that I take his scans off my site--please let me know.)

Has anyone noticed that some of the cheap knockoffs of the Valkyrie (I think Macres, maybe some others) refer to the Valkyrie converting from "airplane to moth to robot" or something like that? Why "moth"? Well, I think I have the answer: In Japanese, "moth" is 蛾 or in kana ㌠, pronounced "ga". As in ガウォーク or "ga wa o ku", "gerwalk". I wonder if this was a deliberate naming choice on the part of the creators, to call the half-plane/half-robot form a "walk(ing) moth", later making up the acronym.

Nope, the YF-1R is a Robotech innovation. You may be thinking of the YF's from Macross Plus. The YF-1R appears in Battlecry and Toynami made a battroid toy of it. It has a hexagonal faceplace and a combination of the VF-1J and VF-1A head lasers (i.e., two on the sides, one in the middle). There's a closeup at the bottom of this page: http://www.menet.umn.edu/~ngo/robotech_s-p...se_v2_vf-1.html

Too many memorable moments for me. That's a good one, though, and the irony of it is that *both* sides really would prefer to watch the beauty contest than fight. The irony reaches a climax when Hikaru comes into the just-empty ship, expecting to find the enemy, and is surrounded by video screens showing the Miss Macross contest.

From the thread on the Yahoo news story, Pat Payne wrote Although Tatsunoko & HG may have merchandising rights to designs that appeared in SDFM TV, I wonder if, conversely, they have no rights to "original" derivatives of their own. E.g., I wonder if Bandai/BW will be able to turn the tables on HG and argue that the YF-1R is an illegal infringement due to its being a new product based on the existing VF-1 design (especially if it has the UN Insignia). Same goes for any Sentinels-type sequels. And what about the fact that Matsushiro owns the patent on the original transformable valkyrie design, which was essentially copied by the Bandai HCM and Toynami MPC? I assume something has been worked out in Japan between the various toy/model makers. (And I'm guessing Matsushiro's patent is now owned by someone like Bandai or Big West...) But prior to the MPC, all non-import transforming Valks were actually made by Bandai & Matsushiro (i.e., the Joke Machines sold by Matchbox, and of course Jetfire). Is the patent expired? Do the current run of Robotech comic book adaptations use the UN insignia? Apologies if any of this has already been addressed in the past.

I will post a comment on this over in the licensing debate thread.

Yep someone posted pictures of it on the old boards. Before that I did not know my self. Ah, yes. It's mentioned in gunsight. http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/gunsig...gs1julaug02.pdf or if you want to read in html http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:71jry...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 by the way, if you want to read a positive but impartial review of the MPC, look here. I don't own one, but I might pay $20-$30 shipped for a Ben Dixon simply because it's the same scale as the Bandai reissues and nobody else has done Kakizaki in a toy. (His TV paint scheme is different from a standard CF, isn't it?)

This thread is beginning to duplicate the pinned HG licensing thread over in the "other anime" forum.

I don't think the MPC has the arrestor gear hooks, does it?