eugimon Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 When did this thread stop being a discussion on Macross F??? Gundam in another thread please and thank you. it *was* a discussion on possible bandai macross frontier toys but a certain gundam fanboy can't let stop trolling his clown samurai fixation.
badboy00z Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 it *was* a discussion on possible bandai macross frontier toys but a certain gundam fanboy can't let stop trolling his clown samurai fixation. And here I thought we're mature and staying out of personal attacks. Lol.
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 So can we say for sure Bandai has the Macross toy license? If so, what scales are covered under their license? Once we find this out, we can find out if Yamato can still get a license perhaps for different scales. It would not surprise me if Yamato scored the 1/60 license, while Bandai scored a different scale Soul Spec license, perhaps 1/72, or 1/55-1/65, scales they have used before. It all boils down to the size of the VF-25. Is it bigger than the SV-51? I'd be happy if Bandai and Yamato both got seperate toy licenses. More to choose from. More to enjoy. If we get something from bandai, I want something as solid and durable as the takatoku 1/55s, but with the accuracy that we know they are capable of. Is it possible? Yes. If Yamato has a license as well, Bandai knows they will have to step up their game to have their line survive. Yamato is the reason the chunky monkey reissues never were released with the new sculpted heads. I expect either a DX valk, HCM revival, or Soulspec.
eugimon Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 And here I thought we're mature and staying out of personal attacks. Lol. I never would have gotten that impression from your replies. but okay, sorry for calling you a fanboy.
eugimon Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 So can we say for sure Bandai has the Macross toy license? If so, what scales are covered under their license? Once we find this out, we can find out if Yamato can still get a license perhaps for different scales. It would not surprise me if Yamato scored the 1/60 license, while Bandai scored a different scale Soul Spec license, perhaps 1/72, or 1/55-1/65, scales they have used before. It all boils down to the size of the VF-25. Is it bigger than the SV-51? I'd be happy if Bandai and Yamato both got seperate toy licenses. More to choose from. More to enjoy. If we get something from bandai, I want something as solid and durable as the takatoku 1/55s, but with the accuracy that we know they are capable of. Is it possible? Yes. If Yamato has a license as well, Bandai knows they will have to step up their game to have their line survive. Yamato is the reason the chunky monkey reissues never were released with the new sculpted heads. I expect either a DX valk, HCM revival, or Soulspec. I think that would be the best outcome from my point of view. Yamato continues making large scale transforming toys and bandai mines the other avenues. Frankly, if the large scale transforming toy licens were to leave yamato, I just hope that whoever gets it produces toys at least on par with what we have now. I really don't want to go back to the stumpy kiddified offerings that bandai gave us with the M7 license.
badboy00z Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I never would have gotten that impression from your replies. but okay, sorry for calling you a fanboy. Lol. Don't even bother apologizing if it's not sincere. I don't understand how you couldn't have gotten that impression. Not one word from my posts were negative and certainly nothing was directed at you personally. So to clear things up, in a Valk, there is nothing else on the insides besides the hands, feet, landing gears? No other internal detail can be reproduced in a scaled model?
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I think that would be the best outcome from my point of view. Yamato continues making large scale transforming toys and bandai mines the other avenues. Frankly, if the large scale transforming toy licens were to leave yamato, I just hope that whoever gets it produces toys at least on par with what we have now. I really don't want to go back to the stumpy kiddified offerings that bandai gave us with the M7 license. Well if Bandai gets a license, they HAVE to make things on par with Yamato. This isn't 94 with a bunch of kids running around and being the demographic the 1/65s were aimed at. Now, there is nowhere near as much kids. There are articles from last year and the past few months discussing how Takara and Bandai are aiming their efforts towards adults since the birth rate is so low. Yamato stopped Bandai when the 1/60 and 1/48 VF-1 came out. More collectors in japan bought the Yamato valks than the Bandai reissues, and Bandai decided not to reissue the 1/55s with the newly sculpted heads they made. I doubt they will let history repeat itself again, with them being trumped by the smaller company on the block, which is relatively new compared to them. Collectors will not settle for anything less in my opinion, the stakes are now much higher than they were back in 94 when bandai was the only one on the block. It is still possible that Yamato scores the 1/60 license, while Bandai scores something else. Bandai produces numerous product in different scales for the same anime a LOT. Gundam has a ton of lines. Evangelion already has 3 under Bandai. Wait, maybe 5. I'm not sure. It would not surprise me if Yamato just focused on the 1/60 license, while Bandai makes either SHCM or Hcmpro versions, SOULSpec, maybe SOC, then a DX line of some sort. as well as plamodels. I HOPE we get multiple companies making different toys. It hasn't been like that in years. Also, when does this show premier? I want some VF-25 goodness NOW.
Phyrox Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I really don't think companies get licenses to make toys in "this scale," or "that scale." They get either exclusive licenses, where they make the only products in a given media, or a non-exclusive license. If Bandai has the license, I wager they are a big and weighty enough company to have pulled an exclusive license.
Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0 Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I really don't think companies get licenses to make toys in "this scale," or "that scale." They get either exclusive licenses, where they make the only products in a given media, or a non-exclusive license. If Bandai has the license, I wager they are a big and weighty enough company to have pulled an exclusive license. Its been discussed a long time ago, but can get different licenses per scale. Like Mospeada in Aoshima's hands, as well as CM corps'. Garlands from Atelier Sai, Yamato, and another company. 3 different companies making Mospeada ride armors. Itching to see proto pics of the VF-25.
David Hingtgen Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Happens all the time with trains and planes---scale-exclusive licenses. One company gets 1/400, another gets 1/200, someone has 1/87, etc.
jenius Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 You can really put anything you want in a license so they're really hard to stereotype. It's all up to lawyers and companies trying to squeeze every penny out of a title. For example, if you know of a company interested in producing only vending machine toys for your license, another company that just wants to make models, another company that just wants to do one item from the show, and a final huge company that wants to do a big series of toys you write up a license that has little clauses that disperse the other chunks out if the previously mentioned companies make it clear it will be profitable to you. If the big company insists on carte blanche then you have a lot of bargaining chips "Well, the license is worth $x because these companies have offered $y for small portions."
azrael Posted November 20, 2007 Author Posted November 20, 2007 You can really put anything you want in a license so they're really hard to stereotype. It's all up to lawyers and companies trying to squeeze every penny out of a title. ...*snip* This is true. You can put anything in a contract. The unfortunate thing is, Bandai does not have to divulge anything in their contract. They don't have to reveal it to the public or to Yamato, Ltd.. If a contract was made with Yamato, they are not obligated to reveal the details of that contract.
malakite Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Whoa... just caught up with 78 pages of reading.... interesting to say the least.... I must say, I like the new designs, I even like the green thingie when the valks transform. Hell I even like the fact that Bandai has the licence to make the toys! Having Bandai make the toys would make it a heck of alot more easier for us to get our hands on the toys. I keep reading about Bandai kits and this and that. I mean, we can curse, swear, whine and what-not all we want, what ever happens, is gonna happen. It's not like we can CHANGE anything, ya know, lol.... But still, I won't mind a Valk done up in a *Fix Figuration* style, pretty cool I'd think.
Chronocidal Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) So to clear things up, in a Valk, there is nothing else on the insides besides the hands, feet, landing gears? No other internal detail can be reproduced in a scaled model? Just for the sake of argument, there is plenty of detail you can reproduce in a model. The problem comes when you try to make it transform and be detailed at the same time. I ran into this problem when I tried to build my 1/18th VF-1 with Legos. I've seen dozens of giant sized Lego Gundams, and they all work beautifully, but only because they have tons of room for the internals, and they're built like tanks. Gundams have no problem with giant exposed hinges, pivots, and joints. They build a strong internal structure, then cover it with armor that isn't necessary to the structure. A Valk is the other way around. Since it's an aircraft first, the shape is dictated by aerodynamics, and there's very little room to spare. When I got to the point of putting that Lego VF-1 together, the structure just wasn't strong enough to hold it's own weight. There's very little room for extra structure to hold it together, and for the joints to have any hope of keeping the arms on, they took up the entire internal space. This is why 99% of aircraft transformers wind up with huge honking limb structures hanging out in aircraft mode.. there's no room to cram a decent structure into a frame the size of the aircraft. It isn't that bad in smaller scales, but looking at the 1/48 VF-1 should explain why you're not going to find much special internal stuff like the Gundams. A Valk can't have an internal skeleton in the normal sense, since things have to transform, and move around a lot. The arms contain the hands.. that's realistic, you could detail up the internals of the arms if you wanted, but now you're talking hydraulic pistons that are probably millimeters in diameter each, and they have to function, or the hands won't have room to retract. The legs on a Valk are solid engine, and there's no way you're going to get an engine modeled inside the legs and still have room for any type of knee, hip, or foot joint that'll support the leg. Forget any type of landing gear as well. The only reason the main gear on the 1/48 VF-1 work is because they fold directly into where the engine would be. Try reproducing the complex twisting hydraulic mechanism those gear would require in real life to fold flat underneath the engine, and they'd snap like twigs in that scale. It all becomes a trade off between detail and strength. Make it too detailed, you won't be able to breathe on it without parts falling off. Make it strong, and you get a Chunky Monkey. Yamato so far has hit the happy medium, keeping the functionality and detail very balanced. But those are toys. Change that to a model built for detail first, durability second, and you upset that balance. Just ask any person who's customized a Hasegawa Valk to transform, and find out how sturdy they are. Joints become a big issue as well, and are one reason I really prefer transforming toys to models. For instance, the 1/48th's joints are ratcheted. Gundam joints are primarily friction based. Ratcheted joints take up lots of space, and have metal parts (springs, gears, etc). They also last a very long time due to that durability. On the other hand, my younger brother has a 1/60th Wing Zero that can't even hold his gun up. Polycaps wear down, as will any friction-joint. Posability is one thing, but when you're talking about joints that hold a plane together, polycaps aren't going to cut it. Transform it one too many times, and your VF-25's nose is going to look like an elephant. Oy.. sorry for the essay, didn't realize how much I'd typed until I re-read it. Edited November 20, 2007 by Chronocidal
eugimon Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Oy.. sorry for the essay, didn't realize how much I'd typed until I re-read it. don't worry, he's not going to read it. he'll just skim it for somthing he can troll on about and post some other nonsense to keep this going. I'm sorry I got suckered into it in the first place.
Zinjo Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) How about we take the Bandai discussion to oh, how about THIS THREAD!? http://macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showforum=4 It's taken on a life of it's own and not contributing to this particular thread anymore... Thank you for your support, bye now... Edited November 20, 2007 by Zinjo
RichterX Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 The blowed up capital ship looks like a Begin Hill class military ship which may be the premise in bringing up a flight school squadron of kids into the fight, as the fleet's military base would have been destroyed along with their probable ability to build up additional fighter forces... You are forgetting that in the Macross universe atleast from Macross 7 pilots are trained really young, i think Gamlin finished training when he was 16? It doesn't seem so rare to have kid pilots in Macross
Graham Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I just had a thought. I'll probably be in the minority here, but I hope when the new series is released on disk that it is released on plain old DVD and not just BlueRay (or whatever the next gen disk format is). Or ideally released on DVD and BlueRay, which would be a win-win situaton for consumers. As much as I love Macross, I really don't want to fork over a whole load of cash to upgrade my TV and movie player yet, just so I can watch Macross F in BlueRay or HD or whatever. I'm still quite happy with DVD. Heck, there's no way my wife would ever approve the expenditure anyway unless my TV and DVD player were both to suffer sudden catastophic unreparable failure and a HD TV and next gen player suddenly dropped in cost to the cost of standard TVs and DVD players. Graham
biggooftoybox Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Mr March, what's your website again. I know you had mentioned in much earlier in teh forum but i can't find it anymore. thanks
biggooftoybox Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Whew finally managed to finish reading this entire thread. You guys sure have a lot of interesting news. Personally I found if very odd teh first tim the Valks transformed. It looked like it was splitting apart into separate parts unless you look really closely at the rails. I can't quite see the VF-17 you guys keep talking of. the VF-17 is the one Gamlin flew in M7 yes? The one that looks lik a stealth F-117 fighter? I'd appreciate it if anyone had a decent pic of the VF-17 in MF or a VF-171. As for toys, Yamato toys have proven to be highly detailed and accurate but their stuff blows when it comes to durability and playability. And I have a VF-11 minus 1 leg to prove it along with a VF-1A. Their stuff just doesn't handle well if you transform it a few times. That's where I think Bandai has a leg up, however it is also true that the M7 Valks look cruddy comparatively speaking. All I can say is whoever gets the license, I hope can produce something that's highly detailed but yet durable.
MacrossCN Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 To Sketchley San and other Japanese Fans, tonight, SK will show on NHK AnimeGiga. Maybe there is some news about Macross F~~~ If it is only Aquarion, I hate it~~~~ T T 11/21 水曜日 (火曜深夜) 午前0：00～0：39 [bS2] 11/21 水曜日 18:00～18:39 [bShi]
badboy00z Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Just for the sake of argument, there is plenty of detail you can reproduce in a model. The problem comes when you try to make it transform and be detailed at the same time. I ran into this problem when I tried to build my 1/18th VF-1 with Legos. I've seen dozens of giant sized Lego Gundams, and they all work beautifully, but only because they have tons of room for the internals, and they're built like tanks. Gundams have no problem with giant exposed hinges, pivots, and joints. They build a strong internal structure, then cover it with armor that isn't necessary to the structure. A Valk is the other way around. Since it's an aircraft first, the shape is dictated by aerodynamics, and there's very little room to spare. When I got to the point of putting that Lego VF-1 together, the structure just wasn't strong enough to hold it's own weight. There's very little room for extra structure to hold it together, and for the joints to have any hope of keeping the arms on, they took up the entire internal space. This is why 99% of aircraft transformers wind up with huge honking limb structures hanging out in aircraft mode.. there's no room to cram a decent structure into a frame the size of the aircraft. It isn't that bad in smaller scales, but looking at the 1/48 VF-1 should explain why you're not going to find much special internal stuff like the Gundams. A Valk can't have an internal skeleton in the normal sense, since things have to transform, and move around a lot. The arms contain the hands.. that's realistic, you could detail up the internals of the arms if you wanted, but now you're talking hydraulic pistons that are probably millimeters in diameter each, and they have to function, or the hands won't have room to retract. The legs on a Valk are solid engine, and there's no way you're going to get an engine modeled inside the legs and still have room for any type of knee, hip, or foot joint that'll support the leg. Forget any type of landing gear as well. The only reason the main gear on the 1/48 VF-1 work is because they fold directly into where the engine would be. Try reproducing the complex twisting hydraulic mechanism those gear would require in real life to fold flat underneath the engine, and they'd snap like twigs in that scale. It all becomes a trade off between detail and strength. Make it too detailed, you won't be able to breathe on it without parts falling off. Make it strong, and you get a Chunky Monkey. Yamato so far has hit the happy medium, keeping the functionality and detail very balanced. But those are toys. Change that to a model built for detail first, durability second, and you upset that balance. Just ask any person who's customized a Hasegawa Valk to transform, and find out how sturdy they are. That's because the kits weren't meant to transform Joints become a big issue as well, and are one reason I really prefer transforming toys to models. For instance, the 1/48th's joints are ratcheted. Gundam joints are primarily friction based. Ratcheted joints take up lots of space, and have metal parts (springs, gears, etc). They also last a very long time due to that durability. On the other hand, my younger brother has a 1/60th Wing Zero that can't even hold his gun up. Polycaps wear down, as will any friction-joint. Posability is one thing, but when you're talking about joints that hold a plane together, polycaps aren't going to cut it. Transform it one too many times, and your VF-25's nose is going to look like an elephant. Oy.. sorry for the essay, didn't realize how much I'd typed until I re-read it. Did your lego Valk look as good as these? Lego VF-1 Lego VF-1 Anyways this is legos we're talking about here. I do give props to whoever can replicate their favorite mecha with legos though. But they aren't made for this kind of thing. Legos comes in kits that have a predetermined way of putting everything together. And even if you have access to 1000s of different parts and find the one part or parts to make a good joint, it's going to be sub par to something that is made for that function. I agree that there should be a balance between detail and durability. But I believe that good creative engineering ingenuity can over come that. Bandai has proved that with the recent MG grade kits where the majority of joints are not polycaps and have screws to reinforce them. The first MG Zeta was a POS but the Zeta 2.0 is solid as a rock. I have both kits mind you. I still disagree with the whole there's no space for internal detail. The bigger the model/ toy the higher the potential to have internal details and/or frame. Just compare 1/144 and 1/100 kits. Looking at the VF-1 or even the YF-19 in battroid mode, the designs are simple enough to have internal detail. It doesn't necessary have to be an internal skeleton, functional or be a solid piece. And in fact, making movable pistons isn't hard to do. Also the one area that requires the most movement in transformation is the nose/ canopy area. Everything else just swings into place. These detail parts can surround the joints, hands, feet, etc. The side of the leg for example can have a removable plate or armor to show off the inner detail. It doesn't have to be 100% accurate. And like I said, it all comes down to the engineering and how things come together at the end. Oh and sorry for the OT but it seems like things were slowing down along with new info on MF. And when more news comes our way, I'll be sure to talk about it.
badboy00z Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 don't worry, he's not going to read it. he'll just skim it for somthing he can troll on about and post some other nonsense to keep this going. I'm sorry I got suckered into it in the first place. Lol. It's so nice of you to assume something like that.
Nexx2 Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I just had a thought. I'll probably be in the minority here, but I hope when the new series is released on disk that it is released on plain old DVD and not just BlueRay (or whatever the next gen disk format is). Or ideally released on DVD and BlueRay, which would be a win-win situaton for consumers. As much as I love Macross, I really don't want to fork over a whole load of cash to upgrade my TV and movie player yet, just so I can watch Macross F in BlueRay or HD or whatever. I'm still quite happy with DVD. Heck, there's no way my wife would ever approve the expenditure anyway unless my TV and DVD player were both to suffer sudden catastophic unreparable failure and a HD TV and next gen player suddenly dropped in cost to the cost of standard TVs and DVD players. Graham Yep, I'm agree with you, I keep using standart DVD player. I have all my favorit movie and tv series in DVD and I am not interesting to change for another kind of disk. I prefer spend money in Yamato and Hasegawa product
briscojr84 Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Mr March, what's your website again. I know you had mentioned in much earlier in teh forum but i can't find it anymore. thanks Main Page - www.un-spacy-qmtdb.com M3 Main Page - http://www.un-spacy-qmtdb.com/M3.html
Chronocidal Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Did your lego Valk look as good as these? Lego VF-1 Lego VF-1 Lol.. you didn't see this one did you? VF-1S Really, that one was ridiculous, and shrinking things down really does help the strength. But as for them coming in kits with a pre-determined way of putting them together, I really have to disagree with you there, but, yep, it is getting off topic. My main concern with Bandai kits was the polycap joints, but it's true, the kits I have seen are much older, so they've probably gotten better. Hopefully they'll give this same treatment to any Macross kits, and they'll have sturdy joints to hold them together. I'm not so worried about internal details, but I guess what it boils down to is that I hope they don't overdo it, and make it overly fragile/complex. Considering the size comparisons, they could probably do a 1/48th Valk easy, with roughly the same amount of material as the average PG Gundam. Bigger would be better in this case, since the plastic is light enough not to get too heavy, and the extra room will make the joints bigger and tougher.
kensei Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) IMO model kits are more sophisticated compared to toys. Most of you collect and display them anyways and not play with them like a little kid would. And at most you will change the pose once in a while. So wouldn't a highly detailed kit be better suited for that purpose? Which is a gross generalisation. You're not speaking on behalf of all those that collect toys. You're manipulating non-existent facts to support your own argument. So are you saying that Bandai is incapable of making a superb kit that is better than a Yamato toy? You haven't seen a well designed plane model because they haven't tried. Gundams are meant to look like humanoids to begin with whereas Valks are meant to look like fighter jets. The same thing can be said about Valks and ugly forms. The battroid mode of the VF-0/1 and some other ones doesn't look very good in battroid mode. They look just like a plane that transformed into a robot with apparent parts of the plane visible. The only Valk design that looks good in battroid mode IMO is the YF/VF-19, YF-21 and now the VF-25 where they don't look like it can transform into a plane and be just a regular humanoid robot. It just looks ugly cause you don't like the design. And it's a mecha that is capable of transforming. Not just a robot, or a fighter. Completely different. And yes, Bandai is incapable of making a model kit that is better than a Yamato toy, because, well, it's a model and not a toy. Ever heard of not comparing apples and oranges? Other than their nutritional content?) And I never said models are superior to toys. I only said they are more sophisticated. Model kits allow you to create your own paint scheme and do your own unique modifications. Sure you can repaint a toy but how good will the outcome be? Certain parts will get in the way. Will you want to take the risk of breaking your expensive toy by prying off parts so you can repaint it? IMO it all comes down to personal preference. I prefer models because I want to feel like I created something instead of take a toy out of a box. I want to look at it and say "hey, I put that thing together". And if you can't be careful while handling a model then hey, maybe a toy is the way to go. It's called "multiple paint schemes." Why release a toy with ONE colour variant? Not a good way to get your money's worth in your investment. Again, he hasn't seen one because Bandai haven't tried. Gundams are not meant to look like planes. And transforming Gundams are not meant to look like planes. Maybe with the exception of the Air Master in Gundam X. ........ And saying that Bandai is incapable of making one as good or better than Yamato's is ridiculous. And in fact, Bandai has the advantage of their modeling technology and can apply it to their toys. They just haven't been serious about it. You're making a lot of excuses for them. And if you think that the Air Master is the epitome of what Gundam Plamodels have to offer, then there is a problem. I think that would be the best outcome from my point of view. Yamato continues making large scale transforming toys and bandai mines the other avenues. Frankly, if the large scale transforming toy licens were to leave yamato, I just hope that whoever gets it produces toys at least on par with what we have now. I really don't want to go back to the stumpy kiddified offerings that bandai gave us with the M7 license. Both would be good. That way we have the more robust and ready to go toys available and the good models for those that want to get creative. A Valk is the other way around. Since it's an aircraft first, the shape is dictated by aerodynamics, and there's very little room to spare. When I got to the point of putting that Lego VF-1 together, the structure just wasn't strong enough to hold it's own weight. There's very little room for extra structure to hold it together, and for the joints to have any hope of keeping the arms on, they took up the entire internal space. This is why 99% of aircraft transformers wind up with huge honking limb structures hanging out in aircraft mode.. there's no room to cram a decent structure into a frame the size of the aircraft........................................... Oy.. sorry for the essay, didn't realize how much I'd typed until I re-read it. I still don't think that he got the point. Rest assured though, what you said is dead true. don't worry, he's not going to read it. he'll just skim it for somthing he can troll on about and post some other nonsense to keep this going. I'm sorry I got suckered into it in the first place. I am too. Edited November 20, 2007 by kensei
kensei Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Yep, looks like you are right wolfx, they do look the same. Thanks for the new pics. That means we have confirmation that 3-mode transformation is possible with the new FPs. Graham I do hope that they are two different systems, but I'm prepared to be wrong. What's good is that the FAST Packs are including armour this time around, something that GBPs took care off. But yet this still allows transformation, which means that it must be unarmoured in some places, but that is offset by the fact that it can still transform and move quickly unlike GBPs. I still see a crapload of missiles while the heavily armoured GERWALK is transforming to Battroid though. I hope we get to see plenty of the good old 3M. The only thing I don't like is that this new armour system has it's dorsal equipment on the wings. As of yet though, what I don't like is the lack of variants for the 25. Those cosmetic changes are what counts!
RDClip Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 As of yet though, what I don't like is the lack of variants for the 25. Those cosmetic changes are what counts! I hope we get more than just different head sculpts and amount of lasers. I really would like to see variation in the VF-25 like there was for the VF-1 in DYRL? (different wings, FAST packs, cockpits and heads)
sketchley Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 To Sketchley San and other Japanese Fans, tonight, SK will show on NHK AnimeGiga. Maybe there is some news about Macross F~~~ If it is only Aquarion, I hate it~~~~ T T 11/21 水曜日 (火曜深夜) 午前0：00～0：39 [bS2] 11/21 水曜日 18:00～18:39 [bShi] Damn... we don't get BS2 or BShi where we are. >.< The wife thinks they may only be available on cable.
kensei Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) I hope we get more than just different head sculpts and amount of lasers. I really would like to see variation in the VF-25 like there was for the VF-1 in DYRL? (different wings, FAST packs, cockpits and heads) Delta Wing (a la VF-0D) anyone? The only sad thing is the lack of destroids. I know that they are useless, but if destroids are useless then you can just imagine how crap a tank or mobile armour is, and by cutting destroids out of the picture and not bring them back in some uber powerful form, then we are missing out on a huge section of potentially delicious mecha designs and battles. At the very least please Kawamori, variable fastpacks, as many as the VF-11, if not more. Edited November 20, 2007 by kensei
RDClip Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Delta Wing (a la VF-0D) anyone? Yeah forgot about that one... But point still stands. (Oh, would a delta wing work on a VF-25?)
kensei Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Yeah forgot about that one... But point still stands. (Oh, would a delta wing work on a VF-25?) Probably not, but an FSW will.
chrono Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 I just had a thought. I'll probably be in the minority here, but I hope when the new series is released on disk that it is released on plain old DVD and not just BlueRay (or whatever the next gen disk format is). Or ideally released on DVD and BlueRay, which would be a win-win situaton for consumers. As much as I love Macross, I really don't want to fork over a whole load of cash to upgrade my TV and movie player yet, just so I can watch Macross F in BlueRay or HD or whatever. I'm still quite happy with DVD. Heck, there's no way my wife would ever approve the expenditure anyway unless my TV and DVD player were both to suffer sudden catastophic unreparable failure and a HD TV and next gen player suddenly dropped in cost to the cost of standard TVs and DVD players. Graham Well there are players out there that will play all 4 mediums(Blu,HDDVD,DVD,CD) and aren't expensive nor really cheap. Last time I saw one was 2 months ago at around 600 USD.
Recommended Posts