Ignacio Ocamica Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 The feet look fine to me, especially since they're actually articulated. It's not that they're extremely small, they're extremely THIN That's why they look off. Quote
Vifam7 Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I don't think the feet is all THAT bad looking. Making a mountain out of a mole hill in my opinion. Quote
Ignacio Ocamica Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I don't think the feet is all THAT bad looking. Making a mountain out of a mole hill in my opinion. Agree with you, not a deal breaker but I don't like them Quote
jenius Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 Yep, the feet DO look worse on the black background, on the white background they look just a tiny bit thin, not very noticeable in that first pic. Quote
Ginrai Posted March 12, 2010 Posted March 12, 2010 I took a chance on the Fire Valk, and while it's decent enough, it's definitely not worth the $60 I paid for it, and even that was 25% off. That's the same as my Masterpiece Skywarp cost, for something about two-thirds the length, no where near the same material content, and no real noticeable difference in quality... This is a ridiculous comparison. MP Skywarp is a mass produced domestic release toy. The Japanese version of MP Skywarp cost 9800 yen, which is over $100 American. The US release of MP Skywarp is only that cheap because of the huge numbers it was produced in. Quote
eriku Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 New shot of the VF-1J. Shiny plastic. I can dig it. Source Quote
EXO Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 i'm guessing its one of those non-paintable high impact plastic... there might be other black parts used as hinges. Quote
Ignacio Ocamica Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 Apart from the different shaped nosecone, it's very similar to Yamato's v2 1/60 It's difficult to perfect what's almost perfect I'm leaving the door open for the shoulder issue critics!!! Quote
eugimon Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 So, I'm guessing the feet don't pull out for battroid and that's why they look small in that mode. Quote
Dr. Z Posted March 20, 2010 Posted March 20, 2010 why must they release the first one in the most boring paint scheme ever. Funny, that's my favorite deco. I especially hate the skulls, they're just too cheesy imo. Quote
hutch Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 Funny, that's my favorite deco. I especially hate the skulls, they're just too cheesy imo. Cheesy? Quote
Chronocidal Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 Funny, that's my favorite deco. I especially hate the skulls, they're just too cheesy imo. *gasps* In all my time here... in all the RT vs Macross threads.. in all the canon detail arguments...I don't think I've ever heard such blasphemy! Quote
danth Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 I'm more bothered by how the feet look in fighter mode. Quote
UN Spacy Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 Funny, that's my favorite deco. I especially hate the skulls, they're just too cheesy imo. Quote
eriku Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 I can see how someone would think the Jolly Roger is cheesy. The skull & crossbones motif has been so overused for so long that it is cheesy. I love it, but I'd never argue that it isn't cheesy. Quote
cypherpunk Posted March 21, 2010 Posted March 21, 2010 I can see how someone would think the Jolly Roger is cheesy. The skull & crossbones motif has been so overused for so long that it is cheesy. I love it, but I'd never argue that it isn't cheesy. Yeah. One-eyed Willy was the last bloke to use the Jolly Roger unironically. It's been downhill for the skull and crossbones ever since. Quote
Fort Max Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 Looking good, only one on display though so probably not quite finished yet. Quote
fifbeat Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 Those 'skulls' are what got my attention about Macross. =) Quote
regult Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 same here! Seems like nobody like those feet, fighter or battroid. Bandai: back to the drawing board!!!! Quote
jenius Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 I'm not worried about the feet... It's a 1/100 toy, if that's the worst of the compromises we're doing great. Quote
eriku Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 same here! Seems like nobody like those feet, fighter or battroid. Bandai: back to the drawing board!!!! The feet look fine to me in both modes. Quote
Dr. Z Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 (edited) Cheesy? I can't help it, when I think "skull + crossbones", I think "Disney pirate ships". I've always prefered minimalist decos. Edited March 23, 2010 by Dr. Z Quote
treatment Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 I can't help it, when I think "skull + crossbones", I think "Disney pirate ships". I've always prefered minimalist decos. yeah. you said it, dude! I, for one, also can't help it that when we talk about VF-1 aircraft with "skull + crossbones" here in MacrossWorld, I think about Donald Duck and his nephews on a pirate ship. wait, what? Quote
regult Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 (edited) To bring a bit of history, the "Skull Team" in SDFM and particularly Roy Fokker's valk, the valk itself is inspired by the F-14 and the livery is a mix between early "Jolly Rogers" (VF-84) and "Wolfpack" (VF-1). From the first it took the black tail with a jolly roger stencil and the orange stripe across the cockpit area from the second. (Actually, it is quite obvious the squadron designator "VF" was also "retconed" to Variable Fighter) I don't mind the thin feet problem myself. Sorry for the previous double post (something was wrong with the connection or the server). Edited March 23, 2010 by regult Quote
Chronocidal Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 Actually the Jolly Roger markings go clear back to WWII, and possibly before. I've got an F4U Corsair kit or two with the skull and crossbones flag pasted on it's nose. Quote
Vi-RS Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 To bring a bit of history, the "Skull Team" in SDFM and particularly Roy Fokker's valk, the valk itself is inspired by the F-14 and the livery is a mix between early "Jolly Rogers" (VF-84) and "Wolfpack" (VF-1). From the first it took the black tail with a jolly roger stencil and the orange stripe across the cockpit area from the second. (Actually, it is quite obvious the squadron designator "VF" was also "retconed" to Variable Fighter) I don't mind the thin feet problem myself. Sorry for the previous double post (something was wrong with the connection or the server). But the very first mecha that Kawamori designed for the Macross series was nothing look like a modern aircraft, it's like a gundam space craft of fighter jet thing. I'm glad he didn't go that route. Quote
Ignacio Ocamica Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 Thanks for that scan!! Bigger resolution needed Quote
mickayesou Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 Thanks for that scan!! Bigger resolution needed Quote
jenius Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 head tucks in super tight... very nice. The hand content is way up over the VF-19K which is also nice. The feet look like they do collapse in on the lower left picture but they're definitely extend out in the fighter pictures so I'm not sure what's up with that. The feet definitely look like they have articulation which is AWESOME if it's true. Quote
eriku Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 There's something about the nosecone that reminds me of the Chunky- in a good way. I look at this in fighter mode and see a blend of Yamato's V2 with a bit of Chunky mixed in. That combined with the compacted head, the articulated feet and the 1/100 'fun-size'...and suddenly I'm finding myself excited for ANOTHER VF-1 TOY. Quote
lechuck Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 If any Bandai Japan employees are reading this: WE NEED SIDE COVERS, PLEASE!!! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.