1/60 Yamato VF-4G Web-Exclusive Toy

[ff95gj]

It looks so big... The wingspan is almost equal to the man's hand-to-elbow in length...

[David Hingtgen]

We should have gotten Graham to let them know about that, that's a pretty major thing to have off. Especially when every single line art picture and even in the video games shows them to be parallel.

We (or at least, I) have mentioned this since the very first proto-CAD drawings were unveiled. I'm pretty sure Graham mentioned it many months ago to them, but got no reply.

[EXO]

i kinda see what might be hinges. But those aren't the same wings. On the left where the arrows pointing is on the shoulder. On the right is on the leg. It'd be cool if they were on hinges but I don't see the point.

nm, I see what you're saying...

[Reïvaj]

We (or at least, I) have mentioned this since the very first proto-CAD drawings were unveiled. I'm pretty sure Graham mentioned it many months ago to them, but got no reply.

Yep, and this is what you said:

"Fin/wing angles still all wrong from head-on. Tell 'em Graham!

(canards and wings should be parallel, ventral fins and tailfins should be aligned with each other)"

Edited July 21, 2012 by Reïvaj

[charger69]

i kinda see what might be hinges. But those aren't the same wings. On the left where the arrows pointing is on the shoulder. On the right is on the leg. It'd be cool if they were on hinges but I don't see the point.

I was trying to say that both tail fins and ventral fins are on hinges and it's highly possible to position all of them in a desirable parallel angle

[MichaelS]

Question how does the VFX version differ from the FB and line art this may how it is.

[MichaelS]

Ok so I found a YouTube video of the VF-4 in VFX and it appears that the fins on this toy are correct to the game model which they said many time is what they build not FB or line art but VFX. I will own this valk. They will have to change the fins and probly something else for FB2012 to be correct.

[Guvava]

I sure hope the feet can be pushed further into the engine bays in fighter mode. I think there was line art for the VFX model not having the feet poke out so much in fighter mode. That's the only major thing that bothers me.

[MichaelS]

At this point the origami VF-4 needs no more folds in my opinion but why not hope for the best.

[David Hingtgen]

I was trying to say that both tail fins and ventral fins are on hinges and it's highly possible to position all of them in a desirable parallel angle

Parallel, but not all along the same line. You should be able to draw a single line from tip of tailfin to tip of ventral fin, that goes right through them. (see the blue line)

[macrossnake]

can't wait to see more from Wonderfest later.

[EXO]

very happy so far!!! You appear to be teasing us, which is very bad for my mental status. Woot I am no longer cannon fodder!!

trust me... I am among the teased!

[charger69]

Parallel, but not all along the same line. You should be able to draw a single line from tip of tailfin to tip of ventral fin, that goes right through them. (see the blue line)

Hmmm... then we need a clear front view of the toy...

[promethuem5]

I'm pretty sure Graham mentioned it many months ago to them, but got no reply.

That's because Yamato's not run by crazy people.

Honestly, if the angle of those fins is enough to completely ruin a toy we've waited years for, then it doesn't sound like you were going to be happy no matter what. The level of your nit-pickery has reached a new high. You're complaining about accuracy to supplementary details added after the fact to something that was animated for an appearance measured in seconds.

[Omegablue]

So will also the variants of it also only be exclusives?

[Chronocidal]

Honestly, if the angle of those fins is enough to completely ruin a toy we've waited years for, then it doesn't sound like you were going to be happy no matter what. The level of your nit-pickery has reached a new high. You're complaining about accuracy to supplementary details added after the fact to something that was animated for an appearance measured in seconds.

That is not nitpickery, that is asking for people to be accurate to the source material, and it shouldn't be that hard to do this.

This is in the same realm as asking people making an F-18 replica to make sure they angle the tails out, because it is one of the defining characteristics of the aircraft. It's not asking too much for them to make sure they get it right.

It won't make or break the product, no. But it looks sloppy, and to ignore that sort of detail entirely is asinine.

Unless there is a very good reason for it, there should be no reason not to make those angles accurate. Given that all the control surfaces already angle all over the place anyway, and the angle of any particular control surface besides the canards has absolutely no bearing on any other mode besides fighter (since they ALL can bend to whatever angle is required), there should be absolutely no reason why they can't design the aircraft so the wings sit at the proper angles.

It's not picky to ask people not to be sloppy in their work, and this is definitely sloppy. It still might be a great product, but entirely missing something like this for so long is stupid.

Really the bottom line here? Yes, it will probably be stupidly easy to fix ourselves once we get these in hand, either by sanding or building up the hinges so the wings are at the right angle. But if it's so easy to do, why didn't they do it in the first place? We're already going to be paying through the nose for these, and we shouldn't have to be doing their work for them to fix mistakes in the design.

Edited July 23, 2012 by Chronocidal

[VF5SS]

Should I bring up that most of the GK's appear to not have the fins or wings aligned correctly either

[sketchley]

That is not nitpickery, that is asking for people to be accurate to the source material, and it shouldn't be that hard to do this.

Who says they are not? The design has anime magic. Therefore, there must be compromises made simply to turn it into a 3D toy that is as accurate as possible in ALL 3 modes.

I say we all relax until we've seen the final product...

[Omegablue]

LOL, people are starting to twitch on the panic button.

[MichaelS]

Please reread the posts about what they are building the VFX Vf-4 not the FB2012 VF-4 there is a youtube video that shows the VF-4G and it appears to be correct to that model that is the only license they have.

[Macross_Fanboy]

Who has the license to FB2012???

[EXO]

MEEEEEE!!!!

[MichaelS]

I dont think anybody has or at least never heard anybody talk about it but Yamato had already owed a VFX license for awhile without spending anymore money.

[Chronocidal]

Who says they are not? The design has anime magic. Therefore, there must be compromises made simply to turn it into a 3D toy that is as accurate as possible in ALL 3 modes.

Anime magic isn't an issue here, because none of the surfaces we're complaining about being misaligned has anything to do with properly transforming the plane.

There are no compromises that need to be made with the wings and tails. They don't affect the transformation (they're actually just kibble in this design really), and you could easily change the mounts yourself to line them up if you want, just by reshaping the supports by filing/superglue/etc.

It's like saying the size of the rear view mirror on a car somehow effects whether the headlights are bright enough. They're not even related, so there should be no reason why the transformation should limit what angle the wings are positioned.

They just didn't do it right, and it's been that way all along.

Edited July 23, 2012 by Chronocidal

[promethuem5]

you could easily change the mounts yourself to line them up if you want, just by reshaping the supports by filing/superglue/etc.

Then do this and let the rest of us enjoy what we're seeing so far and look forward to learning more. You and DH have made your point, and it's clear that nothing will ever make you happy. If you guys have such absolute requirements for such things, why not just make your own? Clearly you're requirements are above that of us 'regular buyers', so you clearly need an extra special product.

And besides, if you're signature is nothing but a list of complaints about Yamato toys, then why keep reading and posting about them anyway? Find something that makes you happy to get worked up about.

[Kyp Durron]

Please reread the posts about what they are building the VFX Vf-4 not the FB2012 VF-4 there is a youtube video that shows the VF-4G and it appears to be correct to that model that is the only license they have.

Link?

-Kyp

[ErikElvis]

from this poor pic it looks the same as the toy.

Edited July 23, 2012 by ErikElvis

[Chronocidal]

Then do this and let the rest of us enjoy what we're seeing so far and look forward to learning more. You and DH have made your point, and it's clear that nothing will ever make you happy. If you guys have such absolute requirements for such things, why not just make your own? Clearly you're requirements are above that of us 'regular buyers', so you clearly need an extra special product. And besides, if you're signature is nothing but a list of complaints about Yamato toys, then why keep reading and posting about them anyway? Find something that makes you happy to get worked up about.

I think you're missing the point.

We've been trying to raise the issue so that Yamato becomes aware of it before it's too late to fix. So far, we've heard nothing from Graham at all about this, but if they're still working from resin prototypes, then the molds probably haven't been cast yet, and there's time to fix it. If not, oh well, people here can (and will) resort to custom mods to fix it.

The problem is, for as much as we're likely paying for this thing? I'd expect to not have to fix it myself right out of the box. Really.. my personal issue with this is that it's stupid to not make it correctly. Obviously no one's going to make a perfect product, but if there's one thing I absolutely loathe in any type of work, it's using the fact that it won't be perfect as an excuse to slack off and not fix obvious errors that everyone can see.

I'll be very honest though.. I'm weird about this type of thing. The actual error doesn't bother me that much. I'm more bothered by the fact that they seem to have just completely overlooked it. I see way too many things like this in my regular job, and they always grate on me.

In the case of this valk in particular, I'd think making the aircraft mode look as good as possible is kind of a big thing, since I really don't know of anyone who's planning to buy one because they love the battroid mode.

If it can't be fixed before production, oh well, we'll live.

You should know by now though that this forum practically runs on debates about inaccuracies though. If you could generate electricity by nitpicking, we'd probably solve the world's energy problems as a whole.

[Mommar]

I'm not going to hem and haw but I believe Chronocidal is right that it would be lazy not to fix it. It's also still possible they're tweaking things and haven't gotten to it yet? Remember the nose didn't used to have any curvature and they've now fixed that. The feet were old VF-1 looking feet until just recently they've changed shape/function (though they don't recess to some people's preferences... yet.) it's possible they're still working up/tweaking the placement for other things and won't bother until the end. Getting the transformation to function is the #1 priority. I'm sure fin configuration is at the end of a very long list.

[VF5SS]

You should know by now though that this forum practically runs on debates about inaccuracies though. If you could generate electricity by nitpicking, we'd probably solve the world's energy problems as a whole.

then the only solution is

occupy Yamato

[EXO]

Azreal brought it up somewhere else and MichaelS could be right. The fact that it's based on VF-X lineart could be a legality/licensing issue. Thee guys have a very keen eye for detail and there are reasons for them doing what they do, I doubt "laziness" is one of them.

Some people on both sides of the arguments are stepping way over the line of civility. They better step it back before the teacher pulls out the ruler and smacks them on the back of their hands. There's no need to get rude or just plain insulting here.

then the only solution is

occupy Yamato

LoL. [insert photoshopped pepperspray pic here.]

[MichaelS]

links that I have: http://www.macrossworld.com/2655/outlook-for-the-2012-version-of-the-vf-4-lightning-not-so-good/ ,

[VF5SS]

Yuuri Yui is the best obscure Macross girl

[Chronocidal]

Eh, I can't say it's lazy, or what. They've obviously already created a masterpiece to get this thing looking as good as it is already, so they clearly know what they're doing. MIssing a big detail like that just seems oddly uncharacteristic.

This actually reminds me of something I did once with a computer model though, so it might be exactly what Mommar mentioned, and they're waiting to fix it until bigger issues are resolved. Design wise it should be very simple to get the wing surfaces at the right angles, but they might not have the alignment of the other components finalized, or something like that. It might make sene to wait and fine tune things.

If there's a good reason for things not to line up, then that's fine, I'm just glad to (maybe) have a chance to get one of these after so many years.

[MichaelS]

LOL now I was trying to compare differance in FB2012 and VFX VF-4's not bridge bunnies