Unix Square Robotech VF-1J

[danth]

Personally I don't see the appeal. Ignoring all the small aesthetic changes, I'm not a fan of the legs being so separated (both vertically and horizontally) from the main fuselage in fighter mode. And there was seemingly no effort to recess the head in fighter mode.

[Black Valkyrie]

 

Finally ! at least there is gonna be a 1A CF, which is a must. 

 

 

[shazam]

https://www.bigbadtoystore.com/Product/VariationDetails/296295?o=1

 

Edited October 30 by shazam

[sh9000]

Major pass.

[Big s]

2 hours ago, Black Valkyrie said:

 

Finally ! at least there is gonna be a 1A CF, which is a must. 

 

 

Not if nobody buys their 1J

 

2 hours ago, sh9000 said:

Major pass.

Captain Aintbuyin Dis

[mikeszekely]

Maybe that price tag is so high because it covers a stint in rehab when you finally convince it to stop using steroids...

[twich]

I think that this is very interesting.  The design of the legs and how panels slide back to cover the feet/thrust vectoring is an interesting new thing.  I hope that we get some in depth pictures detailing all about this.

Twich

[no3Ljm]

Displayed at The Toys Collectors Market in Hong Kong.

[grundee]

4 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

Displayed at The Toys Collectors Market in Hong Kong.

 

 

 

 

[jvmacross]

15 hours ago, no3Ljm said:

Displayed at The Toys Collectors Market in Hong Kong.

[Hikuro]

I mean the robot mode, it's neat, the design isn't terrible at all it's just the esthetics and lines are interesting and over done which brings out a ........neat appearance.
But after that, you put it into the other two forms...damn is it awful to look at, just absolutely awful. Like the entire budget went to making the robot mode cool and the rest just after birth defects.  

[jenius]

They should have made it so the inside of the legs opened up to form a shell over the bottom of fighter mode then stored beefy arms inside the leg cavities and under the backpack. Hell, put the vertical stabilizers on the arms and get rid of the backpack. It doesn't look like the original design so why not go nuts? Super Parts could still open in like the old joke machines. No matter what they did though, having the intakes stick way out from fighter looks bad.

[Black Valkyrie]

In one way I consider it Macross The First merchandise.  Need more pics of the 1A CF. 

 

 

[Big s]

1 hour ago, Black Valkyrie said:

In one way I consider it Macross The First merchandise.  Need more pics of the 1A CF. 

 

 

More like Macross the Ugly 

[Shawn]

I think they should consider retiring this prototype and create another for the shows, it has has seen some pretty severe battle action.

I suspect it was on the clear stand behind it and broke.

[sh9000]

It's got Super Pursuit Mode or something.

[twich]

Looking at the pictures up on BBTS, it looks like a panel on the outside of the legs slide down in fighter mode, at least the picture showed it down in fighter mode.  This is 8 inches tall, so that puts in roughly in scale with the 1/60, ThreeZero take on the VF-1.  I rather enjoy the Three Zero interpretation of this and am hoping that I can acquire this too!

Twich

[jvmacross]

5 hours ago, Big s said:

More like Robotech the Ugly 

fixed!

 

[Black Valkyrie]

 

Overall I like the bulky design, I have no issue with it.  I`m hoping for a TV Max after that. 

 

 

[jvmacross]

This garbage seems to also have slots to accomodate fast packs....wonder how they will ruin that concept....lol

[Radioguy]

Again, if this were die-cast, it would be fun. I still think it may be depending on the build quality.

[Big s]

On 11/3/2024 at 6:17 AM, jvmacross said:

This garbage seems to also have slots to accomodate fast packs....wonder how they will ruin that concept....lol

Just imagine even bigger calves 

[Spark-O-Matic]

Looking Forward to buying the Armored Version! Ill wait to buy another example once it goes on Clearance sale and it will! all because too many macross collectors are purest not getting the stylized point of it while transformer collectors are just going to pass unless they make a god of flame version.

This will be one Robotech/Macross offering that will be a one run and done. 

[twich]

I, for one want to support anyone to make a quality representation of a transformable Valkyrie. I enjoy my Three Zero, Bandai, Yamato and Arcadia Valkyries and want to continue to buy new Valkyries. We, as fans of the series and the collectible toys should encourage this. If the toy is crap, don’t buy it, but I hope it is quality. We shall see.

Twich

[jvmacross]

1 hour ago, Spark-O-Matic said:

Looking Forward to buying the Armored Version! Ill wait to buy another example once it goes on Clearance sale and it will! all because too many macross collectors are purest not getting the stylized point of it while transformer collectors are just going to pass unless they make a god of flame version.

This will be one Robotech/Macross offering that will be a one run and done. 

Nah...I like some SD stuff when done well....these Unix Robotech toys are being rejected by many collectors because they are just simply terrible looking...

[Chronocidal]

I can understand people liking the aesthetics (of the battroid, anyway), but I think this is one of those cases where it is an incredibly bold decision to think that it will appeal to a large enough audience to sell well.  Aesthetics entirely aside, this is a product designed for a niche within a niche within a niche, and should fall under that same reasoning for why obscure variants and paint schemes are generally never brought to mass market: there simply is not enough interest to make the production pay for itself.

This one.. I just don't understand it.  My brain is just kind of screaming at me that it doesn't make any sense.  It feels like they're trying to design a VF-1 for... people who don't like the aircraft mode of the VF-1?  It's just confusing.

Their presentation isn't helping matters either, because holy cow that display is a disaster.  The battroid mode at least stands up, but the gerwalk looks like a looks collection of bot parts slapped together, and the fighter is falling apart.

[jvmacross]

In a long line of bad Robotech ideas, this has got to be among the top 3...top 10 for sure!

I'm sure HG showed no hesitation in taking Unix's money....but then again I doubt they have ever said no to any licensing request...LOL

[Big s]

6 hours ago, twich said:

I, for one want to support anyone to make a quality representation of a transformable Valkyrie. I enjoy my Three Zero, Bandai, Yamato and Arcadia Valkyries and want to continue to buy new Valkyries. We, as fans of the series and the collectible toys should encourage this. If the toy is crap, don’t buy it, but I hope it is quality. We shall see.

Twich

I think this more a vote with your bucks kinda thing. If enough people like it, they’ll buy it, but if not it will be a hard lesson.

 I think it’s tough for anyone to support these since they barely resemble what they’re supposed to be and then on top of that they don’t really look very good for being an odd representation of a redesign.

something like the rg evangelion kits or Orange cat Tekkaman blade are good examples of redesigns that still have an appeal to the original. While some of those samurai style Star Wars figures are so different, yet even with big differences still look cool.

this thing unfortunately only has a couple of misused gimmicks and a whole lotta ugly going on.

if they wanted some type of support, then they should’ve tried taking hints at the early prototype stages to fix things so that the design flowed better.

[pengbuzz]

On 11/2/2024 at 6:15 PM, Shawn said:

I think they should consider retiring this prototype and create another for the shows, it has has seen some pretty severe battle action.

I suspect it was on the clear stand behind it and broke.

Wow... this makes the 1/55 chunky monkeys look good...

[Big s]

4 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

Wow... this makes the 1/55 chunky monkeys look good...

Gotta agree there

[lechuck]

On 11/5/2024 at 6:26 PM, jvmacross said:

Nah...I like some SD stuff when done well....

See I don't like SD stuff, the difference being that I would avoid the threads that don't interest me and not enter them to post one liners of ridicule that serves no real purpose other than drowning everything into negativity.

On 11/5/2024 at 6:26 PM, jvmacross said:

these Unix Robotech toys are being rejected by many collectors because they are just simply terrible looking...

Who are these collectors and how do you know there are many that sympathise this way?

On 11/5/2024 at 7:44 PM, Chronocidal said:

I can understand people liking the aesthetics (of the battroid, anyway), but I think this is one of those cases where it is an incredibly bold decision to think that it will appeal to a large enough audience to sell well.  Aesthetics entirely aside, this is a product designed for a niche within a niche within a niche, and should fall under that same reasoning for why obscure variants and paint schemes are generally never brought to mass market: there simply is not enough interest to make the production pay for itself.

Other posters here have wondered and complained that this costs 160$ instead of the wishful 60$ – maybe the company has actually done their homework and factored in the niche-ness?

On 11/5/2024 at 7:44 PM, Chronocidal said:

This one.. I just don't understand it.  My brain is just kind of screaming at me that it doesn't make any sense.  It feels like they're trying to design a VF-1 for... people who don't like the aircraft mode of the VF-1?  It's just confusing.

What's there not to understand or be confused about? It's a reinterpreted version of the VF-1 that's all. Unix Square never proclaimed to be going anime/line art accurate only to reveal something completely different. Why do you assume that a fantasy space jet fighter (that's what VF-1 is and nothing more) always has to be rooted in real world airframe/aircraft engineering or that fighter mode should be the defining factor for collectors. It's ironic that people here go all Greta Thunberg when a VF-1 fighter mode doesn't look "real" enough, but never have an issue with the fantastical aspect of it transforming into a robot... but yeah "how dare you Unix Square for spacing the intakes so far apart!"🙄 A bit of a weird and contradictory stance to have for all of this if you ask me. 🤔

20 hours ago, Big s said:

I think this more a vote with your bucks kinda thing. If enough people like it, they’ll buy it, but if not it will be a hard lesson.

 I think it’s tough for anyone to support these since they barely resemble what they’re supposed to be and then on top of that they don’t really look very good for being an odd representation of a redesign.

What is this supposed to even mean? What is Unix Square's effort supposed to be like? Anyone remotely familiar with the IP will tell you it's based on the VF-1, all the usual attributes and traits are there, it's the just the design language that differs greatly. Where does resemblance start and end, who defines that?

20 hours ago, Big s said:

something like the rg evangelion kits or Orange cat Tekkaman blade are good examples of redesigns that still have an appeal to the original. While some of those samurai style Star Wars figures are so different, yet even with big differences still look cool.

this thing unfortunately only has a couple of misused gimmicks and a whole lotta ugly going on.

if they wanted some type of support, then they should’ve tried taking hints at the early prototype stages to fix things so that the design flowed better.

Sorry but you are just basically proclaiming what appeals to you aesthetically as a de-facto standard for everyone else to adjust their sensibilities to – it doesn't work that way. The samurai Star Wars figures might be great toys, but I don't appreciate the re-interpretation – so in this instance it is not a "good example of redesign". You say the Unix Square VF-1 is ugly and needs fixing and the next person will tell you it's all fine – who is right and who is wrong is a moot point when it comes to design aesthetics.

[Chronocidal]

2 hours ago, lechuck said:

What's there not to understand or be confused about? It's a reinterpreted version of the VF-1 that's all. Unix Square never proclaimed to be going anime/line art accurate only to reveal something completely different. Why do you assume that a fantasy space jet fighter (that's what VF-1 is and nothing more) always has to be rooted in real world airframe/aircraft engineering or that fighter mode should be the defining factor for collectors. It's ironic that people here go all Greta Thunberg when a VF-1 fighter mode doesn't look "real" enough, but never have an issue with the fantastical aspect of it transforming into a robot... but yeah "how dare you Unix Square for spacing the intakes so far apart!"🙄 A bit of a weird and contradictory stance to have for all of this if you ask me. 🤔

Why do I assume a fantasy space jet fighter has to be rooted in real world aircraft engineering?  Because a significant chunk of the media involving the VF-1 shows it flying in the atmosphere, operating as a standard aircraft, completely independently of any of the advanced technology it depends on for transforming.  That's baked into the definition of what the VF-1 is, as defined in the universe it exists in.  The prototype couldn't even transform, so it had to be capable of flying as a normal aircraft.

Does that mean it has to?  No.  But it does.  Could I cover it in thrusters, remove the wings, and make it fly on pure fantasy rocket power?  Sure.  But it doesn't do that in any of the animation.  Maybe I'm narrow minded, but when I think of re-imagining a design, I don't believe that also involves re-imagining the universe it exists in, or the rules it operates by.  It starts to get into a ship of Theseus situation.  How different can I make something before it can no longer be considered a re-interpretation of the thing it's derived from?  Once you start redefining the rules it operates under, you're probably better off just making an original design, or even writing your own universe with its own lore to operate within.

And honestly, I'm not even saying this goes that far.  With enough thrust, I'm sure even this thing could fly (hey, it worked for the F-4 ),  I get the aesthetic idea.  I don't even mind the look of the battroid.  But what I'm more concerned with are aspects that are completely separate from design aesthetics, and more focused on the actual engineering of the toy.

The mechanical execution of this toy just looks sloppy as hell.  The design just looks like they wanted to make a re-interpreted robot design, and the transformation is a contractual obligation.  How did they manage to come up with tail hinges that look clunkier than just about every other VF-1?  Why are there so many weird joints and panels that look like the toy is actively trying to fall apart at the seams?

It really begs the question of why they would make it transform at all.  The battroid looks like an interesting redesign, especially with the armor added.  But I think they would have been better off selling it as a non-transforming figure, because the other two modes feel like they actually detract from the presentation.  Maybe it's just a sloppy prototype issue, combined with display preppers who don't know how to clean it up?

 

Edited November 6 by Chronocidal

[Big s]

3 hours ago, lechuck said:

Sorry but you are just basically proclaiming what appeals to you aesthetically as a de-facto standard for everyone else to adjust their sensibilities to – it doesn't work that way. The samurai Star Wars figures might be great toys, but I don't appreciate the re-interpretation – so in this instance it is not a "good example of redesign". You say the Unix Square VF-1 is ugly and needs fixing and the next person will tell you it's all fine – who is right and who is wrong is a moot point when it comes to design aesthetics.

You can like or dislike those Star Wars figures, but the difference is that the designs flow smoothly to what they’re trying to accomplish. This toy kinda just fails as far as flow. Things like super skinny knees in the battroid while having massive chunky thighs and calves. And that odd bit of battroid design doesn’t help the flow into other modes like it’s fighter mode.

the gimmick of the collapsing inner leg armor is a very interesting design choice to try and save space with the arms that I think a lot of other vf-1 toys should take a look at since that part is so rounded that it usually gets in the way of the arms. But in this case the arms are so clunky that that bit of cool functionality doesn’t help it since the fighter parts seem too small like the chest plate. It ends up making this fighter appear more like a transport plane. It kinda seems more like something on a far less expensive cheap transformer toy than a premium Macross toy.

this company should have looked at their designs and seen what worked and what wasn’t working, but just didn’t care. In this day of computer technology, it wouldn’t have been too difficult. They could’ve done better to make the design flow more smoothly and that’s something important to a design that’s supposed to change into an aircraft and then they’re charging $160 for it.

 

[enphily]

It's interesting design for me and i would buy one with armor

[nightmareB4macross]

This is a truly a desired taste, and definitely not for me. No matter how bored or delayed in flight I get.

It appears as if this is an over steroid Yamaguchi Revoltech VF.

The proportions are just so over the top and are not appealing in any mode.

But I guess since we’re out of paint schemes might as well change the mold.