mikeszekely

"Fully" being the operative word there. There are in fact two VERY short OVAs. They were bundled with some model kits in Japan or something.

You see how long it takes the battle 7 to transform so some of its defencive weapons wouldn't be clear to fire. Also the gunship undock from the ship while its transforming it won't have defence like the rest of the ship. the pinpoint barrier if it has one won't be as strong as the main. If I was attacking battle 7 with my fleet Ill attack the gun ship soon as it transform and maybe ram it with one or two of my ships to push it away and play keep away. The gunship will most likey be very slow and not very maneuverable compared to any of the other ships of the fleet. Also keep the escorts busy or destroyed since mac 7 they pop in the moments notice. edit: and to as Yeah, I never did really get into the whole Battle 7 transformation... seems to me like it would have been easier to just made sure the flight deck was clear of the gun section, then just point the bow in the direction of whatever they wanted to shoot at. I mean, the New Macross-class carriers mostly operated in space, so I don't imagine that angling the entire ship to shoot at a target would have been any more difficult than transforming the whole damn thing, and it probably would be easier to continue to launch and land Valkyries if it DIDN'T transform. That said, though, on the whole I like the Macross-class carriers. In their actual carrier mode, they look decent enough, and having the flight deck on the ship instead of attaching two smaller carriers makes sense to me. And while I don't see much of a reason to create a variable capital ship, the Macross-class looks fine in attacker mode, and even pays homage a bit to the original Macross by using the bridge section as the head, the engines as the feet, and the flight deck (in place of the entire carriers) as the arms.

Or, in other words, you can break it down like this, and with my personal rating on a 1-10 scale Universal Century (aka original) Mobile Suit (MS) Gundam (TV series, movies) - 9 MS Gundam: The 08th MS Team (OVA, movie) - 4 MS Gundam 0080: War in the Pocket (OVA) - 9 MS Gundam 0083: Stardust Memory (OVA, movie) - 6 MS Z Gundam (TV series, soon to be movies) - 10 MS Gundam ZZ (TV series) - 8 (it starts off like a 4, but ends like a 9) MS Gundam: Char's Counterattack (movie) - 8 MS Gundam F-91 (movie) - 7 MS V Gundam (TV series) - 7 G-Saviour (movie) - 1 Future Century (1st Alternate Universe [AU] Gundam) Mobile Fighter G Gundam (TV series) - 6 After Colony (2nd AU) New Mobile Report Gundam Wing (TV series) - 6 New Mobile Report Gundam W: Endless Waltz (OVA, movie) - 7 After War (3rd AU) After War Gundam X (TV series) - 8 Correct Century (4th AU, or possible the glue that binds all Gundam together) Turn A Gundam (TV series, movies) - no score, I haven't seen it Cosmic Era (5th AU) MS Gundam SEED (TV series) - 8 MS Gundam SEED Astray (OVA... I guess) - no score MS Gundam SEED Destiny (TV series in progress) - no score And before anyone says anything, yeah, I'm sure I'll get a lot of people that don't quite agree. A lot of people love the 08th MS Team, I personally thought it was the worst Gundam series I'd ever seen. Also, people tend to like V Gundam, which I thought was more like a decent AU series than a good UC series, and I also tend to like Gundam X a lot for some reason, even though most people don't seem to care for it. Go figure. On a similar note, Gundam Wing was (and unless SEED is working here, probably still is) the most popular Gundam in the States, with record ratings when it aired on Cartoon Network. For a lot of Americans, myself included, it was our first real taste of Gundam. A lot of people hold the series in high reguards because of it, but (especially when compared to UC Gundam), I find it to be a trite super-robot show full of pretty-boy pre-teen heroes. Finally, I don't care how much better the animation is, yes, I liked the original Gundam TV series much better than the movies, and yes, I do think that Z Gundam beats all, including the original.

This guy ;; Here's what EA says what their next gen Madden will look like Where did you find that picture at? It looks gorgeous..... That was from Magic box. Here's pic of the next gen NFS from EA I can't find any of these Next Generation images..... Here's the link I got it from http://www.the-magicbox.com/0412/game041202c.shtml In other words, it's conceptual art and NOT actual screenshots from actual games.

I think buying Criterion was bigger than buying Origin, since buying Criterion gave them Renderware, and the royalties from anyone who uses Renderware (including GTA, if I'm not mistaken). But I do see your point. In any case... my beef with EA is worse than my beef with Microsoft. I don't mind Windows XP, and I don't have Office installed on my computer. I use Firefox instead of IE. I hear about their anti-trust suits, but it doesn't seem to trickle down to me. Instead, I give Microsoft props for bringing me Xbox. But EA... they're just cockbites. I mean, first they wouldn't release games for the Dreamcast because they didn't want to compete with Sega Sports. Then they buy up little companies until they're the largest 3rd party developer around. Then they don't want to have their games Live enabled, because they want you to pay for their crappy service. Then they start stiffing their employees. Then, when they do have to compete with Sega Sports, they buy an exclusive license with the NFL instead of pricing Madden more competetively or actually working to improve the game. And now, they're buying a sizeable chunk of Ubisoft, who if I'm not mistaken, is EA's non-sports #1 rival. A good bit of that affects me directly.

Given that I'm a gamer first and foremost, and tend to spend most of my free money on videogames, I haven't been able to justify spending money on larger diecast planes or model kits. I did, however, try collecting some of the "Hot Wings" planes you used to be able to find in some department stores' toy section (I got mine at Ames). They were like Hot Wheels, I suppose, but they were planes instead of cars. I got the F-14, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-20, F-22, F-117, B-2, and SR-71. I have no idea what happened to the company, though. I'd have liked to collect a lot more of their stuff.

Missed the boat on that one. They've been buying smaller developers up for years. yes, EA buys developers, but I don't recall them buying publisher And again, it's one thing to buy a smaller developer, but a totally different thing to buy into their largest competitor.

The NFL thing won't count for much, since you always have the option to play non-licensed football games, or non-football games. But when EA starts buying out their largest competitors...? Anyway, there's already rumors going around that EA will dump Madden and mark up their football game to $60 to make up for the ridiculous ammount they paid the NFL.

Everyone I know that bought it played it for maybe a week and shelved it. I borrowed it from one of my friends, and while the setup is pretty cool, control stick sensitivity is still an issue, and a lot of the buttons on the controller are used at start up, and that's it. I personally would have rather paid less for a slightly smaller controller, especially if anything that could have been eliminated would have made your field of view larger. In other words, I think it's a pretty cool idea, but for the price, you could buy an Xbox, a Nintendo DS, a PS2, or three brand new games.

You forgot Mechassault! That's probably the only mecha game for the Xbox that I liked.

your argument is one that has been thrown up time and again, and really its a non starter. Sure countries can get their hands on Su-27, Rafale ect... but do they have the money to buy a E-2 behind it? the money to match the intensive air superiority training pilots recieve in the US? Do they have the experience and the traditions of the USN or USAF? Will they even have a sufficient number of planes? Its unlikely on all these counts. US air superiority is pretty much implied today. I'd be worried more about new generations of russian SAMs. Holy have you seen the defence budget today? 450 Billion dollars. And the military is stretched thin as it is, and is really not designed for the mission it needs to do, and people want to saddle it with more missions that really are obsolete and just waste more cash. Its time to look at priorities, and what you are proposing isn't one. Complacency isn't a good thing. We assume that our air superiority is implied, so we upgrade our planes with cheaper fighters that aren't really any better. One day, we'll wake up and realize that US air superiority is NOT a given. $450 billion... and you yourself admit that the military is stretched thin. I think my priorities are straight... defense should be a top, if not THE top priority. Again, there are plenty of other areas of government spending you could cut first. How about, instead of paying $40 for a hammer or $200 for a toilet seat, the government gets their crap at Wal-Mart for $2 and $6, respectively? How about we nip a few senators' pet projects? Streamline the federal government itself? I mean, we have something like 11 federal agencies that handle intelligence gathering. I can see some of them having differenct focuses than others, but with that many, some of them have to be redundant.

I thought the JSF was the new Commonality And that's why the JSF isn't really any faster or more maneuverable than the F-16.

Like others have said, if there is less of a need for an interceptor, and more of a need for multi-role attackers, then the move does make sense. I NEVER said that we don't need attackers. We definately need aircraft that can make precision strikes at ground targets. The need for attackers doesn't negate the need for interceptors or air superiority fighters. It is the job of the air superiority fighters to secure the skies and allow attackers to hit ground targets without worrying about being shot down by enemy interceptors. I do not believe such thinking is "Cold War mentality" either. The companies like Dassault and Mikoyan have a track record of being less than discerning about their customers. (A considerable portion of Iraq's air force was Mirages). It's not a stretch to imagine Rafales or Flankers in unfriendly forces. "Multi-role" is exactly what we don't need. Multi-role is in the 90's and 00's what "Commonality" was in the 60's. It's a method of cutting costs by using one plane for more than one role/branch that works okay rather than use multiple planes more suited to specific situations. A "jack of all trades, master of none." Personally, I'd rather my friends in the service had the best equipment possible. If government spending needs to be cut back, instead of taking it from defense, why not force polititcians to pay for limos themselves? They can certainly afford it with their ridiculous salaries.

The mecha in both shows look pretty similar. The designs work fine for me, but not really liking their paint jobs...

Then maybe we can get Master Replica bongsabers. Am I the only one who doesn't like Jedi? They're a bunch of panty-waisted do-gooders. They're like the Mormons of outer space. Oh, I'm with you. Dark Side all the way. Well, it wouldn't be Star Wars without somebody with a lightsaber, but I'd really rather see a show about more of a "one the fringe" kind of character, and definately NOT a NJO story, and NOT an X-Wing or Rogue Squadron show.

I think you should have had three choices in the poll. I'm all for progress, and as sad as it is, the F-14 is past its prime. But IMHO, so is the F/A-18, and the Bug is not a suitable replacement for the Tomcat.

The word fighter is what's confusing you. For the rest, http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=8543 http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=12053 Oh, I'm not confused in the slightest. The Navy is. You don't replace air superiority fighters with mutli-role attackers.

Because the Macross HAD crashed into earth by the time of Macross Zero. The Macross crashed in 1999, and Macross Zero is supposed to take place around 2007. SDF Macross takes place in 2009. The VF-0 transforms because it's developed alongside the VF-1 as an interim fighter with conventional jet engines until the kinks are worked out of the VF-1's thermonuclear engines.

No one is arguing that the Tomcat's time isn't up and that it shouldn't be replaced. We are arguing, however, that the Tomcat should be replaced by a newer, more superior fighter, of which the Super Hornet is neither. Hornets went into production only a few years after the Tomcat as a supporting fighter. It's debatable if the Super Hornet is any real improvement of the older Hornets, let alone fit to take over as the Navy's superiority fighter. And nevermind the fact that the proposed Super Tomcat would have smoked the Super Hornet in every way. And as for the whole Navy Raptor thing, it's true that the F/A-22 in its current configuration isn't suited for carrier use... but Lockheed had plans for a Raptor variant that was, and it would have replaced the Tomcat. Budget concerns/pressure from Congress caused the Navy to abandon that project, though, and all we're left with is the Bug.

If they'd wanted to make an ultra-violent football game to begin with, why not take the unlicensed route in the first place? Or maybe have made a game with the XFL license during its one brief season? I mean, with the Sega Sports games, they were going for realism, hence the need for the license. But I fail to see why Midway censored themselves to have it. Anyway, a spokesperson for Take Two said that Take Two and Sega are evaluating their options for considering the 2K franchise without licenses.

Nor did he. He took three existing non-related stories, then edited them in ways that connect (and dumb down) all three, then struts around as if he did actually create something original.

I can, thanks.

For the prices listed on the first page I rather get a laptop. I love those ones that are for "Informational documents on how to get a PSP quicker and cheaper." Here's a tip on getting one cheaper... don't spend $30 on a document!

On mission 15 (I think), Chopper will say something about some song being great and or appropriate for the mission. Say no, and you'll go on to the B side path for the next mission or two. After the branching path ends, the YF-23 should be available for purchase.

This is fairly old news. Before GI, OXM said something about it. And before them, talk was already going around. All signs point to the Xbox Next launching with Perfect Dark Zero, and Halo 3 will release on whatever day Sony decides to launch the PS3.