Cdr Fokker

Colors like that are no problem at all to someone with Photoshop and the know-how. And we have plenty of people here that know how to do this kind of thing (same thing with the extra bits of logos in the images, and the reversed writing on the -21 in that one design) I still hope that the schematics can work out, though.

Not everything carries fighters. The UNS Oberth destroyers - seen briefly in SDFM - do not carry fighters, for one. The Zentradi Gunboat/Gun Destroyer, as seen in DYRL? also does not carry fighters. Just pointing out that you can't make over-generalizations. Plus, what matters is what the craft is designed for; the fact that it may carry fighters is somewhat irrelevant (as your comparison to modern warships harboring rotary-wing aircraft - they house aircraft, but aren't classified as carriers because that isn't their purpose) Besides, the Macross is a SDF, right? It's not a monitor or a carrier...

Am I the only one now who doesn't think so? I mean, the cockpit panels do look good, and if the lineart/schematics will be problematic (due to the small writing, or whatever reason), then that's fine, but I personally prefer the lineart/schematic panels over the cockpits.

Notice the three letters in front of my statement: I M O. That'd be IN MY OPINION. From what I have seen, and what I, personally, think, D3 will not be my kind of game. But STALKER probably will. Comparisons to HL don't get you very far. That game fell WAY short of the hype which I had heard about. While good, it certainly isn't something that should be continued to be followed closely today. With the increase in processor and memory capabilities, we should now expect more ineractivity, more dynamic elements, and less linear shoot-em-up gameplay. D3 will probably give the latter. Why? Because it's doom, for one (and that's what people are expecting from it). Generally, what I've seen also shows this, that while there will be a storyline, the game will still be predominantly straightforward action. Also, I didn't straight out bash D3. I said that IMO, good graphics + incredible and somewhat-original (at least in the way they're combined) elements > what D3 will probably offer, but all in what I would like from a game. Did I say straight out that D3 sucks? No. Did I imply that I think D3 will probably be mostly eye candy? Yes, but until it comes out, we don't know at all, so it's all opinions. Plus, just because I don't like something doesn't mean everybody doesn't like it. Probably the opposite - if I don't like something, chances are, there's a big following.

Guns for arms greatly reduces the versatility of the Valkyrie. With arms and hands, it may perform utility work as well as combat, and for combat, it could utilize multiple types of gunpods without physically changing any "modules" (well, if more than one type of gunpod was standard, that is) As for the "head" - this is to look cool, plus a place to house sensors on a movable/traversable platform.

IMO, STALKER is going to kick the crap out of D3. Pretty damn good graphics coupled with amazing gameplay elements (STALKER) wins out over just great graphics alone (D3), at least in my book. Also, who here has seen the promo images of the Unreal 3 engine? Back to the talk of systems: I have a feeling that D3 isn't going to be that good at all for people with lower-end machines. Yes, they might meet the requirements, but the major draw of D3 (aside from "it's doom") is the graphics, as well as a little bit of the atmosphere that the graphics create As for the talk of consoles - "true" FPS's suck on consoles (meaning ones without assisted/auto aiming and the like). Why? The console is geared toward the joypad instead of the mouse and keyboard. It is much harder to get the speed and precision of a mouse from any sort of stick on a joypad. People also talk about consoles looking just as good - maybe better - graphically. But that's due to some of the issues already addressed, such as the lower resolutions of TVs, which means that the lower-power consoles can still deal with a lot of stuff (try running your PC games at TV resolutions all the time and see what kind of speed you get with that).

It looks to me like that could actually be the Macross in the background - or rather something resembling it. The angle of those twin booms compared to the angle of the Valkyrie makes it seem that they are not actually attached to it, but are in the background.

Which is why stuff like the original Star Wars looks so much better than the newer stuff. Yeah, the X-Wings might have been only two inches long or whatever, but they were still real, unlike all of this obviously-fake CG nowadays.

Like many others, I agree that the Alpha does look cool, but the $80 price tag turns me off. I hope to maybe score one secondhand from a MWer somewhere down the line...

Yeah, I'd like to know as well, so I can figure out how many resin kits I need to figure into my budget...

Note to self - buy another gun safe (or two) and lock up all of my Macross stuff in there. Then it won't matter who dates who... well, unless I can get a g/f like that! Great find, man!

Very similar situation here... after hearing about macross, checking out MW a bit, saw Plus. And that was that. My rt junk has been thrown into a pile, never to be seen again. I guess I really should sell it off to some rt guy who still hasn't converted or something... Anyway, nice to see new faces all the time. You've finally seen the light!

Yeah, me too. I'm only planning on getting one of these stands and have it for a FAST Pack-equipped Valk in fighter mode, like the ARMD launch arms upon which the stand is based. The rest of my valks are either on the ground or on those flexi display stands.

You COULD eBay your Robotech stuff. Seriously after you watch the Orig. you won't EVER pick it up again. *Looks at RT cd's gathering dust A-1 has a point there Yep, he sure does... I'm just too lazy to deal with the whole ordeal of getting rid of all of my RT junk.

OICW, and sort of, but not quite. Yeah, the XM-8 grew out of the remnants of the OICW programme. XM-8 is pretty much old news now, until it gets official adopted as the M8...

Aww, you got my hopes up. I saw this thread moved back up to the top and thought "sweet, maybe they'll be available soon!" Only to find no news...

I like it! On a side note, I got my SDFM cases the other day... very nice, though I'm such a latecomer I got #'s 018 (Mech) and 024 (Mikimoto).

Well, we havn't seen an Alien who used a Predator as a host, so that could make for a interesting combo. Well, unless you count AvP2 for PC, which had Pred-Aliens... it's a great game, BTW. I was hoping that the movie would follow along the lines of that kinda stuff (the games, books, etc) instead of turning into this "xtreme" craptacular production. It seems like they tried too hard... and pulled something doing it. Highly doubt it will be much good, mainly due to the changes in designs and, as I said, the apperence that they tried way too hard to "look good" and so will end up looking very, very bad.

Yeah, I do the same... the "real deal" for thinning, and windex for clean up.

That's the way I see it too... why the hell are so many (Macross) people getting worked up about it? To me, it shows once again how rediculous HG is.

HOLY *%$&!!! Now that's a Valk. If only it were fully variable...

Yeah, black is too much... grey is the way to go. I plan to do some weathering and such on my 1/48s, but first I need the time, and then I need the courage to actually try it on a $100+ valk, as opposed to $20 models...

Hell yeah. That should work very nicely. Not a real big fan of having the robot box/eye on the spine, but hey, guess I'll have to see what you have in mind to really agree or disagree.

Yeah, a pic of Sharon would probably work well, with a black BG too. Otherwise, I think the desert is the way to go.

The M+ box is going to kick so much ass. ... I think that about sums it up.