Vic Mancini

haha yeah i remeber the shaka zulu v wallace smack talk, there were moments when I thought 'someone looks like their gonna start swingin soon' when they were arguing about weapons and such.

I just saw that episode, and I sensed a lot of tension too.

One thing I didn't like about that episode was they weren't really taking environment into account. You look at the Zulu warrior, and yeah...he's kind of ridiculous, fighting in a loin cloth with no armor at all and a rawhide shield. You would think the advantage would obviously have to go to a Scottish Rebel. But are they fighting in Scotland or in Africa? Because if you're fighting in the blazing heat of the African Savannah, (and probably waiting/walking in it for hours before you find an opponent), all those heavy Scottish weapons and armor might become a huge detriment.

Anyways...interesting show for sure. Even if the science is questionable.

I love this show also. I never saw the spetznas vs green beret ep! Sounds awesome.

Spike's been rerunning the first season in preparation for the second, and I just caught the Samurai vs Viking episode again. The guest samurai's accuracy with the bow & arrow is crazy. I was a little miffed when they gave so much credit to the Viking's ridiculous double-spear throw. What a useless attack. A samurai would be able to take out both his eyeballs, both his testicles, and put a final arrow straight through his throat before the viking was even in smelling distance of tagging him with a double-spear throw. ...But I guess they can't make the show too one-sided.

Oh yeah, Moon was good too.

+1 for Contact and especially Gattaca.

Huge fan of PopBot, Zombies VS Robots, and WWR, right here too.

I don't have any of the maquettes, but they look awesome.

If you need proof of this, consider the following - a focal point is just a theoretical point in space, mathematically it could be as small as a spec of dust, yet when I focus on an object I'm not limited to just 1 pixel of it, but I can see the totality of the object pretty well.

Actually that's not really true. Your field of focus may not literally be "1 pixel", but it's actually not far off. The scope of a human being's actual focus is practically laser beam narrow. 99% of your vision is peripheral and unfocused.

It only feels like you can see the totality of an object because your eyes dart and twitch around and scan the object in quick little fragments that your brain pieces together, and you take the overall sense of the object in through your peripheral vision which fills in the gaps. It also feels like you see the totality of something when you've already seen it before. Like if you're looking at a familiar coffee mug from your kitchen cabinet. You already remember what most of it looks like, but in actual truth you can only focus your eyes on a few square millimeters of the coffee mug at any given time.

But I will concede that you can see a lot with your peripheral vision. I'm pretty sure most of what we read is actually taken in through the unfocused peripheral side of our vision. Tests have proven that we don't read words from front to back, or letter by letter. And that we actually fix our eyes on the center of the word, or group of words, and read them as a whole. I'm sure this applies to visual details as well. So it's not like I'm trying to say that you can't see any of the visuals because your eyes are completely occupied with reading text.

But the simple fact of the matter is, and I think we can all agree on this whether you are into subs or dubs, is that your actual range of focus is extremely narrow and your eyes can only be in once place at a time. It's not like you can focus them at the center of the screen and take in everything in detail through a widely flared cone of vision. Your eyes are like lasers darting around from detail to detail. If you are reading words, even quickly, then your narrow field of focus is pointed at them at the bottom of the screen. And while this is happening, even if only for fractions of a second at a time, (which add up by the way), your eyes are taking in the visuals through your peripheral vision which is only partly focused. You can't possibly focus carefully on details in the visuals...(like the way a visor curves and recesses into the mouth guard of a Valkyrie's head)...if your eyes are occupied scanning text.

@Keith:

I did not "claim that dubs give me the exact same experience". I claimed that it could be argued that dubs give me a more similar viewing experience to what the anime creators originally intended than relying on subs. I don't think the creators intended the voice tracks to be incomprehensible to their viewers or intended a viewer's eyes to be distracted from the visuals every time a subtitle pops up. When I watch dubbed anime, it's closer to the experience a Japanese viewer who is watching Japanese anime, has. We both watch the visuals with our eyes and listen to the dialogue with our ears.

Bottom line, if you like listening to things in english, then anime isn't for you, changing the native audio just because you can't handle it being in another language is changing the product into something that it was never intended to be, and in the process giving you a completely different viewing experience than the one that was intended by the creaters.

I dunno, Keith. I think an argument can be made that watching an anime with high quality dubs in the viewer's native language is more natural and actually closer to the creator's original intended viewing experience, than forcing a viewer to listen to a voice track that they can't understand, not to mention distracting their eyes from the visuals by slapping big yellow text over the bottom 1/6th of the screen.

If the experience that a English viewer has when watching subbed anime is what the creators "intended", then all anime would originally be released in a language equally unrecognizable by all human audiences with big bold subtitled translations over the images in the first place.

The problem with your test is that you're asking me to look down then back up on the screen (unless I misunderstood you), which is not something you would do when you're watching TV, a monitor, or any type of screen,

Which is why I also said to try the test again with your chair back so you don't have to move your scope of vision more than you would for a TV or monitor. Hell, forget my test and just try your own little tests around the house...looking from one thing to another and noting how long it takes to fix your eyes on a detail. It always takes time for your eyes to find what they are looking for. You may not realize it, but it does. It has nothing to do with being a fast or slow reader. I'm just talking about the physical limitations of human anatomy.

Even if the word on the subtitle were misspelled I know the meaning -

Whoa. You're missing the point I was trying to make with the spelling of a word. I wasn't trying to prove that you can't catch spelling errors or make sense of the meaning of a word. I was trying to make a point about moving your eyes from point A to point B and focusing them on a specific detail. I could have have asked you to do the same test with a picture instead of a spelling error, and asked you to note some random detail....like count the number of head lasers on a valk, or note how a missile pod opens. In retrospect, I should have done that originally. That's my fault for making you think this was about the ability to read sub titles quickly and understand them and their spelling.

Likewise, your argument is self-defeating. Say, you're watching Macross Zero which is absolutely gorgeous and contains rather high levels of details. If I'm watching a dub, and say I'm focused 100% on video now... I go "wow, that cockpit is neat!" I will thus loose focus on the other 100 things that are going on on-screen.

Except that's something that can't be helped. That's just the nature of the world around us and the limitations of our eyes and the muscles that control them. Using dubs instead of subs is something that can be helped.

Hey, by all means watch anime the way you like. There is no reason this has to get heated. I don't know why people are so sensitive about it. I was just backing up Scream Man and trying to point out the benefits of dubs in response to what Keith said. It's just a simple fact that every time you use your eyes to read a subtitle you are not using them to scan the visuals. But I can totally see your point of view about dubs being more distracting than subs if the dubs are bad or annoying. That's a good point, and I'd go for subs in that case too. I used to always go for the subs when I had a choice. But if the dubbed voice acting is decent I pick the dubs every time now.

I've never had issues with subs, or felt that I have to "scroll" my eyes up & down,

Well unless you have ambidextrous eyes that can independently focus on more than one thing at the same time, they have to be scrolling. And every time you scroll your eyes, they have to find their new focal point. We all know what it's like when we're trying to read a book, then something distracts us, and we have to take a moment to find where we last were on the page. Our eyes are doing this constantly when we are using subs.

As a test, try looking down at your keyboard right now and focusing your eyes on the "y" key. Don't just find it, because I know you know where it is before you even go to look for it, but focus your eyes on it. Then look back up at the monitor and find the word in this post that I italicized, and identify the spelling error in the word. Go.

How long did it take you? Was it an unfair test because your keyboard and monitor are further away than two objects on a TV screen across the living room?...or was it unfair because one italicized word doesn't stand out very much in a field of text? Fair enough. Move your chair back and try it again even after knowing where the word is. It still takes a suprising amount of time to focus from this screen onto your Y key and then back up to the spelling mistake in the italicized word, doesn't it? Now think about how fast the dog fighting sequences in Macross Zero are, and how much you could have missed in that short span of time.

Every fraction of a second spent reading dialogue, or re-acquiring your focal point, is a fraction of a second that you are focusing on the visuals less, or trying to find where your eyes were last focused. A fraction of a second doesn't sound like much, but in a fast paced sequence a lot can happen in less than a second. Hell, even in a slow dramatic sequence you might miss something...or at the very least have a fraction of a second less to appreciate it.

some of us like dubbed. Who are you to say we're wrong? i dont step all over people who like subs. Hell, I'll watch em if i have too.

I used to be a sub/purist guy, but I'm all about dubs now. Especially for mecha/action anime. You miss so much of the detail and fast intricacy of the action when you have to keep shifting your eyes to the bottom of the screen to catch the dialogue. Hell, even in non-action slower dramatic scenes there is usually something I want to look at more than yellow text. You can appreciate the artistic visuals so much more and not feel like you're missing so much. Dubs are way more satisfying for me. It took me a while to realize it though.

Interesting, the X-9 was one big mama then. I always thoughts those missiles were smaller though, like shorter ranged versions, maybe someone is wrong about what it carries.

Has to be wrong.

I was always under the impression the X-9 was about the size of Simon, John, and Peter.

It's just a robot stuck mid-transformation. Every robot can do that.

No. Every transforming robot can turn into a vehicle. Only Valkyries have a third practical mode. Or at least they made it iconic. When you see a picture of a fighter jet with arms and legs do you think, "Oh it's a Transformer stuck mid-transformation", or do you think "Macross"? ...Exactly.

Geez, you leave out some gerwalk mode pics and people start calling you gerwalk haters

Alright fine... here's a couple for you people wanting gerwalk.

And for the record, I'm not a gerwalk hater. I'm just gerwalk lazy

Hells yeah!

That's a thing of beauty, man.

Look at all of the pics and... no Gerwalk. I must be only person on the planet who likes that mode.

G-mode is my fav.

I can understand it not being someone's favorite, but it's always perplexed me how many proud Gerwalk haters there are among Macross fans. Gerwalk is the most iconic mode that makes Macross unique among every other transforming robot series. And a plane with legs looks awesome!

Also I gotta agree with Vic the B's grey looks more military grade and the C's looks more NASA chase plane like but still very slick and formidable.

Yep. And it is a space fighter after all, so the white NASA look is fitting.

I'm a bigger fan of the B than the C, but I love the plain white look of the C too. It's very NASA-ish. I don't mind it at all.

06) GTA: San Andreas (PC) - AGain, I could spend hours just driving. 100%ed this too, though i needed a gameguide to help me do it. The sheer VOLUME of things to do is almost unequalled even today, and the 4th game was nowhere near as good.

Really? I'm playing GTA4 right now and I'm absolutely loving it. I never got the chance to play GTA3. Why was it so much better than GTA4?

I'm not sure I could put together a top 10 list very easily, but I know Mike Tyson's Punch-Out would make the list for sure.

I thought it was going to suck, but I ended up really liking it. (Opposite of my experience with D9)

There is some hippy cheese, but nothing beyond what you see in any Macross series or film.

Here's mine (a serious one):

I'm a sucker for single-shot sequences.

* Best/Worst Anime (film/TV series/OAV) -

Best: Ghost in the Shell SAC 1 & 2.

Worst: No answer.

* Best/Worst SF (film/TV series) -

Best: Children of Men

Worst: Bayformers 1 and 2...or anything Michael Bay touches. Honorable mention to Indiana Jones, if that counts as Sci-Fi.

* Most annoying trend in SF -

Over-usage of CG. I just watched I am Legend for the first time, and it would've been a pretty decent movie if they used live actors for the infected zombies instead of CG. Indiana Jones was killed by the CG, too.

* Best comeback -

Star Trek

* Most disappointing comeback -

Transformers

* Best/Worst Game of the decade -

For me, it's gotta be Half-Life 2 and the expansion episodes.

* What is the piece of technology that you have now which was not available at the start of the decade that you cannot do without?

My PVR. And file-sharing software.

* Best/Worst Band/Album/Live performance -

Best band: Protest the Hero

Worst: Too many to choose.

just one last pics of yf-19 with fast packs.

Very cool.

didn't mention yamato, though they might make a new macross series and f-18 styled valk could be created who knows. I mean they are make a new macross movie a animated one and soon a live action one

But you mentioned an "idea for a new valk", and asked if we'd "buy it", and you're in the toy forum.

It's as if you think the toy companies design the Valks before they make an appearance in an anime. It doesn't work that way. Toy companies like Yamato and Bandai only make toys of valks that are already designed and animated. So if anyone is going to design a new valk that is based off a bomber or a F-18, it's going to be Kawamori.

PS. There is a B-2 style aircraft, it just doesn't transform.

http://www.new-un-spacy.com/macrossplus/starwing.htm

ya your right though im just iching for a bomber valk or at least one modeled after a f-18 the ones we know are modeled after a tomcat

Yamato doesn't design the Valkyries.

Sentence: 2.2 million hits on Google proves that the ignorance out there is not discriminatory/racist.

2.2 million hits on Google: The # of hits returned on said search engine.

proves: to establish the truth or existence of something by providing evidence or argument

that the ignorance out there is not discriminatory/racist: Because of the high number of hits, that people are perhaps ignorant, but calling them racist is a bit too far.

Comments: Google is not good evidence to prove that it is not discriminatory, nor does it prove that it is. Please use a better source k?

/thread.

Here's the best way I can explain it.

Slavery = not racist.

Slavery (when all the slaves are chosen for their ethnicity) = racist.

^

^

*The "wealth of information" or the fact that Americans supported it, or whatever you're talking about, has nothing to do with whether it's racist or not.

Alien intervention theories = Not racist.

Alien intervention theories (when they only involve certain ethnicities) = racist.

Ergo: Since alien intervention theories involve ALL ethnicities and don't discriminate against any, there...is...no...racism.

All I'm saying is that if you want to make your point - which is: the wealth of information about this subject proves discrimination is not a factor, (amirite, amirite?)

No. We're still not on the same page.

I don't know how else to explain it to you.