Radd

That line of thought ignores pretty much everything I've said, unless there's simply a misunderstanding. Unless you honestly believe a lot of the utterly wretched CG foisted upon network television i actually pretty decent? eugimon makes some very solid points as well. I'm not certain how it was done in Zero, but I know in Beast Wars and Beast Machines, robot and animal/vehicle modes were entirely different models. I wouldn't have been surprised if each character had an 'in between' model as well. As for non-robot, non-transforming characters, sometimes the character mesh will look off during certain animations, so a new mesh is required that looks 'off' doing other things. Sometimes other parts of the model need to be resized, redone, tweaked, moved around...much of this manually, mind you. But back to the main issue, I have never once said that CG as a whole is too expensive for television animation, simply that there comes a point where to achieve the quality you want, it becomes easier to work with 2D animation, especially with many of the advances that have been made there (drawing tablets, automatic inbetweening, playing with layers and animation libraries, etcetera). This is why most of the better television work meshes 2D with 3D to work with the best qualities, from a studio standpoint, of both. Of course, even then you still see lots of pretty terrible CG out there when studios cannot afford to, as eugimon pointed out, spend a little more to play off the public fascination with 3D CG. *edit* If this topic must continue, seeing as how it's moved away from the new Macross production into more general territory, if it would be allowed I'd vote to move the conversation to its own thread in 'Other Anime and Science Fiction' (seeing as how it does relate to anime as a whole).

This post seems odd to me. The Protodevlin are the force behind the Supervision Army which sees many references in SDF. Their story is pretty well explained and sits well with what was established in SDF (I just wish they had better designs). The Marduk have no such explanation. They are not the Supervision Army or the Protoculture, yet control an Army made entirely of Zentradi. They use ships, fighters, and equipment that are obviously derived from the technology the Zentradi used, but it's all more advanced. Add in another conundrum that no one on Earth knew about this Marduk race when they arrived. I suppose it's possible that they're another Protoculture derived race, like humans, who somehow conquered a Zentradi fleet and took over, but no explanation or resolution is given for this mystery. The whole 'ship of Alus' thing is odd, too, when it was established in SDF that the Zentradi were chasing a Supervision Army gunship. Of course, MacII is more a sequel to DYRL? anyways, in which the origin of the ship is not specifically given, and there is no mention of a Supervision Army. However, the role of the Protoculture remains the same, still making the appearance of the Marduk something what needs quite a bit of explaining that is never given. Also, there is the odd lack of mentioning of any Earth colonies, despite that part of the story being put into motion in SDF, and again in Flashback 2012. Of course, not mentioning them doesn't mean they're not there. Then there's the Valkyries. Not the numbering, but the designs themselves already seem a decided step backwards from the VF-4 Lightning III from Flashback. That they still hadn't progressed very far by that time simply seems odd, though it's not an outright contradiction. The VF-11 and VF-5000 are both more like the VF-1 than the VF-4. Of course, isn't MacII 80 years after DYRL?, whereas Macross Plus and 7 are more like 30-40 years after SDF? Again, not really a contradiction just an odd sense of not having advanced in such a long period of time, as well as not showing much variety in the forces.

And I pointed out that the common perception of the extent of that automated animation is often exaggerated beyond the reality. Regardless of whether you're using Maxon, Maya, or 3DSMax, more manual work goes into the production than many realize. I'm not comparing the movie industry to the tv industry, just pointing out how quickly quality in CG is affected by technology. The Pixar example was simply the first to come to mind. My understanding was that they rebuilt those models entirely, from scratch, due to the obvious differences in quality between the old and new models. A tv series would face the same issue. And it has nothing to do with "building bad models in the first place" so I'm not certain why you make that comment, unless you're confusing changes in technology with poor judgement and a lack of skill? You also have to consider the going wages. Your average inbetweener doesn't make that much. Also... ...my point remains the same. Bad CG is cheaper and easier than bad 2D, but the higher you up the quality, the more that advantage diminishes. I've made this point since the beginning. However, there is a balance that can be reached for optimal use of budget. I'm not saying that anything resembling decent 3D animation is going to be too cost prohibitive for a tv series (though the quality of 3D CG we often see in television makes a very compelling argument to this effect). To use your own logic, if decent 3D CG were so much more cost effective and easier than decent 2D animation, wouldn't we see far more entirely 3D CG shows?

I could be wrong. I get most of my information right here in this forum, or from the Compendium.

I've always assumed that Macross II is not canon because officially it has been removed from canon? This is not something left up to fan interpretation. The most common reason I've heard for it being removed from canon was how unpopular it was, the last couple episodes having been rushed out do to the budget being cut because of how poorly it had done.

I'd just like to add a couple quick notes on CG. The computers do not magically animate everything all so easily and efficiently as many believe, and motion-capture is a not a magical-super-easy-happy-fun-time-and-sparkles way to do "lifelike" animation. Yes, you do only have to build the models once, however once they are built, animating them is more difficult than the average person might expect. It's actually quite difficult, and requires a lot of time and effort. "Realistic" motion capture animation rarely meshes well with CG without some amount of manual editing. When MoCap does work best is with models that themselves are lifelike and meant to interact in lifelike ways, such as CG background characters in a primarily live action film. The more stylized the characters, the less MoCap works with them. It begins to look odd, out of place, and not quite right in the same "uncanney valley" sort of way that overly lifelike CG can look odd. Additionally, when animating stylized characters, the animation itself needs to be exaggerated and stylized to look "right". Then, of course, there's the apples and oranges aspect of 3DCG and 2D animation. You can often make them work well together, but neither is a replacement for the other. I may have stuck primarily with illustration, but I do have some minor degree of experience with this. I stand by everything in my previous post. I should also point out that CG elements from shows and movies are often not used at a later date. The models/textures/whatnot begin to look outdated next to more contemporary models, and if you want to reuse those old models, you'd also have to limit how good you make the new visual elements. Pixar could not reuse the models from Toy Story in TS2 because there was such a drastic difference in quality despite only being 4 years apart. As I stated before, GOOD 3D is more difficult to produce than GOOD 2D. BAD 3D is cheaper and easier to produce than BAD 2D. There is, of course, a balance that many companies strive for to make the most, budgetwise, out of both. "Labor" is not soley the number of names in the credits, it's also the amount of time those people had to work on a given project.

I'd be happy if they made the purple parts grey. black, or dark red, and the green parts a fiery crimson. He'd look less "raver" and more sinister.

Has anyone else seen that two pack, Optimus Prime vs. Megatron? It has a G1 styled Optimus, but much lower looking quality than the Classics Optimus. His head is still visible in truck mode, no trailer, etcetera. What struck me is I saw like 5 boxes at Walmart, and in every single box Prime was missing his windows. The toy pictured on the box had windows, but the toy itself just had an open chest cavity where the windows ought to have been. That seems like an awfully odd choice if it was intentional. Megatron, on the other hand, looked decent. Not great, but he did look as if he might be much better than Classics Megatron. This one is yet another Megatron as a tank, which I definitely approve of. He looks smaller than Classics Megs, but with better colouring if I recall correctly. His tank mode was still a bit sci-fi looking for my tastes, but not terrible. I would love to pick up this Megatron, but the two pack is 20 bucks and while I probably wouldn't mind Megs for 10, that Prime looked more like a 3 dollar vending machine toy, and that might even be generous.

You thought Max was broken at the beginning of 7 and that Millia was simply argumentative? I can't even chalk this one up to poor presentation. Far from broken, it seemed that Max and Millia both were simply stubborn with the burden of responsibility and refused to let a little thing like marriage interfere with doing what they perceived was "right". This also worked into one of the major themes of the show, that many differences and sources of conflict were simply a matter of different perception. They were different than how we left them at the end of SDF. They were older, in some ways wiser, logical progressions of their young selves.

This is a very good point that is often misunderstood or simply overlooked, if we're all on the same page regarding the definition of 'CG'. CG can be applied to modern 2D animation in that actual cels are no longer used, and that the drawing, while still by hand, is done on a computer using drawing tablets. It seems to me some people were referring to this in the thread. Most people think of 3D computer models when you say 'CG'. For this, it is cheaper, easier, and quicker to create low budget, awful looking animation than it is to do low budget, awful looking 2D animation. On the other hand, it is more difficult, more time consuming, and more expensive to create high budget, good liking 3D work than it is to create high budget, good looking 2D work using modern digital techniques. I believe this was the reasoning given for the 2D valk sequences in Zero.

I wouldn't mind that at all. In fact, I'd welcome it if done well. I rather like much of the ideas and concepts in Mac7, as well as the overall story. It seems to me, a lot of the issues people have are with the presentation (the designs which remind many of monster-of-the-week style shows, the glamrock costumes (which were dropped to good effect for Dynamite), the pacing of the story (possibly a primary reason that Ray's rational presence to Basara's unbridled idealism is so often overlooked), the overuse of songs early in the series, the terrible abuse of mediocre recycled animation, and the worst offender being the misleading lightshow that accompanied the notion of spiritua energy which was otherwise not portrayed as being something so "magical" as it seems many people perceived it as.

Huh. Home reminds me of a simplified version of SecondLife, but integrated with their online multiplayer games. Very neat. From a community standpoint, it really trashes what Nintendo has done with Miis so far. What will really impress me if Sony and PS3 developers do more with the concept, integrating it into games even further. Like how Miis appear in Wario Ware and Wii Sports, imagine being able to take your avatar from Home and use it as your character in some PS3 games? That could potentially be several flavours of fantastic.

Heh, I've got to be the easiest to please person here. So long as it's GOOD, I'll take it. Kawamori or not. Prequel, sequel, side story, retelling, valkyries, destroids, whatever. So long as it's done well. Then again, I think some of the attitudes around here towards certain themes and ideas are comically exaggerated.

The problem is that it's not all garbage. Now, the PS3 is by no means a terrible machine, and a lot of the problems are often exaggerated. Price is the big issue. Really, it's Sony themselves who create so much of this bad press by painting such a large target by a lot of the press comments they make, and how they've used the PS3 to try and shove BluRay into homes. Still, it is Sony, and their brand name still carries a lot of weight. I doubt the PS3 will crash and burn. I even expect it to eventually outperform the 360 in the market, if not by the considerable amount the PS2 bested its competition in the market. Sony and Immersion making up is a good sign for them, even with the ridiculous press statements they've made over the rumble issue. If Sony can get a DS3 or SixAxis2 out quickly enough, there's a good chance it will take to the market and developers will support it. If it takes too long, it's doomed to be a barely used peripheral, so don't expect Sony to wait too long on this.

More than likely it will be much like the FF1, 2, 4, and 5 releases for the GBA. I nabbed Phoenix Wright 2 recently, more of the same as the original Phoenix Wright, but that's just fine with me. I love it so far. My wife got Hotel Dusk and has been loving that. It's even more like the old PC adventure games, and very stylish to boot.

Er...this Zelda is like hands down the most serious in the franchise. There's some downright dark moments in the game. I knew a few people who were skeptical about the wolf thing, and all of them had their opinion changed while playing it. Rent it and give it a try at the very least. As for other good games, just read through this thread. Even on this very page you've got people listing their top 5 games for the system, and further back you've got people talking more in-depth abut those games.

I'm worried about that 'automorph' tagline. I don't want my Transformers to transform themselves. Otherwise. Prime looks decent. Not fantastic, but good. Better than a lot of Prime toys in the past, and much better than the actual movie design. Jazz looks alright, too. Hope his arms aren't too long, looks like they used the side of the car to make his arms, like Barricade, but they shrunk them a bit by removing the side door (those seem to be on his hips). So far, those are the only two I'd even really consider. I do have to agree, though, Hasbro is doing a great job converting the movie designs to toys, and where they are forced to make changes, it seems like they're making them in my favour (Bulkier, more powerful looking Prime over skinny, lanky Prime).

That's actually a very good question. I'd be interested to see just how easily a little kid picks up games like Excite Truck and Wii Sports.

I only just got to playing with the News Channel. It's a lot better than I expected. I imagine I'll be using it a lot if the news they have is...well, newsworthy.

While peeking at the shoe commercial, saw this: I'd love to see a clearer picture of that Prime design. Looks good.

1. Wario Ware 2. Metal Slug Anthology 3. Excite Truck 4. Raving Rabbids Zelda and Wii Sports would also be on that list, but you already have both. All these games, except probably Zelda, are much better when you've got a bunch of people over to play. Trauma Centre is ok, but I honestly don't play it that much. Call of Duty 3 is probably a great FPS game, what I have played of it I enjoyed more than playing an FPS on any other console, but I still liked playing them on PC better. There are a couple great moments early on in CoD3 that you just couldn't do on a PC, but only one or two, and there just seems like so much more they could have done. Haven't really played many games beyond that.

I don't think he's saying that the Diaclone seekers were fantastic marvels of transformation, or that they looked true to life, he's saying that they did a better job, with less kibble, than the movie starscream. I got to agree with him. JBO makes a fair point about removeable pieces, however I think the point still stands that toy design has come so far that they shouldn't need to have removable pieces to get a decent transformation down. Heck, even Classics Starscream doesn't have the amount of excess undercarriage (I hate the term kibble, mostly because it's so overused and often used to describe very different things) the movie toy does. Then again, the movie people were trying to work off of designs intended for the movie and not neccessarily toys, while the Classics designer just had to work off of the cartoon which was based off the original toy. I suspect if the movie people had tried for a more realistic transformation, it would have made it easier for the toy people. Then again, you've got Hasbro's inclination towards, as someone already mentioned, gimicky weapons and whatnot. Movie Starscreams arms aren't as big as the toys. So in the end I think it all comes down to the fact that they're really not trying to make a decent transformation with as little excess parts or misproportioned pieces. They're trying to work with what the movie gives them, and include little gimmicks they think will draw in the kids.

I'm pretty certain this has always been the case for Wario Ware games. It doesn't take much to unlock multiplayer, though, and it forces you to go through a couple tutorial like stages. Believe me, having sat down to play this game, you need those lessons. Smooth Moves uses the Wii remote like no game yet released.

I'll be picking it up sometime this weekend, before a bunch of friends will be coming over. Also plan to pick up the new Phoenix Wright for the DS.

Microsoft bought Immersion? I heard that they settled with Immersion and paid to license the technology, and that Nintendo had been paying Immersion all along. Sony refused to settle with Immersion, then proceeded to lose to them in court. Then they refused to license the technology and simply removed the feature from the PS3.