Jump to content

Anybody Thinks That Sk Needs To Redesign The Vf-1?


Phalanx
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lately, I've been noticing that the VF-1 has somewhat of a run-of-the mill , outdated, boxy and pointy design to it ,so that made me ask this good question;

Why hasn't Shoji Kawamori bother to redesign his VF-1 to make it more indated and viscous looking like all of his other mecha designs. He also needs to redesign the VF-0 as well. Anybody got any opinions on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My fault for posting this in the wrong category. I'm still getting used to this layout of topics in MW forum. I'm new to this forum but not the site.They should be under one of the category of the forum's main page. Sorry for the inconvenience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the VF-0 design fits the timeline just fine. The VF-1, although dated, is a classic design that shouldn't be updated (you basically get an "updated look" VF-1 with the Vf-0 anyways). That's how we first saw it, and that's how I'd like it to remain.

I'd rather have Kawomari spend his time working w/ Yamato create the perfect 1/60 Mac+ toy line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The VF-0 basically is an updated VF-1. Granted, the in-universe fiction and design compromises talk of a less advanced variable fighter. However, esthetically the VF-0 is a modernized VF-1. You can even see Kawamori took design features from Macross Plus era Valkyrie fighters and incorporated them into the VF-0, particularly design elements of the YF-19.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

esthetically the VF-0 is a modernized VF-1.

374897[/snapback]

Where is the logic in that? VF-0 is nice, but as a Valk before Vf-1... <_<

374900[/snapback]

It's not logical, that's the point. Anachronistic vehicle design has always been a problem with science fiction prequels produced decades after the original. Some sci-fi franchises have attempted to explain this contradiction by stating the prequel era was more influenced by artisans and esthetic designers as opposed to eras that followed, dominated by praticality and economics (such as Star Wars, original trilogy vs. prequel era).

Macross however has made no such attempt to explain the obvious design contradictions between eras (and doesn't need to do so in my opinion). As a result, the VF-0's visual appearance is anachronistic in the design chronology of the Macross universe, appearing far more areonautically advanced than the VF-1.

Edited by Mr March
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that is of course true. It's just a bit hard to accept, at first at least. Since I haven't seen Macross Zero, I can't say from that point of view, how does it look/feel like in the actual anime. I'd just think the right way to do it would be naturally making the Valks as prototypes of Vf-1, looking like ones also. Or is it just not cool to make less advanced Valks instead of the modern Vf-0. I would've liked it that way, from the point of Macross time-line. Well, as said, at least Vf-0 is a pretty one. I'll have to watch the anime some time... Oh, and if that Vf-0 to Vf-1 developement was explained, it would be too stupid to hear anyway. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

esthetically the VF-0 is a modernized VF-1.

374897[/snapback]

Where is the logic in that? VF-0 is nice, but as a Valk before Vf-1... <_<

374900[/snapback]

It's not logical, that's the point. Anachronistic vehicle design has always been a problem with science fiction prequels producted decades after the original. Some sci-fi franchises have attempted to explain this contradiction by stating the prequel era was more influenced by artisans and esthetic designers as opposed to eras that followed, dominated by praticality and economics (such as Star Wars, original trilogy vs. prequel era).

Macross however has made no such attempt to explain the obvious design contradictions between eras (and doesn't need to do so in my opinion). As a result, the VF-0's visual appearance is anachronistic in the design chronology of the Macross universe, appearing far more areonautically advanced than the VF-1.

374908[/snapback]

I would've taken Macross' excuse as "The originall was a low-bduget 80s TV show. Zero is a high-budget 00's OVA."

Much like I used that as the "Why don't klingons in Kirk's era have have brow ridges" excuse.

...

Then DS9 had to blow it to hell with "Trials and Tribble-ations."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, that is of course true. It's just a bit hard to accept, at first at least. Since I haven't seen Macross Zero, I can't say from that point of view, how does it look/feel like in the actual anime. I'd just think the right way to do it would be naturally making the Valks as prototypes of Vf-1, looking like ones also. Or is it just not cool to make less advanced Valks instead of the modern Vf-0. I would've liked it that way, from the point of Macross time-line. Well, as said, at least Vf-0 is a pretty one. I'll have to watch the anime some time... Oh, and if that Vf-0 to Vf-1 developement was explained, it would be too stupid to hear anyway. :p

374916[/snapback]

It's hard. Remember, Kawamori and Co. have to make anime that sells. Modern mecha fans want modern mecha designs. Creating a modern anime with 20 year old mecha designs won't impress audiences. The art of mecha design has progressed far too much.

The VF-1 has enjoyed more longevity as an early 80's mecha simply because of the nature of military aircraft. Real world military jets 40-50 years old still look esthetically pleasing to this day (the 1960's era SR-71 Blackbird arguably being the most visible aircraft still "seen" in popular culture to this day). Thus the VF-1 enjoys areodynamic longevity. Even still, young kids won't flock to it unless you make it look better; hence the VF-0.

Edited by Mr March
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*snip*

I would've taken Macross' excuse as "The originally was a low-budget 80s TV show. Macross Zero is a high-budget 00's OVA."

Much like I used that as the "Why don't klingons in Kirk's era have have brow ridges" excuse.

...

Then DS9 had to blow it to hell with "Trials and Tribble-ations."

374924[/snapback]

IMO, Macross does not need to explain the aircraft design inconsistancies. We are all aware that aircraft design advances over time and that Macross would appear much different if originally released in 2006 as opposed to 1982.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard.  Remember, Kawamori and Co. have to make anime that sells.

374941[/snapback]

That is the actual reason I believe. It's too bad that such decisions are needed because of money, though I hate to say, understandable. Mr Kawamori could remember us fans of the old crap with something, someday. :p Nah, those things are in the past for good, I'm afraid. And it would be propably impossible to make anything that would fully please us. No need to try to repeat things already once done. Or twice if we count Dyrl, which is the ultimate in design IMO. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But still I wish that Kawamori would take the time to create a late retroactive redesign of his fighter just Hakime Katoki did with the Wing Gundam. However you do have to consider the fact that in real life, and advanced fighter that was created in the early 21st century would not have a run of the mill design. A good example to prove that something that looks futuristic was made in the present has to look futuristic would be the F-22 raptor. It was made in the late 80's but has a futuristic look to it. Thats why I feel that SK should redesign the VF-0 AND VF-1 to look more dated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But still I wish that Kawamori would take the time to create a late retroactive redesign of his fighter just Hakime Katoki did with the Wing Gundam. However you do have to consider the fact that in real life, and advanced fighter that was created in the early 21st century would not have a run of the mill design. A good example to prove that something that looks futuristic was made in the present has to look futuristic would be the F-22 raptor. It was made in the late 80's but has a futuristic look to it. Thats  why I feel that SK should redesign the VF-0 AND VF-1 to look more dated

374994[/snapback]

He has to desync his timeline.

Macross ceased to be anchored in the real world when it was created.

It's timeline diverges from ours that point.

Rather than renovating the VF-0 and VF-1 to look like modern planes(which really requires revamping the entire line, since he borrows elements of real-world design in all the shows), he would be better served by illustrating the divergent evolution of aviation.

He touched on that in... I believe it was Lonely Night where they flashed back to Roy and Claudia's, umm, courtship. You can see combat aviation went in a radically diffrent direction while watching Focker's dogfights.

Kawamori just hasn't fleshed out HOW it went there instead of here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the difference in design to me is size

Ex : the VF-OS length is considerably longer than

its Vf1 comrades and so

1- my thinking is if the VF0 is so much larger than the Vf1 then its like the early versions of a vaccum tube Tv versus a thin LCD Tv.

in Mzero the VFo has a long nose and larger engine and inner workings. B/c of size it takes longer to transfrom and maneuverability is different. Fokker mentions this to Shin during training. he says something to the effect of being aware of that during combat.

sure in 1984 they could have made the vf1 series look more futuristic but why?

they had good plane design atleast for the tv show, and its grounded in our reality.

it was a plane that changed that was enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the difference in design to me is size

Ex : the VF-OS length is considerably longer than

its Vf1 comrades and so

1- my thinking is if the VF0 is so much larger than the Vf1 then its like the early versions of a vaccum tube Tv versus a thin LCD Tv.

Essentially, you're right.

As I recall, the VF-0 was larger because it used real jet engines. Which means bigger gas tanks, bigger engines, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the difference in design to me is size

Ex : the VF-OS length is considerably longer than

its Vf1 comrades and so

1- my thinking is if the VF0 is so much larger than the Vf1 then its like the early versions of a vaccum tube Tv versus a thin LCD Tv.

in Mzero the VFo has a long nose and larger engine and inner workings. B/c of size it takes longer to transfrom and maneuverability is different. Fokker mentions this to Shin during training. he says something to the effect of being aware of that during combat.

It is larger. It has been pointed out in these forums already.

The VF-0 squadron was designed to test the variable capability of the airframe design and possibly for training purposes.

They were not aware of the existence of the SV-51s before the events of Mac Zero took place.

The VF-1's were smaller, with armored skins and with powerful nuclear engines, not to mention they had space flight maneuvering thrusters as well.

sure in 1984 they could have made the vf1 series look more futuristic but why?

they had good plane design atleast for the tv show, and its grounded in our reality.

it was a plane that changed that was enough.

375078[/snapback]

Agreed.

The fact that the VF-1 was based on the F-14 airframe gave the show more credibility as a drama compared to the shows of the same era.

If anything I'd like to see the VF-1 get the same CG detail treatment that the VF-0 got. The VF-1 designs are very simplistic and needed to be for animation purposes, DYRL is a great example of how the Valks could (should) have looked.

Couple that with what can be done with CGI these days and we could get a damn tasty looking VF-1 Valk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The VF-1's were smaller, with armored skins and with powerful nuclear engines, not to mention they had space flight maneuvering thrusters as well.

One of the things I liked about Macross was that, while it worked, the VF-1 wasn't a very GOOD space fighter.

It was an early attempt at an all-environment fighter, and didn't have enough verniers or reaction mass to excel at space combat. Hence the FAST packs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But still I wish that Kawamori would take the time to create a late retroactive redesign of his fighter just Hakime Katoki did with the Wing Gundam.

374994[/snapback]

and then what?

like gundam: rehash the story over and over, and over and... ?

making an anime that sells is one thing "selling out" is another

However you do have to consider the fact that in real life, and advanced fighter that was created in the early 21st century would not have a run of the mill design. A good example to prove that something that looks futuristic was made in the present has to look futuristic would be the F-22 raptor. It was made in the late 80's but has a futuristic look to it.

374994[/snapback]

as you say "Late" 80's, Macross was created early 80's

Thats  why I feel that SK should redesign the VF-0 AND VF-1 to look more dated

374994[/snapback]

More dated? like a Spitfire? :D

or you mean "less"

then my question would be "Why?"

We're talking about a 23 year old anime

like Gene roddenberry with the original startrek,

SK couldn't look so far forward that he could use the F18 hornet

(which doesn't look futuristic and will probably be in service for the next 15+ years - i.e. the SDF Macross timeline)

Don't we have M+ and M7 to show more advanced fighters?

Edited by Nightbat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Kawamori was to redesign the VF-1 to fit into the time Macross was supposed to take place (instead of the time the series was made in) then Mikimoto needed to redesign all the hairdos and clothes as well! And the hotshot pilot guy should be played by a woman because that´s what they do these days! :D Rory Focker!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The VF-1 is basically THE reason why many of us actually got into Macross (Robotech for those of us who didn't know better at the time). It was cool back then and it's still a cool design today. Why would there be any need to change it? They didn't completely redesign the F14 and still call it an F14. They simply built upon the success and failures of previous designs and made something new (and gave it a new name). Hence the reason why Macross has so many different models.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the swing-wing fighter design is a relic of the 60s and 70s, which achieved it pinnacle of awsomeness with the F-14. The VF-1 pays tribute to the F-14, which I think a lot of us on this board (raises hand) appreciate.

I don't think you could update the look of a swing wing plane any more than they did witht the VF-0. Some may argue that the VF-0 looks a bit goofy in fighter mode because of the update, but I think it looks pretty cool in its own way. Stealthy angles and blended body/glove/wings are hard to achieve and look right with swing wings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something you might want to consider is that Mr. Kawamori has redesigned his VF-1. The VF-0 is technically, a redesign of the VF-1. The SW-XA1 is a redesign of the VF-1 as well (given a stealth nature).

They were not aware of the existence of the SV-51s before the events of Mac Zero took place.

Ummmm.....not quite.

(Spoilers)

They were aware of the SV-51's existance, they just never really saw it much in combat until the events of M0. Remember, DD was part of the original group of test pilots for the VF program before he defected. It's hard not to notice that if one of your chief test pilots runs off to the other side, you can bet he took stuff with him as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For every redesign that is done there is going to be plenty of people that just say, that's not the VF-1 to me.

I would look forward to any new mecha designs Kawamori does but I don't want it to be designated a VF-1. VF-2 or whatever maybe but not a VF-1.

Besides his time would be better spent on new Macross projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...