BlazeEagle@aol.com
Mon, 10 May 1999 18:10:14 EDT


In a message dated 5/10/1999 1:26:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
nandy@U.Arizona.EDU writes:

> > > standrads sure have dropped with the Turn A kit. It makes me sick too,
> that
> > Actually it shouldn't be such a surprise. I first smelled fish when they
> > labelled it as un-graded (UG?). hmm just what did they take out of a
> > typical HG kit to make it UG? (oops I forgot the LMs)
>
> What did they take out? How about colored plastics, cool design,
> details, class, taste....? I never though I'd say this, but the G-Unit
> kits look like masterpieces compared to this turn-A Schlock... A matter of
> fact, I haven't seen a kit so stomach-turningly bad since G-Gundam, and
> even those mecha had usually some multi-colored 'plug-in' plastic detail
> pieces!
> I mean, I'm kinda shocked that the Turn-A doesn't have ANY YELLOW
> PIECES!! Would it have killed Bandai to put a plug-in flat piece for the
> shoulder area, or a plug-in piece for the crotch-pit? Hells bells, kits as
> far back as CCA (how many years ago?) had even that!
> Seriously, there's a definate plummet in quality here.. one can hardly
> believe this is the same company that brought us the MG-line and the
> fabulous Gasaraki kits!

They took our eveything, almost. The Turn A has no detail, Turn A is a robot
made for paper only, as a drawing, not as a physical model kit. I have notice
that most of Turn A's details are drawn and can't be molded in plastic, and
the only to add those details is draw/paint them on the kit. I don't have
the skills to make the Turn A look good, but I can afford to buy a couple to
practice my model technique's and paint skills on, thats about all this kits
good for.

>
> > >From the pix in HLJ and ~tanakuni, you can see that the poseability is
> > indeed very good (partly thanks to a sensible hip box). And it can carry
>
> I dunno about that, I can't say it looks any more poseable than any of
> the other mecha on my desk right now, such as the Gouf Custom or Sandrock
> Custom... and if you look at the knees you'll note the leg never seems to
> be bent more than 45-degrees... I'm worried that it doesn't have enough
> clearance in there...

I noticed that too.

>
> > the rifle at two different spots (regular trigger handle and a carrying
> > handle on top of the gun) which is a small improvement. And it is
>
> Heck, the ORIGINAL gundam had a carrying handle on the top of the gun!
> The 8MST-gundams have this too (As far as I remember) as do the MG-Gundam,
> and MG-Gundam Mk.II, etc... It's nothing really unique.
> Speaking of the weapons, did you notice that this gundam, while it
> doesn't _seem_ to use the Polycap hands, doesn't seem to have a
> _different_ hand for the gun? It seems to have a very simple (Basic)
> plug-in-slot hand! Augh! Even Z-Gundam kits had trigger-fists!
>
> > But is it smart for Bandai to push an UG line in 1999? The big attaction
> > of the UG line is, presumably, the saving of 300 Yens. So who is this
>
> I think it's _Bandai_ who's trying to save money and cut costs here.
> They figger they'll probably sell 'almost' the same amount, but for every
> color plastic they cut down they're probably halving the cost of
> production.

I have to agree, But cutting costs, shouldn't be done, if it means lower
standards.

>
> You know, I'd much prefer it if Bandai would take 1% of the effort
> they're spending on the PG kit line and divert it into their 'regular' kit
> lines.
>
> > Perfect! Give the kid a kit that needs a lot of painting AND show him/er
> > a bunch of pictures how truly amazing it SHOULD look! Of course, if the
> > kid fail to reach to high standard shomn in the posters and box arts,
s/he
> > can always switch to a hobbit easier on his/er self-esteem, such as
>
> It's a little depressing, it reminds me of those long-ago days where
> when you'd buy a mecha kit, it would sometimes have a picture of the
> _Garage_kit_version_ of the crappy model you just bought. That was pretty
> awful.
> One expects some work is needed to make a kit look 'perfect', but a kit
> shouldn't look _disgusting_ straight out of the box! I mean, sheesh, would
> it have bankrupted Bandai to include just one or two extra red and yellow
> 'plug-in' bits for this gundam!?
>
> > model for some MG or PG kits that clearly target adults, it's another
> > thing to use some pro-quality pictures to sell toys to kids. It come
> > awfully close to false advertisment in my books.
>
> Yeah, that is pretty damn cruel!
> Now, I think part of the problem is that the Turn-A itself is so
> godawful ugly that the only way it _can_ look good is to add in all sorts
> of detail that ain't really there (I.e., weathering to an extreeme!),
> which is really a 'finishing move' in modelling. In the past, if you
> picked up a GW kit (for example) you could be pretty sure that the model
> straight out of the box with a couple stickers would look 80% close to the
> model pictures on the side. With the Turn-A it's more like 40%!

More like 20% for the Turn A. Most Gundam kits I have, only need a little
paint and I can handle that fine, but the Turn A needs white paint, to cover
up the ugly white its molded in, the white looks sanded down and dull,
compard to most other Gundam kits.

>
> > I wonder if they put an honest photo of an unpainted model on the box
> > itself. Like they did with the whole 0080 line. (Mark-Kai?)

Yep, I wonder too.

>
> The 0080 line was REALLY SWEET for that reason. I was just getting into
> modelling at the time and those photos were LIFESAVERS! (Gelgoog, for
> example!)
>

I'll have to get some of those kits.

Aaron
-
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue May 11 1999 - 07:11:23 JST