Fri, 6 Oct 2000 02:13:02 EDT

In a message dated 10/6/2000 1:50:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

<< sorry, aaron, but i really have to violently disagree
 with "msia better than kits". msia, from my own
 experience, and from what i can see through the
 blister packs (as i will never ever ever ever ever
 again buy msia) are absolute crap. godawful painting
 and panel lining with joints that are worst than your
 oldest living grandparent's arthritis. >>
Why? Your entitled to your own opinion. I do not have a single mistake on my
MSiA's the panel lines are perfect. Don't know about others MSiA's. To me,
the MSiA's look fine. The faces are done espcially good. MSiA's are very
detailed. Do some just have a bias aganist toys? I happen to like toys better
then model kits, anyway. Some of the newer Japanese toys rival the details of
an expert built model.

I was only telling what I'd like to see in an HGUC kit. It's nothing personal
aganist anyone else. No one said you have to like or agree with mine or
anyone elses view. You think MSiA's are horrible, but I love mine. It's all
in the eye of the beholder. Yeah, a lot of HG kits are more poseable then
MSiA's, but then again some MSiA's are probably more poseable then some 1/144
HG kits.

Let me ask you something, does the ABiA Dunbine figure look sloppy too? I
think it's one nice figure, myself. MSiA's are excatly what I was wishing
Bandai would do, so I am very happy with them. Yeah, the plastic is rubberish
that the MSiA's are made of, but it is durable, there's no denying that. Yeah
some have joint pop out problems, but it's not because it broke. I've had
model kits do the same thing, so it's not just MSiA's with this problem, so
leave the poor, underappercited figures alone. :)

"Believing a sign of Zeta"

Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Oct 06 2000 - 15:01:54 JST