|
Post by Revolver Ocelot on Apr 11, 2007 13:46:44 GMT -5
I suggest you snag a DVD of the series, and just watch it. It's pretty damn epic. It was directed by Yoshiyuki Tomino himself, with initial designs by Syd Mead (of Blade Runner fame, and that's why this design was a depature from others). But yea, just trying to help. You definitely dont want to leave false information like that in one of these articles. Yeah, I've seen Turn A Gundam, and every other Gundam saga, every Gundam movie, and every one of Tomino's mecha animes. You're talking to someone who dropped nearly $300 for the Space Runaway Ideon series and both movies. I'm not knocking Turn A on account of its quality, and again, I'm not saying it wasn't popular. I'm saying, it's different, and that is the fundamental reason for my statement. Not because of its popularity, and not because of its number of episodes. SD Gundam has the most episodes and it's definitely not part of the main Gundam sequence. It's a fantasy. I'll give you the segmented sprite thing as incorrect information because that's a fact and cannot be argued, but the status of Turn A being a main pillar in the Gundam franchise is a bit more subjective, and from my years of experience with the Gundam community, I've seen Turn A prominently placed in a category by itself. I guess you could draw parallels between Gundam and Final Fantasy. Each Final Fantasy game takes place in its own continuity with a few exceptions (FFX2, FFXII: RW, FFVII: DoC), and that's where the sequel sagas like Zeta and SEED Destiny fit. And then you have Turn A, which can be compared to Final Fantasy Tactics. It carries the name, features many of the most iconic elements from the franchise, but is a complete departure in almost every way, and almost no one considers it part of the main Final Fantasy line, despite the fact that it's one of the most popular and highly regarded titles in the franchise. What it all comes down to is my word against yours. Which one of us is more of a Gundam scholar? There's really no way to gauge. Our experiences with the Gundam community are likely to be different and there's no way to tell which is a more accurate representation of the fanbase. I can only go with my observations.
|
|
|
Post by Jaeger on Apr 11, 2007 17:41:06 GMT -5
That's all true. Definitely not here to call your Gundam knowledge into question. You give me the impression that you know your stuff, and that's good. But, I just cant see someone writing it off, like it "doesnt count" or something. It was a serious, next installment of the series. It wasnt like it was a side story, or an SD venture, with silly themes, and characters re-used from pre-existant stories. It was the next installment in the Gundam series. Hell, let's just write out G, Victory, Gundam X, ZZ, Zeta, Wing, or whatever else some group of people "disliked". I just dont get the logic behind a statement like that. The truth of the matter is, it was a serious, and much loved staple in the Gundam saga, and deserves just as much mention as other non Universal Century chapters, like SEED, G, F91, Wing, and the what not. There's a hell of alot of Gundam's that arent apart of the main Universal Century timeline, so why stop at Turn-A? Let's remove the rest of them while were at it. Anyway, my intensions are for only the best, and to make the article that much more authentic. Matter of fact, I cant even count the last time I ended up in a discussion like this. lol
|
|
|
Post by Shinigami on Apr 11, 2007 20:26:40 GMT -5
Is there a Turn-A 2D fighting game? There's really no point in mentioning it if there isn't.
|
|
|
Post by Jaeger on Apr 11, 2007 20:51:39 GMT -5
Is there a Turn-A 2D fighting game? There's really no point in mentioning it if there isn't. I think you missed the reason for our little discussion then. I'm disuputing a statement made in the current progress of the Gundam article. In particular; After the ratings failure of Gundam X in 1996, which was cancelled after 39 episodes, there was a long hiatus for the Gundam franchise. The next true Gundam series (Turn A Gundam is largely excluded from the main sequence of Gundam sagas) was Gundam SEED in 2002.I'm stating that this statement is fasle. I dont know where you got me saying anything about Turn-A needing a mention based on having a fighting game, or not.
|
|
|
Post by Shinigami on Apr 12, 2007 14:55:23 GMT -5
Then what about this statement:
This new saga [Gundam SEED], which sort've functions as a remake of the original UC saga, is by far one of the best...
Isn't this isn't this statement also false? Gundam SEED is not one of the best. The only way for that statement to be true is if you love cookie cutter character design, overuse of flashbacks, plot holes, and dues ex machina resolutions.
If you're going to make a big deal about a minor statement regarding Turn-A, why exclude other inaccuracies? Why not just mention them all at once?
|
|
|
Post by Jaeger on Apr 12, 2007 15:13:56 GMT -5
Then what about this statement: This new saga [Gundam SEED] , which sort've functions as a remake of the original UC saga, is by far one of the best...Isn't this isn't this statement also false? Gundam SEED is not one of the best. The only way for that statement to be true is if you love cookie cutter character design, overuse of flashbacks, plot holes, and dues ex machina resolutions. If you're going to make a big deal about a minor statement regarding Turn-A, why exclude other inaccuracies? Why not just mention them all at once? Haha. I dont understand what you're getting at. I'm not focused on anything else, other than the Turn - A statement. I dont understand why you feel I should start disputing the entire article, when that's not my goal to begin with. I've never been so mind boggled, in my life. Seriously, good work.
|
|
|
Post by natabuu on Apr 12, 2007 23:04:49 GMT -5
This article is about the games. It shouldn't be judging the content of the different anime series at all, especially since the article has been co-written by several authors. G, Wing, X, Turn A, and Seed are all alternate universes separate from the main Universal Century (UC) time-line. It doesn't make sense to single out Turn A in such a way.
Certainly, Seed is the most successful of the alternate universe franchises as it was the only one to spawn a second full-length series. However, calling it "one of the best" is an opinion, not a fact. Seed is one of most "controversial" series in Gundam in that the reaction to it has been so mixed. I, personally, don't care for it. I found Seed and Seed Destiny to be overly derivative of Gundam and Zeta Gundam respectively in addition to the points bought up by Shinigami. But that statement, as well as its inverse, don't really belong in the article.
|
|
|
Post by Ace Whatever on Apr 13, 2007 6:08:57 GMT -5
I agree with Shinigami and Natabuu. The problem is that since this is the first article based on an entire anime franchise as opposed to one show like the one for Dorroro or Red Hot Scramble, there isn't any standard for how it should be written. In the two examples I mentioned, hardly anything is mentioned about the works the games are based on beyond the basics that the reader should know to understand the article. Talking about X or Turn A when neither of them are in the games serves no purpose other than being provocative flame bait.
Also, who wrote what in the article draft? There are some mistakes that need correcting.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Apr 13, 2007 8:20:10 GMT -5
The draft is an assemblage of people's work. If there are any errors or inaccuracies, just post them here and I'll correct them. Knowing me I probably introduced most of them myself during editing. It's also not quite done, so.
I'm probably speaking out of turn here, because I am definitely no guru on Gundam, but I've always gotten the impression that Turn A Gundam is by far the most stylistically unique of the series, which is why it can be held as "separate" or however the original phrasing went, moreso than just being outside of the regular Gundam storyline. It's pretty irregular as far as Gundam goes, so I didn't find that comment to be particularly off base.
Also, the author of that section liked Gundam SEED. It's well within his rights to say it. It's only an off-the-cuff comment anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Revolver Ocelot on Apr 13, 2007 8:25:39 GMT -5
However, calling it "one of the best" is an opinion, not a fact. ... But that statement, as well as its inverse, don't really belong in the article. Almost every author in every article on this site has projected their opinion onto the material they're writing about. I didn't hear you guys complain when the Captain Novilin article repeatedly mentioned how bad the game sucked. Is that true? Well, it's a popular opinion, but still just and opinion. You can't take a neutral stance on everything. It's just not interesting. You might as well go to Wikipedia. I think any writer of any article should write about the material from a neutral standpoint and then give their opinion on it at the end of the article, which is largely what I do. You'll note that when I say "Gundam SEED is by far one of the best", that's at the end of the introduction to Gundam SEED. Likewise, when I get down to saying a game I write an article for is good or bad, that's also usually at the very end of the article.
|
|
|
Post by sandrock on Apr 13, 2007 10:25:43 GMT -5
Battle Assault 2 was broken up into two different budget games for Japan: Simple Characters 2000: Kidou Butouden G Gundam The Battle Simple Characters 2000: Kidou Senki Gundam W The Battle
Oh, and I've just found that Endless Duel recycles game engine from another Bandai Game - Power Rangers the Fighting Edition. It plays almost the same, but unlike GWED was released exclusively in the USA six months earlier.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Apr 13, 2007 10:41:44 GMT -5
!!!! Cool, many thanks for that. I'll have to give that Power Rangers game a shot.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Apr 13, 2007 10:51:31 GMT -5
It would probably be best if this had credits. At least the names of every contributer at the beginning or something.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Apr 13, 2007 10:54:06 GMT -5
Just saw that Power Rangers comment. Same engine? Are you positive about this? I have played that game, and I never noticed that. Give me like half a hour, I will go play that piece of shit again and see what you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Apr 13, 2007 11:10:47 GMT -5
It would probably be best if this had credits. At least the names of every contributer at the beginning or something. It will, when it's done.
|
|