408 replies to this topic

[Lord Ikka]

As much as I want it, PGI won't touch Unseen/Reseen. Too much drama. I'll be happy if we get the Clan Mechs within the next six months.

[Cordel Ordo]

I would like to see FD's MWO versions of the unseen, but would accept the reseen if necessary. But PGI most likely won't bring them in. I think they said that in an earlier ask the devs I believe.

[shabowie]

My vote would have been, try Alex's vision of the unseen, but if we can't, give him carte blanche to make Re-reseen, not hampered by earlier visions of the reseen.

Edited by shabowie, 21 April 2013 - 02:38 PM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Sarous, on 11 April 2013 - 08:39 PM, said:

I'll be honest, until this post I had never heard of Macross or Dougram. I can see how plagiarising their designs might make them angry. I would angry be too! For that reason, I fully think that Battletech works should add a disclaimer giving proper credit to the original artists/companies for all stolen mechs. But its in those companies' best interest to LET Battletech continue to use 'em. Free advertisement never hurt anyone! Call the donated designs an advertising campaign and go on. Honestly, a big ol' disclaimer with their logo on a popular game series will get them more popularity and money than any lawsuit.

FASA licensed the mech designs from Studio Nue in 1983 before HG got the marketing license from Tatsunoko to create Robotech. Studio Nue is the brains behind the entire Macross saga. Tatsunoko's contribution is animation only for SLDF: Macross and Super Dimensional Southern Cross Cavalry. Big West provided the funding. Tatsunoko's license with HG for the mech and character designs is invalid due to them losing to Big West/Studio Nue's copyright suit in Japan in 2002 and 2006. The Japanese Supreme Court finally ruled that Studio Nue owns the copyrights to the mecha/character designs while Tatsunoko owns the copyrights to the animation itself. What this means is that Tatsunoko had no authority to issue the license to HG for the mecha/character designs since they never owned them.

FASA's license was the only one that was legal for the artwork.

ShadowbaneX, on 12 April 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

Gah! All those mechs look like they've been hitting steroids for years. Also, what the heck is with all those micro jump-jets? Looks more like fish eggs or something.

As for Sarous, yeah, I've got no problems with reseen/redesigns, but that's not quite how things work. Other companies own the rights to those images. If someone else uses them, they have to pay for them. It's not about free advertising, it's about having an asset and capitalizing on it, ie getting paid and companies would likely have to pay much more money to re-license these images vs the amount of money these companies would get in increased sales of a 20+ year old anime.

HG certainly can't do anything with them, but Studio Nue certainly did use them in later installments of the Macross saga.

Typhoon Storm 2142, on 19 April 2013 - 04:21 AM, said:

The original designs of Mechs like Marauder, Wasp etc. have always been too "japanese" for my personal taste. Especially Mechs like the Wasp look like they come right out of a "cool FX/dumb story"-Manga movie. Machines that were built to look awesome instead of being made for effectiveness are just too unrealistic. It's what little children want to see, but not a Mechwarrior Fan. So, go ahead and make completely new designs for the Marauder, Warhammer and all the other japanese freakshow robots, for all I care. After seeing what you guys did to the Highlander, I know you can come up with incredible designs anytime.

You realize that Jordan Wiseman and Babcock got the idea for Battletech was because they were huge fans of Japanese mecha/anime/manga and wrote a game to bring anime to the US. The influence of Japanese anime and manga is very evident in the majority of mech designs existing in Battletech.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 21 April 2013 - 02:50 PM.

[DirePhoenix]

shabowie, on 21 April 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

My vote would have been, try Alex's vision of the unseen, but if we can't, give him carte blanche to make Re-reseen, not hampered by earlier visions of the reseen.

There's nothing stopping you from deleting your "vote" and then re-submitting for the option you prefer. If you think that your "vote" on this matters for something. (Which btw, this isn't a vote. There is no decision to be made from this poll)

What PGI decides to do is up to them. However, there is nothing stopping them from creating new designs for these 'mechs other than themselves. PGI doesn't have the rights for the sourcebook art for the 'mechs they have in-game already. ALL of the art in MWO has to be created exclusively for use in MWO. All of our current 'mechs are new, original redesigns unique to MWO. The only thing in contention with the "unseen" is the art originally used to portray them. Because all of the art for MWO has to be new creations anyway, there is no reason that PGI cannot create new designs for these 'mechs as well.

[Gazbo]

The '2C' variations started to distance away from the copyrighted designs.

MWO has seemed to improve and continue to stylise/modernise the original mechs to great effect (most of which looks really naff in their original drawings). I don't see why they couldn't take the 2C directions and continue with them till copyright was no longer an issue. Though IANAL.

Take the Rifleman 2C. Its quite a distance from the 'unseen' version, but still quite 'rifleman-y'.

I'd pre-buy most of those mechs in a heartbeat. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

- Gazbo

[the huanglong]

They should just use the primitive designs from the recent XTROs as a base. Problem solved.

[shabowie]

DirePhoenix, on 21 April 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

There's nothing stopping you from deleting your "vote" and then re-submitting for the option you prefer.

There wasn't an option like that.

Good point on the art being redesigned enough to avoid legal troubles anyways.

[DirePhoenix]

Gazbo, on 21 April 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

The '2C' variations started to distance away from the copyrighted designs.

MWO has seemed to improve and continue to stylise/modernise the original mechs to great effect (most of which looks really naff in their original drawings). I don't see why they couldn't take the 2C directions and continue with them till copyright was no longer an issue. Though IANAL.

Take the Rifleman 2C. Its quite a distance from the 'unseen' version, but still quite 'rifleman-y'.

I'd pre-buy most of those mechs in a heartbeat. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

- Gazbo

They made almost the exact same mistake with the "IIC" Mechs though: They licensed an outside source to make the art instead of having an in-house artist create their art. All the IIC designs of the unseen belong to Victor Musical Industries.

the huanglong, on 21 April 2013 - 08:00 PM, said:

They should just use the primitive designs from the recent XTROs as a base. Problem solved.

There shouldn't be an issue with using the XTRO: Primitives as a "base", but keep in mind that even when using the non-unseen as a 'base', the results vary wildly. Take for example the Catapult and the Centurion. I wouldn't say those two 'mechs look anything like their sourcebook "base" (Better, IMO, but not the same).

shabowie, on 21 April 2013 - 08:04 PM, said:

There wasn't an option like that.

Good point on the art being redesigned enough to avoid legal troubles anyways.

You don't have a button like this?