Mediocre Okawara?

[Dark Duel]

There's actually two that REALLY screw up the pattern:
-ZAFT's Testament Gundam, which is essentially a sinister-looking nuclear Strike with MCVS.
-The Earth Alliance's Aegis, which is IMO quite clearly more ornate than functional - it loses its most powerful weapon in MS mode and has a flight mode that can't even fly on Earth!!! (Rosso Aegis fixed both those problems and managed to look cooler)

[Sandrock]

I believe that the basic shape of ms only allows for so many hard points and hence there is only so many features that can be used in there design. High powered beam weaponry or a pod/funnel systems mounted on the back of the ms seems to be the best equipment for what is meant to be a destructive war machine. Hence (Strike)/Freedom is a truly great design as not only do they incorperate these features but it introduces cannons mounted to the lateral thigh guards. Sadly this seems to be the penultimate design in this mindset and so although I do enjoy Okawara's work I do feel that it is time for a change.

[DeltasTaii]

Funny, I find Aegis the most functional transforming Gundam out there. It's MA mode doesn't look like anything, it just works. No wings when it's meant for space (it's not a flight mode, it's a Zero-G MA mode-it just happened to pwn a GINN as MS only anyways, so they sent into Earth). Just claws for grabbing, a smaller profile, and a big gun.

The Scylla in MA mode only would be an argument, but if you look at the bizarre contortions that Rosso goes through and see how structurally simple Aegis' transformation (the first real one in the CE) is, it's not that hard to understand they picked claws+cannon MA over chest cannon and no MA mode.

[OddlucK]

Honestly, I'm still not following the Okawara recycling argument. So, since he made something with a rounded head, mono-eye, and wings, it's necessarily a ripoff of something previous? By that argument, everything produced today is a ripoff. Katoki's designs just pull elements from earlier Okawara work, which just pulled elements from even older work.

Besides, as has been mentioned, there's only so many places you can realistically put a weapon on a humanoid machine and have it still be viable (let alone preferable over a more conventional, specialized machine).

And, I think the argument that the units from each country should look radically different is just silly. Why mess with what works? Are Russian jets really that different from American ones? Really, compare the MiG-29 (arguably the iconic MiG) with the F-15. Sure there are aesthetic differences, some positional changes, but other than that, they're the same plane. And tell me the YF-22 and MiG I-2000 aren't sister machines (heck, the only real difference I see is the wing shape). Plus, with the twin jets in the center of a machine with two tailfins, aren't they just rehashes of the MiG-29 and F-15? Shouldn't they be condemned as derivative, as well?

My point is, to discredit a man simply because his designs build on his previous work (or even the works of others) is fallicy. Is a new perspective good? Of course! If not, modern writers, composers, and other artists would have no work at all. But, to say Okawara's most recent works are poor simply because they bear resemblance to his older works is, I think, inappropriate.

[Kavik Ryx]

Katoki may have taken the design concept from Okawara, but he has a record of innovating it. And I'm not just referring to the Ka. Gundams from Endless Waltz and the Dendrobium. In Victory Gundam, he retrograded the design to a rather simplistic one, which is was probably a first, and let's not forget the RX-0 Unicorn. Also, you can never mix up two Katoki. Okawara does have some pretty neat, if not awesome designs, but nothing to brag about, I actually have a tendency of mixing up his designs frequently, which doesn't happen with any other Gundams.

[Chris]

My point is, to discredit a man simply because his designs build on his previous work (or even the works of others) is fallicy. Is a new perspective good? Of course! If not, modern writers, composers, and other artists would have no work at all. But, to say Okawara's most recent works are poor simply because they bear resemblance to his older works is, I think, inappropriate.

No, if anything, what you're saying is "inappropriate." What you're basically saying is that mediocrity is ok. If an artist produces painting after painting with only slight variation for 15 years, is that ok? If a rock band produces variations of the same album for 15 years, is that ok? You say in one sentence that a new perspective is good, which is a contradiction to the previous statement. Copying elements of the same thing over and over is not "building on previous work." No one is discrediting Okawara as you say, because he has made great designs in many other series. The point here is that his Gundam designs are stale, and I don't see how there's much room for argument. The way some are trying to defend it as "Oh they're based on the same technology" or "They're ZAFT designs and have continuity" is really reaching, and frankly just lame.

[auriga]

Honestly, I'm still not following the Okawara recycling argument. So, since he made something with a rounded head, mono-eye, and wings, it's necessarily a ripoff of something previous? By that argument, everything produced today is a ripoff. Katoki's designs just pull elements from earlier Okawara work, which just pulled elements from even older work.

...

My point is, to discredit a man simply because his designs build on his previous work (or even the works of others) is fallicy. Is a new perspective good? Of course! If not, modern writers, composers, and other artists would have no work at all. But, to say Okawara's most recent works are poor simply because they bear resemblance to his older works is, I think, inappropriate.

So you're saying that a Dom with a beam shield is "original?" How about a Gouf with a flight pack? And to think this isn't even in the same timeline.

It's like what I was doing a few days ago. I was designing a PCB on a design program. I was basically lazy, so I just set the position of the components, then clicked the "auto route" command to let the computer make the necessary connections. Everytime I clicked on "auto route," the computer would churn out a different track pattern. Effortless? Definitely. But is each output unique? Not really. Based on that experience, I wouldn't be surprised if Okawara had his own computer program that would churn out an amalgam of whatever previous designs he would input.

Besides, as has been mentioned, there's only so many places you can realistically put a weapon on a humanoid machine and have it still be viable (let alone preferable over a more conventional, specialized machine).

Weapon placement has zilch to do with this.

And, I think the argument that the units from each country should look radically different is just silly. Why mess with what works? Are Russian jets really that different from American ones? Really, compare the MiG-29 (arguably the iconic MiG) with the F-15. Sure there are aesthetic differences, some positional changes, but other than that, they're the same plane. And tell me the YF-22 and MiG I-2000 aren't sister machines (heck, the only real difference I see is the wing shape). Plus, with the twin jets in the center of a machine with two tailfins, aren't they just rehashes of the MiG-29 and F-15? Shouldn't they be condemned as derivative, as well?

*sigh*

What you're basically saying is that mediocrity is ok.

Finally the magical m-word.

To say that we purely hate Okawara's designs is just wrong. It's just that we think that it's high-time for him to step aside.

[flamingtroll]

As for the comments on Okawara's rehashes designs in Destiny. I am pretty sure he is not the one alone that decides one day to just "homage" his own designs with a blend of blocky MSG styles and the SEED style that came before it. I am pretty sure it's part of the marketing strategy of Bandai as well. My guess is that bandai is trying to get the newer Gundam fans to be interested in or at least used to seeing UC style MSs (which is still the bulk of model kits sales).I don't think they would be a very good example of the "lack of originality". Most of the SEED's ZAFT's non-gundams are still fairly original in style, despite being yet another set of mono-eyes.

[Aegis]

Honestly, I'm still not following the Okawara recycling argument. So, since he made something with a rounded head, mono-eye, and wings, it's necessarily a ripoff of something previous? By that argument, everything produced today is a ripoff. Katoki's designs just pull elements from earlier Okawara work, which just pulled elements from even older work.

If it was simply people hating Okie and other artists for creating new Gundams, every other series made would've been bashed.

There's a HUGE difference between drawing a Gundam that retains the basic, symbolic appearance while adding a new style to the MS, and literally taking different body parts from different series (including SEED itself), and then pasting them together. The latter part, anyone joe artist can do, and is typically done when they are either running smack into artist block, feeling rushed, or feeling lazy. It's like taking the Mona Lisa, removing the head, and the drawing the head from, say, one of the dogs from Dogs Playing Poker picture onto where the Mona Lisa's head was with no thought as to how the parts are supposed to match, then colouring it and introducing it as a 'new variation' to the old painting. No one excuses artists for pulling off such a stunt, yet that's what Okie just did. Freedom Gundam is the only one I truly like out of his 'frankens', and even then I see it as a XX franken with so little effort put in.

The excuse of marketing to bring in new fans does not translate to 'copy and paste parts on mobile suits'; if that were the case, the likes of Gundam 00, X and Wing would've done the exact same thing with all their designs, and those series were geared towards a broader audience. On the other hand, copy and paste parts does translate to 'cutting corners'.

*waits for someone to bring up Turn A*

[OddlucK]

No, if anything, what you're saying is "inappropriate." What you're basically saying is that mediocrity is ok. If an artist produces painting after painting with only slight variation for 15 years, is that ok? If a rock band produces variations of the same album for 15 years, is that ok? You say in one sentence that a new perspective is good, which is a contradiction to the previous statement. Copying elements of the same thing over and over is not "building on previous work." No one is discrediting Okawara as you say, because he has made great designs in many other series. The point here is that his Gundam designs are stale, and I don't see how there's much room for argument. The way some are trying to defend it as "Oh they're based on the same technology" or "They're ZAFT designs and have continuity" is really reaching, and frankly just lame.

I'm sorry, but you miss my point, entirely. Not once have I said anything remotely resembling "mediocrity is ok." Personally, I don't find his SEED/Destiny designs mediocre at all. On the contrary, I think they're all quite well done. Obviously, this is a matter of opinion (and, apparently, a minority one on this board). My point is simply that the chief complaint I am hearing here is that all his most recent designs look like his old ones. I hold that's not necessarily a bad thing, nor do I think it's overly true. Sure there are similarities/comparisons/maybe more, but not, as I see it, an inordinate or damning amount. To your rock band comparison, I direct you to every major rock band since (and not including) the Beatles. Every time they innovate, the audience turns, often calling them "sell-outs." U2, REM, the Who, Toto, the Carpenters, Brittany Spears, N'Sync, Metallica, and many more all "sold out" at one point by making music which was not in the same style/tone as that to which fans had become accustomed. Sure, before "selling out," they didn't just write/perform the same songs over and over (I imagine that to be the next step in the band analogy), but they stuck with the same sound, overall, that made them successful in the first place. It was deviation from said sound that lost them fans.

Katoki may have taken the design concept from Okawara, but he has a record of innovating it. And I'm not just referring to the Ka. Gundams from Endless Waltz and the Dendrobium. In Victory Gundam, he retrograded the design to a rather simplistic one, which is was probably a first, and let's not forget the RX-0 Unicorn. Also, you can never mix up two Katoki. Okawara does have some pretty neat, if not awesome designs, but nothing to brag about, I actually have a tendency of mixing up his designs frequently, which doesn't happen with any other Gundams.

Fair enough, but can you really say you don't know a Katoki design when you see one, regardless whether it's a gundam, or a Wildwurger, or a Huckebein?

So you're saying that a Dom with a beam shield is "original?" How about a Gouf with a flight pack? And to think this isn't even in the same timeline.

No less so than a gundam with a really big freaking gun along for the ride.

And, I think the argument that the units from each country should look radically different is just silly. Why mess with what works? Are Russian jets really that different from American ones? Really, compare the MiG-29 (arguably the iconic MiG) with the F-15. Sure there are aesthetic differences, some positional changes, but other than that, they're the same plane. And tell me the YF-22 and MiG I-2000 aren't sister machines (heck, the only real difference I see is the wing shape). Plus, with the twin jets in the center of a machine with two tailfins, aren't they just rehashes of the MiG-29 and F-15? Shouldn't they be condemned as derivative, as well?

*sigh*

Not sure what you mean by "*sigh*," but that was in response to a specific comment made a page or two back.

To say that we purely hate Okawara's designs is just wrong.

yet...

I wouldn't be surprised if Okawara had his own computer program that would churn out an amalgam of whatever previous designs he would input.

Honestly, I couldn't imagine a much harsher criticism of a creator's works than that.

Regardless,

It's just that we think that it's high-time for him to step aside.

This is the crux of what I was trying to understand. Is it really that people think it's time he stepped aside and let in some new, different perspectives? If so, why so much venom in talking about the man and his works? Why call him mediocre, uninspired, stale? Why not simply say, "It's nice to have some new perspectives [/blood/whatever] in the designs." Why mention him at all in a review of a series with which he had nothing to do? Why spend so much time raving against his most recent works in such a harsh manner?



PS--Sorry for the long post.

[Ork_dreadnought]

*waits for someone to bring up Turn A*

That's another can of worms.

You could easily argue that series is the reason why Seed was so derivitive in its mecha designs. Turn A tried to hard to be different it turned off the long term fans and generally made model sales difficult. Seed was a knee jerk reaction and Okie got his hands tied, regardless of the actual merits of the animes involved.

[Chris]

I'm sorry, but you miss my point, entirely. Not once have I said anything remotely resembling "mediocrity is ok." Personally, I don't find his SEED/Destiny designs mediocre at all. On the contrary, I think they're all quite well done. Obviously, this is a matter of opinion (and, apparently, a minority one on this board). My point is simply that the chief complaint I am hearing here is that all his most recent designs look like his old ones. I hold that's not necessarily a bad thing, nor do I think it's overly true. Sure there are similarities/comparisons/maybe more, but not, as I see it, an inordinate or damning amount. To your rock band comparison, I direct you to every major rock band since (and not including) the Beatles. Every time they innovate, the audience turns, often calling them "sell-outs." U2, REM, the Who, Toto, the Carpenters, Brittany Spears, N'Sync, Metallica, and many more all "sold out" at one point by making music which was not in the same style/tone as that to which fans had become accustomed. Sure, before "selling out," they didn't just write/perform the same songs over and over (I imagine that to be the next step in the band analogy), but they stuck with the same sound, overall, that made them successful in the first place. It was deviation from said sound that lost them fans.

Sorry, but it's you that misses the point. To stick with the rock example, all those bands did indeed get accused of selling out. But everyone will always be accused of selling out by angry people, so whether they lost some fans is irrelevant. Real artists make the best art possible and understand that you can't please everyone all the time. A mechanical designer can work within certain limitations and still create something original. Syd Mead created something that was very different with the Turn A. Okawara himself created several good non-Gundam designs for that series. The whole thing that started this thread - a comment in my 00 review, shows this as well. Kanetake Ebikawa and Takayuki Yanase have created four designs that fit the mold of a Gundam, but at the same time manage to look fresh and not feature the same recycled elements.

But as you stated, it all comes down to opinion. I and several others in this thread have shown why we think Okawara's designs are generic and recycled. However, you have yet to explain in any detail why you think they AREN'T. Why do you not see all the similarities as "inordinate or damning"? That's really not enough to go by. Could you take a look at ALL of his designs over the last 10-15 years and point out how they don't copy the same elements over and over across each series? Honestly, I don't think you can, so you're just going by an opinion that has nothing to support it.

[OddlucK]

But as you stated, it all comes down to opinion. I and several others in this thread have shown why we think Okawara's designs are generic and recycled. However, you have yet to explain in any detail why you think they AREN'T. Why do you not see all the similarities as "inordinate or damning"? That's really not enough to go by. Could you take a look at ALL of his designs over the last 10-15 years and point out how they don't copy the same elements over and over across each series? Honestly, I don't think you can, so you're just going by an opinion that has nothing to support it.

Fair enough. You got me there. I can't go year by year and tell you exactly how each suit is different from everything before it. But, I couldn't do that with anyone's. In fact, I already conceded that point when I said Okawara's work builds on everything that came before it (though I suppose it didn't read that way--sorry). But, my point is (and you clearly disagree) that not only are the similarities not damning, I see repeated designs in even these vaunted new mechs in 00. The Excia is a blue Spiegel with a hole in its chest. The Dynames is a skinny, green Tallgeese, without the back boosters (or a GM Sniper with the gun on its shoulder). The Kyrios is the Zeta. The Virtue is SRW's R-2 Powered (actually what I thought it was at first glance). The 0 Gundam IS the RX-78-2 (after taking a shell to the chest, it seems). The Tieren is a stilted Zaku and the Union Flag/Hellion/Enact is a modified Taurus. Those last two are grunt suits and/or basic upgrades to grunt suits, but still show the most change from their predecessors. But, again, folks have already conceded the grunts in SEED/Destiny had some originality, like the ZnO and the Ash. Don't misunderstand, I think these mechs look great! But, their "ground-breaking" designs really aren't anything new, in my eyes. They do what many things have done before, in a slightly different way.

As for the rock band analogy, it seems to me you've proved my point. "But everyone will always be accused of selling out by angry people." Honestly, the remarks I hear from you and others around here sound like angry people accusing (in a bit different way) Okawara of "selling out" and taking the easy route. What makes you any different than those angry rock fans accusing bands of the same thing when it comes to making more popular/mainstream songs?

But, I respect that you're sticking by the remarks in your review (even if I do still feel they were unnecessary--for reasons already stated).

While I'm sure we could go back and forth about this forever, you've answered my initial question well. Thank you.

--OddlucK

[Recon 5]

One last thing. There was this example of:

Justice + Dinn backpack = Infinite Justice (designwise)

somewhere back in this forum. I think that pretty much sums up the reason for people hating on Okawara's work in SEED and DESTINY.

[Chris]

As for the rock band analogy, it seems to me you've proved my point. "But everyone will always be accused of selling out by angry people." Honestly, the remarks I hear from you and others around here sound like angry people accusing (in a bit different way) Okawara of "selling out" and taking the easy route. What makes you any different than those angry rock fans accusing bands of the same thing when it comes to making more popular/mainstream songs?

To run with the rock band quote, your counter example presented deviation from what made a band a success as a bad thing. On the flip side of that, doing the same things over and over IS just as bad. So to stick with that analogy, Okawara isn't "selling out" to be mainstream. You seem to think that something has to stick to a very established formula to be mainstream, and that's simply not true. Rock bands (and mecha designers) can try different things and be successful. Maybe some others take it too far, but when it comes to criticism of Okawara, I'm only speaking for myself. My beef is that I'm tired of seeing him do the same old designs for Gundams over and over in each series, when his designs in other series clearly prove that he's capable of doing more.

As for 00, I'd disagree with your assessments about most of the mobile suits. Sure, you could make those very superficial assessments of the Gundams, but upon closer look, they have elements that make them stand out from Okawara's work. Even if the Virtue does resemble the R-2 Powered, that's not a kind of design Gundam has really done. Grunts like the Flag, Enact and Hellion definitely don't look like the typical Gundam monoeye enemy suits. The ultimate point is this: given how many mobile suits have been designed over the last 3 decades, nothing is completely original. But what gets designed now depends on how old elements are combined or mixed with some input from new designers. Even if no one argued that Okawara's designs were mediocre, I think everyone would agree 100% that a long-running franchise like Gundam needs new input from fresh blood. Tomino said in an interview 5 years ago that young people need to work on Gundam. No one doubts Okawara's place in anime history, and it's admirable that he's still in the industry, but it's clearly time for a younger generation to step in with its own ideas.

[Koshernova]

Regarding that counter-argument about the grunt MS, I must vehemently disagree. The Tieren is more in the style of Armored Core-style grunts, or the very Mechwarrior-ish grunts we see in the first scene of the first episode. Basically it has a little mono-eye and small details added to it to make it a tribute to the Zaku, but the basic design of the robot is COMPLETELY different.

On the other hand, well... just look at those examples given of mediocre Ohkawara designs.

I am not going to lie, I don't think the Gundam 00 designs are the most original I have ever seen in a mecha series, or even in Gundam (Turn A still gets that kudos). But they are much fresher than Ohkawara's. Personally, I am getting a big Code Geass vibe from Gundam 00, with a popular shoujo character designer alongside realistic, sleek well-animated mechs. In fairness though, I have only watched one episode of both 00 and Geass...

[auriga]

Fair enough, but can you really say you don't know a Katoki design when you see one, regardless whether it's a gundam, or a Wildwurger, or a Huckebein?

A Katoki design is generally defined by a *relatively* small torso, long legs, and a quite blocky feel. It's more of a style, really...

On the other hand, an Okawara design is specifically defined by this Gundam's thingamajig, this other suit's whatchamacallit...

Take the Akatsuki for example. As much as it is ORB's pride and joy (even coded ORB-01), it's a blatant Strike. Let's look at it in-universe: sure, Morgenroete does have a history with the Strike Gundam... But for something Uzumi supposedly commissioned, it sure as hell looks like the machine they helped the Alliance develop under the table (wow, how "neutral" of ORB), and I highly doubt Uzumi has the nerve to give his daughter a pile of scrap parts.

Again, let's take the DOM Trooper. You don't hear "oh, it reminds me of the UC's Dom!" Rather, you hear "WTF, IT IS THE UC'S DOM!"

Which is why, along with Chris, I disagree with your analogies. Sure, the Exia does have a switch blade that is very reminiscent of the Spiegel's Spiegel blades, but does it have a German WWII helmet? Heck, the GN large blade barely even looks like the Spiegel blades, moreso does it even function like them.

I sure as hell can't see any bit of Tallgeese on the Dynames... Shoulder-mounted gun? Mind you, the Dynames only stores it on the shoulder; and by your logic, I declare that all suits with shoulder-mounted guns "Tallgeeses." And I don't see any justice in saying Dynames = GM Sniper on virtue of both having sniper rifles, either.

All the Kyrios has in common with the Zeta is that it transforms into a plane (and might I add that the Murasame is the Zeta?).

Not sure what you mean by "*sigh*," but that was in response to a specific comment made a page or two back.

... Means it's pointless to prod there.

Honestly, I couldn't imagine a much harsher criticism of a creator's works than that.

I haven't got to the level of sending death threats yet. So yeah, no hate.

Seriously, though I have to point out... Okawara's SEED work was decent (though his works showed off his super-robot style of lineart - that, I hated, but that's immaterial here). It was the Destiny stuff that really did him in, IMO.

[codename:v]

To me, OO is a testament where new bloods like Yanase and Ebikawa get to present their ideas and concepts on Gundam and most important of all, it should appeals to the younger audiences today. Of course everyone gets mixed feelings over the designs, some like it and some despise it, that's pretty normal.
Okawara is still a pretty much revere figure in the Gundam world coz' it was him who whipped up Gundam 20 years ago. As time changes, it seems that his SEED MSs just aren't up to par and didn't update with time because another bunch of mecha designers like Katoki, Izubuchi, Fujioka etc emerged during his prime period. Then again, Sunrise still gives Gundam oldmens like Tomino and Okawara royalties and that is respect for the elders in asian cultures.
I don't see the point of comparing his older works with SEED's. Time has change.

[Kavik Ryx]

I think my signature speaks for itself. Tomino himself, has stated that he's done with Gundam, granted he isn't around for it's 40th or 50th anniversary. He's moved on letting the new generation, build on his creation. That's not to say, he couldn't whip out another Gundam, his touch is still in tact. Perhaps Okawara may have to take a similar path. Let the young people inherit the Gundam. This actually feels like a parental situation. Tomino has given his creation independence from him, but Okie is still hanging on. Gundam is probably going to turn out like a moma's boy and Okie like a moma's boy's moma if he doesn't let go. I think both are ready for a change, and change brings about growth.

[DeltasTaii]

His assessment of the 00 Gundam's was no less superficial than the one's most people are giving SEEDs. Avalanche Exia just confirms my belief they look like random SRW mechs as much as Gundam, which only makes them all that original as the latter and not the former.

I mean, seriously, Justice+DINN backpack=Infinite Justice? What could be more wrong about that? Justice+new head (barring the obligatory tall sensor), 100% new legs, GOUF/Jet Striker style new lifter, and a complete rework of all the details, yes. Apparently the tactic of giving something a new colour scheme and calling it new would work pretty well around here, because if you use the same one it's clearly the exact same MS.

Calling Freedom a Double X franken is always...freaking silly (once again, ZOMG BACK CANNONS, but with ZOMG WING LIKE SHAPES this time. No, Master, and every Wing variant didn't have the latter either). DX is a big, bulky monster of a Gundam whereas Freedom is on the elegance side of MS design. It's leagues closer to F91 anyways, if you feel the need.


Oh, and Akatsuki is a Strike ripoff in universe. Deal with it. Them Morgenroete dudes took that X-105 thing they'd be helping develop and tried to make a mass-production MS for Orb. Couldn't do Phase Shift, did Yata No Kagami, went "Wooooooooaaaaaaah" when they saw the cost, and threw it in a hangar to go focus on the Astrays. It actually precedes the M1 as such, though not its final equipment (as for how everything down there looks like it hasn't been touched in years when it would have had to have been, I just don't know.) It's not as if Hyaku Shiki isn't a cross of Zeta, Gundam Mk.II and Rick Dias painted gold people...