Blockio wrote:Registration2#939067#939070 wrote: who do you think it was there buying gundam x, turn a, sd gundam gunpla? The male audience. Using peaks to defend this point is just dumb.
Barely anyone, those shows did extremely poorly. Lemostr00, if you're gonna accuse me of not knowing my shit or arguing in bad faith using cherrypicked examples, it's really fucking rich to use two of the worst performing shows as an example yourself; the commercial failure of X and Turn A was
the very reason why Gundam as a franchise was on tough times when Seed was released.
And you know that fact as well as I do, since your damn pfp on the Gundam wiki was the Turn A concept that got turned into the Sumo before you got your ass banned there for pulling the same toxic shit there that you are pulling here, so I will not look the other way if you are using your knowledge of the franchise to gaslight people in hopes that they don't have the experience to contest you. The only reason you are still on this forum in the first place is because your bullshit was primarily aimed at myself and other staff; had you tried to pull even a fraction of the assholery that you do on wiki discussions or Reddit towards any normal user, you would have been long gone, so consider this the final, most clearly worded warning you are going to get: Your elitism and toxic attitude is not welcome here. If you wish to remain a contributing member of EGF, shape up.
You are ignoring the point of my argument.
Gundam x and turn a were underperforming in comparisson to g and w but not near close to end gundam whole existence, its been a long time since no gundam series as bad as it can perform can end in a catastroph to end all gundam related projects. Gundam X did badly on TV ratings, but it wasnt a failure in other aspects like the story itself and other related projects: it was still released as laser disc and vhs. It got a sequel manga in 2004 (which was even expanded from the initial premisse), it got a new sequel manga alongside the blu ray box and the manga was reissued some years ago. Gundam x failed on TV ratings and was cut short. That was the failure. The gunpla did under perform too but that was expected since the designs arent very interesting.
Now turn a was a comemorative series. It was part of the Big Bang Project, to celebrate the 20 years of gundam. The reigns were looser to other series and more creative freedom was given to the staff and we got Turn A. The ratings and gunpla did not perform as well as g or w again but even then, for a failure of a project to get a cinematic movie project as a duology right in 2002 to be a failure? Nah that isnt.
And nor I and you did really bring it up since I think it is also a commemorative project and also a media mix project and somewhat different from the gundam project as a whole in the same vein this stage play is.
What failure really means in Gundam: G-Saviour. A multi media project that was swiftly ignored in all senses, even in the 40th anniversary book there wasnt a single mention of it. This is what failure means, to disregard and forget it completely. X and Turn A arent those. It was underperfoming but when the context is GUNDAM, this underperfoming could still be successful compared to other series, because the name is too big.
And how do you get this underperforming but still buying audience? By having a core fanbase, who in this case is the plastic model community (even people who dont even watch gundam bit still buy plastic models). Gundam has since the 80s this fanbase (who unlike you said before with the gundam female audience, still stick up after the 80s plastic model boom, who even helped finance other sunrise mecha series like Ideon or Xabungle), this core audience isnt barely anyone like you said, because you dont count on long sustenance after peaks, you count on the core audience who follows your overall work, not a single piece of work that was successful.
Lets use evangelion as example. Back in the 90's there were 2 theatrical movies for evangelion: death and rebirth and end. These two movies had the X people going to watch it on cinemas. But decades later we had Shin Evangelion, who had 10X people watching it on cinema. You dont pick the 10x number and use it as example of how evangelion is able to make 10x with any movie work after it. We dont know and in the past they didnt know.
Another more clear example: star wars.
The sequel trilogy, the first movie was a gigantic success and with each movie less people attended to it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_sequel_trilogyPrequel trilogy started strong, fell off but then got stronger in the third.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_prequel_trilogyDo you understand how the core audience is basically the ones who went and watched all 3 movies regardless of what? I wasnt the core audience of the sequel trilogy, I only watched the first one, for disney to count me as part of the TRILOGY movie audience because I watched the first would be wrong, I didnt consumed other star wars movie after that, for disney I dont exist past little part of their first sequel movie audience.
But just like gundam, does that mean that star wars sequel trilogy was a failure in financial aspects? No, not at all. They did underperform in comparisson with their peak but still did perform well in comparisson with other movies areleased around the same time.
So after all these explanations, do you understand why you dont pick peaks as examples for ANYTHING? They are outliers in their own context. Gundam seed was an outlier for Gundam, no other gundam series since then came close to what it did, if you dont analyze and contextualize their place, you dont understand their success. The context matters a lot to explain, even in evangelion movie series (years between the third and last).
But enough talking about gundam here. (Funny that you dont even commented about SD Gundam that I brought it up, I would love to talk how having two gunpla lines at the same time can cannibalize each other, that was the case with sd gundam vs victory gundam gunpla in the early 90's. Of course, to say that SD gundam is a failure would be the most stupid thing ever to read, it is all about context in the end)
And since you ignored my whole comment, what else can I reply? Do you have a type of persecution complex? Why are you accusing me to be a random person on outside the forum and bringing up stuff that I have no clue of what is it about? Go argue with that dude if you have problems, but dont use me as his proxy.
And funny for you to say that I am toxic when in this own thread you said shit to Konja7 (he was totally right, mecha genre is male oriented, the only example I can think of it Rayearth manga), yes you apologized, but are you going to be agressive-passive then apologize, is this a pattern for you? I dont pay attention to who I reply, I dont save name of users in my mind (and if I did, it would be really dumb to pick up fights with moderators of all people). If it is an admin or moderator, I dont care. But since you are one, bring it up examples of me being a cunt here. I want to see it myself, since from my perspective you are a paranoid who accuses users from being people from outside the forum, when you cant refute what they say.
And lets be clear: the only user that you can "accuse" me for being is the user Registration (wow, what a surprise), since I lost the password and I used a throwaway e-mail, and this was cleared it up on private messages with other admin.
So please respond to my previous whole argument instead of using me as target for your virtual battles outside the forum.