Um, im pretty sure that's EXACTLY why they were drawn that way. ;D
Yes. And they do.
From a 1980's perspective certainly and truthfully some of them really just stand the test of time. However, if we are talking practicallity for example then why design them with heads at all. One could argue that a speedy scout needs better situational awareness and having a 'head' or big bubble style cockpit independant of the torso makes sense. However I look at designs like the Banshee, Battlemaster, and Atlas and wonder why wrap them in 15 - 18 tons of armor and only cover the head with a half ton. A very visible, very vulnerable location. In modern tanks you don't give the driver a commercial car style windshield. You wrap the crew in the inards to increase servivabilty. My point is the answer to the above is because it looks cool and intimidating...same for mechs. :)
-Gunz
Do I really need to get into pedantry here? Yes, I am aware that a 40 foot humanoid tank with an exposed cockpit is a stupid idea in the real world.
Is it really so hard to accept that some people (like me) like an aesthetic that makes them resemble what real military hardware might look like in a world where giant stompy robots were possible? Frankly, that's one of the things that attracted me to Battletech. For all the ridiculousness, the designs and the Universe shared an aesthetic that was much more "armies in space", and much less "kung fu with robots".
I don't want to belittle anybody who wants the latter, or something else entirely. At the same time, I get a little frustrated when I am constantly told that I only like these things because of nostalgia, or because I somehow prefer an aesthetic that is "objectively worse" than modern designs. I read that a lot from people who love modern look. Why can't both be perfectly acceptable?
To be frank, a big part of the reason that I am such a huge fan of Justin and David's work is that, to my eye, they bridge the gap between practical-looking and stylized-awesome. (Brent Evans has also (IMO) produced some amazing work in that zone.) For me, Matt Plogs art does not usually hit that mark, but I recognize that it is purely because of my own subjective preferences.
Right now I am a
huge fan of Catalyst's art direction. I think they have done a fantastic job of bringing in talented artists who can satisfy more than one taste. They can't satisfy everyone, but I think they are giving it as good a shot as
I could ask for.
thank you for answering that for me, i hadn't gotten around to coming back to the forum in a bit and forgot about this.
also i've always assumed that the oval leg components on the Stalker are armored shields, in place because the legs have to be constantly bent a little to balance the massive torso and without 'em there's a lot of fire vectors that are getting drawn right into it's already overworked hip joints.
Sorry, man. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I hope I didn't misrepresent you.
