
To all intents and purposes I come across as a mecha fan much of the time when discussing anime, and something that often comes up when talking about mecha shows is often something along the lines of “that show felt really realistic”, or “that show was more realistic than this other show”, or “that show didn’t feel real at all”.
A recent post by ghostlightning brought a lot of fermenting thoughts to a boil – despite the fact that mecha anime is pretty much always about fictional pretense, it seems we still appreciate a dose of the “real-world” in our entertainment. Or do we?
I think there are essentially two axes at work in any given mecha anime. As Iknight points out in some older posts, part of what makes mecha interesting to watch is that they are essentially anthropomorphic machines – they mimic human characteristics and mannerisms; and provide a useful visual accessory to a character. The other major dividing factor is the one that in casual speech we might refer to as “realism”, but I prefer the more technical term verisimilitude – how closely the show mirrors reality, or rather, our expectations of reality given the fictional setting of the show.
In summary:
1) Anthropomorphism – how “human-like” the mecha are. Note that here, I speak in terms of relatives. All mecha are human-like to a lesser extent – it’s arguably their defining feature. However, one can draw comparisons between mecha that take on more of a utilitarian appearance, versus those that take on more of a symbolic significance. At heart, this axis captures the mechanical design of a particular show. A lot of games, such as Battletech, Steel Battalion, or Chromehounds, feature mecha that take on more of a vehicular feel – in part because of the limitations of the game interface to capture humanoid movements. On the other hand, stylized depictions of the “iron knight” exist in shows like Escaflowne or more recently, Code Geass.
2) Verisimilitude – how the mecha fit within the fictional reality of the show. I find this tends to be the true deciding factor in terms of the “realness” of a mecha show. This incorporates elements of how the mecha are portrayed, the sorts of skills and training, a lot of background detail. As with the previous axis, this is more of a relative that absolute comparison. Little background details, such as the how and why of mecha deployment, evidence of pilot training, attention paid to interface, etc. are all things to consider. Essentially, this axis seeks to capture how much of the mechanics of the mecha are explained and how much is left up to “hand-waving”. Gundam for the most part is higher on the verisimilitude scale – it tries to explain the origins of mecha and the rationale for their use with “Minovsky physics”. Some is handwaved, but not all. Escaflowne and many Super Robot shows on the other hand do very little in the way of explaining why mecha are used in the first place.
And to simplify, a diagram:

Figure #1 - Mecha Typology, with some examples plotted.
The first confession to get out of the way is I’ve actually seen very little in the way of actual mecha anime, let alone shows that most mecha fans would consider essential. I can count my paltry list of completed anime on one hand and a finger (Gundam SeeD, Macross Plus, Macross Frontier, Code Geass, Gurren Laggan, and Escaflowne – though there are many half-starts and drops). Hence many of my categorizations are fairly debatable. Second to note is that many shows feature a varied mix of mecha, resulting in rough area on the chart – this gets even more aggravated when you take extended franchises such as Gundam or Macross, with very many iterations. The key thing to note is that this criteria is relative – it ceases to make sense if you try to apply it on a single show alone.

While technically not Japanese, Battletech and Mechwarrior have ripped enough off from the Japanese to warrant a lawsuit or two (which has actually happened, as a matter of fact)
On the other hand I don’t exactly consider myself a stranger to the aesthetic of mecha in general – most of my exposure to mecha has been more from the gaming side, mostly from series that exist independent of anime franchises. And here, I’ve experienced all three of the essential names: Mechwarrior (or Battletech, for the more grognardly), Front Mission, and Armored Core. (Some fans may be aghast that I don’t list Zone of the Enders or Steel Battalion here; while I think they’re great they just don’t quite have the same, ah, pedigree). One interesting thing to note is that most games are fairly consistent on the verisimilitude angle – Battletech, Front Mission, and Armored Core often feature militarized geo-political settings – but also are fairly low on the anthropomorphic axis – as noted before, this may be due to the limitations of gameplay; there is much less to account for in a game that simulates driving a vehicle rather than one where you play a human-like character with a wide range of motions. Mechwarrior and Chromehounds feature very vehicular style play, and have correspondingly vehicular design. On the other hand, the Front Mission and Armored Core series (strategy and action genres, respectively) attempt a wider range of expressive motion due to their genre, and have more humanoid designs as a result.
This is a fairly rough paradigm at the moment and I still think it needs some work myself. There is to some extent major association too between these axes – high verisimilitude mecha often require low anthropomorphic designs, but there are some series – Evangelion comes to mind – are particuarly problematic and difficult to plot easily; but I would say Evangelion perfectly achieves its deconstructive objectives in that sense.
Very nice. The fundamentals of your quadrant diagram are sound, if you ask me – but I’d be very interested in how you’d do it once you watch more shows.
We’re developing a ’sliding scale’ device that may or may not interface well with your quadrant. I’d rather that the tools ’speak’ to each other.
I had played a lot of Battletech and Mechwarrior (Board games, RPG, table-top figures, card games, PC games you name it) and their shift to less humanoid mecha is interesting – perhaps due to them getting sued for ripping off Dunbine and Macross designs. That said, Hajime Yatate of Macross did specialize in non-humanoid designs, so the web of influence is hard to pin causal links on.
I like it. I think it’s always nice to do something with two axes rather than one. It took me a little while to pick through the diagram. I think that’s partly because the subject is inherently complicated, but I think you might also be able to label it to show which quadrant is which a bit more clearly. (Also, the diagram says ‘versimilitude’ not ‘verisimilitude’.)
Thinking about the low anthropomorphism — high verisimilitude quadrant, I suppose there are two (and perhaps more) ways of seeing the anthropomophism axis: it might be a kind of scale from very humanoid (I agree that a lot of ‘classic’ shows — mecha before Gundam — sit here — the Zambo Ace in Zambot 3 comes to mind as a typical example, as it’s not only humanoid but displays different expressions on its face) to beastlike, or it might be a scale from very humanoid to very like a real war machine (so a real tank would be no anthropomorphism & extremely high verisimilitude — or no verisimilitude, since it wouldn’t be imitating anything). Hmm. That’s complex.
@ghostlightning – Looking forward to what you’ve got cooking. I have to agree on the difficulty of pinning down the conceptual roots of Battletech. It definitely has the most schizophrenic mecha design I’ve ever seen, and it’s only exacerbated by the nature of it as a tabletop game spanning over twenty years and having many designers come and go.
@Animanachronism – thanks for catching the spelling error there. I have to admit the anthropomorphism axis was the hardest to pin down. Initially, I was thinking along the humanoid – war machine angle (walking tank or iron knight), but the human-beast dichotomy is very pertinent too.
It’s tough to separate the two completely though, so I’m not sure if a third axis would be appropriate…
Thanks for the comments; I probably will eventually come back to this and do a more refined graph at some point.
Maybe you could use a triangle instead of an axis for the human-beast-tank difference?
Using ideas from polar coordinates, you could have a triangle, with each vertex identified with one of “beast” “tank” and “human”. How “close to the center” the point is could represent lower verisimilitude.
But I’m suggesting this on the assumption that the lower a show is in verisimilitude, the less likely there are boundaries between whether the mechs resemble humans or animals or whatever.
The polar coordinates idea might also work for what Animanachronism suggested- “so a real tank would be no anthropomorphism & extremely high verisimilitude — or no verisimilitude, since it wouldn’t be imitating anything”, since it would be ‘periodic’, at some point, having too high verisimilitude would loop back to having none at all. Clarification: “Polar coordinates” in a separate sense from what fisharon was suggesting (i.e. not necessarily a triangle, but a different scheme that still uses ‘polar coordinates’).
My understanding is that Battletech (FASA) didn’t rip anything off, and that the designs were copied with permission and under licenses (though perhaps not great licenses). There was speculation about FASA losing a lawsuit, but in fact the gave up the legal battle because there was no effective enforcement for designs they did not own. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BattleTech and http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BattleTech).
@EastwoodDC – Thanks for the clarification. I’ve found one of the things about Battletech mechanical design is that it tends to be all over in terms of consistency. You notice a gradual move towards their own style as time goes on, but the ‘mechs still feel all over the map; although ‘mechs like the Atlas and Mad Cat/Timberwolf are the face of the franchise, they really have very little in common with something like say, a King Crab.
[...] is Eureka SeveN a real robot show? Use this system to find out! (Vendredi [...]
[...] recommend this foray into robot anime typology! (Vendredi [...]
[...] the heck are real robots and super robots, and how the frick can I tell the difference? (Vendredi [...]
EastwoodDC is right. FASA got the rights to use the designs for their original mechs from the artist who did Macross himself (back when Battletech was called Battledroids). Licensing issues, rights, and whatnot became a problem sometime later, so FASA dropped those designs for something completely original. As of about a week or two ago, the original designs that haven’t been seen since 1985 have been re-licensed and are being re-released with the newest iterations of the Battletech line in the coming months.