Sereglach, on 02 September 2018 - 05:46 PM, said:
Bitter much? I find this whole statement ironic coming from the one who's had sentiments wishing people expressed more positive views on the forums. Personally, I like the new art and have always felt most of the older art needs some serious face lifts, especially to compete with art (and thereby miniatures) from other, newer games. It's seemed Catalyst has felt this way, too, with the way they've been making new artwork.
Honestly though, when it comes to older omnimech art, I think the more pressing issue FASA started to run into was realizing that having a bunch of chassis at different weight classes, yet sharing the same "core chassis" for physical components (Dasher and Koshi, Vulture and Mad Cat, etc.), made little sense. If they share the same core in their chassis then why are some of lesser max tonnage? FASA never seemed to find a solid way to explain that, so they just said "well, they share some parts to make logistics easier, but the chassis are still different at their core" and started to make whatever art they felt like making.
To each their own, though, I suppose.
What's bitter about the statement?
I expressed an opinion about the art decision. Nothing to do with bitterness.
You also seem to be conflating two totally separate points I am making into one. I am referring in one point to the trend in TRO art to go to all sort of weird and wonky designs on Omnimechs. Regardless of your subjective aesthetic opinion, it defeats the idea of MODULARITY, easy swap parts that was the original idea behind the original 1 omnimechs. Period. Which is an objective fact.
Yes we can get into the tonange, endo, ferro and other issues that FASA dumped on themselves ad infinitum also, but the original intent, is obvious. We can see many other areas where they deviated from whatever original concepts were from the art to final product from things liek the missile pods on the Summoner and Hellbringers legs, the twin 6pack/dual LL arms on the Stormcrow that obviously never became a thing (despite the old fluff referencing it), etc. Oddly curved and strange shapes do not tend to lend themselves to easy modularity, so things liek the later Turkina, Night Gyr, Arctic Cheetah Art, really fell away from the concept.
My next comment was a subjective opinion that I did not like the artistic choices made on either the Hatamoto (which I have always felt was a Weeaboo mech made to grab the attention of the Gundam kiddies of the 90s, period) or the Charger, which if you took away it's little pistol and the left arm and posted without a name, I would bet NOBODY would have identified it as a Charger, because it is missing almost every basic cue from the Charger design. What is "bitter" about that?
Maybe it's time you spent a little less time trying to be an armchair psychologist, and more time working on your reading comprehension? There is a difference between wanting to see more positivist, and fighting against toxicity and trolls, and having an opinion. Alex usually makes great concepts. IMO, this was not one of those times. Deal with it.
*SMH*
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 September 2018 - 06:39 PM.
111
