So It's The Bushwacker! Are You Going To Buy It Yes Or No, And Why Or Why Not?
#1
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:18 PM
#2
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:21 PM
1. Voting with mah wallet.
2. It probably won't be very good anyways.
#3
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:24 PM
#4
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:26 PM
#5
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:26 PM
Holding out for Wasp / Cougar / Mk II / Stone Rhino.
Depending on where they go with ED.
Until then we are closed until further notice.
#6
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:27 PM
Because this isn't a game, it's an interactive art gallery.
#7
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:30 PM
#11
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:39 PM
#13
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:41 PM
Edited by DaZur, 06 September 2016 - 07:55 PM.
#14
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:44 PM
#16
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:46 PM
dervishx5, on 06 September 2016 - 07:35 PM, said:
Yeah it's not fat and melted enough. 0/10. Try harder Alex.
By Bushwackery I meant something like this.
Alex's art is too generic. Bushwacker's arms should be wide-spread, not that clumped up Linebacker knockoff Alex drew up. I'm gonna take a look at it from different angles before reaching definitive verdict, but for now, I am disappointed with the Wacker's artwork by Alex.
Edited by El Bandito, 06 September 2016 - 07:48 PM.
#17
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:48 PM
El Bandito, on 06 September 2016 - 07:46 PM, said:
By Bushwackery I meant something like this.
Alex's art is too generic. Bushwacker's arms should be wide-spread, not that Linebacker knockoff Alex drew up. I'm gonna take a look at it from different angles before reaching definitive verdict, but for now, I am disappointed with the Wacker's artwork by Alex.
Those aren't the official LOOSE work though, so they don't count.
:3
#18
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:48 PM
DaZur, on 06 September 2016 - 07:41 PM, said:
lol dude the Bushwacker is an IS battlemech
Which is also why I'm not spending $$ on it. With that said, the Bushwacker is one of the only IS mechs that I've seriously considered spending money on as of late.
#19
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:50 PM
dervishx5, on 06 September 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:
Those aren't the official LOOSE work though, so they don't count.
:3
See the FASA logo from first picture? You can't get more Battletech than that. They are similar to the Bushwacker featured in MW3 and MW4, so I count them as official. Current art is too distanced from the concept to my liking.
Edited by El Bandito, 06 September 2016 - 07:57 PM.
#20
Posted 06 September 2016 - 07:54 PM
Imperius, on 06 September 2016 - 07:18 PM, said:
Nope.
1) Never was a fan
2) Was only "good" in MW3... and every mech was an interchangeable gunbag there, so no big feat
3) PGIs legomech "dynamic" weapons look horribly out of place on it especially the torso laser and sidecar taped on AC10.
4) Have no desire to reward PGI for making packs of Made Up Variants, when there are still mechs with enough timeline/tech level available variants that could be made instead, without screwing up potential future tech variants, in the process.
5) I've only been buying mechs that would be art assets for HBS's Battletech game
6) Until MM, FW and overall TTK/Gameplay are remotely balanced/fun again, I see no reason to buy anything.
And... that about covers the basics.
Still, I have an outstanding Mech Pack waiting to be claimed from a contest..... after passing on the last 3 mechs, I might cash it in just so the poor soul waiting on me doesn't have to wait any longer. Would have been an easy choice with a Charger or Crusader... both mechs with copious in timeline/tech level variants about..
DaZur, on 06 September 2016 - 07:41 PM, said:
Btech Street Cred... lost.
*SMH* Turn in your Bro Card at the door and move along, nothing to see here......
dervishx5, on 06 September 2016 - 07:48 PM, said:
Those aren't the official LOOSE work though, so they don't count.
:3
the official Loose work..... sucked in pretty much ALL of the TRO 3058.
Edited by Bishop Steiner, 06 September 2016 - 08:00 PM.
3 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users