|
|
Post by doublea on Mar 30, 2009 11:04:40 GMT -5
I think I posted this previously, but I admit if Bendis was the 1st artist in COTG lore, my time playing would have been short. Carter and Snelly really got me hooked. By the time Bendis (and ugh, Gustovich) came around, I was immersed in the storyline
|
|
|
|
Post by Knapik on Mar 30, 2009 11:08:25 GMT -5
My only gripe with it is that (imo) it doesn't look as good as some of the guys in the first LOTF did. We've seen Albright, Jacobs, Black, and Ultramantis, and in my opinion, they don't look all that great. Then again, it's the stats on the card that matter at the end of the day. See, I don't have a problem with you saying this. But man, I think crazy to not like UMB or Jacobs' art.  |
|
|
|
Post by swarm on Mar 30, 2009 13:43:42 GMT -5
My only gripe with it is that (imo) it doesn't look as good as some of the guys in the first LOTF did. We've seen Albright, Jacobs, Black, and Ultramantis, and in my opinion, they don't look all that great. Then again, it's the stats on the card that matter at the end of the day. See, I don't have a problem with you saying this. But man, I think crazy to not like UMB or Jacobs' art. At least for me, it's not that the Jacobs art is bad, it just doesn't look like him. It's the eyes or something. I haven't seen UMB yet. Where is that pic at...? With that said, I'm not really worried about it. To be honest, there are a lot of the Legends art I'm not crazy about. That doesn't mean I won't one day run a LOW fed. LOTF1 just happens to be my favorite legends set so I have high expectations for LOTF2. Like someone else said, it's the stats that are most important and Knapik does a pretty good job with them. I'm sure whatever interest might be lacking foe me due to Jacobs drawing will more than be made up for with Knapik's stats and the way he designed them. As far as not being able to criticize art without offering suggestions to improve it, that kind of makes sense, but at the same time, kind of doesn't. I could say "Make them look less hokey, and cartooney" when talking about some of these fan made LOW cards but then how does that really help? If the artist draws hokey cartoon looking guys that's what he does. From an outside perspective I think it's ok to criticize things without offering detailed examples of how to improve them. That would take forever. I guess my only suggestion in this scenario would be to find an actual real picture of the wrestler to use on the card (since we are talking about real people here) rather than draw some distorted cartoon looking thing that doesn't really look like the wrestler to begin with. Maybe save the art for COTG boots and use pics for the LOW guys. Something like that. Now it's different when you are working directly with the artist. If the artist isn't giving you what you are looking for you can nitpick it, and work together on improving it, one drawing at a time. But when you're talking about someone's entire body of work, you're probably going to either like it or not for the most part. Bendis was like that for me. He had some stuff I really liked, but for the most part, everything he did was bad. I don't see the problem is saying that without offering an opinion on how to make it better. And just because someone does something for free doesn't mean it can't be criticized. People have been doing free bootlegs forever around here and not everyone loves ever single one of them. If you are going to make stuff, you have to have a spine and be able to take criticism. Not everyone is your Mom or Dad who is just going to act like everything you do is great. All that should matter to whoever is making the free stuff is that they like it. If they get a certain sense of joy out of making bootlegs for others then that is what is important. Not that some people might look at them and think they suck. |
|
|
|
Post by Knapik on Mar 30, 2009 14:01:12 GMT -5
And this is what it really boils down to. How sensitive are you? If you're so sensitive that the slightest bit of criticism is going to ruin your world, you probably shouldn't have this stuff out in the open. I have a pretty extensive body of work, and I've been criticized often for choices on cards and the like. It's REALLY important not to take it personally. I may not agree with people's suggestions, but I'm sure as hell not going to take it to heart and stop doing what I love for myself and the community.
I think the LOTF art is amazing. I was apprehensive at first (I still don't like Hero's art), but seeing the final product (especially in hand)... the artist is a true standout in the COTG universe, and he was a great discovery. No one should get bent out of shape if one doesn't share my opinion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2009 15:17:27 GMT -5
My only gripe with it is that (imo) it doesn't look as good as some of the guys in the first LOTF did. We've seen Albright, Jacobs, Black, and Ultramantis, and in my opinion, they don't look all that great. Then again, it's the stats on the card that matter at the end of the day. See, I don't have a problem with you saying this. But man, I think crazy to not like UMB or Jacobs' art. Well, to be fair, I'm going off of barely being able to see UMB's art. |
|
|
|
Post by canadianpittbull on Mar 30, 2009 16:10:45 GMT -5
There is a difference between being sensitive and being insulted by individuals who have no business even addressing this issue when they don't even run a LOTF or LOW fed to begin with.
|
|
