Tahrey: I'd suggest increasing 3 to 4 frames, to put one inbetween the fully up and almost fully down position (even if it's just almost-fully-up, to suggest some acceleration as well as deceleration) which might smooth it out enough. Also IRL the arm would be at least slightly (and more like distinctly) bent and extend to being straigh throughout the slashing/throwing action.
Tahrey: Was I supposed to just see a picture of some legs and what looked like the taint part of some white panties? Cuz that's the picture that appeared behind the "hahaha you've been conned into automatically voting" text.
Tahrey: That already happens anyway, anyone who's logged in can tag or untag an image. But presumably the mods are able to set/unset and lock certain tags, and warn/ban anyone who's abusing it.
But yeah, straight rules would be good. Can someone bring up the illustrated posting guide (and maybe the tagging one) for us again, to show whether or not they already exist?
Tahrey: Oh right - the second line with the flying head wasn't there when I wrote that. It looked like an exploding head animation :D --- it all makes more sense now.
And, well... STILL making me think of some of the Lemmings traps, though whether I've seen another platformer that does similar? Like, a less arcadey, more strategic one?
(Not that it's either a bad idea, or I'm making any accusation of plagiarism; it was a nice touch that added a little extra in that game, rather than having the same generic death sequence regardless of what trap you activated, and it should do the same here too.)
Tahrey: not sure how it ended up being tagged, though. is someone just trying to make a point, or is there some actual guideline on it that this triggered?
Tahrey: bluedraggy: Works for me. At least then we can join forces to bitch at the mods instead of fighting with each other.
Kaz, Gera: Lol, internet. Were any of them (n)-chan mods in ages past?
Also, the internet is fuelled by stupid arguments and flamewars, they create the high pressure hot air that keeps it from collapsing in on itself. Without them it would self destruct within a matter of hours.
Were either of you around back in the days when Usenet / Newsgroups (as opposed to web-based fora) were a major part of the internet experience? Because, man, the pointless flaming that went on there... the bills that were racked up on charged-by-the-minute modem connections that you forgot to disconnect whilst writing your replies... oi vey.
Uzi_Man: I know you're probably after making things fairer and more democratic over all, but this isn't a democracy, I'm afraid. Most webforums aren't. You're always at the whim of the board owner and their appointed moderators. Deal with it.
The rules can sometimes be open to change if a great enough proportion of the userbase think they're drastically unfair and start petitioning for their alteration en masse, or there's a suggestion box that gets a continual trickle of "it might be a good idea if..." submissions from different people, or everyone just starts leaving... but, I think you're probably out on your own with the changes you wanted made.
Feel free to mooch on over to 8chan and set up a board there though ... in fact, it might even be a good thing to have a semioffical outlet for more... adult... Prequel fanarts that isn't hardlinked to this one ;) - then no-one can reasonably complain about their stuff being rejected, or slapped with an NSFW warning they think is unfair, because they can always be directed to that board instead via a PM or something.
Not enough pixel-particle-effect blood spray, though. Unless there's going to be a sub-frame "pop" effect where one of the usual explosion graphics is drawn over her head at the end of the second frame for a very short period, the third one is redrawn underneath the explosion, and then said explosion is erased whilst keeping that third frame in place?
(I'm thinking kinda... "Lemmings" here. Or maybe "Worms" :D ... it's also giving me feels of the rubbish quasi-platformers and the like me and my brother used to try and make in Shoot Em Up Construction Kit, vying with each other to make the most gruesome death anims for both the player and the enemies...)
Tahrey: Actually, cancel that. I've gone back and checked now...
This frame:
...is actually followed by one where the pixelation is removed following the gang boss noting that she's a reptile and therefore there's nothing really sexual about her chest. IE it's basically a bit like a human wearing an alligator-skin shirt.
So, in that case, carry on.
(However, my point still stands about the other stuff being pixelated - Kat was still censored until she applied the paint, etc... and QW PD was at least censored at first until that point was cleared up in story. So care still needs to be taken.)
((I'm not touching the bit about her apparently being "about 15", btw. You can fight amongst yourselves over that, and whether age, and particularly the difference between being adult and being underage, would make a difference between QW potentially being censored even though PD ultimately wasn't))
Tahrey: I thought it was low quality meat full of filler and not much flavour, that quickly gets repetitive...
But, OK, I'll do my best to refrain.
It *was* in the interest of avoiding further potentially acrimonious blather that was getting us nowhere though. Wanted to bring the attention back to the actual art...
Tahrey: Besides all that, I like this a lot :) Very nicely drawn and shaded - even though, as you admit it's obviously a 95% done WIP... Fix the bow, make that hand a little larger (and delete a finger on each ^_^), maybe make a version with a shirt to keep both sides of the boob-war happy, and it's all gravy.
Tahrey: Never knew we'd end up testing the mods' opinion on Uncovered Lizard Boobs quite so soon after the previous debacle...
I really can't decide either way myself, as I figure without any direct connection to the outside they're no more "offensive" than regular boobs underneath some kind of leather or scale armour, or other areas of stored fat under the skin.
Buuuuuuut Kaz pixelates them in the main comic, and as I was thinking that would work as a justifiable benchmark for what should/shouldn't be marked questionable, it probably needs the sticker. Yknow. Just to err on the side of safety. "Anything that's not displayable on the front page of the site should get a nsfw on the booru", pretty much.
(again, it's not like it restricts access or anything like that, it just hides potentially "offensive" (-sigh-) details from the thumbnail list, and warns the more timid clicker that they might want to steer clear)
Tahrey: Yeah, I was wondering about the "destroy weapon" bit. Does any part of the game rely on modfiable chance rolls or the like?
Asotil could be one of those cards that is either a great help (if you have an attack that is inferior to fireblast and/or you need a recharge - though actually the latter would be a non-canon thing), or no use at all (if you already have that or a better attack, and are fully charged).
Like, you might not deliberately add him to an opening hand, but there's nothing to say he wouldn't be part of the random-draw pile, and then appear either just as you need him (eg after your opponent has done something to nerf your main attack), or exactly when he's not needed (just as you've built up to maximum asskicking strength independently of him) and ends up just sticking around for ages until you can dump the card with little/no cost.
Tahrey: Nice :3
Clean lines, good proportions, captured the style just right.
But again they're insisting on being weird and drawing Katia as some kind of 5-fingered mutant abombination. What is this crazy fetish some artists have for polydactyly? Where will it end? Six fingers? Nineteen? MAKE THE MADNESS STOPSPORU£()_U_"M c9u-
Tahrey: I was shoving that infernal argument down the list because I couldn't be bothered trying to explain to UziMan why his proposal to turn the usual censorship standards on their head wasn't going to wash no matter how bizarre the protests got, and I didn't want to leave it there to bother everyone else any longer either.
Seemed a better idea to bump some actual nice posts up to the top of the Dramatic Descriptions list instead.
Well, as it's a site made and curated by an American, we should probably assume American publication standards.
And, in any case, it's the internet. When publishing you should assume the most stringent widespread standards need apply, and when browsing you should assume the most lax.
Tahrey: (and ditto makes three - i'll do a couple more and that should be enough to see a good set of nice posts at the top of the list and all the craziness down at the bottom or shuffled off to the inacessible void of Page Two)
Tahrey: Also, my own weight is not the issue here; in the interest of disclosure, I'm one category above "normal/healthy" and recognise I need to lose a few pounds, but have no self image issues over it as neither am I dragging around an enormous spare tyre. My family background on both sides tends towards the heavy-set even amongst the lean-going-on-anorexic members, so the BMI is a touch biased, and compared to three particular close relatives (one each from my generation and the two preceding gens, the oldest of whom being long deceased) I'm a goddamn featherweight.
But we were discussing the images, and the only thing I could positively identify as a complaint that would stand up to the most rudimentary scrutiny was that Katia was kinda well-funded in the booty department on the cartoonish pic. Which itself seemed to have had some kind of heated discussion over People's Firmly-Held Opinions Over Whether They Should Be Allowed To Freely Click On Images Depicting Overweight Characters And Look At Them Long Enough To Become Disgusted By It... whose participants are unknown to me because the moderators deleted it all. But I do have a sneaking suspicion that at least one of the contributors to this particular thread may have been involved...
Seriously, it's the interweb, if you don't like the picture, add the tag to a blocklist (if we have that system here), or just close the tab / hit back / shut your eyes, stumble out into the street and pay the nearest person who'll accept your money to go into your house and destroy your computer.
Grape: The painted underwear is at least *something* (for one thing, putting paint on thin-ish fur has a rather more concealing effect on what lies beneath than either the fur itself, or doing similar on bare skin; and IRL at least, animal fur tends to be thinner around these, ah, problem areas).
As per the self-arrived conclusion in my post in on the Civil War pic, painted underwear is shown uncensored in the comic, but nudity not concealed by such efforts is pixelated out for all three of smooth-skinned (Orc ... & human?), scaly-skinned (Argonian) and furry (Khajiit) characters, so in Prequel context at least it would seem that nudity = "explicit", painted undies on furry character = "not explicit" (with paint on skin or scale being as yet undefined). Even if it was done, as is most likely, either for comedy purposes or to comply with MSPAF rules, it still makes for a consistent rendering if we follow that.
Oh, and the argument may seem petty and all, but a line has to be drawn *somewhere* for clarity in future cases. And I may not have been quite so mind-boggled if the argument was either "they're both explicit!" (ok, a bit extreme, but maybe you come from a culture where undressing to/beyond the point where your knees and elbows are visible is considered unseemly), or "both are clean" (arguable given the fur and lack of nips/clefts, though errs on the side of fail-deadly rather than fail-safe from the censure-vulnerable user's perspective). The crazy-ass thing from where I'm standing was trying to claim that the clean/explicit classification needed to be reversed such that Pepe Le Pew got an NC17, but a front-lit, effectively-naked version of this:
...gets a U.
(note, artist could have given her a painted or fabric (or chainmail) bikini, but didn't)
FWIW I could probably have found the classic pin-up version of that which is what I have in my mind's eye, to put behind a NSFW'd link, but the problem is that I am myself at a workplace PC (it's a quiet week...) and adding even the mildest of suggestive terms as a modifier to what was needed to produce that pic results in just ALL OF THE PORN. Which I'd skim through for the desired pic with no issues at home, but it's rather too obvious even in thumbnail form on your monitor in an open plan office and forces a rapid, instinctive Ctrl+F4.
Dramatic Descriptions
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
Otherwise, good work as always :)
- Reply
- Reply
Also where's the head-coming-off animation already? :D
- Reply
- Reply
And how can her ankles bend that way
- Reply
Is the guy with the safety hat a British immigration officer?
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
Like, Linux Is Not UniX.
- Reply
But yeah, straight rules would be good. Can someone bring up the illustrated posting guide (and maybe the tagging one) for us again, to show whether or not they already exist?
- Reply
And, well... STILL making me think of some of the Lemmings traps, though whether I've seen another platformer that does similar? Like, a less arcadey, more strategic one?
(Not that it's either a bad idea, or I'm making any accusation of plagiarism; it was a nice touch that added a little extra in that game, rather than having the same generic death sequence regardless of what trap you activated, and it should do the same here too.)
..... hmmm .... D/Generation maybe?
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
...and what's with the plane :D
- Reply
Kaz, Gera: Lol, internet. Were any of them (n)-chan mods in ages past?
Also, the internet is fuelled by stupid arguments and flamewars, they create the high pressure hot air that keeps it from collapsing in on itself. Without them it would self destruct within a matter of hours.
Were either of you around back in the days when Usenet / Newsgroups (as opposed to web-based fora) were a major part of the internet experience? Because, man, the pointless flaming that went on there... the bills that were racked up on charged-by-the-minute modem connections that you forgot to disconnect whilst writing your replies... oi vey.
Uzi_Man: I know you're probably after making things fairer and more democratic over all, but this isn't a democracy, I'm afraid. Most webforums aren't. You're always at the whim of the board owner and their appointed moderators. Deal with it.
The rules can sometimes be open to change if a great enough proportion of the userbase think they're drastically unfair and start petitioning for their alteration en masse, or there's a suggestion box that gets a continual trickle of "it might be a good idea if..." submissions from different people, or everyone just starts leaving... but, I think you're probably out on your own with the changes you wanted made.
Feel free to mooch on over to 8chan and set up a board there though ... in fact, it might even be a good thing to have a semioffical outlet for more... adult... Prequel fanarts that isn't hardlinked to this one ;) - then no-one can reasonably complain about their stuff being rejected, or slapped with an NSFW warning they think is unfair, because they can always be directed to that board instead via a PM or something.
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
Not enough pixel-particle-effect blood spray, though. Unless there's going to be a sub-frame "pop" effect where one of the usual explosion graphics is drawn over her head at the end of the second frame for a very short period, the third one is redrawn underneath the explosion, and then said explosion is erased whilst keeping that third frame in place?
(I'm thinking kinda... "Lemmings" here. Or maybe "Worms" :D ... it's also giving me feels of the rubbish quasi-platformers and the like me and my brother used to try and make in Shoot Em Up Construction Kit, vying with each other to make the most gruesome death anims for both the player and the enemies...)
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
"So, Steve... do you have any hobbies?"
"Steve"
"...pardon?"
*nod* "Steve"
-----
"You work on the land,
Take your rest on the water"?
- Reply
This frame:
...is actually followed by one where the pixelation is removed following the gang boss noting that she's a reptile and therefore there's nothing really sexual about her chest. IE it's basically a bit like a human wearing an alligator-skin shirt.
So, in that case, carry on.
(However, my point still stands about the other stuff being pixelated - Kat was still censored until she applied the paint, etc... and
QWPD was at least censored at first until that point was cleared up in story. So care still needs to be taken.)((I'm not touching the bit about her apparently being "about 15", btw. You can fight amongst yourselves over that, and whether age, and particularly the difference between being adult and being underage, would make a difference between QW potentially being censored even though PD ultimately wasn't))
- Reply
Also, U_M, he drew her with her breasts pixelated. As seen in the parody painting image from a week or two back.
kind of the entire point of what I was saying if you'd bothered to pay attention
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
But, OK, I'll do my best to refrain.
It *was* in the interest of avoiding further potentially acrimonious blather that was getting us nowhere though. Wanted to bring the attention back to the actual art...
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
I really can't decide either way myself, as I figure without any direct connection to the outside they're no more "offensive" than regular boobs underneath some kind of leather or scale armour, or other areas of stored fat under the skin.
Buuuuuuut Kaz pixelates them in the main comic, and as I was thinking that would work as a justifiable benchmark for what should/shouldn't be marked questionable, it probably needs the sticker. Yknow. Just to err on the side of safety. "Anything that's not displayable on the front page of the site should get a nsfw on the booru", pretty much.
(again, it's not like it restricts access or anything like that, it just hides potentially "offensive" (-sigh-) details from the thumbnail list, and warns the more timid clicker that they might want to steer clear)
- Reply
Asotil could be one of those cards that is either a great help (if you have an attack that is inferior to fireblast and/or you need a recharge - though actually the latter would be a non-canon thing), or no use at all (if you already have that or a better attack, and are fully charged).
Like, you might not deliberately add him to an opening hand, but there's nothing to say he wouldn't be part of the random-draw pile, and then appear either just as you need him (eg after your opponent has done something to nerf your main attack), or exactly when he's not needed (just as you've built up to maximum asskicking strength independently of him) and ends up just sticking around for ages until you can dump the card with little/no cost.
- Reply
You could at least have taken the clothes off her dismembered torso before showing off your loot.
(Anyway, nice sculpin')
- Reply
Clean lines, good proportions, captured the style just right.
But again they're insisting on being weird and drawing Katia as some kind of 5-fingered mutant abombination. What is this crazy fetish some artists have for polydactyly? Where will it end? Six fingers? Nineteen? MAKE THE MADNESS STOPSPORU£()_U_"M c9u-
Also, I wonder if that's the artist's real name?
- Reply
Seemed a better idea to bump some actual nice posts up to the top of the Dramatic Descriptions list instead.
- Reply
Well, as it's a site made and curated by an American, we should probably assume American publication standards.
And, in any case, it's the internet. When publishing you should assume the most stringent widespread standards need apply, and when browsing you should assume the most lax.
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
but then that would spoil the uniqueness value of yours, so it's better this way
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
But we were discussing the images, and the only thing I could positively identify as a complaint that would stand up to the most rudimentary scrutiny was that Katia was kinda well-funded in the booty department on the cartoonish pic. Which itself seemed to have had some kind of heated discussion over People's Firmly-Held Opinions Over Whether They Should Be Allowed To Freely Click On Images Depicting Overweight Characters And Look At Them Long Enough To Become Disgusted By It... whose participants are unknown to me because the moderators deleted it all. But I do have a sneaking suspicion that at least one of the contributors to this particular thread may have been involved...
Seriously, it's the interweb, if you don't like the picture, add the tag to a blocklist (if we have that system here), or just close the tab / hit back / shut your eyes, stumble out into the street and pay the nearest person who'll accept your money to go into your house and destroy your computer.
- Reply
Grape: The painted underwear is at least *something* (for one thing, putting paint on thin-ish fur has a rather more concealing effect on what lies beneath than either the fur itself, or doing similar on bare skin; and IRL at least, animal fur tends to be thinner around these, ah, problem areas).
As per the self-arrived conclusion in my post in on the Civil War pic, painted underwear is shown uncensored in the comic, but nudity not concealed by such efforts is pixelated out for all three of smooth-skinned (Orc ... & human?), scaly-skinned (Argonian) and furry (Khajiit) characters, so in Prequel context at least it would seem that nudity = "explicit", painted undies on furry character = "not explicit" (with paint on skin or scale being as yet undefined). Even if it was done, as is most likely, either for comedy purposes or to comply with MSPAF rules, it still makes for a consistent rendering if we follow that.
Oh, and the argument may seem petty and all, but a line has to be drawn *somewhere* for clarity in future cases. And I may not have been quite so mind-boggled if the argument was either "they're both explicit!" (ok, a bit extreme, but maybe you come from a culture where undressing to/beyond the point where your knees and elbows are visible is considered unseemly), or "both are clean" (arguable given the fur and lack of nips/clefts, though errs on the side of fail-deadly rather than fail-safe from the censure-vulnerable user's perspective). The crazy-ass thing from where I'm standing was trying to claim that the clean/explicit classification needed to be reversed such that Pepe Le Pew got an NC17, but a front-lit, effectively-naked version of this:
...gets a U.
(note, artist could have given her a painted or fabric (or chainmail) bikini, but didn't)
FWIW I could probably have found the classic pin-up version of that which is what I have in my mind's eye, to put behind a NSFW'd link, but the problem is that I am myself at a workplace PC (it's a quiet week...) and adding even the mildest of suggestive terms as a modifier to what was needed to produce that pic results in just ALL OF THE PORN. Which I'd skim through for the desired pic with no issues at home, but it's rather too obvious even in thumbnail form on your monitor in an open plan office and forces a rapid, instinctive Ctrl+F4.
- Reply
That's it, I'm totally done feeding the troll. Whatever, dude. You win. Enjoy your hollow internet victory.