Flight Rising Discussion

I'm so stoked about this, it is exactly what I have been waiting for. Just let me dip the dergle in the glitter :D

I like it for its simplicity. My Meadow now has it, and it looks like little plant buds or floating pollen around her, its perfect.

If underbelly came out today people would call it lazy.

I say sparkle is pretty cool! As an aspiring G1 collector I value it mainly as a tert saver gene- I've never really been a fan of spines (it makes the tert colour basically invisible. please just leave it basic if you've resorted to spines) and koi and stained are too expensive.

I need like 100 permababies with this gene, ik it's simple and cheap but that's exactly why I love it besides its actual design, it's very affordable, could save an ugly tert and makes great permababy dragons also shiny pokemon, kidcore, night sky themed dragons and it's glamorous, I'm happy.
It's ok if you don't like it, I think I can see your point tho I won't change my mind about liking it, maybe next tert will be more on your liking.

I do wish it had a Firefly or Runes-like glow, but I can see how that is offputting to some people. I love the gene anyway! But now I feel like this gene would have been better named "Stars" or "Starred", and then they could have implemented a different tert later with smaller, Flaunt/Flair/Star/Con-like sparkles, a glowing effect like Runes/Firefly, and called [i]that[/i] "Sparkle"... Oh well. I suppose another sparkle-like tert can still come out under a different name, I just definitely think something with 'star' would have fit this gene better in name lol (kinda like how "Keel" isn't actually anything like keeled scales, but that doesn't mean we can't get a more keel-accurate tert. "Lace" and "Ringlets" are similar concepts done differently, for example, with Lace being the older gene) But yeah, I love it and this girl's gonna rock it [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/dressing-room/scry?sdid=2523020&skin=44903&apparel=&xt=dressing.png[/img] I also love that it's relatively cheap. Praise [emoji=rainbow star 1 size=1]

[quote name="Atherissss" date="2022-05-10 05:09:07" ] [b]If underbelly came out today people would call it lazy.[/b] I say sparkle is pretty cool! As an aspiring G1 collector I value it mainly as a tert saver gene- I've never really been a fan of spines (it makes the tert colour basically invisible. please just leave it basic if you've resorted to spines) and koi and stained are too expensive. [/quote] I think that the more genes we get, the more critical we are of new ones. I think that now that we have so many different options, a new gene has to be something really special to stand out, and if it doesn't stand out people are a little disappointed. Whereas in the early days, there were so few customisation options that we were almost pitifully grateful to get any more :)

[quote name="Hippotang" date="2022-05-10 05:14:02" ] But now I feel like this gene would have been better named "Stars" or "Starred", and then they could have implemented a different tert later with smaller, Flaunt/Flair/Star/Con-like sparkles, a glowing effect like Runes/Firefly, and called [i]that[/i] "Sparkle"... Oh well. I suppose another sparkle-like tert can still come out under a different name [/quote] I don't doubt that we might get a underbelly/glimmer situation, but the thing that makes me really sad about that whole bit is that the hypothetically future more galaxy like sparkle is almost certainly going to be a gem tertiary. Which is whatever, the site needs to make money blah blah... But I would like treasure genes to have at least some of the more flashy types of genes too, the only one I can really say fits that right now is runes. I'm sure a big reason people like sparkle so much is that its a solution to more lackluster terts that doesn't cost an arm or do almost nothing That and the idea of making 'cheap' and 'elite' versions of gene concepts really doesn't sit right with me, even if its arguably happened a few times already. I'll always be somewhat salty stained is a gem gene

I, too, have rather mixed feelings about this gene. For one, sparkles are cool. They're distributed somewhat unevenly which gives them a more "natural" look. However, they are unusually cartoonish for the semi-realistic look of Flight Rising, and would probably do better with more transparency or being more like lens flare. [quote name="HenryTheArcher" date="2022-05-07 04:15:58" ] But as a gene itself, we can have shiny Pokémon fan dragons with the sparkle effect now. [/quote] This. This is genius. In cases like this, the gene's cartoonish look actually lends itself to a better overall appearance.

[quote name="anemo" date="2022-05-10 02:42:25" ] i think going for a cutesy, flat vibe for an aesthetic that is in and of itself quite kitschy and extra just makes no sense. i would at least give it a glow effect like people in this thread provided examples of people are comparing it to firefly but IMO its more keel than anything [/quote] Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense to go for when it's a popular aesthetic on site, as this post laid out: [quote name="kyat" date="2022-05-07 06:21:02" ] I know your complaint is that it's too sticker-like, but I think that's the point! The sticker aesthetic has been popular on FR for years now, I mean take a glance at most cute-themed UMAs and you'll find hundreds of sticker accents. (My vista is also a good indicator of that, as well.) Honestly I'm kinda glad staff is dipping into various sub aesthetics of the site. As an artist, I've noticed a trend where people are leaning away from "3D" aesthetics and more into 2D, simpler aesthetics (this is a general observation.) [/quote]