Suggestions

[quote name="Twizz" date="2023-03-30 20:23:39" ] Since OP has clarified they mean the appearance of the eyes, not the placement, gonna ring in again. This actually seems to be consistent with any breeds that were created/added after...2013/2014? Not just ancients. Check out multi-gaze on Bogsneaks and Obelisks (our two "newest" Moderns): [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=0&body=164&bodygene=0&breed=14&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=0&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=143&auth=711c395a8830f399bbba9451313d923df01efa9d&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=164&bodygene=0&breed=14&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=0&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=143&auth=ddca2e45c7e6ddc1b2ee68d34b11d2c9de1938fb&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=164&bodygene=0&breed=14&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=1&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=143&auth=846b776a386283aa9137f24dfabe423b1eba77a9&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=0&body=92&bodygene=0&breed=15&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=0&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=135&auth=1e4e9c51b86fa839a42bd100db7c17175b8051aa&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=92&bodygene=0&breed=15&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=0&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=135&auth=131052cda53c6eda099715e15c34c6aa168561fb&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=92&bodygene=0&breed=15&element=11&eyetype=5&gender=1&tert=88&tertgene=0&winggene=0&wings=135&auth=bb20c27b9e2ec7d0210497ffe10bfde91bc11d7b&dummyext=prev.png[/img] They all sort of have a more copy-paste/deform tool look to them, similar to the Ancients. Maybe [i]slightly[/i] less so but not by much. If I could posit a theory, I believe the Devs confirmed that Eye Types were supposedly planned to be a feature way back in FR's Development stages that for one reason or another weren't present at launch. If that's the case, this may simply be another case of "missing Art assets". By "missing art assets" I mean the original art assets for Multi-Gaze that are used on the original 12 or so breeds that were ready at launch may have been lost, similar to how some early apparel and familiar art assets were also lost or otherwise unable to be replicated in order to make re-colors/re-vamps. This would explain why Multi-Gaze for newer breeds feel kinda copy-paste/deform tool-y. Because that's currently the best that can be done. They can't make more customized Multi-Gaze eyes without them looking "different" from the current Multi-Gaze. Granted this is just a theory but I do find it possible given Multi-Gaze's appearance on the newer Modern breeds compared against the older Modern breeds. [/quote] Ah yes good point! I am still in the camp of preferring the hand-drawn and hand-fitted eyes. It would indeed take more time than copy pasting, and potentially be less consistent, but I really really love multigaze (it is my favorite eye type, situationally) but only end up keeping it on the oldest breeds that do have fitting hand drawn eyes. I am personally not into the sticker look. It's true that this breed list of sticker-eyes is long, and it would be a lot of changes that would definitely upset some people. This is just personal opinion and conjecture but I'd like to think most people would prefer eyes to look like eyes and not just stickers. Even if it's just a change that is only kept in mind for future breeds and the site decides not to alter past ones, I am glad this topic was made because it's been on my mind for awhile.

Support- they legit look like a bad edit.

I wish multigaze was done differently from start. it is too late to change it now

[quote name="Valrunie" date="2023-04-01 09:15:30" ] I wish multigaze was done differently from start. it is too late to change it now [/quote] This. This is the truth for any kind of gene/eye/apparel/[i]anything[/i] edits for things that have been around for far too long. Yes, they can be improved by a wide margin. But should we? Players have already gotten used to how they are. Everybody's figured out workarounds and ways to incorporate errors into their own styles and visions. People have made countless projects based on the colors and the styles and the general vibes. And there are a ton of people who have just grown to love them for how they are or who have loved them from the start. It wouldn't be fair to change something this long-standing this far after it was implemented. So with that, despite me agreeing Multi-gaze as is doesn't look great and never planning on specifically buying or planning on it for a dragon [purely for the mediocre art], I have to say no support.

[quote name="Valrunie" date="2023-04-01 09:15:30" ] I wish multigaze was done differently from start. it is too late to change it now [/quote] Clearly the solution is to have Multigaze 2: HD Edition ... this is half a joke, but it could be a potential solution. Is there anything that says they cant make another multiple-eye type? Make multigaze and. man idk, polygaze lmao Keep the old type untouched and have an alternative that '''looks nicer''' ?

[quote name="Whitefire" date="2023-04-01 12:30:09" ] [quote name="Valrunie" date="2023-04-01 09:15:30" ] I wish multigaze was done differently from start. it is too late to change it now [/quote] Clearly the solution is to have Multigaze 2: HD Edition ... this is half a joke, but it could be a potential solution. Is there anything that says they cant make another multiple-eye type? Make multigaze and. man idk, polygaze lmao Keep the old type untouched and have an alternative that '''looks nicer''' ? [/quote] Idea for a newer alternative that doesn't look exactly the same as Multigaze HD: Gembond style clumps of eyes all over the body. I've always kinda been eh about the idea of just a perfectly even line of eyes all down the body. Big organic piles of 'em would be so so good. Gonna make a mockup later fr

[quote name="MaskedAres" date="2023-04-03 01:04:43" ] for anyone uncomfortable by my choice of words about sanity, I apologize, as I did not mean it as any form of insult. I just cannot see how anyone could prefer copy-pasted eyes, is all. [/quote] This is still a backhanded way to refer to people who actually like multigaze. You don’t have to understand. That’s fine. But you don’t get to keep making these sorts of comments.

[quote name="MaskedAres" date="2023-04-03 01:04:43" ] for anyone uncomfortable by my choice of words about sanity, I apologize, as I did not mean it as any form of insult. I just cannot see how anyone could prefer copy-pasted eyes, is all. [/quote] There might be people who find them tolerable and don't want all the extra time spent on them, or there might be people who just prefer the vibe for one reason or another (they are pretty uncanny, they do have that "too perfect"/"too alike" je ne sais quois) Not that I wouldn't like a fix, but I don't think people liking them as they are is too out there