Suggestions

[quote name="gemajgall" date="2024-02-19 16:42:07" ] I support this as the Gene Variation suggestion. I can imagine some players do like the new version. And some players make like the old version on Dragon A but the new version on Dragon B. Either way, this IS a huge change, and I feel this really merits the Gene Variation suggestion becoming reality. (Plz? For us reverse clown fans. And Filigree without the gems. And Contour without the leg lines. Etc etc.) [/quote] This. I like both in their own right on certain colors. Where I think one fails, the other looks good. I think it would be best to just add gene variations so that everyone is happy. Not likely to happen soon, but still the best option. Besides, filigree without the gems? Yes, please!

[quote name="vortexbreakdown" date="2024-02-19 09:23:27" ] (snip) I knew that the extra shine was considered a bug, but the top feathers of the wings being solid was something that 100% read as an accommodation for Auraboa anatomy to me (something that staff explicitly describe as a reason to reject certain gene error reports), so I didn't even consider that that would be part of the bug report for the gene! [/quote] Agreeing with this quote and supporting Paisley being reverted. I noticed that Paisley was on the error report, but assumed that the highlights were the issue from the wording. I understand and sympathize with staff on gene errors. It can't be an easy thing to sort out, and it's a lot of work to correct things in a timely manner. In this case, however, it seems like there was a miscommunication on artistic difference versus bugged inconsistency. Given the combination of timing (being months from release) and the extent of the change, I also understand why so many people are upset.

I'm going to say it because everyone is thinking it. auroboa paisley looks like poop now. It was easily the best secondary and they have broken it. [quote name="Undel" date="2023-11-21 00:48:26" ] Many genes have accommodations for dragon anatomy where one breed is every so slightly different than others because it worked better for them. These are not considered errors. [/quote] STOP SAYING THIS AND THEN IGNORING IT!!! Ans the extra shiny was what made it so pretty on boas too I thought the lack of patterning on the top portion on the wings was intentional, it's so distinct and looks good... my idea would be to darken it and make it match the belly instead of just adding the pattern to it and making it blend in to the rest of the wing. [quote name="Undel" date="2023-11-21 00:48:26" ] Many genes have accommodations for dragon anatomy where one breed is every so slightly different than others because it worked better for them. These are not considered errors. [/quote] EXACTLY!! From the bug thread: [quote name="Undel" date="2023-11-21 00:48:26" ] Secondary: Rattlesnake not having patterning in the upper portion of the wings is intended. [/quote] LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYERS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!! Literally everyone said this looked intentional and preferred it. Change it back! [quote name="mothscale" date="2024-02-19 09:19:49" ] SNIP • …Especially, as pointed out, when that gene is being used as a Roundsey prize with the bugged version. That should not happen. That feels really particularly pointed— the old version of a gene is being used to solicit user interest and treasure and then that is taken away. At least wait until the gene is fixed before using it as a Roundsey prize in the future, please! SNIP [/quote] Also Big this ^ feels so dishonest to have a "bugged" dragon in roundsey [quote name="vortexbreakdown" date="2024-02-19 09:23:27" ] SNIP For Paisley, though, the change is drastic, being a fundamental change to the breed art. I knew that the extra shine was considered a bug, but the top feathers of the wings being solid was something that 100% read as an accommodation for Auraboa anatomy to me (something that staff explicitly describe as a reason to reject certain gene error reports), so I didn't even consider that that would be part of the bug report for the gene! SNIP [/quote] It's gone now but several people pointed out that the original bug report did in fact only mention the highlight and shading issues, NOT the entire top of the wing. [quote name="Xela" date="2024-02-19 10:30:13" ] I'm glad I don't own any auras with this gene right now, but I'm in full support of changing it back, the previous version looks like intentional variation and looks better than the 'fixed' version. Why is koi on veilspun allowed to be inconsistent with the same gene on other breeds, but other genes aren't allowed to have interesting intentional differences across different breeds? [/quote] [quote name="arawoods" date="2024-02-19 10:36:07" ] support. the old paisley wasn't a 'gene error', it was a unique gene variation that we've gotten for other ancient genes in the past I mean, this has now happened with obelisk flair AND aberration f capsule, so I hope they revert this too... [/quote] [quote name="EaterofMan" date="2024-02-19 10:57:12" ] SNIP Breeds need to take longer time being developed and checked over for super obvious flaws like this during the designing process. I don't care if it even means we only get one breed a year. Previous breeds have released bugged, but none to the severity of aura's. Practically every gene they released with had bugs, and they still have an expensive gem gene listed as a "maybe" bug. It's very, very clear that they rushed aura's out to release them before rockbreaker's because they had the fest gene. You can't convince me otherwise. SNIP [/quote] Auroboa are so half-baked it isnt even funny [quote name="Seungmeong" date="2024-02-19 10:58:16" ] Full support—whats the point of different breeds if every gene will be nuked for consistency? Besides, it looks bad with the new paisley, thats... thats just not how feathers work. Like, they've reverted it before with Obelisk flair, so I don't see why they wouldn't revert it again...the old version seems to be widely agreed to have been better. [/quote] [quote name="Dottler" date="2024-02-19 12:01:49" ] The most myterious part about these "bugs" is what the communication between the gene artist(s) between each other and the FR team was like. These aren't "the luminosity layers was too bright" or "the gradient is too dark" mistakes, this was a very deliberate artistic choice. Can artistic choices be wrong? Sure, but this is not one of them just like Obelisk Flair. And besides, the old paisley was consistant with some breeds because the deeper color part of paisley can't really go anywhere else on auraboas. Now that it's completely gone we actually created a new consistancy issue. But back to the original point... does the FR team not communicate with the gene artist(s) involved? Can't the gene artist give their justification for this choice (to the team, doesnt need to be public but transparency could be nice) without it getting labelled as a "bug" immediately and then forced to change? Is there no review process before genes are released? Why aren't they doing polls and asking for community feedback before making major changes in artistic decisions (not fixing bugs) after already releasing the gene? Edit: worded some things wrong so im trying to fix them </3 [/quote] [quote name="fatui" date="2024-02-19 12:03:52" ] support, this change genuinely sucks. like it legit looks Awful. it looks printed on and fake whereas it's first iteration looked really fresh and clean uuugh genes dont need to be 100% consistent between breeds bc they arent in Several other cases showcased in this thread idk why staff decides to make these kind of decisions that Directly impact players without at Least making a post to gauge interest or even a poll like come on man inb4 staff post saying 'we had no idea how much of an impact this has made on our playerbase' I call absolute bull on that bc the auraboa gene error thread has Tens of replies and posts saying that fern/paisley looked great how it was. makes me think staff just Isn't listening to its users imo final point but it is actually Insane to me that this "issue" that no one wanted fixed got fixed before they fixed obelisk antlers item placement. what is prioritized by staff and in what order are things prioritized lol [/quote] Also this, as one of the people repeatedly posting reasons it was better the old way [quote name="HoraDusk" date="2024-02-19 12:24:02" ] I rarely post but I have to say support to having a poll or having the community choose on the end result. I had reported a bug I had noticed on the old version and had been keeping my eye on the report thread to see when/if it would be changed. The bugs listed were only the ones regarding the highlights being too bright and an investigation one (which, I belived to be about what I had reported). Image below to show what the bug was, an inconsistency on the colour of the clawed fingers in the further wings. [img]https://file.garden/ZW3u0mxuQg5gDIzJ/Dragon%20files/wing-hand%20different%20colour%20M%20pose.png[/img] [img]https://file.garden/ZW3u0mxuQg5gDIzJ/Dragon%20files/wing-hand%20different%20colour%20F%20pose.png[/img] Better shown by the F pose, I believed there was a mistake on the M pose as it looked like a patch of colour left behind (maybe missing a bit of lineart?). I am mostly annoyed at the fact that, while they're being listed it is not made clear enough [i]what[/i] exactly is being investigated and to which degree. As many users have pointed out, Auraboa Paisley was clearly designed to match the modern version shown on Obelisks and Tundras. Another thing that bugs me at the moment is that, while I could understand (but still, personally, disliked) the pattering being expanded on the WINGS, there was no need and is in no way consistent to change the head and tail feathers. This is because one of the two breeds being listed as reference for consistency (Skydancer) shows the glossy second-tone of the gene on the mane, leg fringes and tail feathers exactly like Auraboas did. [img]https://file.garden/ZW3u0mxuQg5gDIzJ/Dragon%20files/paisley%20sd.png[/img] [/quote] THIS the bug report had nothing to do with the top portion of the wings being different, that's something staff pulled out of their collective butt and forced on us [quote name="Zenzic" date="2024-02-19 12:35:46" ] It's a real shame. The Auraboas were already compliant with gene consistency! The solid patches on the wing arms and frill matched the mane stylization on other breeds, and Auras clearly have those areas designated as that "mane" style. The breakup gene shows this off pretty well: [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=2&bodygene=0&breed=15&element=9&eyetype=9&gender=0&tert=82&tertgene=0&winggene=58&wings=2&auth=6aeee83cd230d8e5d047861082adb26f6f94dbc8&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=2&bodygene=0&breed=24&element=9&eyetype=9&gender=0&tert=82&tertgene=0&winggene=252&wings=2&auth=00179bd86b0cfae996d128432a3d77868bd6b396&dummyext=prev.png[/img] and now they've actually been made [i]inconsistent[/i]. Heh: [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=2&bodygene=0&breed=15&element=9&eyetype=9&gender=0&tert=82&tertgene=0&winggene=136&wings=2&auth=b576dfea5a0533133acc70173d85b789648f985d&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=2&bodygene=0&breed=24&element=9&eyetype=9&gender=0&tert=82&tertgene=0&winggene=244&wings=2&auth=258e447a7e983c5733ef78e6b693a1e135c73087&dummyext=prev.png[/img] [/quote] "consistency" is a slippery slope [quote name="Vabam" date="2024-02-19 12:47:06" ] [quote name="NobleLycanthrope" date="2024-02-19 08:56:33" ] oh my gosh I just realized that my G1 has been ruined. I'm literally crying right now I adored this G1 because I loved the way the feathers looked with the black shiny part, it looked so much like a raven and now it's just ruined :( [/quote] @/NobleLycanthrope While I can't speak on behalf of the FR staff, I am genuinely sorry that this change has distressed you to the point of tears. I stand strong because I remember very clearly the distress from the last change of this nature, and it deeply upsets me that people who deeply invest in this site, whether it be time, money, or the undeniable emotional investment, can have the rugged pulled out from under us based on arbitrary personal taste decisions. The only comfort that I can truly offer is that many [i]many[/i] users agree that this change should be reverted, regardless of whether they voice it on the site or not. For you and anyone else who feels similarly, I would strongly implore you to not make any hasty decisions to change the genes just yet. I do believe this change can be reverted, for a bountiful amount of reasons. Don't give up just yet, okay? Things can still be alright. [/quote] As someone else literally brought to tears (again) because of a change made to dragons I'm attached to I truly hope staff will actually LISTEN [quote name="NovaTheOne" date="2024-02-19 13:15:43" ] support!!! why does gene consistency need to be a thing. veilspun runes have runes on the wings that no other breeds have. sandsurge seraph is nothing like the modern versions or any other version for that matter. just by the NATURE of gaoler wings, their genes often look totally different. why was this change needed. please please hit the back button. also i recently gened an M aubo with paisley and he looks rancid now!!! tip: i am so freakin mad!!!!!! [/quote] [quote name="Zenzic" date="2024-02-19 13:33:59" ] I just took a look through Morphology. Comparing how specific "mane" designated areas on each breed interact with genes compared to Paisley. Paisley consistently matches designated mane areas across the following breeds: Aberration, Fae, Imperial, Nocturne, Obelisk, Pearlcatcher, Skydancer, Tundra, Veilspun, Wildclaw. The Auraboa's original Paisley was previously consistent with the above, but the "fixed" version is now consistent with the following breeds: Coatl ... Oops? Seems Coatl Paisley was incorrect, and Aura's fixed version was based on it. [/quote] Thank you for the time to look and the post. But yea, exactly [quote name="Kunemon" date="2024-02-19 14:02:01" ] Support. It was cool and unique before. Now it's boring and looks bad. [/quote] [quote name="GODHEX" date="2024-02-19 14:08:26" ] [b]immense support.[/b] it's stuff like this that makes me not want to bother interacting with brand new breed releases. it's really feeling like more recent releases have had [i]every[/i] gene bugged or [i]'not up to standards'[/i], which only makes me question why things are getting released in such states to begin with. either something in the pipeline is failing the team, or things are not getting QA'd properly. or both. it's incredibly frustrating. edit: [img]https://files.catbox.moe/qa2pws.png[/img] [img]https://files.catbox.moe/wcpeon.png[/img] i am confusion. why is the [u]OFFICIAL SKIN TEMPLATE[/u] mane classification of the wing now being ignored. america explain. [/quote] Seriously... Guys c'mon [quote name="Lyuna" date="2024-02-19 15:35:22" ] Looking over this thread again... How on earth was this EVER considered an error. It's pretty clear now that the portion of Auraboa's wings that got changed were classified under the 'Mane' and then having that colour was entirely intentional. I'm so confused, this doesn't seem like a bug fix at all just an arbitrary change. I genuinely, truly believe that genes do not have to be fully consistent from dragon to dragon. Some level of consistency is good, but a little bit of variety makes things more fun. [/quote] [quote name="Illuna" date="2024-02-19 15:55:50" ] Full support, this has majorly altered countless dragons who are already gened due to the major delay it took in installing this update, and people are unanimously displeased with the change regardless. The upper half of the feathers are designated as a mane, which this change fully disregards. I think the previous stylistic choice did nothing but enhance the design, which has been stripped from it now. [/quote] [quote name="JLinaria" date="2024-02-19 16:12:11" ] Feels like the only consistent thing about the staff changing things in the name of consistency is that we players don't like when our dragons are suddenly changed What should be consistent is genes being released looking the way the staff intend for them to look, with the only changes post-release being fixes to actual errors, not re-designs that completely change like half the gene. And if that consistency cannot be upheld, then at least prioritize fixing the genes with the most significant errors so players don't have months to design dragons (and even skins) around them. [/quote] [quote name="Recallback" date="2024-02-19 16:20:23" ] Glad to see this has gotten a lot of attention, especially honestly considering the skin template counts that area as mane????? This was clearly an intentional choice that was reverted for reasons I truly do not understand - half of the point of ancients is that they don't really have to be consistent, but this WAS consistent because that's clearly counted as mane so like!!!! It's so sad seeing HOW drastically a lot of people's dragons have been changed now, 3 months after the gene released. Hope they at least offer a vote here like Obes. [/quote] Sorry for the long post/ string of quotes. I just want these really good points to be in several different places for players and devs to see, and in case of thread deletion. This was an artistic choice changed for no actual grounded reason that no one likes. Obelisk Flair 2.0 is something I've seen several time and I can only pray that we get the reversal that gene did as well :/ because this is horrible I have 8 Boas broken by this and several are so dissapointing I feel like throwing up

full support on this!!

I'm sure I've thrown in support already, but this was in absolutely ZERO way an error

It's aligned with EVERY maned breed other than Coatls. It looked better by miles, and it has been multiple months since the release of these genes

The staff have been getting honestly, flagrantly disrespectful of the resources that players are putting into gening dragons. There's not any justification for redoing an entire gene that was clearly working as intended other than a couple small highlights

From the FRD discussion: [quote name="Arcadaline" date="2024-02-19 09:55:55" ] Oh gee, old paisley looks way better on the auroboas! D: I feel like what looks better should trumps consistency particularly in this case where it's not necessarily inconsistent, it's just how it has been adapted to the breed. It looks too busy and lacks definition now. I don't know why anyone would suggest for this change. [/quote] That's the thing, Nobody did. the bug report was highlight issues. [quote name="EaterofMan" date="2024-02-19 10:31:38" ] I don't understand why they'd put a bugged gene into roundsey in the first place. I get there was probably some miscommunication between different parts of the team, which is fine, but it seems like a pretty big oversight when these issues have been known for months. It's just a shame that aura's released so bugged. It definitely gives me second thoughts about buying breeds upon release. I haven't gened a single aura yet, despite loving the breed, because how can I be sure that any genes I buy stay consistent? Especially gem genes. Like, idk what the solution is, but something needs to be done about it. Aura's release was an absolute disaster on so many parts. [/quote] [quote name="cantrip" date="2024-02-19 11:30:55" ] [quote name="fistfulofdragons" date="2024-02-19 11:26:07" ] With every new breed release there are dedicated threads in the bugs forums for art errors, and they keep a running list of known gene issues and inconsistencies. They track which ones are intentional and which will be fixed. [i]Reminder to everyone to keep an eye on the dev tracker during new releases I guess.[/i] The thread always shows up in there when it goes up, and from there you just gotta keep an eye on it to see what kinds of errors people post about and which make it to the main post. Kinda agree about the "error" version looking better though...I can see why everyone's disappointed [/quote] a minority of a minority of players even use the forums at all, much less actually track the bug thread. that's a big problem. it means that the median FR player had no idea this was a bug in the first place. the fact that they released a roundsey prize and let it run for 6 days with the 'wrong' version of the genes just supported the idea that it was not a bug to anyone not in that tiny little subsection of players who tracked the bug reports thread. [/quote] [quote name="Halszkaraptor" date="2024-02-19 13:12:15" ] I've already said my piece in the suggestions thread but the one annoying thing about this is that: sure there was mention of paisley (and fern probably I'm not sure) might have been bugged and was possibly being investigated. But as far as I was aware, and apparently many others too, the error being investigated was about the saturation of the gradient and the harshness of the highlights. NOTHING about the upper wing being "inconsistent" from other feathered breeds. This is a pretty dramatic change. (Sadly there was no archive of the thread prior to the update so I can't even go back to check to make sure I'm not misremembering things and getting mad at nothing.) [/quote] No, you're 100% correct as I state above [quote name="ShinySalamence" date="2024-02-19 15:11:51" ] [quote name="Silence1250" date="2024-02-19 10:06:46" ] Yeah, I feel like this is probably going to become another Obelisk Flair situation [/quote] [img]https://j.gifs.com/KeY2xZ.gif[/img] Obelisk flair...2! [/quote] We can Only hope [quote name="Khuzdul" date="2024-02-19 17:16:29" ] SNIP That's the problem. They haven't really communicated these big design changes, to see what we want. From my understanding, the bug reported for paisley was solely for the highlights. I'm not sure what the actual listed bug said (did it say "paisley is missing from parts of all auraboa poses" or did it simply say "paisley highlights are over saturated?") Especially to do it so far from release, when people have spent money to gene up a dragon to look a specific way. That's what happened with the butterfly problem, and now to a (somewhat) lesser degree, paisley for auras. Also, idk if it's been brought up in this thread, but over in the suggestions thread, [url=https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/sug/3316377/17#post_56218322]it's been confirmed[/url] that the top feathers of the wings, and the lower part of the crest are considered "mane." Meaning that it would line up with other breeds with a mane. [/quote] The original bug report was in fact only for Highlights/shadows and had nothing to do with the top portion acting like mane. People are confused and upset

[quote name="Haligtree" date="2024-02-19 16:42:25" ] this probably should go in its own thread, but I'm starting to feel a little... frustrated? with how many gene errors ancients have on release. I know staff are only human, and I don't expect things to be perfect, but maybe we could slow down on the release of ancients to make sure that genes are working as intended? [/quote] I made a suggestions thread for this a little while ago and it got locked because that was a topic they'd rather have go through Contact Us. Which is to say yeah I still really really want them to slow the heck down and give themselves time to work these things out. Not intending to derail, but maybe just as a note to other people feeling the same way: go through Contact Us and save yourself some time.

the gene change itself doesn't affect me (bare minimum ancients, chucking the ones im keeping for the breeding achievements asap) but i do think this is indicative of a larger transparency issue with staff. communication is at a low for fr when previously the team was very hands-on with the community.

please go back, staff. full support for reverting changes. let different breeds have unique gene expressions. imo, this was not a bug, this was unique artistic gene expression. and this is a VERY big, VERY visible change that should have at least been put to a community poll before being rolled out. and like others have mentioned, this really poses some questions about communication between staff and the artists that are designing/coloring the genes. if you're calling this a "bug" when it really appears to be unique gene expression, that makes it seem like there are communication and quality control failures happening. and that is not being clearly expressed to your userbase and is instead being labeled a "bug." [img]https://i.imgur.com/WO8KdUi.jpeg[/img] (meme above is pulling from example images posted in this thread, alt text: the top half shows 6 pre-"fix" dragons next to a finger poised over an "upgrade" button, below that are the same 6 dragons post-"fix" next to a finger now poised over a "go back" button. open image in new tab for a larger/clearer image) also this point seems important: [quote name="GODHEX" date="2024-02-19 14:08:26" ] [b]immense support.[/b] it's stuff like this that makes me not want to bother interacting with brand new breed releases. it's really feeling like more recent releases have had [i]every[/i] gene bugged or [i]'not up to standards'[/i], which only makes me question why things are getting released in such states to begin with. either something in the pipeline is failing the team, or things are not getting QA'd properly. or both. it's incredibly frustrating. edit: [img]https://files.catbox.moe/qa2pws.png[/img] [img]https://files.catbox.moe/wcpeon.png[/img] i am confusion. why is the [u]OFFICIAL SKIN TEMPLATE[/u] mane classification of the wing now being ignored. america explain. [/quote]