Suggestions

[quote name="@neocardinia" date="2024-02-19 18:26:58" ] editing to add--idk how it is for others but the little icons of dragons in my den still show the old version until you click on them to see the full thing lmao. I don't want to be antagonistic but this feels sloppy [/quote] Hopping back in here to say that that's probably just a browser cache thing. As soon as that refreshes, the little icon will be updated to the current version. Alas...

While I am personally unaffected by this, as neither of my Auraboa's rn have Paisley, I was a huge fan of how it looked. The 'fixed' version, while no the absolute worse, is far too much of a drastic change to 'fix' this late into Auraboa's being live on the site. As the outrage clearly shows. There's plenty of """inconsistent""" genes among the various breeds--- but those just make each version unique in their own way.

Big support on reverting it back, because with 0 warning or input from the player-base, this was wholly unnecessary. And no I don't think it being on the 'error list' is a warning, because we don't know exactly how they're going to 'fix' things, nor is every single player on this site aware it even exists.

Also adding I agree with the sentiments they need to slow down these release times. This many errors that take THIS long to fix isn't doing anyone any good.

Out of curiosity, I went through the Scrying Workshop to see how Paisley looks on every breed it's available for.

Breeds with manes/crests that were consistent with the old Auraboa Paisley: Aberration, Fae, Imperial, Nocturne (throat frill), Obelisk, Pearlcatcher, Skydancer, Tundra, Veilspun, Wildclaw

Breeds with manes/crests that match the new Auraboa Paisley: Bogsneak, Coatl

(all other breeds either don't have manes/crests or don't have the gene available yet)

I'm just so... confused??? The gene was perfectly consistent as it was. If anything, it's less consistent now. And on top of that, the shading/highlights and gradient made it obvious that it was an artistic choice that has since been redrawn, not a case of missing layers. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the original Auraboa Paisley design, and no reason whatsoever to change it this drastically.

Plus, yeah, the Roundsey Auraboa...

[quote name="Ningyo" date="2024-02-19 19:22:08" ] Out of curiosity, I went through the Scrying Workshop to see how Paisley looks on every breed it's available for. [/quote] Psst, I beat you to this back on page 15. XD (I don't count Bogsneaks because their frills aren't "mane"s, even in other genes. I used Breakup for my comparison as the pattern differences between wings and "mane" are very distinct.)

I'm in support of this. The older version is easier to look at and clearer, the newer version makes my eyes swim and looks cluttered.

I have no dog in this fight because I don't keep Ancients but

this is clearly bugged art, even if this is intended. Like the dumb wing silks on the F Spiral.

The pattern shows no respect to the layered feathers and looks just liks someone stamped the pattern on a picture of an Auraboa.

Full support.

As others have said, it has been much too long since the release for a change of this significance to go through—referring in particular to the original shine + color difference on the upper wings (I'm much more indifferent to the thickness of the swirl in the design).

This is a substantial change in the look of the gene, and I don't understand the reasoning behind backtracking on what was a perfectly viable artistic choice—the "mane treatment" for that portion of the wings, as another user put it—long after people have designed and grown attached to dragons with this very distinctive look. Additionally, I'll note that, while fern/paisley are not expensive genes in and of themselves, the dragons those genes are included in very often include other pricier genes chosen on the basis of completing a specific look, so this is still also not a throwaway dragon investment, you know?

______

Edit to add:
…Wait, you’re telling me that literally in the skin files those portions of the dragon are labeled as "mane" equivalents? So, according to the rules of the gene, SHOULD be darker and have an intense shine to them? What the heck!! This feels like straight-up adding in a bug where there wasn't one, to the immense detriment of the gene (and the breed as a whole)!!

[quote name="Zenzic" date="2024-02-19 19:35:18" ] Psst, I beat you to this back on page 15. XD (I don't count Bogsneaks because their frills aren't "mane"s, even in other genes. I used Breakup for my comparison as the pattern differences between wings and "mane" are very distinct.) [/quote] Ahh, that's what I get for not backreading enough! :'D But yeah, I wasn't sure if I should count Bogsneaks or not since their frills are definitely more like "wings" in terms of how other genes affect them.

Full support! I don’t really have any reasons to express that haven't already been stated.