Flight Rising Discussion

This is something I feel somewhat strongly about because it keeps happening and it gets tiring for me from time to time. Generally lurk and probably will continue to lurk after posting this but need to get it out.

Quote from the actual Bug Reports:
Bolded and underlined the part about the patterns because it's also an issue blantantly stated in the bug reports, not only the highlights. As someone who actually disliked how Paisley looked because of the inconsistency and sudden darker change in color, I was happy this got fixed but I'm sad to find myself in the minority.

At least this was a bug everyone should've known would be fixed, which includes the pattern additions that are now present. This isn't like Jupiter/Saturn suddenly getting its patterns stuck closer together, nor is it like Banescale Met/Alloy which iirc wasn't even made aware of until after it was fixed that it was an error.

The thing with Obelisk Flair (to me) was that it was mostly a color change, not a whole highlight/shadow issue on top of there being patterns straight up missing. I may be alone in this but to me that's an error, not a "fun breed inconsistency" akin to Lionfish on Tundras.

The only thing I wish would change in this entire situation is if reported gene errors were made quickly accessible in a way that a user didn't have to enter the Bug Report forum to see them. A link in areas such as the Scrying Workshop or gene section of the TMP and in GE shops or something like that so you can quickly see what may get fixed in the future. In cases like this, maybe an example of what the fix will look like if it's really going to cause a stir like this.

I'm sorry for everyone's dragons that were ruined by this change, including the Roundsey dragon (which is the only issue here that has me :/ in terms of the decisions). I'm more happy this was with a cheaper NotN gene that's readily available than another instance like Bane Met/Alloy where 500+ gems were spent to buy the genes used. I'd rather know something was an issue or error to be fixed in the future than not know at all until the change has already been made.

Honestly, this might make more sense if the portion of the wings/crest weren't supposed to act like a mane. Except it does act like a mane, and has now been pretty much arbitrarily changed. That's the part that upsets me (and likely a lot of people). Like, as far as I'm aware, it wasnt even really a bug in the first place.

[quote name="StrawberryAlex" date="2024-02-19 18:52:19" ] Quote from the actual Bug Reports: Undel wrote: Secondary: Paisley on all Auraboa had highlight intensity issues and a lack of patterning on the top portion of the wings that would make it more consistent with other dual-color feathered wings like Coatl and Skydancer. Fixed. Bolded and underlined the part about the patterns because it's also an issue blantantly stated in the bug reports, not only the highlights. [/quote] What you posted is the [b]corrected results[/b] of the bug-fix, whereas people are complaining that the [b]initial report[/b] did [i]NOT[/i] list the patterning on top of the wings as the bug, only the highlights. As this "bug" has been fixed, there's now no way to see what the initial report said as only the corrected results segment is left. EDIT - Just checked the Way Back Machine and the latest snapshot is from Nov 27, or 5 days after the breed premiered, which does NOT list Paisley or Fern as issues.

That's a shame. I didn't have any 'boas with those genes but I agree they looked so much better before.

If they can revert the Obbie mane "bug" with Flaunt/Flair, they should revert this one too.

[quote name="Teletraan" date="2024-02-19 18:59:27" ] [quote name="StrawberryAlex" date="2024-02-19 18:52:19" ] Quote from the actual Bug Reports: Undel wrote: Secondary: Paisley on all Auraboa had highlight intensity issues and a lack of patterning on the top portion of the wings that would make it more consistent with other dual-color feathered wings like Coatl and Skydancer. Fixed. Bolded and underlined the part about the patterns because it's also an issue blantantly stated in the bug reports, not only the highlights. [/quote] What you posted is the [b]corrected results[/b] of the bug-fix, whereas people are complaining that the [b]initial report[/b] did [i]NOT[/i] list the patterning on top of the wings as the bug, only the highlights. As this "bug" has been fixed, there's now no way to see what the initial report said as only the corrected results segment is left. [/quote] In addition to this, the "correction" to the pattern on the top of the wings is an incredibly strange choice. The top of the wing arms and the first layer of the feather crest on the head are designated as "mane" styled areas on Auraboas. (This is not conjecture! It can be seen clearly on the official skin templates.) The "mane" areas on other breeds all look like what Paisley on Auraboas originally looked like before this "fix". (Darker in colour, no pattern, and shiny.) (The way Coatls display Paisley is actually inconsistent with how the "mane" area is treated on every other breed. I am perplexed as to why they'd change it to match the non-mane-conforming Coatls.)

[quote name="harpyja" date="2024-02-19 18:57:35" ] Honestly, this might make more sense if the portion of the wings/crest weren't supposed to act like a mane. Except it does act like a mane[/quote] it doesn't just act like a mane, someone in the suggestion thread found out that according to the layer names in the skin and accent template for auraboas, [b]it IS supposed to be part of their mane.[/b] [quote name="GODHEX" date="2024-02-19 14:08:26" ][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] ^ excerpt from the thread in question. sure it could be a catchall term for it, but it still doesn't change that this is a BIG change to drop so suddenly that alters the dragon's appearance with this gene so harshly. there's nothing wrong with different breeds having little things that make them unique, especially on ancients where the whole point is how different they work than moderns.

[quote name="Teletraan" date="2024-02-19 18:59:27" ] [quote name="StrawberryAlex" date="2024-02-19 18:52:19" ] Quote from the actual Bug Reports: Undel wrote: Secondary: Paisley on all Auraboa had highlight intensity issues and a lack of patterning on the top portion of the wings that would make it more consistent with other dual-color feathered wings like Coatl and Skydancer. Fixed. Bolded and underlined the part about the patterns because it's also an issue blantantly stated in the bug reports, not only the highlights. [/quote] What you posted is the [b]corrected results[/b] of the bug-fix, whereas people are complaining that the [b]initial report[/b] did [i]NOT[/i] list the patterning on top of the wings as the bug, only the highlights. As this "bug" has been fixed, there's now no way to see what the initial report said as only the corrected results segment is left. EDIT - Just checked the Way Back Machine and the latest snapshot is from Nov 27, or 5 days after the breed premiered, which does NOT list Paisley or Fern as issues. [/quote] Decided to use the Wayback Machine myself to check this and found a capture from December 28th in the known issues section that includes a couple eye errors, Starmap, and Striation on top of this. Yes it's the Corrected version but it's wording is basically the same, with the reasoning of it being in-line with Coatls and Skydancers being added afterwards. I'd post screenshots but I'm pretty sure that's against ToS so I'm going to copy-paste the whole block from known issues at this time. [Quote=December 28th 2023 Wayback Pull] [b]Known Issues[/b] [LIST] [*][b]Eye: Glowing[/b] has a glow intensity inconsistency when compared to modern dragons. [*][b]Eye: Common, Uncommon, Unusual, Rare, Pastel, Bright, Multi-gaze (head eye)[/b] are missing line art around the edge of the iris. A very thin line will be added to make this more consistent with other breeds without causing major changes to the look of the eyes. [*][b]Primary: Starmap[/b] on all Auraboa has a missing horn/claw gradient. [*][u][b]Secondary: Paisley[/b] on all Auraboa has highlight intensity issues and a lack of patterning on the top portion of the wings.[/u] [*]Secondary: Striation on all Auraboa has pattern placed where a secondary gradiant color would normally be, as is the case with dragons who also have tapir/striation and a mane or secondary wing color. [/LIST] [/quote] Underlined the Paisley portion but copied everything else word for word. [u][b]Quick Edit:[/b] I forgot I could check the edited date on the Wayback Machine as well and this edit was made as late as [b]December 12th[/b] according to the archived post.[/u] As for the Skydancer/Coatl comparisons, they're both breeds with very clear head feathers, like Auraboas have. Skydancers also have a sort of "second" layer to their wings where one is feathers and one is the more leathery portion, but they don't share the mane effect there. I personally would use Coatls for comparison because they [i]only[/i] have feathers for Paisley to effect (unless you count the weird body fluff). It makes the "Mane" choice read as fluff instead of feathers on Auraboas on the old Paisley which flips a lot of switches that it was an error long before I read the error. Between the very abrupt color change and the fact the existing patterning cut off equally as abruptly made me read this immediately as an error. As for the PSD stuff, I've been playing Occum's Razor (however that's spelled) and treating the term as a catch-all since what else was staff supposed to easily call that area on the PSD. They could try and come up with something or use something that's on literally every other breed template.

Nooo, my Nature Rep has Paisley cause it looked so pretty. This is straight up giving me Obelisk Flair flashbacks.

Oh, I was starting to think that the Aurabora gene errors were going to be on hold for a very long time. There was an issue with striation that I was watching for, and then when the Roundsey dragon had a gene with a reported error I thought there might be something odd going on behind the scenes that was holding them up - but wow, that's really bad timing to have the change to a gene happen right after a raffle prize using that gene goes out.

I definitely agree that the prior version looked nicer, and I hope it gets reverted on both moral principle for the person who won that raffle derg, and because I think it just looks nicer that way.