This needs to be changed back. Devs clearly dont care about consistency given how different genes look between breeds. Look at lionfish on every breed....and then tundras. Tapir's beautiful thin lines in M pearlcatchers, and then the boring, ugly, thick lines on M wildclaw.
What I dont understand is the number of times a gene is changed like this when the old "bugged" version is objectively better. Whoever is making these final decisions clearly has much worse taste and needs to be given a different task.
What does it say about the state of the game as a whole if players need to start checking art error threads before buying genes? I thought theyd learned not to make changes like this without at least telling us beforehand. Or are we about to get [i]another[/i] completely sincere apology thread promising to do better.[emoji=mirror deadpan size=1] I'm sick of all the apology statements. At a certain point you need to stop screwing up in the first place
This needs to be changed back. Devs clearly dont care about consistency given how different genes look between breeds. Look at lionfish on every breed....and then tundras. Tapir's beautiful thin lines in M pearlcatchers, and then the boring, ugly, thick lines on M wildclaw.
What I dont understand is the number of times a gene is changed like this when the old "bugged" version is objectively better. Whoever is making these final decisions clearly has much worse taste and needs to be given a different task.
What does it say about the state of the game as a whole if players need to start checking art error threads before buying genes? I thought theyd learned not to make changes like this without at least telling us beforehand. Or are we about to get
another completely sincere apology thread promising to do better.
I'm sick of all the apology statements. At a certain point you need to stop screwing up in the first place
full support for reverting the change, the new version looks incredibly flat to me and i loved the sheen on the old one!
full support for reverting the change, the new version looks incredibly flat to me and i loved the sheen on the old one!
|
__________________________________
mini/yest - they/them - huge nerd - infp
- your friendly neighbourhood fruit bat -
average artist - what is communication
__________________________________
|
|
Full support for all of the reasons stated!
Full support for all of the reasons stated!
Honestly, the update makes Paisley look a lot more flat and boring. I don't have high hopes that the changes will be reverted but I really, really hope they are.
Honestly, the update makes Paisley look a lot more flat and boring. I don't have high hopes that the changes will be reverted but I really, really hope they are.
I support reverting
I'm somewhat of Paisley fan, and I really loved that particular detail on auraboas. It's really sad that they decided to remove it. [emoji=veilspun sad size=1]
I support reverting
I'm somewhat of Paisley fan, and I really loved that particular detail on auraboas. It's really sad that they decided to remove it.
Support. This was a design choice, other auraboa secondaries have that section of wing unpatterned we're other breeds don't. Are they all going to be changed to completely cover the wings? (Diamondback, Hex, Hypnotic, Peregrine)
I totally agree with the post that pointed out that those previously glossy wing sections might be behaving like the manes of other dragons. This is also the case with Hex, which has those nice little dots Hex manes have
[img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=132&bodygene=255&breed=24&element=10&eyetype=1&gender=0&tert=64&tertgene=219&winggene=246&wings=58&auth=6554a58ed33c75f76a896c3eaf759b7f1bb0ffbd&dummyext=prev.png[/img]
This could also be the case with Breakup
[img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=132&bodygene=255&breed=24&element=10&eyetype=1&gender=0&tert=64&tertgene=219&winggene=252&wings=58&auth=557dab670b9361173c097bc1c45061379913a51a&dummyext=prev.png[/img]
I'd prefer keeping this part of the wing as "Mane" otherwise auraboa genes are just inconsistent with themselves?
Support. This was a design choice, other auraboa secondaries have that section of wing unpatterned we're other breeds don't. Are they all going to be changed to completely cover the wings? (Diamondback, Hex, Hypnotic, Peregrine)
I totally agree with the post that pointed out that those previously glossy wing sections might be behaving like the manes of other dragons. This is also the case with Hex, which has those nice little dots Hex manes have
This could also be the case with Breakup
I'd prefer keeping this part of the wing as "Mane" otherwise auraboa genes are just inconsistent with themselves?
Support. Some of my dragons look like completely different dragons now. The entire aesthetic changed. I've never really been that bothered by gene updates before but this one was really dramatic.
Support. Some of my dragons look like completely different dragons now. The entire aesthetic changed. I've never really been that bothered by gene updates before but this one was really dramatic.
Support, I got a couple g1s specifically for aura paisley, and would probably have to completely re-gene them if it's not changed back :(
Support, I got a couple g1s specifically for aura paisley, and would probably have to completely re-gene them if it's not changed back :(
Support.
I don't think it matters whether the old or new version looks better. I think it's more important that major visual changes to genes aren't made three months after they were released, with no gameplay indication that they were bugged in that entire time. A tiny note on a forum thread that users may or may not know exists is not enough warning for players.
If we spend months getting attached to dragons, which then have major changes made without warning, it damages trust and makes users less excited about new releases. Especially if it keeps happening. "I can't buy that yet because it might be bugged; I guess I'll just forget about it for now." That's the smart thing to say whenever new releases happen, and it is so, so disheartening to feel that way as a player. Especially if the safe time to wait to enjoy something is like, six months.
Support.
I don't think it matters whether the old or new version looks better. I think it's more important that major visual changes to genes aren't made three months after they were released, with no gameplay indication that they were bugged in that entire time. A tiny note on a forum thread that users may or may not know exists is not enough warning for players.
If we spend months getting attached to dragons, which then have major changes made without warning, it damages trust and makes users less excited about new releases. Especially if it keeps happening. "I can't buy that yet because it might be bugged; I guess I'll just forget about it for now." That's the smart thing to say whenever new releases happen, and it is so, so disheartening to feel that way as a player. Especially if the safe time to wait to enjoy something is like, six months.
Slept on the whole thing and I'm not going to argue every last detail in circles after this. I am done with this conversation but if I'm going to go paragraph after paragraph on the issue I may as well put in my two cents into this thread as well.
I say No Support to a full reversion of the gene. The highlights are still very jarring and look more like white blotches than a gentle shine like all the other mane stuff being pointed out. I'm done arguing about consistency, but the highlights still need fixed and I would at the very least want that. I don't want the actual bugged parts of this gene returning on top of the color change.
What I would Support is a partial reversion or revision of the gene. I personally still don't like the sudden and abrupt dropoff of the patterns, nor the aforementioned nearly pure white highlights on the original across all colors. I knew this would be part of the fix because the gene error thread stated it was something missing from the gene. However I also acknowledge I am in a minority when it comes to liking the newer version of the gene.
I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if staff really wanted to fix both highlights and patterns, add the patterns back to the upper wing, but keep the "mane" colors. What this would fix for me is the issue I have with the lack of patterns on the original, while also keeping the colors that the original had. It'd also still fix the more intense, nearly white highlights on the original. It also would allow Auraboas to remain unique in their expression of Paisley, which I think was another issue presented here at some point.
I know my entire 'suggestion' goes back into the whole consistency argument, but again, I'm done arguing circles around that. There's both consistencies and inconsistencies everywhere if you go looking for one or the other. There are also a number of consistencies/inconsistencies as well across the various breeds that are older than this and are inconsistent across multiple moderns as well as the ancient breeds. We could go on and on giving examples of both, but I want to leave this argument behind.
(I also put forth the suggestion of adding the gene error report threads in other locations besides the forums and occasionally the front page, but that's not the point or topic of this thread. This proved an issue I had with the gene report threads in general in terms of how well information on what is or isn't an error was known. This on top of if there is going to be a major change like this in the future, possibly have an announcement or post somewhere that previews how the new change will look. That way players can give more immediate feedback on major changes before they get made.)
Slept on the whole thing and I'm not going to argue every last detail in circles after this. I am done with this conversation but if I'm going to go paragraph after paragraph on the issue I may as well put in my two cents into this thread as well.
I say No Support to a full reversion of the gene. The highlights are still very jarring and look more like white blotches than a gentle shine like all the other mane stuff being pointed out. I'm done arguing about consistency, but the highlights still need fixed and I would at the very least want that. I don't want the actual bugged parts of this gene returning on top of the color change.
What I would Support is a partial reversion or revision of the gene. I personally still don't like the sudden and abrupt dropoff of the patterns, nor the aforementioned nearly pure white highlights on the original across all colors. I knew this would be part of the fix because the gene error thread stated it was something missing from the gene. However I also acknowledge I am in a minority when it comes to liking the newer version of the gene.
I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but if staff really wanted to fix both highlights and patterns, add the patterns back to the upper wing, but keep the "mane" colors. What this would fix for me is the issue I have with the lack of patterns on the original, while also keeping the colors that the original had. It'd also still fix the more intense, nearly white highlights on the original. It also would allow Auraboas to remain unique in their expression of Paisley, which I think was another issue presented here at some point.
I know my entire 'suggestion' goes back into the whole consistency argument, but again, I'm done arguing circles around that. There's both consistencies and inconsistencies everywhere if you go looking for one or the other. There are also a number of consistencies/inconsistencies as well across the various breeds that are older than this and are inconsistent across multiple moderns as well as the ancient breeds. We could go on and on giving examples of both, but I want to leave this argument behind.
(I also put forth the suggestion of adding the gene error report threads in other locations besides the forums and occasionally the front page, but that's not the point or topic of this thread. This proved an issue I had with the gene report threads in general in terms of how well information on what is or isn't an error was known. This on top of if there is going to be a major change like this in the future, possibly have an announcement or post somewhere that previews how the new change will look. That way players can give more immediate feedback on major changes before they get made.)
Wishlist
Gene Plans
FR+8
