>>8274956>Why is it bullshit? Guys like this >>8274910 (You) are basically saying that the sculpt quality is bad thus not a Figuarts clone, despite the fact that it's still basically a clone.It's not. The SHF looks miles better. Pic related.
>Again, i posted my own example and considering how it's physically made, they're not literally identical duplicates and the dust specks are smaller than $20 microprinting. I can still see the dots clearly. Comparing it to a $20 isn't going to make them less noticable. >How are DCC's Figuarts clones not clones and how did they manage to price them for ~$30 less? Because they don't look nearly as good as their import counterparts. How is this so difficult for you to grasp? The DCC looks like John Travolta and the SHF looks like Henry Cavill.
>How is Saitama's face even relevant to this discussion? It's an indication of the quality of western figures. You were the one who devolved this thread into and east vs west debate with
>>8274552. You were the one that moved that goalpost.
>Despite the fact that other figures from McFarlane's lines don't use spray apps like that for cleaner results?So you admit it's shitty looking. Awesome.
>So because you don't like what I say, that means that products like the ones I've posted don't exist and don't cost much much more than the equivalent products while having significant lesser value (size, articulation, paint, engineering, etc).No because I can post actual evidence proving you wrong.
>I was mistaken. IT actually came out in 2013So you just say shit without actually verifying it. Awesome. Noe I definitely know not to take anything you say seriously since you can't even be assed to make sure the bullshit you does is even correct.
