>>9262885Hey, all I did was say I wanted the Barbie up top, and made a big purchase. I didn't mean to get into this.
>>9262886>“More interesting?” They don’t even do anything! You can’t pose them or change their clothes, what’s even the point?It's about the amazing amount of extra detail. I collect in 1/4th scale, for just a few characters. As opposed to having my house littered with $20 plastic in a huge collection, I have 5 pieces in the main part of my house that show some of my favorite characters in great detail. Changing clothes is nice and all, but ultimately is also a bit of a waste of time at the end of the day.
Seriously though, it's like any piece of art. Do you not have any art in your house? Is it just shelves and shelves of dolls you frequently play with?
>Why are you worried about putting something “too immature” on your shelf when you’re a fan of a cartoon made for little girls?I never said "too immature," I just implied that a lot of toys can look pretty cheap. There's a reason there's a scale of collectors, even in the doll community. Fashion Royalty and such wouldn't exist without a desire for higher quality.
>Cartoon for little girlsHave you checked where you are? What thread you're in?
>Also the new wave of Miraculous Ladybug merch is pretty accurate to the showDoes pic related look at all accurate? A derpy face with a costume that doesn't cover the hands, and comes with a onesie with cheap red shoes that don't match the rest of the doll? And it's not like I don't own it... it just doesn't look like the character.
>had more fun photographing and posing themI don't have a ton of time for that. Or to openly play with toys. I play around with my dolls' outfits every other day or on the weekends, but that's about all the time I have.
