>>6883702Calarts, thin line drawing. It's the same ugly shit and the shows employing it have similarly bad humour and action. It's supposed to be used in order to make production costs and time viable, but we've had cartoon shows for decades now. Why were they viable then but not now when the technology is more advanced and people better trained?
Hell, why not turn to CG instead? It's faster and more consistent on account of using the same assets. It's more cost effective and convenient.
>>6883701Dire need as in having spread themselves too thin or spent too much money experimenting, though the later is clearly not the case by a long shot. They did experiment in the 90s with monster Joes, Ninja Batman, spliced dinosaurs, troll dolls with bazookas and axes, skeletons on jetbikes, scifi troopers with working screens for faces and more. Shit was all over the place in the 90s and yet the companies didn't go under. They even survived the jap invasion of the 00s.
>>6883699Nostalgia has as much value as the product it sells. Take for example all the people here who buy characters just to recreate full past teams instead of whether or not the toys themselves are good.
