>>7899607>The popular opinion on this board is that it's shit And you say I'm the one with reading comprehension problems?
Someone who says a movie is bad because they hate the director and didn't watch it is lying that the movie is bad, because they never saw the movie.
Again, people who actually have owned the product, including the guy who took OP's pic, did not notice or care that the face had dust speckles on it.
Again, you and others (like
>>7899602 ) have shown you have no real opinion on the product, as you've never actually seen it except in a zoomed in shot of the figure's face that was angled and lit to show off the flaws. You're just contrarians.
Nevermind you'd still be considered contrarians even if the entire board did shit on it, because it's like saying McFarlane wasn't praised for their god tier paint jobs. Just because the rest of the board would agree McFarlane didn't have god tier paint, doesn't mean the rest of the toy community wouldn't be calling /toy/ a bunch of contrarians.
So again, people who have actually owned and handled the toy have didn't notice the dust specks and called the paint job great.
And again, ALL of McFarlane's products have had the same types of specks since forever. Which again shows you have no real knowledge about anything painted, because you obviously only own budget toys.
>ib4 but you didn't have a choice back then OR they didn't know betterpeople did have access to colored plastic toys forever. McFarlane introduced complex paint jobs to the toy industry and are rightfully praised for their work. Again, tiny little dots have been around forever and mostly ignored, because most of us aren't autistic to hold them next to our nose at all times.
But again, you're just contrarians who have no actual knowledge about anything you're shitting on. You just look at zoomed in pictures and shitpost.
