>>21406109Adding things to the design
In engineering, this could be an objective fact- investing a ton of effort into making something better, exceeding your requirement in a useful way.
In art, it could be a useful feedback term, as in "some of the things thrown on the design serve no purpose. Stick to the goal of the thing you're designing more closely."
Just shouting "OVERDESIGNED" is pretty useless, of course. So what might make people feel that way?
The design goal is to have metallic humanoids with blades, apparently (which is probably why people say it's like a digimon- the design goal is literally metallic human). Also, the pokedex fluff tells us they are hunters and work in packs. So, with that in mind, does any actual criticism exist or are we still drowning in >opinions?
Pawniard and Bisharp already have armblades and headblades- why add the things on their chests? They can be metallic predator things with just their arms and head.
one of the pokedex entries does talk about pawniard suicide-attacking by clinging to things, so their chest blades make sense, but perhaps having suicide blades on the body of the "leader of the pack" makes less sense. Maybe they should disappear upon evolving instead of getting larger. Different chest decorations could be tried if the plain grey torso doesn't work.
Maybe it also doesn't need forearm fins, and can fight with just sharpened hands/fingers.
On the internet, having a conversation that nuanced is hard, when we take our own opinions for granted and react with horror to differing ones, so shit descends into trolling and counter-trolling. The attraction of the board is "I FUCKING LOVE POKEMON AND WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT AT ALL TIMES" not "I am passionate about art and want to figure out why people react to things in certain ways," so it's even easier for the emotional or trollish to take over conversations.
why did i write this long-ass post I don't even care about bisharp. Oh right real work is hard.
