mr_rowan13 wrote:Ahoy hoy, so I've been off the forums for a while (since you guise moved into the new one), but today I decided to see what is going on around here, since I really enjoy some of the threads launched by some people.

Now I came across this.
I'm sorry, but are you fucking kidding me? Changing SCP 173? This isnt a minor tweak you are suggesting, its a complete change from the original figure.
Fyi, the picture from the SCP 173 article is from an actual existing statue, made by some random artist and photographed from an exposition.
I dont quite understand what you are trying to pull off here, but it doesnt sound good, not one bit. As someone here already commented, you seem to know too little about the SCP universe and you quite frankly seem to not get how "things work". The art you made about it looks good, but its not realistic tking in consideration what 173 actually looks like. This isn't the first dumbass post I've see from you.

I know he looks like a god damn peanut, but its the more terrifying giant peanut I have ever seen. My personal opinion on its looks, its that it just makes him scarier (not the cliché alien/humanoid anorexic sharp teeth or claws kind of thing).

He could be a fucking dildo on the original paper, I would still not support your change idea.

CostaRic wrote:What would you suggest me to do? That doesn't changes 173 too much and keeping the fans happy but would appeal for a broader audience aswell?

mr_rowan13 wrote:Man, as far as art goes, your mind is the limit.
I loved the drawings tbh, but putting it ingame would rape it.

Unless we start calling it KSCP:CP (Kinda'SCP: Containment Breach).
Imaging a guy drawing concept art on Gordon Freeman and going like "oh it would look so much cooler if Freeman was actually alien looking instead of just a person, he still would not speak and use the suit and crowbar, but now he's an alien. Yolo."

Omniary wrote:

CostaRic wrote:What would you suggest me to do? That doesn't changes 173 too much and keeping the fans happy but would appeal for a broader audience aswell?

Leave it the same. What do you mean appeal to broader audiences? If it doesn't appeal to em, screw them, it's unique, there's no point to dilute that characteristic to 'appeal' to more people.

Omniary wrote:Alright, the above is an example of a double post if you haven't recognized one. Just want you to see it before I revert it. Please try to just edit it.

On topic, I think it'd be best if you could do that, there's always a chance for participation in this game. For example, we have yet to have any D-Class models, the really crappy placeholders are still being used after 5 big updates.

CostaRic wrote:

Omniary wrote:Alright, the above is an example of a double post if you haven't recognized one. Just want you to see it before I revert it. Please try to just edit it.

On topic, I think it'd be best if you could do that, there's always a chance for participation in this game. For example, we have yet to have any D-Class models, the really crappy placeholders are still being used after 5 big updates.

I have actually thought about the D-Classes for a bit now, seemed like if someone really just screwed the textures, I will try to do a quick fix about that and then I will try to actually talk about actual re-models of the D-Class.

Oh, and about the double post, am sorry, I will just edit it and you can delete the resting one, I am renaming and scraping all my current work and alternating it into something else, I think that would be for the best.

Trialtrex21 wrote:

CostaRic wrote:

Omniary wrote:Alright, the above is an example of a double post if you haven't recognized one. Just want you to see it before I revert it. Please try to just edit it.

On topic, I think it'd be best if you could do that, there's always a chance for participation in this game. For example, we have yet to have any D-Class models, the really crappy placeholders are still being used after 5 big updates.

I have actually thought about the D-Classes for a bit now, seemed like if someone really just screwed the textures, I will try to do a quick fix about that and then I will try to actually talk about actual re-models of the D-Class.

Oh, and about the double post, am sorry, I will just edit it and you can delete the resting one, I am renaming and scraping all my current work and alternating it into something else, I think that would be for the best.

A fix for the current D-Class texture already exists and is known by the community. Making a "new" one would be pointless.

Omniary wrote:

CostaRic wrote:What would you suggest me to do? That doesn't changes 173 too much and keeping the fans happy but would appeal for a broader audience aswell?

Leave it the same. What do you mean appeal to broader audiences? If it doesn't appeal to em, screw them, it's unique, there's no point to dilute that characteristic to 'appeal' to more people.