Shard - A Mortal Rising PF

[Atheris]

Originally Posted by nbr3bagshotrow

It seems the word "art" is a foreign concept to you.

Not as foreign as money is to you.

Originally Posted by VS1976

I'm embarrassed to call him my Canadian brother..

Oh dude, shut up.

You literally just made a thread about why SS pieces cost so much, but are here willing to drop money on a line guaranteed to cost you even more money as a Canadian resident. I make a similar post detailing why a particular line is over valued and you're embarrassed of me?

I'm embarrassed for you and me, now everyone is gonna think Canadians don't understand the definition of hypocrisy.

Chris

[The Mule]

Meh.
The artwork is "cool", ok, but she looks like a generic MMORPG character. This is something I noticed since they showed the second round of artworks, many of the new characters we've seen look like generic dark fantasy RPG/MMORPG characters.
I don't really like it, to be honest.

Also, about the whole argument above... whoever thinks Sideshow is creating some kind of new universe here or whatever is in denial. I applaud the originality of the line and the designs they made so far, but let's not kid ourselves here. They're just doing small backgrounds for their characters, with a couple of artworks and some brief comic here and there.
Let's not pretend there's complexity or a bigger plan going on, it's a nice feature, but nothing more than that. It really takes a couple hours to write down a few backgrounds like this and making a pair of 15-pages online comics.

[majestic1]

I agree with Mule this is disappointing, looks to be a very uninspired and generic character design, just another run of the mill fantasy female warrior/femme-fatale, seems like Sideshow are banking on the T&A selling point like the Queen and Keir.

I was hoping for some more unsettling designs like a monstrous Harpy or a Banshee type character.

Shard just looks like a mix of Lady Sif,Wonder woman and Xena warrior princess, which I'm sure some people will love but I was hoping for designs that are less commercialized.




=

[ZenLogikos]

"Meh" for me as well.

This line is in constant flux. Can't pin down what SS wants to do with it. "Court of the Dead"...but with only a couple releases, and we've already got mortals now?

As a "grim reaper" fan, give me Mortighull and I'm out.

[loricstone]

How some of you are jumping to ill fated conclusions about a character you know nothing to very little about is quite baffling to me.

Is this how it was for Marvel and DC starting out in the comics field? My goodness. They wouldn't have made it past the first year if they were left to fend against the likes of some of you naysayers and doubters.

For the record, I am an artist first and foremost...so I collect what I enjoy or find aesthetically pleasing or creative. Guess what...If I don't know anything about a character, guess what I do?

RESEARCH AND EXPLORE. SOMETHING SOME DON'T DO....obviously.

[The Mule]

You're right, people are in this line for aesthetics, which is exactly the point in case. This artwork could be out of a generic RPG from 10 years ago, having played RPGs (both pen and paper and videogames) since I was very young I can tell I've seen similar artworks thousands and thousands of times.
I don't need to research nor explore, this design has been done and redone to vomit.
When Marvel and DC started it was a century ago and the market wasn't full of already developed characters. The whole "dark grim fantasy" has been widely explored in all medias years ago.

[Silas Loki]

Originally Posted by The Mule

You're right, people are in this line for aesthetics, which is exactly the point in case. This artwork could be out of a generic RPG from 10 years ago, having played RPGs (both pen and paper and videogames) since I was very young I can tell I've seen similar artworks thousands and thousands of times.
I don't need to research nor explore, this design has been done and redone to vomit.
When Marvel and DC started it was a century ago and the market wasn't full of already developed characters. The whole "dark grim fantasy" has been widely explored in all medias years ago.

Everything has been "done" barring minor variations.

You know, there is a physiological reason for it! It's the same reason why fashion (clothing) is cyclic! The human form has not changed in thousands of years, and it only has a certain range based on having a head, two arms, two legs and so on. So, how different can a pair of trousers be (and still be practical?), same for armour, weapons, hairstyles, etc etc.

So even if you imagine the most advanced Sci Fi battle armour, chances are, apart from a few peripherals and materials, it won't look a million miles different from medieval types.....because the base form (the human body) is the same.

In short, don't blame Sideshow, blame nature itself

[The Mule]

Oh Lord, spare me the holistic philosophy.
There is a HUGE difference between "already done" and "already done to death in every possible media in the last 10-15 years", it really takes an inch of common sense to see it.
I'm not joking when I say that the first Guild Wars and Dragon Age had the exact same stereotypical female warrior character in their concept arts, and we're talking of 10 years ago. Someone at Sideshow must have felt really brilliant seeing the anticipation around The Witcher 3 and came up with this female Witcher concept.

Keep in mind, there is always room for re-interpretation and innovation, always. Some pieces of this very line are a testament to it, just look at the Red Death, Xiall, Cleopsis.
Look at the Siren, that's a classical character reworked to fit the undead theme and sculpted with symbolism, the duality of the creature above and below the water, that's a brilliant concept paired with a brilliant execution.
Originality was the most interesting premise of this line, take that away and these are really worthless.

Speaking of the Siren, this sculpture was in the same contest where Newman brought his Siren, behold the Venetian Harpy.
Classy, original, elegant yet decadent.




And another side point. Someone already mentioned it, but it makes me smile seeing people that bring up the "art" here and there, while Sideshow keeps pushing and pushing T&A in every single license.
I admit it's hard to take this seriously as "art" when Sideshow, first, cheapens it so much with these design choices.
I love pussy like the next guy but give me a break, these are supposed to be 500$ collectibles, not Playboy calendars.

[Shanesg]

Another chick. Lol

[Silas Loki]

Originally Posted by The Mule

Oh Lord, spare me the holistic philosophy.
There is a HUGE difference between "already done" and "already done to death in every possible media in the last 10-15 years", it really takes an inch of common sense to see it.
I'm not joking when I say that the first Guild Wars and Dragon Age had the exact same stereotypical female warrior character in their concept arts, and we're talking of 10 years ago. Someone at Sideshow must have felt really brilliant seeing the anticipation around The Witcher 3 and came up with this female Witcher concept.

Keep in mind, there is always room for re-interpretation and innovation, always. Some pieces of this very line are a testament to it, just look at the Red Death, Xiall, Cleopsis.
Look at the Siren, that's a classical character reworked to fit the undead theme and sculpted with symbolism, the duality of the creature above and below the water, that's a brilliant concept paired with a brilliant execution.
Originality was the most interesting premise of this line, take that away and these are really worthless.

Speaking of the Siren, this sculpture was in the same contest where Newman brought his Siren, behold the Venetian Harpy.
Classy, original, elegant yet decadent.




And another side point. Someone already mentioned it, but it makes me smile seeing people that bring up the "art" here and there, while Sideshow keeps pushing and pushing T&A in every single license.
I admit it's hard to take this seriously as "art" when Sideshow, first, cheapens it so much with these design choices.
I love pussy like the next guy but give me a break, these are supposed to be 500$ collectibles, not Playboy calendars.

Holistic philosophy?! or science..... take your pick.

By your reckoning, I'm surprised you stopped with a 10 year gap! Why not go right back to Joan of Arc.....

With regards to "T&A"..... You do realise that, to qualify as such, the piece of " art" needs to be more than simply female. From the one picture shown of this piece, I see NOTHING that qualifies it as T&A.....other than, it's a depiction of a female. By that qualification, all of the other pieces, based on being female, must also fall under the banner of T&A......

I love the way you decry the falsehood of people calling these pieces art, whilst setting up your own standards for what should be considered as art, hypocritical much?