Yes, yes...differences of opinion and all that...
...I still don't see how anyone can claim unironically to like the revamped female worgen model. It literally looks like it was cobbled together from spare parts.
Now, I won't deny that the alpha model needed work. It looked like an anthropomorphic husky with human hair, and the teeth weren't quite sharp enough. However, when viewed as a work of progress, it was decent. It actually made me want to roll a worgen, and that's saying something. And it got a mostly positive reception.
But all I can figure is that when creating what now seems to be the final model (hereafter called "the revamp," which should be self-evident), Blizzard's art department took every detail that anyone had complained about on the alpha model (hereafter "the teaser" for how they teased us with it) and exaggerated it.
The teaser allegedly looks like a cat? Give the revamp a kitty smile from the front. People compare the teaser to a fox? Take the head shape beyond "fox" and well into "lapdog" territory, eradicating any last trace of wolfishness in the process. A lupine ruff is preferable to human hair? Keep the human hair, make it dark and shaggy, and make every style some variation on "big hair." People think the teaser's tits are too big, and it looks like fetish fuel for "furries?" Make the revamp's tits even bigger, and copy-paste on the sultriest available eyes from the female human model in place of eyes that could at least pass for canine. People complain about the "perma-snarl" on the male revamp? Give the female revamp a sort of quasi-snarl that nonetheless doesn't interfere with the kitty smile, resulting in a sort of Ninja Turtle sneer that makes it look as if this poor worgen's flews have been carved off.
On top of all this, every face option looks nearly identical to the next. They've got different fur patterns, true. But any other differences (incredibly subtle variations in eye color and nose shape) can only be discerned if you zoom in on the model. I'd argue that female tauren with their oft-deplored mere four faces actually have it better: At least those four faces, with their intensely-hued eyes and markedly different snoots, are distinct.
It looks like a mob (and about a BC-era one, at that), or a placeholder, or a bad joke. Some people are even convinced that it is a bad joke. (I'm not, although I certainly wish I could believe it was.)
But defenders of the revamp seem almost rabid: They sing the praises of its "beauty" and "ferocity," mock the teaser for traits that are not only still present but actually exaggerated in the revamp, swear that the face options are more distinct than those for Burning Crusade races (much less tauren), and accuse anyone who disagrees of being a troll, blind, or "disrespecting their opinions." And that's when they're not accusing people who preferred the teaser of being "furries" or wanting the model to be "sexy."
Differences of opinion are all well and good. But this goes well into the realm of outright denial and illogic. For example, I don't believe I've seen anyone but proponents of the revamp call the teaser "sexy." (In fact, a major complaint about the revamp seems to be its "Jessica Rabbit eyes" as contrasted with the teaser's "wolf eyes.")
Now, unlike some critics of the revamp, I'm not going to call sexism on the design team. Attributing the lapdog look of the female model to some notion among the artists that women are delicate tame little creatures seems silly to me. However-and here's where it may get controversial-I can't help but see some disturbingly sexist implications in the excuses tossed out by the revamp's proponents. (No joke-I've seriously heard "women clearly get a weaker version of the curse.")
And it should be noted that I find it incredibly ironic that it's perfectly acceptable to call female dwarves and male draenei (to name the main targets) objectively "bad" models-and for entirely aesthetic reasons, no less-but not to say the same about the female worgen revamp. So much for "opinion."
Now, off the subject of that: My grafix card no liek WoW any longer. But I've got a replacement in mind.
Now, I won't deny that the alpha model needed work. It looked like an anthropomorphic husky with human hair, and the teeth weren't quite sharp enough. However, when viewed as a work of progress, it was decent. It actually made me want to roll a worgen, and that's saying something. And it got a mostly positive reception.
But all I can figure is that when creating what now seems to be the final model (hereafter called "the revamp," which should be self-evident), Blizzard's art department took every detail that anyone had complained about on the alpha model (hereafter "the teaser" for how they teased us with it) and exaggerated it.
The teaser allegedly looks like a cat? Give the revamp a kitty smile from the front. People compare the teaser to a fox? Take the head shape beyond "fox" and well into "lapdog" territory, eradicating any last trace of wolfishness in the process. A lupine ruff is preferable to human hair? Keep the human hair, make it dark and shaggy, and make every style some variation on "big hair." People think the teaser's tits are too big, and it looks like fetish fuel for "furries?" Make the revamp's tits even bigger, and copy-paste on the sultriest available eyes from the female human model in place of eyes that could at least pass for canine. People complain about the "perma-snarl" on the male revamp? Give the female revamp a sort of quasi-snarl that nonetheless doesn't interfere with the kitty smile, resulting in a sort of Ninja Turtle sneer that makes it look as if this poor worgen's flews have been carved off.
On top of all this, every face option looks nearly identical to the next. They've got different fur patterns, true. But any other differences (incredibly subtle variations in eye color and nose shape) can only be discerned if you zoom in on the model. I'd argue that female tauren with their oft-deplored mere four faces actually have it better: At least those four faces, with their intensely-hued eyes and markedly different snoots, are distinct.
It looks like a mob (and about a BC-era one, at that), or a placeholder, or a bad joke. Some people are even convinced that it is a bad joke. (I'm not, although I certainly wish I could believe it was.)
But defenders of the revamp seem almost rabid: They sing the praises of its "beauty" and "ferocity," mock the teaser for traits that are not only still present but actually exaggerated in the revamp, swear that the face options are more distinct than those for Burning Crusade races (much less tauren), and accuse anyone who disagrees of being a troll, blind, or "disrespecting their opinions." And that's when they're not accusing people who preferred the teaser of being "furries" or wanting the model to be "sexy."
Differences of opinion are all well and good. But this goes well into the realm of outright denial and illogic. For example, I don't believe I've seen anyone but proponents of the revamp call the teaser "sexy." (In fact, a major complaint about the revamp seems to be its "Jessica Rabbit eyes" as contrasted with the teaser's "wolf eyes.")
Now, unlike some critics of the revamp, I'm not going to call sexism on the design team. Attributing the lapdog look of the female model to some notion among the artists that women are delicate tame little creatures seems silly to me. However-and here's where it may get controversial-I can't help but see some disturbingly sexist implications in the excuses tossed out by the revamp's proponents. (No joke-I've seriously heard "women clearly get a weaker version of the curse.")
And it should be noted that I find it incredibly ironic that it's perfectly acceptable to call female dwarves and male draenei (to name the main targets) objectively "bad" models-and for entirely aesthetic reasons, no less-but not to say the same about the female worgen revamp. So much for "opinion."
Now, off the subject of that: My grafix card no liek WoW any longer. But I've got a replacement in mind.