Wrong. Citing from your posts >He’s saying that it’s up to whoever buys the shit to make it look fancy.
It’s up to the buyer to design and make it look good. Not that it’s invalid to dislike. In fact, I’d say that >>60370698
saying>Why would you buy something that looks like shit?
Is the wrong one. Looks like shit? He can judge that for all? That post was in response to>>60370569
saying>A talented painter could produce something brilliant.
So it implies that no, a talented painter will still make it shit.
says>other anon literally says gw yourdudes theme
Citing GW deliberately aiming for customization. And it’s in response to>>60371486
saying>If the only way to make a model look good is to change it up yourself, it's bad
Which made me giggle because “change it up yourself” is exactly what everyone I know does with their paint and ideas. Are they supposed to come painted already or are we supposed to get someone else to paint it for us? That post is wacky.
Finally for >>60371708
it’s just calling out >>60371617
for saying there’s no relevant middle ground which I myself find to be a dumb statement. Personally, I agree that >anon thinks that he can chalk it up as irrelevant
Because really? Just claiming it’s irrelvant? For all he knows, anyone here can be in a community who enjoys doing that. The only part I find similar to your claim is>If you don’t like something, you are too shit to do something with it
But that’s just a response to the equally questionable >If you don't like the design of something you're in no way obligated to change your opinion simply because the model can be kitbashed into something better.
Given how the core argument is that the design is from the player or buyer and how utterly dismissive these people have been. I mean, that’s the same guy arguing that people should get pieces of clay. Nevermind how not even warhammer started from scratch.