>>99063738>Steven Universe, in most cases, looks very good
As someone who might have defended the show at one point, this is objectively wrong.
In SOME cases it looks good, and outside of background shots, this is only when they show a character for the first time, before the storyboarders get lazy and just guesstimate what a character looks like instead of actually caring about the design.>Over the Garden Wall
That's hardly a show, it's a special. I'd even consider it more of a movie that just happened to release episodically. It's kinda cheating to compare it to regular CN shows because they were able to create the episodes long beforehand without much time pressure.>Craig of the Creek looks very clean
That's hardly something worth bragging about.>Gumball is consistent and beautiful
This is also objectively false. As time goes on characters get simplified and reduced, as well as the artstyle for the Wattersons going from far more expressive to shitty, CAD-tier copy/paste faces. The 2D-animation-on-3D-backgrounds thing is nice, I'll say that, but the 2D animation itself is lacking quite a bit.>We Bare Bears
It looked okay. Far from great, just passable.>Regular Show looked great
Again, it looked okay, not great. >Adventure Time spawned its own style
That's not a good thing. Even as someone who likes Adventure Time the art is objectively the weakest element to it outside of more complex characters like the Lich. It has good character design, but there's a pretty big difference between character design and art style.>Don't mention OK KO
OK KO is probably the only valid defense of this and you don't bring it up. OK KO uses an extremely simple artstyle, but it counteracts this with extremely well done animation, which, for an action-oriented show, is a very good thing. If I based my judgement on it solely on screenshots, though, I'd go all out on saying how fucking awful it is.