| |
In lugnet.build.minifigs, Ran Talbott writes:
> Since we have CRAPPs and POOPs, how 'bout Figs Absent Redeeming Traits?
Not bad- FARTs. That could work. Or how about Weak Tiny Figures?
(I'm still attached to "suckifigs", though.)
> > * The legs won't stick to studs in a sitting position, thus requiring you
> > to attach the figures to vehicles in more "creative" ways.
>
> This is more serious for Martians than for Battle Droids. You can just fold
> BDs up and throw 'em in the trunk: they don't mind...
Agreed.
> > This means that the whole range of existing minifig body parts
> > are mostly not interchangeable.
>
> True, but at least you don't have the "You can't tell the players without a
> scorecard" effect that arose from using so many common parts on the UFO and
> Insectoid aliens. Set a Martian and a minifig side-by-side, and there's not
> much doubt which one represents a human.
Good point... but it begs the question:
If you really want your aliens to look different then why do they have 2
locomotive limbs, 2 manipulative limbs, and a sense-organ cluster at the top?
Shall I go on? There is also the knees in the middle of the legs that bend
toward the rear, the feet that are connected to the legs at the rear, the
single elbow per arm, the arrangement of eyes, nose, mouth, and hair on the
head, the overall proportions of limb length to body length, the overall size...
To some degree, I would also argue that, coloration aside, a Martian fig
looks almost as human as a minifig. *Almost.* We're just so used to seeing
minifigs that we think of them as looking human. In reality, both are
stylized representations of a human that just differ in the execution. The
biggest difference is that the martians have significant open body cavities-
which is clearly because the piece was originally a robot!
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
