- 813
- 137
Again, why not? Why cant these mountains be as big as europe or any other country? Unless explicity proven otherwise, your taking these fictional worlds and thinking these worlds have to be realistic, which is where the issue begins and needs to honestly stop.Matthew Schroeder said:The art is blatantly non-literal unless you seriously think those mountains are the size of europe.
This is fiction for a reason. Like I already explained, these fictional worlds are vastly different from our world for numerous self-explanatory reasons. Yet, for some reason, we suddenltly have the mentality of thinking these planets sizes need to be as realistic as possible in relation to our own planet. And thats blatantly disregarding what fiction is in the 1st place. If the laws of the world in question are not remotely the same as our world, why does the size need to? If there are ways to prove its bigger, than that should be sufficient to go off of. If not, THEN regualar earth size becomes the verse's standard.
@Assalt
The purpose of what Pixel Scaling is used for has absolutely nothing to do with the legitimacy of the method, which was what was being discussed in previous arguments.
People we're saying Pixel Scaling would need to be dropped because of how art and drawing styles can be inconsistent, which they obviously are. So that means Pixel Scaling would need to be dropped too because it solely relies on those inconsistent artstyles. But thats clearly never going to happen since its ridiculous to suggest. So if Pixel Scaling isnt to be dropped for these reasons, then neither should planetary size scaling for those reaaons.
Otherwise, its flat out cherry picking.