GameSmashDash's art Reviews on Newgrounds

[Pixel Bot]

Oof; why the bloody heck is this rated a 1? I mean a 2.5 to 3 star sure but a 1? Eh...
Probably should explain my reasoning, middle part design looks entirely smooth, and round while the two side parts don't match pixel to resolution size wise with the fact of flat parts making it not look as good.

That and no real depth to the image, where does it extend out, meaning the point on the image where it's the smallest, and then the larger points to really tell/ show where the perspective of the image is. You know like how in art class you draw the road, and the further back part you draw smaller, same rule still applies to pixel art.

The middle design looks fine, it's usage of a lot of negative space expect for the middle, and all it's colors are mute with no real color theory usage.

I'll probably try my hand at a redesign of this myself if I'm honest, and I'll tag you to see your reaction for the given results if I get around to it.

[Sabaneroh Evo Line (Fakemon)]

Okay this NEEDS TO BE A POKEMON! You even made good use of negative space, and everything!

[Dinosaur Planet concept]

IT'S SO CUTE!!!

[Bowsette and Eggma'am]

WHY ARE THEY SO HOT! Is Egg man's plan to bang sonic? 10/10 plan if I do say so. I never knew the rated E stuff could be so lewd!

[Tifa workout]

Ah SFW porn; my favorite

[Strawberry]

The strawberry is too flat, no depth, the outside off slightly pixel art, the fruit looks odd with being a bit too flat, the leaves are too dark of a green.

[Lady of the Lost]

Overly simple, the face looks too generic, what is wrong with her eyes? What's wrong with her feet? I will give you that the cloak looks fine.

[Freedom Fighting game]

Now I understand; complex, beautiful artwork is what people want to look at and pass judgement on, they want something like this; detailed, good coloration, good character designs, depth, and dynamic art work with poses beyond something small and simple.

Considering the simple 64 by 64 pixel art takes me an hour if I'm lucky this must've taken days! If not a couple weeks, holy crap for the amount of detail in every position, facing, and shot in this.

ScepterDPinoy responds:

Thanks. I was taking the hard route but before that started practicing drawing in early-mid 2000 before trying pixel art in late 2000's. Hadn't have a NG account back then.

[My SCP-173 Redesign]

Edit: okay if you have a problem with my review stop being a child, and actually talk to me when I message you; the fact the creator of this art is being more of an adult than you is sad, I will not treat you with respect if you're incapable of taking criticism, let alone criticism of someone you like.

Okay; the art is good but judging it as a SCP-173 design? Uh... no, no it's not good. I am going to be to busy laughing myself to death before this thing breaks my neck. This thing isn't horror, sure it's creepy but in the wrong way. I mean when I think SCP-173 I think of the barbwire, the concreate, the simple and yet effective design.

Most horror creatures aren't overly designed. I mean even your other art of horror creatures show that as a great example! Keep it simple! What is supposed to be scary about it?

Sure your fans will praise it because they're not going to be rude to you but I'm going to be honest; I don't like the design from an objective stand point for the standpoint horror wise. How does this make me fear it? What about it makes it scream, "I'm screwed" it's a sculpture with wires that looks like a child drew it and to me that's not scary. Now Ib did this correctly but I'm not even going to get into that but what about this would even come close to make you think, "neck snapper" nothing really.

Don't get me wrong I love your other works of art! Your other works are amazing! However here I do believe you missed the mark, again design wise not art wise.

[Pixel art gems]

This looks amazing!

PocketIllust responds:

THANK YOU!!