[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / chicas / clang / imouto / kennedi / misr / strek / tijuana / wai ]

/fur/ - Furry

Making Anthro Great Again

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 12 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


►►► Get Whitelisted | Rules | Catalog | Log ◄◄◄

| Find & Share | Art | Edit | Literature | Porn |

File: 393cb07c74d8503⋯.png (86.62 KB, 1450x1272, 725:636, 1492212265187.png)

 No.32240

Real talk: why is it wrong to like sparkledogs or other things that aren't super complex or adultish?

Is it honestly that wrong to have a more kiddish essence and optimism rather than just indulging in the same, complex, anthro, white fursonas over and over again? Is it honestly so terrible to have some shame and enjoy stuff that isn't always so 'serious' and 'amazing' all the time? And honestly, what's wrong with some individuality?

8chan is a site all about not fitting into the norm, but there's a huge standard and norm here that is beyond just satire.

 No.32241

I don't mean to act or endorse snowflake syndrome, but really, what's the point of blending in like another person and liking the same stuff?

8chan out of all places should appreciate the diversity of the human race, since everybody here is abnormal, but a lot of you guys act like normalfags. "I don't like this because it doesn't meet my standards! I don't like being adventurous unless I do such in the most edgy way possible that will harm others more than me!"

I know 8chan is full of ignorance and not wanting to fit into the norm, but if you go to like ANY Sports Bar or popular place, most people there will act just like an 8channer.

I'm not even a SJW, I'm just a person that notices how SJW and self-centered 8chan has become, despite wanting to not be normie. Sorry, but hating things for being 'too pure' is just as bad as hating them for being 'too offensive'.


 No.32242

>why is it wrong to like sparkledogs

Simply because their design sucks, 99% of them are literally made by teenager girls drawing "what they feel like it", that's why most of them end up replacing those characters as they get older by better fursonas/OCs and why previous fursona self bashing happens so much.


 No.32246

>>32242

True.

But that is objectable, and we all enjoy different things.

Something new would be accepting others for their beliefs.

People have been trying to push it, but nobody actually pays attention to that because they do the same shit over and over.

I mean if 8chan is trying to hard to not be normal, then why do they act JUST like normalfags do?


 No.32249

>>32246

8chan is more about brutal honesty and being an asshole for the lulz than about being a "rebel","different", hispter or whatever.


 No.32250

>>32249

Damn it, I'm an idiot lmao.

I haven't been on 8chan for so long that I almost forgot the whole purpose of it.

I guess it's mixed.

Eh, it's not productive to use 8chan for long periods of time though, but there's some nice shit here.

I just wish that there were more nice people on 8chan, because I'm fine with all the hostility, I just wish there were some nicer peeps too.


 No.32251

>>32240

Cute stuff is too idealistic to the point where it looks silly for me. I don't think that people hate cute stuff for the sake of being cute, but they dislike it for the sake of being untrue or not grounded in reality. I used to like cute stuff like anime and sparkledogs, but I got burnt out on them.

The serious stuff is viewed as more mature not because it has violence or dark lighting, but because it puts the viewer through both comfort and discomfort. It seats you through a wide variety of emotions while expecting you to handle loss, suspense, and grief. Sorry if I sounded too pretentious.


 No.32252

There is a huge gulf of talent and taste between sparkledoggery and making genuinely interesting OCs. Individuality is all well and good but it's no excuse for not being able to design your way out of a wet paper bag.

You want to make a sparkledog? You go right ahead. You post it here or anywhere else, you can and should expect to be pilloried for having zero fucking talent in creative design and shit taste to boot.


 No.32254

File: 5db9b47233027f4⋯.png (62.38 KB, 650x367, 650:367, kds0014.png)

>>32251

I do see what you're saying; it's more realistic to deal with alternative viewpoints rather than slick, stylized crap, helping you cope with real issues hands-on rather than just being about entertainment or distractions. Different strokes for different folks, though. I don't see why people gotta rain on the parade of people who like cutesy stuff though, they just are more optimistic and haven't felt the same pain yet, which they very well could one day.

>>32252

That's true. I actually started liking sparkledogs less after I made this thread. But the thing is: great OC's take a long time and a lot of brainpower to create. Sparkledogs are more like symbols and things to mess around with for fun. Proper characters are more intricate and can convey emotions much more powerfully. However, colorful characters can still be made well if their colors fit together or don't feel too distracting.

Sparkledogs that are original take a certain degree of talent to make, though.

It's just that they don't look as great as complex fursonas.

For example: this design is something unique to represent an idea and person, but it doesn't get super distracting to the eye, although it is eyecandy.

The way she combined the cat and dog aspect was actually done in a special way.

Patterns were used, specific colors were used, and the painting was skilled.

But people still constitute creative designs like this as sparkledogs?

I know this isn't the perfect example, but it's an example of an intricate fursona with an actual design behind it.


 No.32255

File: f04c0809371595e⋯.jpg (75.74 KB, 1024x630, 512:315, serveisdfsadfasmage.jpg)

>>32254

I'm glad that you're chill. I can't say it for other folks associated with the "cute" community though. They get really abrasive over petty stuff, probably because their stream of idealism becomes dammed. A lot held grudges towards me for not making their favorite cartoon character 100% on-model and treat me as their worst enemy #1 because I said "no" to them.


 No.32256

>>32255

It's because the cute community is mostly full of kids, teenagers, and people with personality/behavior disorders.

I have personality disorders myself and can get extremely sensitive at times where I shouldn't be. I also act extremely annoying and/or insensitive at other times.

So I just like cute nonsense to escape from all the seriousness and boredom of life.

It's kinda like a less harmful coping mechanism for me, and it also helps me take my mind off of pain, boredom, annoyance, and other things.

Plus, they make me happy even when I'm already pretty relaxed. :>

I just don't see why people are so upset by it. I know that it's 8chan, but why are people that upset over some innocent drawings? It's to the point where it honestly doesn't seem like sarcasm.

Perhaps I'm just sensitive though, haha.


 No.32258

>>32240

>>32254

God fucking dammit, again? YOU ALREADY MADE A THREAD >>31886

FUCK OFF, ALREADY

THAT SHIT IS GARBAGE.


 No.32260

>>32258

Hide it if you don't like it, dude.

I'm not guilt tripping /fur/ over whining about popufurs, so why are you guilt tripping me about liking things?

I know it's probably bait, but hey, I'm not even upset. I'm just an easily annoyed autist.


 No.32264

>>32252

Basically what this guy said. There is an entire scale between "Generic Red Fox #27459" and an edgy overdesigned sparkledog. The issue with most people isn't that they necessarily lack creativity, but that they don't understand how animals work. They only know how to be "distinctive" the way humans are distinctive. This is stuff like hairstyle/color, tattoos (or unnatural fur patterns as an alternate), clothing, jewelry, and accessories.

The other reason is because more people who have OCs will commission artists than draw them on their own. This is a serious issue with having the OC be visually recognizable, because artists will have wildly different art style. If you make a coyote character that is distinctive and hand it to 50 artists, you'll get 50 different canines, many of which will look like dogs or wolves or foxes. The easy way to maintain a distinction is to add something that can be identified no matter the style, or how bad the quality. If you give your wolf a blue-and-white striped scarf, or give your fox teeny round glasses, or give your dog a bizarre spot of color like a random green toe, then everyone will know it's you even if the art is bad and the style makes it look like a completely different species.

The way I got around this was by custom designed a fur pattern for my fursona that is both based on real animal pelt patterns for the species, and distinctive. That way it's not required to add sparkledog features like neon hair or a tribal tattoo or a giant anime sword. But I wouldn't expect very many people to be able to do that sort of thing, or want to; it's just much easier to do the alternative. Either way, I would still be wary about having anyone else draw him, because it still might not come out the way I want in their style.

All the same, the other side holds true. Anyone has the right to design a ridiculous eye-melting OC that's a dragonfox hybrid with a sergal and a digimon that has Goku hair and sharingan eyes; but they have to accept that anyone else will also have the right to judge them for that choice.


 No.32265

>>32254

I would like it if it had 2 ears and natural colors. Hair dye is gross.


 No.32268

>>32255

>On model

I've only recently started commissioning folks for fur stuff, and I only asked them to keep on model because I like the original design so much. I did ask one to give muscle tone and a hard body look to one character, but I knew they could pull it off from what I saw of their previous work.


 No.32269

coonfox

ottagon


 No.32277

>>32268

If it's a commission then I'm cool with it. You must always get what you paid for.

I'm talking about the folks who get really rustled over off-model fan art or free requests, and I unfortunately see that happening constantly.


 No.32279

>>32240

I like how you posted a picture what obviously doesn't fall into that category. As though you knew, in advance, that sparkledogs are cancer.

Sparkledogs are shit because they look like ass.

Their colors clash. Their patterns are overly complex. They've got random parts coming off at odds with one another.

These problems in poor-quality character design inevitably result in a poor-quality character.

It's as though people think you have to be a neon puppy to be original.

Kill yourself, OP.


 No.32280

>>32241

Just because we shit on things doesn't mean we don't have our own individuality or difference. Be less of a fucking scrub, and maybe you'd realize it's not about 'being different' or 'diversity', it's about knowing what is and is not aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

Bad design is bad design. I don't care if you're designing a room, a skyscraper, a video game, or a fucking sparkle dog.

Besides, you miss the core point of these sites: If you can't defend your autism, your interests in a field, your likes and dislikes, you are a limp dick faggot who never really cared for any of those things.

These places are filled with arguments 24/7. Just because you don't like people calling your opinion shit doesn't mean we all fit a singular mold and format.


 No.32281

File: bbd3948a065adb1⋯.jpg (284.97 KB, 1314x2557, 1314:2557, 1467570385145.jpg)

some of it i don't mind if colors blend well and it's not too bright and in your face, but mostly it seems like it's just random colors and symbols in order to try and stand out. I personally prefer naturals colors or at least a more thought our design

obligatory


 No.32283

>>32250

You hang around for a while, and you'll find most folk here are nice. We just care. A lot.

People around here invest well into the idea of 'tough love'. If you have shit tastes, we want to help drag you in to the light.


 No.32286

Sergals are worse, as are people with sergal fursonas.


 No.32291

>>32269

Wat.

Wut?


 No.32300

>>32286

Sergals are fine so long as you avoid furry OC sergals.

If you hunt down /tg/-tier shit, you're golden.


 No.32301

>>32283

Speak for yourself. (re: second line)

Anonymous communities like *chans are characterised by people telling the truth. No identity -> no ramifications outside the thread. If I think something is shit, I'll say it's shit. If I enjoy something, I'll encourage it. No-one can stalk me and spam me for disagreeing with their taste.

I don't care if someone has shit tastes. I might tell them why I think their taste is shit, and laugh if they don't rebut with a sensible response. No biggie. They probably think my taste is shit too.


 No.32308

File: 4271e0f6027b040⋯.jpg (577.81 KB, 578x1103, 578:1103, Delibird.jpg)

File: 82453968d0078b8⋯.png (3.17 MB, 3991x3000, 3991:3000, Sapphirus.png)

File: e06c6471480ad7b⋯.jpg (148.69 KB, 581x600, 581:600, Tyrantopphirus.jpg)

>>32240

>trying to defend this shit

Post some examples of what you think is not so bad so that I can tell if there's just a misunderstanding or you really do belong in the trash with these creative black holes.


 No.32317

File: 6d2f124a886e6db⋯.png (88.45 KB, 629x436, 629:436, sjw.png)

>>32286

You sound like you're part of the Antifa furry circlejerk.

>>32300

>so long as you avoid furry OC

That can be applied to any species in general.


 No.32321

>>32317

>Antifa furry circlejerk

You just made that up, right?

Please tell me that doesn't actually exist.


 No.32329

File: 53648d836acf962⋯.jpg (370.28 KB, 1144x500, 286:125, 1492908987027.jpg)

File: 44f1641a6fa17ce⋯.jpg (124.74 KB, 475x778, 475:778, 1493670761453.jpg)

>>32321

Boy you haven't been around furry Twitter have you?

I really don't blame you, it's the worst fucking shit to look at and apparently their "all sergals are bad" chant is also leaking into imageboards.


 No.32330

File: ee3022980a3a91f⋯.png (682.9 KB, 845x479, 845:479, ,.png)

>>32329

>A bunch of furfags wearing fursuits trying to fight a group of skinheads

Please make it happen.


 No.32336

>>32330

Whoever loses, we win


 No.32339

>>32329

But all sergals are bad. Thinking they're not compared to other sparklespecies is just an appeal to popularity. Never forget the females canonically have prehensile clitoral hoods.


 No.32343

>>32339

So?

Again, furry sergals, I grant you, are trash.

But the more /tg/-tier stuff is pretty swell. Really get that xenophilia boiling.


 No.32344

File: 301d3cbd2ea8a99⋯.png (1.31 MB, 907x1400, 907:1400, 14kas.png)

>>32339

>thinking sergals are popular enough

They are as underground as you can get without going into the "beast design #6246" category and even in the popularity scale between angel dragons and actual sparkledogs. Hell even taurs are more popular than sergals.

>Never forget the females canonically have prehensile clitoral hoods.

And that somehow makes them bad?

>>32343

Forget /tg/ that stuff is from 2010 and nobody remembers or works on it, stick to Mick's stuff.


 No.32350

>>32344

My only exposure to sergals is from that era anyway.


 No.32352

>>32344

>And that somehow makes them bad?

Yes, it's complete "look how special I am!" bullshit on the same line as snake tails or three dicks on a dog.


 No.32375

>>32352

Snake tails are bad?


 No.32377

File: 477649f4c8c9be7⋯.jpg (153.79 KB, 400x568, 50:71, xenomorph-7-400-wide.jpg)

File: eff6d80981870b1⋯.jpg (67.29 KB, 700x1000, 7:10, Turian_without_armor.jpg)

>>32352

>on the same line as snake tails or three dicks on a dog

So dogs can have swelling cocks, dolphins prehensile dicks and ducks corkscrew vaginas but a small tentacle to aid in sex of an alien species is on the same level as a fully living thing instead of a tail and 3 appendages that don't help a dog at all? Next you're gonna tell me that Turians or Xenomorphs are too much of a sparkledog for anyone to like.

You sound like the type of person that thinks it's ok when anthro animals speak full English and wear clothes but gets mad when they are not 100% anatomically accurate.

>>32375

Like actual snakes as tails yeah it looks off, unless it's on a chimera.


 No.32383

>>32377

Ah, fair enough. Not run in to many with full on snake tails, myself.


 No.32386

>>32377

Just because you like sergals doesn't mean they aren't shit. Just because their creator made up some small amount of worldbuilding for them doesn't mean they aren't shit. Just because they have m-muh fetish!! pussy tentacles doesn't mean they aren't shit. You can't compare it to something in reality because it's NOT reality. It's EXACTLY like someone adding dicknipples to an OC because that's their fetish.

Oh, and "dolphins have prehensile dicks" thing is a meme. They have some small degree of flex at the tip that can sorta bend around an object, but it certainly couldn't grip a dildo and fuck himself with it.


 No.32389

File: 6b503f5d4a3383c⋯.jpg (55.69 KB, 720x960, 3:4, 14724396_521471041390356_8….jpg)

>>32386

Vagina tentacles are a fetish?

Id assume more that sergals are vorefags but eh.

I honestly don't care about sparkledogs as long as they don't shove their shit oc in my face and try to hit me up with one liner roleplay.

Having variety in your sona is nice, it prevents "red fox syndrome" but if there's too much effort in standing out it'll look ugly.

I enjoy the creative freedom in the fandom, which is something to appreciate before antifa communist furries like Deo start sprouting up like weeds.


 No.32390

>>32386

You still haven't said why they're shit or how Xenos, Turians or whatever alien race are any different. I mean you can dislike them all you want because they are not your cup of tea or whatever but actually hating them so much that you can't ignore them over something so minor as a weird vagina is pretty fucking petty. There are worst furry designs out there that fit perfectly on the sparkledog group, for example: actual sparkledogs

>It's EXACTLY like someone adding dicknipples to an OC because that's their fetish.

You're still comparing chalk and cheese.

>Oh, and "dolphins have prehensile dicks" thing is a meme.

So the dogs and the ducks get a free pass on freaky sex organs?

>>32389

Who's Deo?


 No.32391

File: 4f74dda657947f1⋯.png (80.94 KB, 305x486, 305:486, e2431592a499465f4be561b8a8….png)


 No.32392

>>32391

So THAT was the guy that got his sona face posted on BLFC. Christ talk about people making a big deal over nothing.


 No.32394

>>32392

It's a she, and she's a nasty little cunt. Probably a lot more bark than bite, but nasty regardless.


 No.32396

>>32390

>You still haven't said why they're shit

They're generic furry sharks. They only have legitimacy over other such custom species because they're old and popular. Same reason why people think Christianity is legit while Scientology is not (when in truth they're both garbage).

Just because you say my argument is "comparing chalk and cheese" doesn't mean you're correct. But supposing it is, comparing a dick that's a little bit of an odd shape with MY PUSSY CAN GRAB THINGS!!! is like comparing a punch in the face with cheese.

Also, sergals being a matriarchy with strong female characters (and the males don't even have a design; he once scribbled on a napkin the ugliest nonsense penis ever invented when asked enough) makes it an entire species of feminist cuck garbage in the first place.


 No.32398

>>32391

>communist feminist blm

well, at least she admits she's commie scum.


 No.32411

File: 2723a78acaf500a⋯.png (27.4 KB, 350x350, 1:1, 1234488471396.png)

>>32396

>They're sparklespecies! Worse than sparkledogs and chakats!

>They're generic furry sharks

Jesus Christ anon

>But supposing it is, comparing a dick that's a little bit of an odd shape with MY PUSSY CAN GRAB THINGS!!! is like comparing a punch in the face with cheese.

Haha what? So you admit that your comparison was indeed way off?

>sergals being a matriarchy

That's not even a thing anymore.

>with strong female characters (and the males don't even have a design; he once scribbled on a napkin the ugliest nonsense penis ever invented when asked enough)

Wrong, male sergals always had a design, their penis too.

>makes it an entire species of feminist cuck garbage in the first place

Holy fucking shoot anon. Imagine being so irrationally mad at a fictional species just because the females tend to initiate sex.

You are no different from the Antifa circlejerk that yells all sergals are bad because of bullshit reasons like "their ugly culture and rapey anatomy".

Jesus fuck we've fucking come full circle.


 No.32419

>>32386

So, by your standard, everything must have basic human physiology or it is trash?

Should we go full Star Trek tier aliens, where the only difference between two races is a bit of lines on their nose, or a few dots on their neck?

Maybe it's one of those things that come up now and again, where furries are just not really so to speak 'ready' for it. One of those too alien races, what go out of the comfort zone of people who typically just make the same standard human body with a different paint job and a vaguely animal face.


 No.32421

>>32411

>I love sergals and nobody can convince me otherwise!

>I'm such a moron and so bereft of personal creativity that I think this is actually good!

>I don't mind being dominated by females!

Tell me: how many times did he have to suck your cock before you agreed to shill this hard?


 No.32423

File: ce39d1600f36dec⋯.jpg (51.44 KB, 428x600, 107:150, 428px-Old_Sergal.jpg)

File: a113b82ddc9333c⋯.jpg (89.21 KB, 736x1071, 736:1071, 8fa168b3cf634b02fec854a2ed….jpg)

>>32396

I'm rather confused as to how you could possibly describe them as "Generic furry sharks".

Then again, you're equating them to Christianity and Scientology, so I guess you might not be the most stable when it comes down to it.

Your argument was "chalk and cheese" when it comes down to it. Dicknipples are not at all comparable to a simple clitoral hood.


 No.32424

>>32421

>Anything different from the standard human body is shit!

>Any variance of anatomy is a sign of lack of creativity!

>Any alien culture that isn't standard western human culture is cuckoldry!

Bro, just kill yourself already


 No.32437

File: 5bea824a91d4946⋯.webm (1.77 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, youre_done.webm)

>>32421

>I have no actual way to defend my stance so I'm just gonna go full Ad hominem on you!

>Just like the Antifags

Yeah I think you're done establishing what kind of retard you are and that your opinion should be completely disregarded.


 No.32460

>>32398

she's a middle aged man

check his facebook link. it's somewhere on his fa or twitter i think. i cant be assed to look


 No.32481

>>32423

You misinterpret. Furry sharks as in "sharks with fur on them". They're just generic canines with a shark-like face and disarrayed fur.

A simple clitoral hood isn't six inches long and prehensile.

Also, they should also be as stupid as cows with those minimal braincases. I appreciate the attempt to custom-design a skull, but don't be ignorant of the implications.


 No.32484

>>32481

See

>>32377

And to be fair sergals are not very smart or agile. Some of them can't read or even speak a language.


 No.32508

File: 8fc802bf62444e6⋯.jpg (226.42 KB, 879x842, 879:842, 3079_Rain_Silves_Sergal_Tr….jpg)

>>32481

So first they're 'generic furry sharks', now they're 'generic canines with shark-like faces'.

You can't even keep your issues straight, mate.

Also, I feel like you miss what is the majority of canine art. Given the standard, again, I really just don't see it.

I think it depends on the rendition, but regardless, it's still really not comparable to 'dick nipples'.

Brain size does not mark actual intelligence. Crows have quite small heads, yet they're one of the smartest animals on the planet, capable of crafting tools in the wild, not to mention complex puzzle solving, and advanced mimicry.


 No.32513

>>32484

>And to be fair sergals are not very smart or agile. Some of them can't read or even speak a language.

Ins't that because of local culture?Also afair they used advanced military strategies and were able to keep a good part of the world under their empire.


 No.32521

File: b323a25c6d3a990⋯.jpg (73.29 KB, 1000x800, 5:4, 9ixzUFG5.jpg)

>>32513

>Ins't that because of local culture?

It depends on location and on what time period you're looking at them but cries and body language was the norm for a long time for sergals. They all also seem to have problems with fine motor skills.

>Also afair they used advanced military strategies

Not really. Rain's strategies were based on wild "wolves".

>and were able to keep a good part of the world under their empire.

See pic. Two cities and some towns on a planet larger than Earth is not exactly a good part of the world and even then Rain's kingdom collapsed after a few years.


 No.32528

>>32240

I have no objection to cute or light-hearted things. My objection to sparkledogs largely stems from the fact that they boil down to some asshole with crayons going "look at me I am do art" and then people praise them for it as if they were literally children. It's disheartening when you're trying to get actually good at something and someone with no drive or motivation to improve can get more positive attention than you simply because "teh shiny" or whatever.

Since you mentioned special snowflake syndrome I won't harp on it, but I also find that there's a whiff of postmodernism in sparkledogs that gives me an immediate "kill it with fire" reaction. There are too many artists in real life who squander their talent by peddling bullshit and acting like people who don't understand it are "out of touch" for me to have any patience for people doing it for free on the Internet, and remember some people actually charge money for this shit. It's disgusting and frankly is a contributing factor to my dwindling faith in humanity.

That and honestly even if it's not sparkledogs people who use unnatural colors in their OCs just make me feel like they aren't taking this shit seriously. I don't mind people who are just in it for the lulz or whatever you do, but the only other group of people I identify with hair dyed in bizarre colors is feminists and I have every right to hate them for what they've done to society in general, and I'm not going to pretend that those types of people aren't ruining furry as well. I will bash those people. I will bash and bash until red shit is flowing down the halls of the fandom like the Nile. I will have my corner of the Internet where people have interesting discussions about anthropomorphics and talk about their creative projects and the kind of people who plow through with shiny hair and rainbow tattoos aren't allowed in until they grow some self-respect.


 No.32533

>>32508

>Brain size does not mark actual intelligence

Absolute size, yes. It has to do with the ratio of brain size to body size, though. A large dog has the same body weight as a human, but much less brain matter. That's the different in intelligence between them. Given the size of the braincase related to their (roughly) human size, sergals should be even LESS intelligent than dogs.


 No.32535

File: a6aeb550eadcb4c⋯.jpeg (192.12 KB, 750x750, 1:1, ToriMidoriFinal.jpeg)

>>32240

I've got a multicolored character who fits several sparkledog traits. I n my opinion, while anyone can laugh at design features they think look stupid, the following are what pushes a character into "deserves mockery" territory:

-- Extremely detailed markings, which aren't species-related, and which the creator demands be drawn precisely a certain way

--Extremely detailed additions. Exact outfits, overloads of specific accessories, etc. that they MUST be drawn with at all times

-- Truly bizarre traits. Things like hypodermic syringes stuck through body parts, mouths or eyes elsewhere on the body, parts which drip acid or mind-altering substances, parts stitched back on, multiple pairs of limbs, or things which beat physics bloody with a nail-studded baseball bat

--Extreme backgrounds. Truckloads of angst. Dead lovers, parents murdered in front of them, all their friends die horrible deaths, cursed somehow, etc.

All of the above examples are ones I've seen, though some were on parodies, of which there are many.

Thing is, some people will laugh at you if your character is too detailed, AND if your character is too generic, suggesting that what they really want is to laugh at people. That being said, creators being crazy-detailed and crazy-specific does tend to suggest immaturity.

>>32280

> If you can't defend your autism, your interests in a field, your likes and dislikes

There a bit too much of the following:

Random 8channer: Your creation is shit

Other user: Calmly and descriptively defends their creation

Random 8channer: I don't care, you're still a whiny faggot who's just trying to be a snowflake. I said so, and that's final.

>>32283

A-OK with that, but if the person says "fuck you, I like this and here's why," I'll give 'em respect. If they whine and cry and act like criticism is wrong, too bad.

Might as well pop in my example. My characters are ALL designed for a nonmagical setting where shapeshifting is a scientifically-understood ability, and where it's rare, but not unheard-of, for normally-non-flying biped species to have wings, depending on their (interbreeding) background. Despite the details people would term signs of internet autism, it's supposed to be a fairly mature and well-thought-out setting (the ones I created as a teen make me cringe so hard that I refuse to talk about them, but suffice to say most involved magic and were dreamed up in AOL's RPG chats. Anybody remember RhyDin? Eeek!)

Here's my sparkle-genet. My design, but I let the artist choose the species. Her wild fur colors, bioluminescence, and eye colors (and her disappearing wings) are shifting in action-- again, in this setting, these are all understood by modern science. She's a musician, more rock than pop, Japanese but eschewing the "Engrish word salad" thing that's popular in Japanese music. Her combined guitar/bass is a custom of the setting's loose equivalent to Alembic, whose instruments she endorses officially. Her stage name is intentionally silly.

Her markings are the artist's version of what a spotted genet has, and if someone else drew her, as long as they drew what they think a spotted genet looks like, it's all good. Her exact colors can vary, and she has no default clothing, so there's really no "she must be exactly this way" as long as she's a genet. The Dashie shirt isn't necessarily typical; she's not a fan per se, but will wear anything she deems cheerful.

My opinion on HER is, if someone thinks she's stupid, or a sign of immaturity or internet autism, I couldn't care less. I'll be happy to defend my creations, but if someone just wants to tell me they think I have shit taste, they're most welcome to waste all the time they like.


 No.32537

>>32535

Here's my question: It seems like you've put a lot of thought into your setting and your characters, and all I want to know is what do you want to accomplish with them?

The reason why I said that I feel like people aren't taking this shit seriously is that it feels like a lot of people will just do this colorful wackadoo stuff for the sake of it, and if that's all there is to it then it's your bag, but for myself personally I don't see the point of doing it if you aren't trying to do something with it. Something meaningful, like using it to frame an idea you're trying to make other people see. For instance in the literature thread I posted a story where a man and a lizard-man take an opportunity while lost in the woods to learn about each other. I designed the setting specifically so that there would be a secluded race that most men didn't know anything about, and then I put one of that race alone with a repressed scientist and wrote down what happened.

I guess what I'm saying is, in my opinion, if your concept isn't grounded in reality, like not even a little bit, it's going to be hard for you to do anything meaningful with it. I know it means something to you, but that's just not going to be as rewarding unless other people can appreciate it too.


 No.32540

>>32537

> what do you want to accomplish with them?

Several friends and I roleplay in it. It isn't anything I intend for any serious purpose.

> like using it to frame an idea you're trying to make other people see

I agree that doing things with a purpose is absolutely wonderful. But I'm honestly not good at that sort of thing. I'm really just using my setting and characters (and some of my friends have other, different settings in which we run plots) as a way to unwind, when I'm relaxing and don't want to go out somewhere.

> I know it means something to you, but that's just not going to be as rewarding unless other people can appreciate it too

I totally understand, I'm just not really making this for anyone but myself and some friends.


 No.32541

>>32535

jesus christ


 No.32542

>>32540

Fair enough. Have fun.

>But I'm honestly not good at that sort of thing.

You might surprise yourself someday. Never think that you can't get better. And never, ever talk yourself into not doing what you love.


 No.32544

>>32541

LOL. Is it really that bad? I'm betting mine isn't within miles of some of the shit that's out there.


 No.32546

File: 0de0cd99047fe98⋯.gif (1.92 MB, 400x299, 400:299, mLitlT3.gif)

>>32533

If you're gonna get autistic about some fictional creature's brain you might as well get your facts straight. The brain-to-body-mass ratio is not an entirely accurate way to measure a creature's intelligence. As that anon said crows and parrots have low encephalization levels compared to mammals but yet they still show complex behaviors because their brain cells are small which could mean there are more synapses per volume happening.

Nobody knows how Sergal brains are arranged or how they even work and quite frankly it's not an issue that should even be addressed. You are part of a culture that is guided more by looks than by what's really inside. Nobody complains about the brain size or intelligence of the average human-body-with-an-animal-head anthro.

also sergals are part of a fantasy universe so yeah midichlorians need not apply


 No.32549

>>32535

"Too detailed" isn't the issue so much as "shit details".

Frankly I feel like this is a rather sharp mischaracterization of the issue at hand.

Also, fucking christ, yes, that is a good example of a sparkleshit character. Glaring shitty colors, parts that don't belong, differing eye colors. It doesn't help that apparently the character's a brony, either.

Do keep in mind, most of these items stack with one another to produce a truly shit character. On their own, they wouldn't necessarily be bad, outside the absolutely garish and offensive color pallet. Two-color eyes aren't a major issue, for instance, provided the rest of the character doesn't look like anus.

>There a bit too much of the following

I rarely see it. Far, far more often, I see people going

>Random 8chan user :This is shit

>Other user: "THAT'S JUST YOUR OPINION ART IS SUBJECTIVE YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO JUDGE"

>Another 8chan user: But it's shit, and here's why

>Other user: "BUT ART'S SUBJECTIVE YOU JUST WANT TO BULLY EVERYONE ON THIS SITE IS JUST MEAN THEY DON'T ACTUALLY CARE"

See, for instance, right now, with your post.


 No.32562

>>32533

Brain size isn't the only indicator of intelligence, and neither is brain-to-body ratio. Not all brains are even designed to be highly intelligent. The reason why humans are so smart is that we have large brains, but we also have abnormally large frontal lobes. The frontal lobe is the part of the brain responsible for decision-making, moral judgement, and the projection of past experiences onto future expectations, which combined make up a large part of what we think of as intelligent. Compare the frontal lobe in a human with that in a dog; that's not the only piece of why humans are so much smarter than dogs, but it's a big one.


 No.32573

>>32535

>eye-searing pink everywhere

>wings

>heterochromia

>glowing body parts

>tail changes colors

>into a rainbow pattern of all things

>things which beat physics bloody with a nail-studded bat

>using "it's science!" instead of "it's magic!" to justify adding what you want instead of what would make a good character

>but if the person says "fuck you, I like this and here's why," I'll give 'em respect

You can respect them all you want, but all they're doing is shouting "fuck you" instead of getting sad.

Either way they're still ignoring criticisms made by the very people they're trying to please with their character's design so they're both equally awful.

If they aren't trying to impress anyone else, they should keep the character to themselves rather than post something they know is shit and get angry or sad when people tell them as much.


 No.32574

File: 8b17df032862541⋯.gif (490.31 KB, 300x318, 50:53, 1422497164597-1.gif)

>>32535

The question you need to ask yourself is WHY?

-Why does she have heterochromia?

-Why does she have a rainbow tail?

-Why do her paws light up neon pink?

-Why does she have wings?

-Why does she dress like that?

-Why does she wear a headset?

-Why is she holding an electric bass/guitar?

As of now, you only answered correctly to the last three

>she's a musician, more rock than pop

>she's not a fan per se, but will wear anything she deems cheerful.

So, she's a cheerful musician and dresses in casual attire to show she doesn't care... about being fashionable? Or conspicuous?.

But you didn't even need to put Dash on the shirt. A big smiley face would've conveyed the message better. Especially with registered IPs, nobody can realistically make that connection without also assuming the character is somehow a fan of the IP.

To the other questions, you either didn't answer, or you answered "just because, in my own headcanon, it can happen"

First, people don't know what your headcanon is.

Second, if you don't provide an explanation, it makes all the crap you slap on her unnecessary. Therefore, your character comes off as an uninspired mashup of random things, aka a sparkledog.

Then, you need to follow basic color theory, which means dominant, pure, saturated colors as a color scheme just don't work.

They give no rest to the eyes of the viewer.

The fact that they're an unnatural color for an animal just makes it worse, and begs yet another question:

-Why does she have such a vivid colored fur?

And your answer, yet again, is "just because".

A character cannot be entirely made up of "just because". Some degree of creative license is of course permitted, but it cannot influence everything about the character.


 No.32590

>>32574

Solid analysis anon. Sparkledogs are shit because there's no thought behind them, it's like coloring books and adding all sorts of shitty glitter designs on your journal, except for furries.

>>32535 's character is awful and another case of a furshit sparkledog, he can try to come up with as many justifications as he wants but the fact is that it doesnt look like a stage performer it looks like a preteen trying to be a stage performer with preteen ideas of what would look good on the stage.

The one who came up with it obviously has done fuckall research into fashion and it shows, both the designer and the character come off as toddler-tier stunted growth autism.


 No.32592

>>32240

Source on your pic? Reverse image searching gives nothing.


 No.32596

>>32535

The issue with this is that, just because you create a very detailed and complex sparkleworld for your sparkledog, it doesn't change that it's still a sparkledog. For example, Sasuke in Naruto is still a bullshit, deus-ex-machina, badly-written mary-sue-character, despite being in a universe that allows him to have those absurd crazy mary-sue powers.

I get the impression that there's too much leniency in creative worlds. People are all too willing to accept complete nonsense just because "it's fictional, so anything can happen!" or "it's magic; I don't have to explain anything!". It's too often used as an excuse for poor writing or plot holes, when the setting has nothing to do with it.

JK Rowling has gone on record that the reason Hogwarts has those silly shifting staircases and magical rooms that appear and disappear, is because she is terrible with organization and never designed a floor plan for the place. So she knew that there would be plot holes regarding characters getting from one place to another, which is also why teleportation or flying is used as a method of travel more often than not. It allows the world to exist without constraints on time or space. Compare that to Tolkien; do you think he'd have done something like that? Nah, man, he had MAPS AND SHIT. He never needed Gandalf to suddenly teleport somewhere because he needed a wizard to cross Middle Earth in a day. This is the difference between bad writing that has problems that fans can handwave as "A wizard did it!" and good writing that has wizards, but they don't patch plot holes.

This is why I point out that a sergal having a prehensile clitoral hood is absurd. Because there's no reason for it. There's no reason such a thing would logically evolve; just like there's no reason a snake-tail would evolve. The only method to defend it existing is "It's a fictional creature so it can be ==ANYTHING==!!" That's not an argument, that's just putting your fingers in your ears and ignoring the debate.

To contrast this, a couple days ago I was doing research on ostrich dicks this is what I put up with for the bettering of my craft. I realized that I might be able to use this to come up with a logical way for a canine penis, with a knot that only swells at orgasm, to actually evolve. My poor drawing skills might prevent my being able to telegraph this concept, but the point is it exists. The point is that I didn't just say "This character has a dick that does whatever I want because I am the creator and nobody can stop me." No, there has to be a REASON for things to be the way they are, and a sensible reason at that. Just because we live in a real world that has manifold possibilities for exciting genetic engineering, doesn't mean we have glowing babies with heterochromia and tentacles and retractable wings. These are not things beyond human science; you tell a human "you can't!" and they put a man on the moon within a decade. But there is a moral reason, and scientific reasons, and cultural/religious reasons that prevent such things.

Did Mr. Sparkledog in a Sparkleworld consider the millions of cubs that would have been butchered alive in experiments, to figure out how to make furries glow and have wings? Did he consider the cultural or legal implications of creating what are essentially brand-new species from scratch and plonking them into society? Or did he just handwave it that science is perfect so nobody ever is harmed by such flagrant rape of biology, and everyone is cool with this?

THAT is the difference between good creativity and bad creativity. I hope all of you can understand this and see it.


 No.32602

>>32596

>It's a fictional creature so it can be ==ANYTHING==!!

tbh, that is true to some degree.

The hardest part is finding the balance between real and fictitious, i.e. plausibility.

Also

I'm a sparkledog, in a sparklewooorld...


 No.32605

File: 5f557c40c038b78⋯.jpg (50.23 KB, 550x650, 11:13, MackenzieAlmost.JPG)

>>32549

> I've got no problem with you, or anyone else, calling my character shit. It neither changes me nor bothers me. And no, she's not a brony.

>>32573

> Either way they're still ignoring criticisms made by the very people they're trying to please with their character's design

I'm not trying to please anyone but me. And part of the reason I posted that pic was to see the reactions of horror. S'funny. Especially considering people will assume that (a) I'm a teen and (b) all my characters are probably autistic crap.

> If they aren't trying to impress anyone else, they should keep the character to themselves rather than post something they know is shit and get angry or sad when people tell them as much

Agreed, but I'm not getting angry or sad. Unless someone just assumes I must be.

>>32574

> Why does she have heterochromia/a rainbow/tail/crazy colors/etc.?

Stage persona. Her answer would be, "because I have a good time like that." Offstage, she reverts to a relatively ordinary brown genet.

> But you didn't even need to put Dash on the shirt... ...nobody can realistically make that connection without also assuming the character is somehow a fan of the IP

I did it because I believed she'd find it cute. If someone assumes she's one'a them bronies, it doesn't bother me.

> First, people don't know what your headcanon is

As stated, she was written for a setting that's made for myself and some friends. The art site where she's posted has an explanation of her. People can read it or not, like her or hate her, whatever they do is okay with me.

> Then, you need to follow basic color theory, which means dominant, pure, saturated colors as a color scheme just don't work

I get that, but it isn't as though pictures of her will be all over the place. I usually commission one drawing of a character and that's it. And she's posted on one art site, here, and nowhere else.

> And your answer, yet again, is "just because"

If you had the ability to be any species (in biped form), color, etc. you desired, at will, and you were a rock performer, you might go a bit wild, too. Glowing racing flames? Band's symbol on your shoulder? Devil horns? Really, performers would probably go nuts.

>>32596

> I get the impression that there's too much leniency in creative worlds

I suppose there is... unless said world is created for a total of five people.

Again, half the reason I posted this was to watch everybody call it the worst thing I could have come up with. I wasn't disappointed. Here's an example of one of my more common sorts of characters, for comparison. Most of my many characters *don't* have anything wild about them.


 No.32606

On that note, what is the absolute worst sparklecritter anyone here has seen? Parodies included.


 No.32616

File: 0b11f39acdf1d77⋯.png (1.37 MB, 1200x1200, 1:1, ClipboardImage.png)

>>32596

ontop of the argument over bad creativity, throwing in any sort of brand like MLP in a universe that isnt our own and isnt MLP is just shit-tier creativity. There are ways to make something cute or cheery without slapping something from an IP already designed to be cute. and in writing or designing with artistic liberties you can do expies where it alludes or hints at something we all know, like a cameo but not so fucking empty that it's literally the exact brand marketing in a donutsteal universe.


 No.32617

File: d980329d1430428⋯.jpg (18.44 KB, 178x227, 178:227, 1420830794143.jpg)

>>32605

>Stage persona. Her answer would be, "because I have a good time like that." Offstage, she reverts to a relatively ordinary brown genet.

That is the laziest character design I've ever heard. Basically a fursona within a fursona. You thought it would be clever to "shift the blame" on the character itself, but she doesn't even know why she does that herself (and by that, I mean YOU don't, so nothing has changed). Lolrandumb is what it is. Lolrandumb is shitty character design.

>I did it because I believed she'd find it cute.

Plenty of other cute things to go around.

Want a pony? Put a generic cartoon pony. Not an existing IP. If I have my furry character put on a Metallica shirt to show that he is a metalhead, the only message that conveys is that the author likes Metallica. The character therefore explicitly becomes, for all intents and purposes, the author's alter-ego, and therefore LOSES depth as a character. What I should do is make up a fictional metal band and slap it onto his shirt.

>As stated, she was written for a setting that's made for myself and some friends.

>I get that, but it isn't as though pictures of her will be all over the place. I usually commission one drawing of a character and that's it. And she's posted on one art site, here, and nowhere else.

Not an excuse.

>If you had the ability to be any species (in biped form), color, etc. you desired, at will, and you were a rock performer, you might go a bit wild, too.

Not an argument.

>Glowing racing flames? Band's symbol on your shoulder? Devil horns?

There are reasons for the existence for all of those. They're stereotypical symbols and therefore "free" to use, if they fit the character. Of course, if the character is only made up of stereotypes, the character itself will be a stereotype. And therefore, flatter than you might want it to be.

If you come up with new symbols yourself, you need an explanation. A valid one. Or it's just shit you made up to feel "unique".

You know, Pixar and the like write ENTIRE NOVELS about their characters' backgrounds, even shit that will never make it into the movie.

You don't need to necessarily do that, but you also don't have to completely disregard that just because "I'm not making a Pixar movie".

The more "why does it..." questions you extensively answer about your character, the better it is designed.

On that note, just look at how much shit I can ask myself about that little guy you posted.

>It's a little bear

>Wearing a shirt with Ursa Minor

Ursa Minor == Little Bear. Clever.

>What's his favorite color?

>Is he a space enthusiast?

>What does his room look like?

>Is the starred sky painted on the walls and ceiling?

>Does he own a telescope already?

>Does he have a shelf filled with books about stars and constellations?

>Does he go well in maths and sciences at school?

>Does he go not so well in other subjects because of that?

>Is he an adventurer-type?

>Does he keep in shape?

>Does he dream of becoming an astronaut?

>Or is he a more theoretical nerdy guy?

>Is he fascinated more by the science behind orbiting stars and planets?

>Does he dream of becoming an astrophysicist?

>Or is he more interested in spaceships and engineering?

>Does he dream of becoming an aerospace engineer?

>Why is his name Mackenzie Martin?

>Is it an homage to one or more astrophysicists/astronauts/etc?

There are many, many more questions I missed.

But, you see what I mean now?


 No.32618

>>32617

>All these questions about the character

You know he didnt think any further than "its a cute bear uwu"


 No.32619

>>32618

I'd be willing to bet it was the artist that came up with the "ursa minor" pun.


 No.32623

>>32308

holy shit these are some absolutely hideous sparkledogs, they put wolfydicks neon radiation fur to shame.

>>32619

id take that bet anon and side with you on it


 No.32624

>>32617

I can answer all the questions about said character. And similar ones about my sparklegenet. I have their lives, hobbies, interests, etc. planned out in quite a bit of detail. Without derailing the thread too much:

Yes, she likes stars, she has glow-in-the-dark ones on her bedroom ceiling. Yes on the telescope. She's not serious about it, just thinks stars are... she would use the word "neat." Playing music is her focus. She's learning saxophone, and banjo (because her music teacher plays jazz on banjo and she finds it fascinating). Her favorite musicians (of whom I imagine she'd have posters if they were available) are Dave Koz, Jackiem Joyner, Bela Fleck, and Alison Brown; she likes Joyner's more soul-angled style better, while a friend of hers who also plays sax prefers the straight smooth-jazz Dave Koz type music. Yes, she does a lot of running, climbing, outdoor stuff, so she's fairly strong, as kids her age go. She's average in school, generally, but excels in music, and she has a group of friends she practices with, who'd all like to form a band together someday. I chose "Mackenzie" as a name that seemed to fit the tomboyish girl, but it took a week or so of thinking about surnames before I found one that seemed to fit. Oh, and her favorite colors are black, blue, and pink (but not too much pink). The kind of shirts that have pink outlines on the sleeve ends and collar is enough.

>>32619

Mackenzie's (single) mother is a really humorless person, of the sort who just doesn't really 'get' it or see a purpose. Her daughter does have a sense of humor, but she's developed it in a subtle way. The shirt is a pun the artist suggested, when I was describing her personality. He offered a visual pun that not everybody would get (it IS specifically, by the number of stars, Ursa Minor) and I said it was appropriate for her; canon is, she saw it in a planetarium gift shop on a school field trip and found it amusing. Any other questions about her? I'm open to them.

I'm placing my own bet right now. Someone said earlier in the thread that if you have what are deemed shit-tier characters, you'd best be ready to defend them. Now that I'm doing that, in detail, I bet whatever questions I answer will be declared made-up BS to try to defend stupidity. But I can and will answer any questions asked.


 No.32626

>>32624

Nothing is BS. This is a good character with relatively decent worldbuilding.

It still doesn't excuse that OTHER character.


 No.32627

File: 0b95dee9b31a3a7⋯.png (951.1 KB, 776x1100, 194:275, 4b33eef4e423465dbbf23daea0….png)

>>32596

Nature makes lots of weird genitials. Someone already mentioned a duck's corkscrew dick, for instance.

It's a sex aid. Nice and simple. Keeps foreign material out of the cooch, as well. Seems sensible enough to me.


 No.32629

>>32605

> I've got no problem with you, or anyone else, calling my character shit. It neither changes me nor bothers me. And no, she's not a brony.

Fair enough, if that's your stance. Just don't expect anything in the way of respect, care, or even tolerance.

See the stuff at the end of that reply, incidentally. This is what I mean when I say "see, for instance, right now with your post".

It's what you are doing. You whine about us critiquing your shit, but the reason you whine is you refuse any actual critique.


 No.32630

>>32626

I can answer equally-detailed questions about the genet. Would you like to ask some?

>>32629

I'm really not whining, I'm saying I think I know how this board operates. I don't expect respect, care, or tolerance. I'm posting partly for my own amusement. But if people want to ask questions about my characters, I'm always happy to answer them.


 No.32633

>>32627

Don't pigs have a corkscrew dick, too? My suspicion is that Mick intended that prehensile hood to be scary. It seems as though the entire sergal concept was to create a deeply terrifying critter.


 No.32634

>>32627

if you wanna be autistic about it, and try to use BUT MUH NATURE as an argument. Pigs and ducks and other animals have weird ass genitles because ducks are rapists and evolved anti-rape vag's and then evolved anti-anti-rape dicks. Sergal's have no such history or reason why it's just a prehensile clit, it's a shit handwave to have the tenticle fetish


 No.32637

File: be2ec0807c06e7b⋯.png (790.77 KB, 923x418, 923:418, bannerfinished2_zpsdb5f358….png)

File: cbda39f630303d1⋯.png (3.56 MB, 3240x2690, 324:269, 1397889839977.png)

File: 94739183491c087⋯.jpg (104.41 KB, 1024x589, 1024:589, tumblr_mfbrxx36ZU1rpb34po1….jpg)

>>32605

Since we've got MLP brought up, this is a great example for color theory around bright characters.

I don't know if you noticed, but most of MLP shit isn't exactly horrendously garrish, while still being bright and bubbly

These are relatively good examples of proper color work, in that regard. Rather than full ugly garish trash.

Now, I've only got ones revolving around griffons, because griffons are what I actually found interesting in that lot, but still, these should provide at least a basic example. Even if they aren't actually from the show, they're not bad in most the cases.

Also, stop with the fucking reddit spacing.


 No.32639

>>32637

"Reddit spacing"?


 No.32640

>>32630

Pardon, then. Stating untrue facts about the standards and behavior of the board, as you prefer.


 No.32641

>>32639

It's used to refer to putting spacing between sentences.

Like

This

Here

If you will. This is built on the way Reddit formatting works.

Personally I do not believe it is a marker of reddit, I just think people are shit at formatting.

Makes stuff a pain in the rectum to read. Please don't do it.


 No.32642

>>32639

>" "

>doesnt know what reddit spacing is

>doesnt greentext right

hello reddit


 No.32643

File: b1de58468819d9b⋯.jpg (140.29 KB, 604x865, 604:865, 92391_Rain_Silves_Sergal_T….jpg)

>>32634

No history that you know of, yes.

That's my issue.

You've got the "WE DON'T HAVE THIS IN NATURE, IT DOESN'T EVOLVE THAT WAY" without knowing how the Sergals evolved.

There's plenty of solid reason to have a clitoral hood. It could be as simple as, what I had said, a way to keep dirt out of one's cooch.

>>32633

Quite possible. Though, my issue is more that the idea of "well if it doesn't have a backstory clearly explaining exactly why it evolved this way it is sparkle dog shit".

Especially when it is entirely within the realm of possibility. The clitoral hood isn't exactly super complex or that dramatic, after all. Certainly not as suggested earlier, 'dick nipples'.


 No.32644

>>32641

I'll certainly try not to.


 No.32645

>>32643

>muh dirty cooch

Asspull attempt: fail.

Animals already have a defense for this, its called fluids you retard.


 No.32647

File: c2ea12b75d26cfa⋯.png (448.35 KB, 400x1200, 1:3, 36569f1be72ad595df5e798cf2….png)

>>32645

And if fluids are quite valuable? Besides that, why not just have a sealable hole? Just having a potential option of wasted fluids doesn't inherently make having a means to keep dirt out non-viable.

Maybe it's for when you've got an increasingly dry climate, or maybe sergal cooches are just more sensitive.

Might as well be saying an AR doesn't need a dust cover, because as long as you keep it oiled, dirt won't matter.


 No.32648

Incidentally, where does one find good sergal art?

I've become increasingly interested in them as a result of this thread.

But unfortunately, places like e621 are some 80-90% sparkleshit.


 No.32650

>>32624

Now, other than the fact that it looks nothing like a "she" and neither looks like a tomboy unless someone (you) tells you that, you also failed on conveying that:

>playing music is her focus.

Literally nothing about that character suggests it even knows how to play an instrument.

No, description only doesn't work, sorry.

Because then I can pick literally anything and have it be anything, with the excuse that one has to read its autobiography to even begin to guess what the fuck the character actually does.

Names can do a lot, you could've borrowed the name of some famous jazz musician. Incidentally, Armstrong suits perfectly (Louis for the jazz, Neil for the cosmos, Arm-strong because she's strong for her age). Now, unless you have some other picture that makes it clear that she's a jazz enthusiast who plays sax (like that other one of yours), then the one you posted is just a glorified reference sheet.

>b-but, that's the point! I know her interests because I just roleplay with her

Then don't slap that pic in our faces pretending that suffices to describe her and assume we're just ignorant about character design because we can't guess her every trait from a reference sheet.

Also, I find it hard to believe someone who thinks stars are just "neat" would have a telescope. She wouldn't even know how to operate it.

The more stuff you put in "for the hell of it", the weaker and, paradoxically, more generic your character gets.

Again, a mashup of things you find "neat", but don't blend together consistently. Like a box full of puzzle pieces coming from different puzzles. You can put some together, but you can't quite get the whole picture.


 No.32651

>>32650

Eyelashes were the only thing to vaguely female. It's got the same body as that shitty kobold what looks more or less like straight up pedo bait.

Not much a fan myself.


 No.32652

File: 139906662d2b55a⋯.jpg (57.51 KB, 300x334, 150:167, 139906662d2b55ab538c85a7b9….jpg)

>>32647

no one gives a fuck about your headcanon you pull out of your ass xenofaggot. this is a sparkledog thread, not another chance to shill your shit-fetish


 No.32653

>>32643

A clitoral hood is fine. A flap of tissue that covers the vagina (both for keeping it clean and so the female can choose her reproductive partner by denying access to it) is fine. None of that justifies it being LONG and PREHENSILE. That's the part I have a problem with.

It's entirely possible to justify it; in fact, if I tried I could come up with an explanation, myself. I'm just saying that Mick made no attempt to do so. You're just supposed to accept it without any reason for it, just like some of them being desert critters with long-ass fluffy fur, and no way of heat radiation (like big fennec ears). There is no justification for sergals being the way they are; they just ARE.


 No.32655

>>32652

You do realize why I bring it up, right?

Sergals were brought in to this thread as an example of "sparkledogs".

>>32653

From what I have seen, they don't appear to be very long. As far as prehensile, they're not going to be having a bone, so I see no issue with this any more than one would have issue with a tongue.

Anyway, I'm afraid I've not done much research in to the lot, to say whether or not the author justified it. Though, I do believe that's not really the point.

As you said, I believe, Sauska being a marry sue in a universe that allows and justifies him being a marry sue doesn't change that he is a marry sue. This, I believe, is the case with sparkledogs like >>32535 , even were they 'justified' by the author.

Sparkledog is not something of an issue of story, as much as of the design of the character.

All this said, now, I do not think lack of author justification makes something a sparkledog either. Does it make it poorly writ? Maybe. Depends on what the story focuses on. But I don't think it makes it a sparkledog.


 No.32657

File: d171c222dbed78a⋯.png (65.63 KB, 338x271, 338:271, d171c222dbed78a9fd44be8376….png)

.>>32655

>Sergals were brought in to this thread as an example of "sparkledogs"

>Implying they're not

>Muh dick

They are, in terms of anatomy a fucking sparkledog. Maybe not in colors or that retarded marysue shapeshifter shit of >>32535

But Sergals are the ones that have deeper world building lore and mythology than people typically dont even know about right? Yet NOWHERE in the lore theres been justification of their shitty prehensile sex organs, thats just your own autism trying to desperately cling onto it because youre a xenofag whos in denial youre a furry and youre offended that your shitty precious xeno is a sexual-sparkledog.


 No.32658

>>32657

What makes them 'sparkledog' in terms of anatomy?

Just the clitoral hood?

It's just such a minor little thing to complain about, especially when in nature, there is far, far worse.

If we were talking about dick nipples, maybe you'd have a case, but this is something rather simple and largely unobtrusive. I just don't see the logic.

>"-M-MUH XENOPHILIA, U-U'R JUST A FURRY IN DENIAL"

Doesn't change anything, mate.

While I do vastly prefer creatures what are not the standard human frame with some animal bits tacked on, that doesn't change much of anything in this argument here.

Unless it is your stance that anything not the standard human frame with no deviation whatsoever is "sparkledog".


 No.32659

File: 63c64456b0fddfd⋯.jpg (68.74 KB, 1000x875, 8:7, 70b615289a9b62f0d5b4bd5b5b….jpg)

>>32658

>What makes them a sparkledog in terms of anatomy

It's literally the exact same shit as calling something a hybrid crossing species traits that are otherwise impossible to breed with in reality. Like already been discussed without even the fucktarded genitles, Sergals are just a shark-like head slapped ontop of a canine body.

The entire sch-peel around sparkledogs is that the artist cant decide between 1 thing or another species/color/traits so they just create a mashup of autism.

This pic isnt a sergal but it's only a stones throw from one. and it's a sparkledog species. Sergals arent any less guilty of being a sparkledog species because the author decides to make it a fictional race.


 No.32661

>>32648

Check

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/mick39

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/raesheris/

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/solidgrain.lab

you can also find a few pics with them with

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/nataliedecorsair/

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/lingrimm

>>32643

>>32653

>>32657

Holy shit has anyone in this thread even bothered to look at the Sergal wiki?

''The female Sergal possesses a unique prehensile tentacle structure that is normally stowed inside the vagina. This "clitoral hood" is extended during mating to grasp the male's penis and maintain erection until ejeculation. This is an adaptation to ensure successful breeding during difficult survival conditions where males become timid and avoid mating.

The clitoral hood also serves as a cover to protect the vagina, allowing the female control over mating and potentially preventing rape.''

Is it a fetish to get your dick grabbed by tentacle? Maybe. Should one sperg out and shit on a species design because about this specific feature? No, unless you're very petty.


 No.32662

>>32659

And as I've already mentioned, they really aren't. 'Least not by any standard I've seen for anthromorphic sharks or canines.

Regardless, I don't see how that matters. They do not look like either a shark or a canine. Even assuming they were based on the two, this alien species what is entirely separate from sharks or canines in a fictional setting is not a "combination" thereof that was "bred". They are, from what I understand, entirely their own species, of no relation to sharks or canines. They are not bred by canines fucking sharks, or sharks fucking canines.

No, that is not the reason of the "sch-peel". The reason is that the artist jams together things that do not work together. That ends up making the lot look ugly. That makes it look overly complex and shitty.

I do not see it in this case. We do not have fur of a canine clashing with a smooth-skinned shark mouth. We do not have gills strapped to a land mammal. We do not have shark fins jutting out at random. We do not have a dog penis on a shark.

This does not appear to be a "mashup" of anything.

>"Here is something completely unrelated to the creature we're discussing that I am going to use to prove my point"

Fuck off, faggot.


 No.32664

>>32650

>No, description only doesn't work, sorry

So if I have a picture drawn of a character, it must tell the viewer all about their personality, their interests, their hobbies, their talents, in that one picture. Got it.

>Louis for the jazz, Neil for the cosmos, Arm-strong because she's strong for her age

That seems really silly, to me.

>She wouldn't even know how to operate it

Lots of kids have these. I did when I was little. It's not like one of those computerized star finders. Mine cost about twenty bucks at Sears.

https://d39qw52yhr4bcj.cloudfront.net/catalog/product/cache/9/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/e/5/e5305-omega-refractor-kidcomp_1.jpg

>The more stuff you put in "for the hell of it", the weaker and, paradoxically, more generic your character gets

I put in nothing "for the hell of it."

>>32651

She's a kid. What do you expect, big hips and C-cups? Lingerie?

>>32658

I think what's being considered to put them in that category is what seems to be no reason for the hood beyond making the species 'different' in an unusual way.

>>32659

Have you seen fictional races you think were well-done? How about, say, Eugene Arenhaus' Focco?


 No.32665

>>32661

Kek, so it was justified by the artist anyway. That guy's complains are entirely worthless.

Didn't even know there was a sergal wiki. Should've looked these things up, I guess


 No.32666

>>32664

Put bluntly, I expect people not to design pedobait characters to roleplay as.


 No.32667

File: af318bb3d3e42b8⋯.png (465.12 KB, 800x800, 1:1, af318bb3d3e42b8b531576cd2d….png)

>>32662

>muh dick

Youre a blind retard and everyone in the community has always refered to them as furry-sharks since their inception.


 No.32668

>>32667

Then people in the "community" are fucking retarded blind morons, mate.

You've also notably not given any other reason or counter to anything else in that post. It would seem your only defense at this point is a low-quality appeal to authority, in this case the "community".

Kill yourself.


 No.32670

>>32666

LOL, thinking she was designed as pedobait. Well, she's a cub, of COURSE she was, that's the only point, amirite?


 No.32671

File: 1176a6d3430f6ca⋯.png (167.71 KB, 1671x765, 557:255, sparkledog race.PNG)

>>32668

Guess the wiki is wrong too huh, the one you just touted as should having to check it and its one of the first things it says on the page.

end your life xenoshitter.


 No.32672

>>32659

Next you're gonna tell us that the Wookies are sparkledogs because they're just humans mixed with gorillas and dogs and that is not possible in "muh reality".

>>32665

>Didn't even know there was a sergal wiki. Should've looked these things up, I guess

I'm going to fuck you up you goddamn fool but yeah check it

http://goldring.wikia.com/wiki/Vilous_Wiki_Home

>>32667

>most furries say it's so, so it must be so!

Hmmmm how ironic.

>>32671

>Wikifur

Are you pretending or you actually like this?


 No.32673

The sergal argument is pretty entertaining.


 No.32674

File: f3bb258d039b92d⋯.png (111.87 KB, 883x522, 883:522, muh wiki .PNG)

>>32672

>Muh wiki

>Its not official so it doesnt count REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Really just making yourself out to be the biggest dumbass possible huh


 No.32675

File: 3cdbd823261926f⋯.jpg (28.93 KB, 518x416, 259:208, 5-SharkHeadTerm5.jpg)

File: 5e5271c61178dba⋯.jpg (56.62 KB, 1786x584, 893:292, shark_-_quiz_-_caudal_fin1….jpg)

File: c817cf463345623⋯.jpg (34.09 KB, 800x566, 400:283, 35bc88a87910e26308e9bd1cea….jpg)

File: c0453de872cc196⋯.jpg (42.77 KB, 598x350, 299:175, the_official_reference_she….jpg)

File: e9ee1f529587fc8⋯.jpg (77.9 KB, 900x546, 150:91, sergal_scull_tutorial_by_h….jpg)

>>32671

Yes, the wiki is wrong. There's nothing shark-like about them, except to people with shit retard eyes.

You've still not countered the rest of the points I've made.


 No.32676

>>32674

>reminiscent

Search Results

rem·i·nis·cent

ˌreməˈnis(ə)nt/

adjective

adjective: reminiscent

tending to remind one of something.

"the sights were reminiscent of my childhood"

suggesting something by resemblance.

"her suit was vaguely reminiscent of military dress"

synonyms: similar to, comparable with, evocative of, suggestive of, redolent of

"the smell of fresh apple pies was reminiscent of the aromas from Gramma's kitchen in Middlefield"

(of a person or their manner) absorbed in or suggesting absorption in memories.

"her expression was wistful and reminiscent"


 No.32677

File: 3359a72ab192a49⋯.png (441.52 KB, 1155x990, 7:6, 3359a72ab192a496d42efe6d92….png)

>>32675

>the official wiki is wrong


 No.32678

>>32677

The official wiki shown >>32674 states "reminiscent", which, this might surprise you here, doesn't mean "Literally just a shark head jammed on to a canine"

Faggot

>Undermeme

Well this explains your autism at least


 No.32679

File: 8d6c1463cab441a⋯.jpg (83.4 KB, 1141x775, 1141:775, 8d6c1463cab441a773200cb433….jpg)

>>32676

>>32675

>>32678

>>32676

DAMAGE

A

M

A

G

E

CONTROL

O

N

T

R

O

L


 No.32680

>>32661

To be pedantic, I was using the prehensile clitoris more as a symbol of everything wrong with the sergal design, rather than just the only thing. I still see no way how they'd manage to not be dead living in deserts or any hot climate, or why they have such tiny braincases.

>This "clitoral hood" is extended during mating to grasp the male's penis and maintain erection until ejeculation. This is an adaptation to ensure successful breeding during difficult survival conditions where males become timid and avoid mating

Still reeks of "intelligent design" rather than anything that would have evolved naturally, but at least it's something. Credit where credit is due, I guess. I can't expect many people to understand how evolution works when so many of them think it doesn't even EXIST.

Although it really only leads from a tentacle pussy fetish to a dominant woman fetish, so it's STILL fetish-bait existing for its own sake.

>>32672

>Wookies are sparkledogs

Nah, but pretty much all Star Wars races are total shit, as they, too, exist the way they are for no reason that "just because". The depiction of the Wookiee planet in Episode III shows it's a goddamn SWAMP, that's so much water that the droid army specifically brought amphibious craft to assault it. Why the HELL would an extremely furry creature evolve in a swamp? It's insane.


 No.32681

File: 43f04f637ec9120⋯.png (174.19 KB, 499x518, 499:518, anons discover there is a ….png)

>>32673

All you need is some autists and some cheeseheads to get the salt flow.

SALT MUST FLOW

>>32674

Are you actually gonna make a case or you're just gonna sperg out like the NOCUCKPLZ fag up there?

>>32679

Haha ok I guess you're also done showing that you have no argument.


 No.32682

>>32679

>No argument

No surprise, given you completely ignored everything else in >>32662

Still; Disappointing. I expected more.


 No.32683

File: 523df2d20a89f86⋯.png (154.43 KB, 449x283, 449:283, 523df2d20a89f86c694ef2548f….png)

>>32681

>>32682

>if i say you have no argument i wont have to face the facts

>oh no an image macro of an IP i dont like, time to ad hominem to deflect that I have no arguments


 No.32684

>>32680

As mentioned prior, brain case size does not equate to effective intelligence.

See birds like crows, one of the smartest animals on the planet.

>>32683

>"I'll just post reaction pictures and claim damage control! That'll show those dirty sergal-lovers!"


 No.32685

>>32535

>In my opinion, while anyone can laugh at design features they think look stupid, the following are what pushes a character into "deserves mockery" territory:

Are you trying to pretend that character of yours doesn't fall into "deserves mockery" territory?


 No.32687

>>32680

> I still see no way how they'd manage to not be dead living in deserts or any hot climate

The difference in temperature between the north and south of their planet is not too great and desert sergals are smaller with shorter fur.

>or why they have such tiny braincases.

Holy fuck dude. It was already addressed up there.

>Still reeks of "intelligent design" rather than anything that would have evolved naturally, but at least it's something

>intelligent design

Ooooooh boy you have no idea what you're up to. The world of Vilous is not what meets the eye.

>Star Wars is shit

>Because muh 100% accurate science on a fantasy world

Why is it always this shit? Fucking hell it gets exhausting. Also Star Wars has worse flaws than their science.


 No.32688

>>32685

Not so much. Here, every character falls into that category. Too generic or too specific. I posted my characters knowing they'd get mocked, and ready to enjoy watching it happen. If you can't take mocking yourself, your skin's too thin.


 No.32689

File: 3f71533cb486b19⋯.png (420.83 KB, 787x945, 787:945, but muh dick .PNG)

>>32684

You're a tool and you havent provided anything close to an argument except your own idiotic headcanon. Your argument has been utterly destroyed but it was nothing more than paper-thin fetishism for a shit fetish anyways.

:^)

I leave you with your shitty sparkledog species, clearly defined as a sparkledog species right on the official page but you're so autistic you grasp at straws like seeking out a dictionary definition of a word so you dont have to face reality.


 No.32690

File: 88589637600c98e⋯.png (613.07 KB, 1226x1159, 1226:1159, autism furry.png)

>Inb4 its inspired !!!!


 No.32691

>>32684

Stop responding to the retard


 No.32692

>>32689

Are there any fictional fandom species which aren't shit?


 No.32693

>>32689

>"If I keep saying it, it will be true, even though I've not challenged any of his points!"

:^)

>>32691

No, it's fun.


 No.32694

>>32688

>Here, every character falls into that category. Too generic or too specific.

Not true, it's just rare to see a good one since thinking up quality characters isn't as easy as many people imagine.

I've seen one or two get posted in the fursona threads back before /furry/ went under, even more if you're only looking at the visual or backstory side of things alone.

Good OCs exist, even here, but they're rare enough that it can feel like everyone is just bashing on everything for no reason with all the differing opinions flying around on exactly why people don't like them.


 No.32696

>>32693

Nah you better let him be dude, you proved your point and he abandoned it and went straight to ad hominem mode. He has nothing left but to screech, don't let him drag you.


 No.32697

>>32694

>it can feel like everyone is just bashing on everything for no reason with all the differing opinions flying around on exactly why people don't like them

Most of the opinions tend to amount to, "because I think it's shit, it IS shit." But I did post them knowing that, and execting them to get torn apart, and it's fun to watch people do that. I have other OCs I'm sure would get the same treatment.


 No.32700

>>32687

>Ooooooh boy you have no idea what you're up to. The world of Vilous is not what meets the eye

Well, if it really WAS intelligent design, then there is no need for an argument. That just goes back to "a wizard did it!", which is bad for a completely different reason.

>>32692

Probably not. Like asking if there are any fictional fandom languages that are not shit. Hardly anyone has the expertise necessary to construct such a thing properly in the first place, and would never bother because this is a low-effort fandom in a low-effort world. Just look at the people fawning over the even-worse-than-Twilight grammar in the "I'm too good for everyone else's writethread" thread. Fucking morons who don't know any better, because their reading experience barely extends past Twitter and tumblr blogs. Feed a man nothing but shit, and he'll eventually learn to like it.


 No.32701

>>32700

Are there non-fandom fictional species, or languages, which aren't shit?


 No.32702

>>32700

>Discarding entire genres of story telling like fantasy, cosmic horror and weird fiction because it doesn't fit my autistic need for a scientific explanation of everything.

How do you enjoy anything? How the fuck are you even interested in the furry fandom?


 No.32703

>>32697

>Most of the opinions tend to amount to, "because I think it's shit, it IS shit."

I must've missed them then.


 No.32706

>>32697

More like most people's opinions are "It's shit because {reasons} [read as: It's shit]".


 No.32707

File: 69a20ca1129fe8e⋯.jpg (171.82 KB, 1300x800, 13:8, SierraFinished.jpg)

>>32703

I'm exaggerating, of course. They did make some solid points. Were I to create works intended for a wider audience, I'd be using certain characters and not using others.

Here's another of my characters. I've posted this here elsewhere. I'm so happy with this one that it's on my wall in a frame. I should add that I have other (G-rated) furry art up in a few places.

This is Sierra Winchester the Iberian lynx. She plays adventurer & pilot "Katie K," the lead character of a radio play serial set in the year 1934, at a station which runs 1930s-style content. On the left, explorer Katie holds an Inca artifact (actually a prop donated to the station by a fan). On the right, Sierra at her usual broadcast spot, at station KTK's Barton pipe organ.


 No.32708

>>32701

For languages, anything that's actually a complete language other than just "I threw together some alien-sounding words". Anything Tolkien, of course, and Klingon (though only sorta). Despite the plot being Pocahontas run through a garbage disposal, the language and worldbuilding of Avatar is complete and rather excellent, should you look past the contrived spiritual element. Mass Effect aliens are okay, particularly the ones used LEAST, like Quarians, Elcor, and Hanar sorta. Everything to do with Quarians, in fact, is richer and more interesting than the entire rest of the franchise combined. I always thought it would be neat if they explored a parallel to the Amish tradition of Rumspringa, in that it's only the stated goal for young Quarian to leave their home and explore the galaxy for a contribution they can bring back. The real purpose is to scare the living shit out of them, at how brutal and corrupt life is "outside", so they return to the Fleet and never think of leaving it again.

>>32702

Look, sergals are shit. If you want to dismiss every reason I've given and call it merely my opinion, whatever; then I'll just say whoever likes them is similarly just expressing an opinion.

That doesn't mean I don't enjoy things that ARE NOT FUCKING SERGALS. I do. I enjoy them thoroughly so long as they are put together with skill and competence. My interest in the fandom, however, is more about exploring anthros, and applying that to my own creations. Other than pornography, my consumption of fandom-created media is limited. Most of it is shit, after all.


 No.32709

>>32708

Yeah, s I understand it (as a non-Tolkein-fan) he really created entire languages, properly. I'll admit I know nothing about Mass Effect, so I can just trust your assessment.


 No.32716

File: bbd6499e929772b⋯.png (113.3 KB, 587x467, 587:467, _ Sergal origin.png)


 No.32717

>>32708

>Sergal are objectively shit because of "scientific" reasons

Your scientific reasons fall short because you're misinformed or you're just plain ignorant. On top of that you're applying them to things that they cannot be applied to.

>you can call it an opinion though, I'll do the same

You can dislike or like Sergals I normally wouldn't give a shit because normally people don't sperg out about things they don't care for. Going through texts claiming they're objectively bad because they don't fit your limited worldview and knowledge only shows you're a fucking idiot.

>My interest in the fandom, however, is more about exploring anthros, and applying that to my own creations.

I'll bite cause I'm curious of the creativity of such a square individual. What have you created? What is this furry media that you consume that is oh so much more sophisticated and scientifically accurate?


 No.32728

File: 2b3be9f533f005b⋯.gif (502.15 KB, 400x226, 200:113, applause.gif)


 No.32730

>>32717

>What have you created?

Check out the /lit/ thread. If it has multiple chapters and is shoved into pastebin, I probably wrote it.

Once you extract your foot out of your mouth, please feel free to share what YOU have created.


 No.32764

>>32730

>expecting me to go through hundreds of anon posts looking for pastebin links on a /lit/ thread

What's the matter? Are you too embarrassed to link the specific posts or the pastebins yourself? Aren't you proud of your work?

>feel free to share what YOU have created.

>implying it was an appeal to accomplishment

I said I was curious not that you were not capable. I mean you seem to have some sense of world building even if it's as rich as a middle-school science book.


 No.32774

>>32764

Sounds like you're the one too lazy to bother looking. I guess it's true what they say: you can lead a retard to water, but you can't make him drink.

Breeding Program (unfinished)

How to train your dragon, except loving and very lewd. Tags: gay, human, feral, spicy-hot sex and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/YawaNeDJ

https://pastebin.com/1v5u5q5Q

https://pastebin.com/gVvv2EaC

https://pastebin.com/YjAMuAAM

When the Lights Go Down (basically finished)

Two guys make a baby, and then the world ends. Tags: gay, science jargon, excessively long, sex and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/pH9QA6z6

https://pastebin.com/rvUPpFr3

https://pastebin.com/Q2xqv1VT

https://pastebin.com/Ug0N3eGn

https://pastebin.com/zr2g5F5R

Pokemon Confessions: Sylveon

Please understand that love goes both ways. Tags: gay, human, feral, sex and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/xyGGTzVR

Predator Type

Beware the ones who walk alone. Tags: gay, cub, plot-twist, rape and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/VskHrW5n

https://pastebin.com/iKjqGgkC

Knotted Confessions

A long-winded vicarious explanation as to why this is my favorite fetish. Tags: gay, cub (and not cub), sex and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/9jxKPwgY

Turned On, Tuned In, Dropped Out (never going to finish this, mostly because I like the conlang I developed for it so much, that I'd rather use it for something else)

What an average anon would do with a furry cub girl. Tags: straight (surprise!), human, cub, masturbation and stuff.

https://pastebin.com/XXbZjqvn

There would be more, but a free pastebin account only allows a limited number of private uploads, and I tend to delete old things to put in new things.


 No.32782

>>32774

>It's all gay but one

>That one is pedophilia

Every fucking time.


 No.32784

>>32782

>It's all gay

Where do you think you are?


 No.32786

File: b93392e2ceb6fc1⋯.jpg (41.44 KB, 640x480, 4:3, 1425670816933.jpg)

>>32784

I know. This is a problem with the entirety of furshit.

Most everything's gay. The stuff that isn't gay follows some horrifying fetishes.

It's part of why I like to stick with more /tg/-tier stuff. Usually straight, most the time vanilla, and always a lot more emphasis on love.


 No.32787

>>32774

>it's all gay smut and pokemon

Holy shit I don't know why I thought it would be something different or good. I guess you peaked my interest when you mentioned Tolkien but Jesus you crushed that tiny bit of hope so fast.

Still, I'm gonna give you a chance and read the one about the gays and the baby since it seems to be the one you put some effort in, but judging by the premises of your works so far you have absolutely no grounds to criticize anything.


 No.32806

>>32787

>peaked my

it's piqued you illiterate fucking shithead


 No.32816

>>32774

Bondage Gay Website

ITS ALL MALE


 No.32826

>>32592

probably another 14 year old that banifag stalks


 No.32837

>>32806

Unless you mean 'maximized my interest'.

As in, brought it to the peak.

Piqued is for homosexuals.


 No.32838

>complex, anthro, white fursonas

>white fursonas

>white

What did he mean by this?


 No.32839

>>32838

>What did he mean by this?

Do you really want a nigger fursona?


 No.32842

>>32786

To be honest, all of the actual novels I write are (by necessity) 99% straight-pairings only, do not have graphic depictions of sex (I'm no Stephen King), and of course only concern humans. Writing short stories here that have furries and faggots and fetishes is my method of embracing that other side of me, without allowing it to corrupt my professional work.

But if it's love you want, that's what I typically write. Romance is almost always placed at a much higher priority than sex in my stories. If anyone's fucking, it's generally because they're deeply in love, and it's been established logically over time.

>>32787

Tags are warnings, not a summary of content by any means. I didn't want anyone to read it if they're highly offended by gay sex or cub or whatever, but it's by no means the largest or most important component of the story. Think of it like a movie rating: it'll have to say "PG-13: language and violence" even if it's only a single scene of violence and cursing, in a movie that is otherwise completely child-friendly. The Lord of The Rings movies has warnings for violence and drug use, but you'd be pretty remiss to think they were banal slasher movies where people snort coke in every scene.

Really, I just hate summaries that are anything but extremely vague. They just spoil parts of the story, like movie trailers. It's better if you find out things naturally through the plot progression.

Anyway, absolutely nothing I write is porn-without-plot. Not even that silly Pokemon one. But by the same token, almost nothing I write has ZERO sex in it; that would just be inhuman.


 No.32844

>>32774

>Sounds like you're the one too lazy to bother looking

I'm not the guy who asked, but I've tried looking at your pastebin profile and I only one I see there is Knotted Confessions.

Perhaps you have a list with all your stuff somewhere?


 No.32917

>>32844

That one I fucked up and set it to public and couldn't be bothered to correct (and it doesn't contribute to the limit). The rest are private, so you need the links the view them. Everything I have on pastebin that relates to furries is already listed here.

I might make an inkbunny or sofurry account sometime, but I'm not sure if you have to also have an account to see mature-rated stuff. I would hate for people who don't want to make an account to not be able to read this stuff.


 No.32923

>>32839

I was more referring to the fact that I've never immediately referenced fursonas to white or black people. The only time consciousness of human race comes into play is if I'm looking at some kemono design.


 No.32925

>>32837

>but Jesus you crushed that tiny bit of hope so fast.

you definitely did not mean "maximized my interest".

>damage controlling this hard because you're illiterate

kek, whatever makes you sleep at night, m8.


 No.32945

>>32925

I wasn't even that guy, you gook fucker.


 No.32979

>>32925

If i say it was autcorrect will you get more mad? I know you're rights'

>>32917

Oh btw i reached the third chapter and man what a grind. It's like someone took the Day After Tomorrow, Interstellar, that movie with Adrien Brody fucking the bald rat butterfly hybrid, an FA gay furry story and managed to make it tedious and dull to read even the sex scenes. Also there's random ass fucking singing

Irregardless to say for someone that complains about sergals and their story this thing you wrote lacks more background and emotion than Ryan Gosling's Driver.

Anyway maybe all the answers are at the last sentence of the last chapter or maybe I'm just too bored out of my fucking skull to understand how a zero point battery made out of the blood of millions of blue japanese spirits that transcends dimensions fits in with a pocket multi dimensional fetus brain named fucking Xael that was created out of this failed out of college, messianic complex fox and this raccoon's cum and who's dicks hurts each other's asses but they gotta preserve the furkind of Earth for billions of years because a star happened and furry Earth is now going to get sucked off by still jovian Jupiter and there's also an asexual hacker girl that loves the fox but dies and holy luddite poor trigger discipline mammalian stolen valor terrorists hybrids god fucking dammit WHY


 No.32996

>>32521

>Rain's kingdom collapsed after a few years.

Rain was a terrible politician even by Sergal standards.


 No.33013

File: 571cb3e2003dde3⋯.jpg (216.34 KB, 625x750, 5:6, e4834cf451429663205261f1a9….jpg)

Why do sharks get the worst sparkledog treatment?


 No.33014

>>33013

Because sharks are currently in vogue as memesonas among newfag furries, simple as that.


 No.33019

>>32979

>managed to make it tedious and dull to read even the sex scenes

It sounds like all you really wanted was the sex scenes tbh.


 No.33242

>>32996

>"Great General Rain what should we do about the Reono troops in-"

>"I NEED YOU TO BRING ME 10 MORE FLASHLIGHTS! RIGHT NOW!"

>"But I-"

>"NO! DO IT!"

>>33019

The story is fucking terrible so the only thing this amalgamation of letters says it has are the sex scenes and they are also fucking terrible, vapid, with no buildup and it doesn't do dick for the story or characters. There is no purpose for them.

It sounds like all the author really wanted was the sex scenes to be there to grab the attention of furries and distract them because everything else is uninteresting as fuck and even then he failed at that.

How the hell does this guy write romance or anything "professionally"?


 No.33254

>>32774

I read "Knotted Confessions." The writing is a bit clunky at times, but among stories where the writer can spell and knows grammar, it isn't by far the worst I've read.

My issues with it: (a) There's no reason for the supernatural character, and (b) It falls into an archetype I see constantly in fandom fiction and fanfic: "We're made for each other, but in the end, we can't be together." In this case, the common variant where the picture of perfection is played to the Nth degree...and then "we can't be together." Usually, these either end with an abrupt finish (like this), or spend pages or even chapters turning the knife and reminding the characters that they're being forced apart. Angst, or implied angst, is THE preferred ending, it seems, for fics.


 No.33303

>>33242

You talk like someone who wouldn't know "professional" if it slapped you in the face like a giant dildo. Your own writing is composed with all the care and experience of a toddler's fingerpainting.

>>33254

>"We're made for each other, but in the end, we can't be together."

It wasn't meant to be a perfect relationship, or even an ideal relationship. The sex was good, but the kid was just playing at "fixing people", and the adult desperate and reaching for any real affection. It was unsustainable in the first place, so of course it had to end. That doesn't mean it ended with "angst"; nothing suggested either of them turned out unhappy, and in fact both had their situation improved.


 No.33320

File: 3b912bf7e4f56d3⋯.jpg (26.97 KB, 625x350, 25:14, FursonaTells.jpg)

>>32240

Happened to record Stigmata's "Fursonas: Types and Stereotypes" panel at BLFC. It's 2 hours long and about half a gig if anyone's interested. (not sure where to upload a file that size)


 No.33325

>>33320

just upload it to mega nigger


 No.33338


 No.33339

>>33013

Mayhem isn't even sparkledog to me. That's just basic rave stuff, and there's an ordinary shark underneath it all. She doesn't have a glowing tongue or neon skin patterns or something.


 No.33341

File: d1333ed2a814094⋯.png (40.66 KB, 983x495, 983:495, reddit spacing.png)

>>32641

Nah, mate.


 No.33357

>>33303

>You talk like someone who wouldn't know "professional" if it slapped you in the face like a giant dildo.

I've read from Neruda's sonnets about love and hope to Lovecraft's stories of cosmic nihilism and despair. From the harsh dunes of the planet Arrakis to the magical streets of Macondo. I can tell from 1982 Stephen King to post-1997 Stephen King.

I mock your writing in the most simplistic way possible because so far you haven't proved to be worthy of serious discussion. You profess to be good and everyone else shit when you're just slightly above the average furry smut writer (which is not a huge accomplishment). Only thing you've showed so far is that you think focusing autistically on scientific accuracy (whenever it's convenient), romantic "drama" and fanfic tier sex somehow translates into a good or readable story.

You wouldn't know good writing if a Rat-Thing jumped up and tore your stupid asshole.


 No.33367

>>33341

I'm almost certain it's the double-enter spacing due to the way that Reddit's formatting works.

A single enter on reddit does not result in the typical space that we see here, or on other, standard formatting systems.

Instead of starting a new line directly below, it continues on the same line it was on previously

In order to make a new line on a new layer, as is necessary for ease of writing as well as reading, on Reddit, it is required to press the enter key twice.

Resulting in what is commonly referred to as "reddit spacing".

That guy sounds like some dicksucking faggot who thinks he's smart.


 No.33369

>>33367

I don't know if he's the guy who originally forced this dumb meme, but he has a point. I have no idea what "Reddit spacing" is because I don't go to Reddit. Placing a clear break between paragraphs for readability's sake is nothing new to imageboards, not when I was a wee anon on /b/ eleven years ago and not now.


 No.33372

>>33369

I know, but I'm fairly certain the guy is mistaken on the origin of the meme.

Regardless, I've explained that lot in my post >>32641

It isn't about being from reddit, or having a reddit habbit that makes it bad. It's bad because you're running incredibly shoddy formatting.

Full breaks should be for separate, new points. Not every fucking line. See >>32605 for a good example of absolutely fucking trash double-spacing, and posts like >>32596 for perfectly acceptable cases.


 No.33380

>>33339

Yeah Mayhem is only as much of a sparkledog as every other furry with colored hair. She might have had neon parts but pre-dated that shit-trend.


 No.33445

>>32838

I meant blank fursonas with basic colors. Expressionless, dull, the same crap over and over.

>>32826

Taeshi (Veronica Vera) is 20 something you moron. She made Bittersweet Candy Bowl a while ago.

>>32592

Bittersweet Candy Bowl, Veronica Vera/Taeshi

>>32528

I see your point. That's actually a really good argument.

>>32528


 No.33532

>>33357

Lovecraft is overrated, and everything King has ever written has been essentially the same. Dreamcatcher was just IT except half the length and with significantly less prepubescent sex.

Also, just because you've read it doesn't mean you understood. You still compose your sentences like a child.

Whatever. I don't care. You read one thing I wrote (even though you clearly didn't like the subject matter) for literally no reason than to bash on it. That's some seriously advanced shitposting.


 No.33544

>>33532

>Lovecraft is overrated, and everything King has ever written has been essentially the same.

>trying to downplay other authors because you don't know shit about good storytelling.

Overrated doesn't mean bad and yeah granted that King has fucked up beyond salvation but he used to be good.

>Also, just because you've read it doesn't mean you understood. You still compose your sentences like a child.

>Implying

I know shit writing when I look at it and again you are clearly not worth the effort.

>You read one thing I wrote

Unlike you I actually took the time to read several of your stories (and whatever small background they had). You just went "well ackchually sergals vaginas brains science reeeee" before even reading anything.

>(even though you clearly didn't like the subject matter)

In case you didn't noticed my jam is science fiction and furries. You had an interesting idea about how the Earth was going to end but you fucked up on everything else.

>for literally no reason than to bash on it.

Nope. I went in trying to understand why you were so hell bent on scientific accuracy over fucking furries and how you were not shit compared to everyone else. Sure I didn't had high hopes but I wasn't expecting such an hypocritical shit fest.

Do you really think your writing is good or do you actually have your head so far up your own asshole that you can't tell? Answer me this and I leave you alone to your scientific furry world building and cub-knotting coonfox Xael fantasies.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / chicas / clang / imouto / kennedi / misr / strek / tijuana / wai ]