[2021] Vex is the champion that should have gotten an ARG Twitter account, not Seraphine

Originally posted by Darknevoir

All that team would've had to have done was unearth their dusty forum posts from when they were teenagers and then tweet them. No additional work required.

Originally posted by MoreBasedGigaChad

Can you do like 6 months of not making generic anime girls/boys? I'm not sure if the people capable of that even work at rito anymore

Originally posted by bz6

Riot Axes: Bet

🤣

Na but for real, look at this wholesome? Reaction to a champion that isn’t a copy paste to appeal to China aesthetic. Speaks volumes. Anyways, with the new legislation limiting hours for teenagers game time in China can we stop bending the knee? 😅 We know what the artists are capable of and besides the disposable lore, we know how creative the art team is and we want them unshackled.

/u/RiotAxes

Originally posted by Spideraxe30

Hey Axes, are you able to share some info about Sett's dev, since I recall you owned him before moving to TFT

Originally posted by ShadedOffline

I agree with you, however I have a theory that Seraphine was a Marketing department idea and they forced you guys to make a champion to sell skins in two weeks, so you had sona's rework laying around and were like "welp, this could work I guess". Then hired an intern to write her story and he was paid in redbull. That would explain the abomination to storytelling and character design that champion is.

rant over.

Originally posted by Spideraxe30

I'd love to know what was his primary gameplay hook, since he seems like a relatively tame and simplistic release as well as how did you guys come upon the idea for Grit, since it's been a while since a new resource was made

Originally posted by Sona_Legendarius

u/RiotAxes

I agree that characters like Akshan and Rell have nothing to do with anime. Honestly, I dislike when people mention anime because it distracts from this point: "conventionally attractive". That's because, bar a few exceptions, characters of recent years were attractive. This was mentioned in the famous blog Of Men and Monsters.

I understand they drive engagement, but... like sure they do, but it does not mean this is how design should operate. Sure, I'll buy a sexy character and play her/him, but does it mean to make things change I have to drop them? Because my engagement for those characters might be, say, 7 out of 10, but when someone else, with more unconventional design comes, it'll be 10 out of 10.

Should the game really be about engaging as many people as possible even if for most it is 7 out of 10 instead of choosing groups (however small) of players where it'd be 10 out of 10 even if for many it'll be just 3 out of 10?

Like, for example, I will engage much more with a character in a gown (like Sona) over any mini-skirt/tight pants one, even if I will still play sexy ones given no other choice. I'll choose a character with a realistic armor anytime instead of with a boob-plate and exposed thighs.

And what about giving people characters that resonate specifically with them? Like those who are slightly overweight or have an unattractive face or old? Like, sorry if it sounds a bit too much, but with attractive characters it really comes close to the reasoning: "most people engage the most with white characters so no need to give diverse characters any representation, cause engagement will be less."

Sorry for the rant, but I feel like design (as an actual art form) deserves more than a generic appeal.