I've noticed that the cartoon ponies no matter which gen look kind of awkward when viewed head on. This is especially true for G3s.
It's the opposite for me! The toys just don't look that great to me. Ears too big, horns too small on the unicorns (shorter than their ears), tail set awkwardly low, and a head that really could belong to a deer or a mouse as easily as a pony . . . The whole effect is kind of generic.
The animation is what makes them feel like ponies, because in that they move like ponies.
It's the other way around for me. ;) Even though the show has all the same ultra-stylized facial distortions as the toys (gigantic ears, weensy noses, etc) I feel like the cartoony style somehow works in 2D, and all the charm falls away in 3D leaving the disproportions front and center.
It's interesting that you find the wider-set eyes on the toys more attractive. I seem to recall hearing Lauren Faust say she actually vetoed Hasbro's first pass at translating her 2D designs into 3D because she thought the faces looked too wide and wall-eyed from the front. Which, to be fair to Hasbro, is a more realistic take on an equine face-shape, but it can sometime result in things like this:
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
(Poor Luna!)
so it's a difficult balance to strike.
---Personal opinions, should-a could-a, and unintentional puns ahead---
The horse is already out of the barn at this point, but I personally feel like Hasbro made a huge misstep by tying their latest MLP gen so tightly to the show. I think MLP would have benefited as a whole by Hasbro letting all of their variously talented employees play to their strengths and by having a firmer division between the show-design and the toy-design. In my opinion, they should've given Faust free rein to shape the characters and mythology for the cartoon without her worrying about how to work around the expectations of doll manufacturing, and let their toy designers actually design attractive toys without being hobbled by the impossible task of "show accuracy" (I hate this phrase so much, I can't even) to an incredibly stylized design. FiM fans could've still had the show they love, with all the attendant spin-off properties/merchandise -- comics, clothing, TCG, etc... even specialty figures and plush -- without feeling let down in their entitlement toward the mass-market toyline and its *grits teeth* show accuracy. Fans of the toys could've had a generally more appealing design (and maybe more variety) for their "brushables" and other toys without feeling like they have to defend their affection toward the point of the franchise; it would be more clearly delineated as Not For You to strictly-show-only fans. The Equestria Girls line could've been a nice middle ground that everyone hated equally. (Kidding! :P Sunset Shimmer is the legit best.)
If anything G4 toys need to take more inspiration from FiM. G3 integrated the cartoons and the toys better than any other gen, from what I've seen. If you saw a pony or a building in one of those cartoons, odds are you could buy one. FiM has so many interesting character designs, but the problem is most of them are never made into toys.
And the accuracy complaint isn't really aimed at the basic body shape. Most of the time it's referring to the hair. Besides, as much as you hear complaints about the toys from them, it really doesn't have and effect on the direction of the toyline since most of them don't buy many toys, partly because there's not much interest and partly because most of them are teenagers and have no money. Mostly they like blind bags, Funkos, and plushes. The only overlap with them and children in terms of merchandise are the blind bags. And even then, they're outnumbered greatly by children.
Personally I don't think the cartoon designs translate that well to actual physical 3D reality. It just wasn't made with that in mind.Sparkle gets it. Have you guys seen a custom plush that looked show-accurate from the front? Half their eyes are literally on their muzzle when you look at them from the side. Vice versa.
Personally I don't think the cartoon designs translate that well to actual physical 3D reality. It just wasn't made with that in mind.Sparkle gets it. Have you guys seen a custom plush that looked show-accurate from the front? Half their eyes are literally on their muzzle when you look at them from the side. Vice versa.
Personally I don't think the cartoon designs translate that well to actual physical 3D reality. It just wasn't made with that in mind.Sparkle gets it. Have you guys seen a custom plush that looked show-accurate from the front? Half their eyes are literally on their muzzle when you look at them from the side. Vice versa.
I'd say Nazegoreng and ButtercupBabyPPG on DA get as close to perfectly show accurate as 3D can represent from the front. But then again, for people who hate the big eyes of G4, they will probably not like those plush.
Personally I don't think the cartoon designs translate that well to actual physical 3D reality. It just wasn't made with that in mind.Sparkle gets it. Have you guys seen a custom plush that looked show-accurate from the front? Half their eyes are literally on their muzzle when you look at them from the side. Vice versa.
I'd say Nazegoreng and ButtercupBabyPPG on DA get as close to perfectly show accurate as 3D can represent from the front. But then again, for people who hate the big eyes of G4, they will probably not like those plush.
Yeah ButtercupBabyPPG's plushies look fantastic from the front and the side.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
So it's definitely possible to make them look good in 3D
That Fluttershy Plush must be using some kind if witchcraft! Even if a devoted individual can do it though, I don't think a lot of toy makers are going to go that far sadly...
The best Hasbro "has out" right now is the 4DE plush...but who knows when people are ever going to get those.