arparham wrote:I am sorry but changing one thing on a shirt does not make it "blatantly different." Bear vs. Yeti... come on.
I meant that the piece was blatantly different from the game involving the yeti which got it rejected in the first place.
I know skooling iz hardz, but let's try here:
In the game, which the piece was originally rejected for, a penguin is launched/dropped, and a yeti, using a large bat, hits it for distance. That is the entire game.
In this shirt, originally, there was far more going on. The penguins were in line, waiting to be tossed, not batted. There was a storyline going on. Instead of a brute, the yeti acted as a friend and/or lucrative businessman. Since yetis are mythical beings from snowy climes, and penguins are real birds from similar, their interaction makes sense from a "penguins can't fly... what might help them fly?" standpoint. Since there is a whole story made up in the image, it is silly to presume that it is based on a flash game with no further storyline, just as it would be silly to presume a bunch of letter blocks walking together to form words is based on Scramble, and not on letter blocks from one's childhood and words.
As for the polar bear, if we presume the first one was rejected for being like the game in question (despite being different enough, and the game itself being so simply done that it is as foolish to call something inspired by it as it is to call a shirt with a fake necklace on it inspired by bejeweled), then getting rid of the yeti was indeed what needed to be done. The polar bear, being another bulky land animal from snowy climes, made perfect sense, and by adding him in the yeti's stead, the thing which made the other rejectable is totally gone. The polar bear, you'll notice, is fully re-drawn, despite the rest not being. why should the rest not be, after all? It wasn't why it was rejected! So it's not really so simple as just substituting one thing for another. That other thing had to be created from scratch and worked into the piece effectively, so the substitution didn't look substituted.
The obvious attempt here is to call this no different from the tiger in a pumpkin, which proves the ignorance of seki fans. The tiger in a pumpkin had no single line altered... just a color change of the same exact "picture". It was a tiger simply due to "designer" insistence... had she not said anything, it would be an orange cat. Because it looked JUST LIKE the cat originally in the pumpkin. Since the original was rejected for being a cat in a pumpkin, and since a tiger, if drawn like a little kitten instead of a tiger, looks just like a cat, being a breed of cat, then both should have been rejected. Just as this should have been had the yeti been painted orange and called a tigerti.
