MCU has been run into the ground and the art is very digital like an MCU movie.
And why should I care that the MCU has been doing poorly? That isn't even all of Marvel. And, no, the artwork on the cover looks nothing like a live action movie. Let alone that "digital art" just means art done with a digital tool, which is such a huge number of modern art pieces that tying it to Marvel is simply pointless.
The art is also very generic.
Yeah, it is fantasy art. It is all generic by this point.
1E phb with statue they're not posing in some fake looking action pose.
Wow, people stand differently after a fight as compared to before it. I never knew. And why is it "fake looking"? Why is an action pose bad to have before action?
2E 89 it's an action scene not pose.
The one with the guy riding a horse through a tiny canyon? Okay, um... how is that not a pose? Because you can more easily imagine the horse galloping than you can the lady with the blades in this art dodging and stabbing a kobold?
If you say so, I can't track down all of these from acronyms and dates. Maybe the one where the guy looks like he is strangling his horse as he pokes his sword lightly into the snout of a worm bigger than him and the horse combined?
1995 2E it's posing and kinds a meh piece. Hand drawn though.
Who cares if it is hand drawn on a canvass or hand drawn on a screen? That's like saying that oil-based water is superior to pencil and charcoal based art.
3.0 and 3.5 didn't have it.
Didn't have what? Covers? Art? Both are false. They even had rulebooks with art that depicted people, just not the core books.
4E posing and WAR art. Very meh. WAR very distinct style not for me but escapes MCU comparisons.
Why? It was posed, it was digital. I don't even know what WAR means in this context, so I have no idea what makes that different from this. This is what gets so grating about people crapping on this art. You just say things, with no context or point. First it was marvel posing, then MCU digital art, and now... what?
5E action scene not posing. King Snurre iconic D&D character.
No posing? My man, that lady in the center is not moving in any realistic manner. I can't tell how she got in that position, nor how she is going to get out of it. The Fire Giant (who for being so iconic I rarely heard anyone mention him in anything) is supposed to look like he swung his sword, but is maybe dragging it because his arm is completely bent and he might be falling forward, because he is nearly parallel with the ground and on one knee. Plus the guy in the corner who just has his arms spread.
Also, isn't Strongheart and Elkhorn and them... ALSO iconic DnD characters? I've at least heard of them before, unlike that Fire Giant.
5.5. Generic digital art similar to AI art. Very common. Not much D&D related maybe gold dragon. They're not unique to D&D though.
It's not bad but nothing outstanding one can go to other forums or AI art threads and see similar art style.
Right, classic adventurers appearing in multiple DnD adventures are totally not related to DnD. It is somehow similar to AI even though I've never seen AI art able to pull of that brushed look ever. It is somehow generic, unlike "dude riding horse" which is totally unique and never been done before.
Look, again, you don't need to love it, but your criticisms make no sense. It isn't bad art because it isn't handdrawn, it has iconic and easily recognizable DnD elements, and it certainly has a sense of action about to happen. Sure, it isn't action ongoing, but that doesn't make it a bad art piece. Lots of art doesn't depict people mid-action.
The new cartoon characters about to enter a dungeon is a better piece imho not for a cover though due to 80s throw back.
I like that piece too. And oddly, though I can see some flaws with it, not a single person has thrown any hate at it.
