Why is this seen as "bad" animation when if it was

>>155196800
It's missing most of the principals of animation. Looks lifeless.

>>155196800
Because 3D isn't 2D.

>>155196800
people are used that drawn 2d looks like it does, when it's obviously 3d and not done right like in this example, it adds to the uncanny valley effect and looks like garbage.

>>155196800
are you retarded?

>>155196800
Because it isn't 2D, and looks like shit. If it were 2D it would look a lot less shit

>>155196800
It looks horrible, are you blind?

>>155196990
>>155196924
>>155196875
>it's not 2D so it's bad!
Retards

>>155197099
try harder faggot

>>155197128
All I see ITT is people saying it would be better if it was 2D when that's just not true. It would look just as stiff with nothing but flapping mouths if it was 2D.

>>155197099
3D carries an entirely different set of advantages compared to 2D you fucking retard. You can't animate 3D like it's 2D and expect it to look as good unless you're pulling some Guilty Gear Xrd-tier magical bullshit.

You have to animate while playing to the strengths of 3D CGI, not like it's 2D and call it a day. That shit just doesn't fly.

The character models are also horrible and that's a worry you really don't have with 2D since a drawing is much easier to get "right" than a 3D model.

>>155196800
The actual motion isn't the issue in that shot, the overall visuals are.

>>155197245
>guilty gear
>looking good
The CGI in Xrd's story looked like terrible choppy crap just like Berserk

>>155197290
I'm talking about the actual in-game animations, mind you. Not the shitty story mode cutscenes.

>>155197099
But that's true.

>>155196800
The problem with 3d animation that 2d doesn't have to deal with as much is that 3d has to follow real world rules more than 2d does. So when a character/object moves, their movements have to be more realistic.

The biggest issue I see here is with the mouth. Our mouths move differently depending on what sounds we make. It's why people can read lips. But here, his mouth is only making one kind of movement, which makes it seem like he's not really saying anything.

>>155196800
Its possible to have CG look good(Gantz:0) but the Berserk CG looks like shit not cause its 3d, but because its lazy.

the show also lacks the downtime that was present in the movies and the 99 series, relying totally on action but its action is trash.

>>155197175
I want to watch an anime. Not an early PS2-era cutscene.

>>155196800
Get your eyes checked

>>155196800
I personally don't mind CG anime. I for instance really like Ajin and Sidonia (as long as I don't think about the latter's manga's terrible ending ;_;. But that just looks bad. The characters look fucking lifeless.

File: 1467505858288.jpg (87KB, 606x871px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 606x871px

this is now a rabbit thread

>>155196800
stiff, unexpressive, choppy, lifeless, flat, bland lazy

File: IMG_4758.jpg (10KB, 232x218px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 232x218px

Haven't seen this but nice mems

File: GRIFFITH.jpg (79KB, 496x515px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 496x515px

being a beserk fan is suffering

>>155202670
>that edit where the rabbit clangs when it gets hit
Makes me laugh everytime

>>155196800
Because it looks like a child animated it.

>>155196800
Because it does nothing to mask how shit it looks.

Most animation studios get by with shit animation but good direction. This a dude woodenly talking while some kid derps in the background for the whole scene. It just looks fucking terrible and it's obvious how shit the animation is.

A 2D animation studio would have focused on the old man talking, moved or zoomed the "camera" around to bring the derp kid into frame, and then hard cut to the pixie thing. They probably wouldn't have even animated the mouth moving. Just frame the old dude's eyes and forehead, maybe jostle the mustache a little bit. They would have focused on making the eyes seem like they're actually staring at something instead of blankly staring off into the distance.