Slits on the elbows and knees don't equal mechanical joints.

 

The ones in her knees have obvious metal in them.

 

Because that's how they'd look in promotional material for the restaurant in-fiction. Like how the commercials have Chuck E. Cheese as an organic mouse instead of a robot. It looks more adorable.

I was actually thinking of making an animated trailer for a (fake) animated movie/TV series called "Freddy Fazbear and Friends" (like a rebooted version of Fredbear and Friends) using a similar style.

They're seam lines- same thing.

 

It's hardly furry at all. Like Lego said, that's how they would look in promotional images and commercials.

And I honestly prefer stylized art like that instead of on-model stuff. The variety of artists in the FNAF community have different designs for the animatronics and each are interesting and unique.

 

M

Movie spoilers

 

10/10 movie of the year

 

I crai everytime.

 

Those are some suspiciously robotic looking "organic" characters on those posters.

Inside the restaurant itself.

 

Because those are pictures of the animatronics made into posters.

 

Isn't that by definition promotional material, then?

 

Totally look the same.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue here.

 

Kinda seems like a discussion is brewing about whether or not drawing the Fazbear gang as cartoon animals instead of robots constitutes as Furry fanart.

 

"Fazbear entertainment spent a small fortune on these new animatronics." If they spent so much on the robots they likely wouldn't have had a ton of money (or even time) left over to commission posters, so they just used photos of the robots.

Besides, just because they didn't in this one location doesn't mean they didn't in others, or that such a thing is entirely impossible in-universe.

 

Well I guess I didn't need sleep tonight anyways.

 

Chuck E. Cheese isn't drawn to look like an animatronic, though.

Why would they draw them as animatronics that don't look like the actual animatronics unless that's what they look like? Why not as cartoons?

I mean, I don't really care, but I think that's what AB is trying to say.

 

It isn't. Cartoon animals =/= furry art.

I get the feeling that most people who say that haven't actually looked at any furry art.

That's not what I'm saying. In commercials, Chuck E. Cheese is an anthropomorphic mouse, not an animatronic mouse. That's what we meant by "promotional images".

The characters are not animatronics. They are animals. The animatronics are based on the characters, not the other way around.

Back to the Chuck E. Cheese argument: he's not an animatronic mouse, he's a mouse that has an animatronic at the restaurant.

The real answer is that there was no reason for Scott to make new poster graphics when you can just use the models you've already made.

 

I wish more people would realize this. It's especially annoying when people pull the whole 'robots have no gender' thing with Bonnie and Mangle- we're not talking about the robots themselves, we're talking about the fictional characters they're based on.

Note that Scott is a modeler/game maker, not a 2D artist. The most 2D thing we've seen in the games were the child drawings and chibi "awesome face" pictures.

I mean, he could have commissioned someone to make nice cartoony images of the characters, but then that would mean someone else worked on the games and they wouldn't be entirely his own thing.

 

You do realize how that makes no goddamn sense, right?

We are talking commercial scale here. Commissioning a guy to draw up some cartoon imagery is a drop in the bucket - we're talking maybe $100 at most per large drawing.

What you are suggesting is that the company spent so much on both all the brand new robots and gave some of the upgrades to the scrapped old animatronics just for shits and giggles apparently that they couldn't afford a few hundred dollars to hire a commercial artist to draw up some basic character sketches to be used for promotional material. A company that was spending stupid amounts of money on everything to improve their image...literally couldn't spend money on advertising.

Stop. Just stop. You clearly do not have any concept of budgeting on a commercial scale, because if the company couldn't fucking afford some cartoon drawings, they couldn't afford to fucking pay anybody to work there in the first place.

 

OK, fine, you make a good point.

...but I'm not really sure what the point of your argument even is. We got on this topic because of another discussion regarding if organic/cartoony animatronics could be considered furry art or not. Your pointing out that the images of the characters in the FNaF 2 location are of the robots themselves doesn't really lend much to that discussion, unless you're trying to make a different point that I'm not picking up on.

 

.....I feel like this is silly topic taken to extreme lengths