An animation by 
SMX spotlighted on Saturday August 31, 2019
[No Description]
OC Battles #3: Core Vs SMX
Stick Nodes®
A stickfigure animation app created for mobile devices!
Create your own stickman animations on your Android or iOS device!
Story and humor are inapplicable for this animation, so I won’t critique them.
Wow, that was really good stuff. Let’s dive into it.
Cons: The animation itself has some fairly inconsistent pacing moments at times, which can slow down the action and inhibit the energy and intensity being displayed. Effects look flashy but sometimes don’t have the impact necessary to make them feel powerful. The dialogue could use some improvement, and the introduction (while humorous) doesn’t really set a good tone for the rest of the fight. These two almost kill each other by the end of the fight, so the fact that it was started by a cookie isn’t exactly cool or realistic. The background could also really use some touching up since it’s completely in shades of grey and doesn’t contribute much to the fight itself. Good fights manage to look great within a background, but great fights use that background to their advantage, allowing characters to interact with it and give them a fighting edge. The only real interactions with the background here were when people got shoved through walls, which isn’t too special. In general, the animation lacks this sense of memorability. There aren’t any particular climactic or memorable moments in the fight. There aren’t any cinematic moments or tense scenes or displays of power that could elevate this animation much higher. Dynamic lighting could also be used here as well and would really elevate the animation. The animation itself uses dynamic angles a bit too much and would benefit from making more consistent shots. The beginning part with flash, while interesting and a neat touch, doesn’t really contribute much to the fight itself.
Pros: With all that said, this fight is really great. The usage of effects is really on point and the animation quality overall is particularly great. There are some iffy moments, but overall it is a consistently well-animated fight. The introduction was not something I really expected, and it was well done for what it was. There were many neat touches with how characters were selected, with the whole scrolling through Sticknodes and pivot file logs to select characters. There were many neat touches all throughout this fight that really elevated its quality.
I know I did many more cons than pros, but that doesn’t mean this animation is bad, just that it has the potential to be so much better. In fact, if these cons were addressed, this fight would be 5/5 for sure. It stands well for what it is and is a consistent well-done fight. It has flaws but is overall enjoyable and well-made. I recommend it. It has so much potential to be better than what it is, and I really hope to see that potential grasped.
High 3/5. Well done!
I like how the cons you listed regarding animation consistency, backgrounds, and introductions to make it seem like a full fleshed fight were directly addressed at the beginning of the video.
You could perhaps, critique this on a more animation style perspective, rather than looking at it as a fully fledged video production. That was the purpose of the OC Battle.
I really shouldn’t be calling it an OC battle because the purpose of it wasn’t meant to be a full fledged high quality fight.
Of course, you should know this. I said it numerous times in the video.
If not, maybe you should read the context before you write an essay?
also, humor and story can be applicable to this.
Not true in the slightest. Would you rate a simple comedy skit meant for laughs with storyline in mind? No. Humor is not applicable to this because specifically, the animation isn’t focusing on humor. Neither is it focusing on the storyline. They are not applicable, that’s just incorrect to say they are.
I have rewatched the beginning and read through your descriptions, and my points still stand. Yes, your animation may have been practice to discover a new style. However, it still stands as a fight animation, regardless of that, and I critiqued it as such. Though its purpose may not have been intended to be a fully-fledged fight, it is undeniable that this is ultimately the result, and I have critiqued it with that in mind because of this.
You did not actually directly address this at the beginning of the fight. Stating this animation isn’t a “dojo duel” or “rhg” does not mean it is free from criticism pertaining to the fight. You also did not state this numerous times as you describe, only twice (once at the start, once at the end). I have indeed read the context, and all of my criticism still applies. If I really did critique this from an animation style perspective, the score would most likely be worse. You aren’t a professional animator, let us be certain of that. Consequently, if I were to genuinely critique your style in that regard, you would react in just the same way you are now. If I were to specifically critique your style, that would also mean I would have to analyze every single frame of animation and make sure that the movements and effects were well-animated. Let’s abandon pretense, you’re not a professional animator. If I were to legitimately review this work with the way you have in mind, you would still get angry regardless because I would be “too critical” of moments and effects, though that would be the actually correct way to review the work.
Let us abandon pretense. You are really just angry because I didn’t review it the way you wanted and I didn’t give you a higher score. Though you may not have meant it to be a higher-quality fight, it is undeniable that this is the end product. No matter what you “intended” to make, this is the result. I actually praised the animation in my review. A 3/5 is a GOOD score. A high 3/5 is a VERY GOOD score. No matter what you intended to make, this is an animation fight, and I have reviewed it with that in mind. It’s a good fight too, and I recommend it to viewers to watch.
I hope this answer is sufficient to prove my critique is in the right, as it is indubitably so.
Jesus Christ dude. You can’t just call me angry because I wanted to be criticized in a certain way.
There was no part of my reply that said “your critique is invalid and stupid”. I agree with all your points. There is no background, solid introduction, lighting, whatever correction.
That being said, read carefully on this one, since you clearly need more improvement on critiquing than I do with my animation.
I did NOT say I was angry.
I did NOT say that I wanted you to redo your review and give me a bigger score.
I did NOT say that I would get angry if you did what I asked.
I did NOT say that I was a professional animator. (That should be obvious)
I wanted to be critiqued on my animation style, not my skill to make a fully fledged animation project.
Let me be clear before you say I’m angry and I want a good review.
I made the animation to get good at my animation style. You critiqued me based on the appeal. Your critique is irrelevant as of now because my priority was to improve my style. I can’t use your critique since you mostly talked about how I didn’t add story or any sort of background check.
Now let me just dissect everything you just said, before you call me out for being angry.
” If I really did critique this from an animation style perspective, the score would most likely be worse.”
I personally don’t mind if you give me a bad score. The community isn’t about rankings. Nothing about your star rating will affect me in any way. Your Critique however, will. I slapped a gray background because that was not my priority when making the animation, yet you emphasize on that fact, saying I needed more “interaction” and just detail in general.
” If I were to specifically critique your style, that would also mean I would have to analyze every single frame of animation and make sure that the movements and effects were well-animated.”
THIS WAS THE CRITIQUE I WAS LOOKING FOR.
Say, if I were to give you an animation that had a white background and I showed you a fight animation, you would say: “Your background is bland.” That’s the kind of message you’re giving off of me. I want actual advice, not you listing what is right or wrong based on some kind of fight animation checklist. THE FACT that you didn’t want to do this, and instead give me an ego check and just say “I’m angry” and ignore what I asked for, damages you as a critic.
“No matter what you “intended” to make, this is the result.”
Yes, this is the result: my progression of changing animation styles. You looked at it from a perspective as if I was trying to be consistent with everything.
“Though its purpose may not have been intended to be a fully-fledged fight, it is undeniable that this is ultimately the result, and I have critiqued it with that in mind because of this.”
This is completely false. If I wanted critique on a specific aspect of a video, that should’ve been your first priority. Yes, your other critiques will most probably be valid and true, but as I didn’t try to focus on that aspect, that’s not what I’m focusing on improving on.
“You aren’t a professional animator, let us be certain of that.”, “You are really just angry because I didn’t review it the way you wanted and I didn’t give you a higher score.”, “you’re not a professional animator.”
As if my reply originated out of my ego being attacked.
Yes, I perhaps may be ticked off that you decided to review it not how I wanted to be reviewed, but not of the score. The fact that instead of helping me out, you lectured me, holds you accountable.
In summary, you did not help me improve in what I was trying to improve when I made my animation, and when I asked you again, giving you another chance to help and critique and review on what I asked of, you took that as an aggressive approach, and immediately decided to say “I’m angry because I’ve got a bad review”. On top of that, you decided that it was best to say: “You’re not a professional animator”.
I didn’t even say anything like that that would even make you feel like you needed to correct me. That’s just an asshole move bro. Not cool.
I will no longer rely on you for criticism. You clearly do not listen, and are more content on using a checklist, rather than actually helping.
You are completely free to choose not to rely on my criticism, as anyone is free to be ignorant. However, I will not tolerate your ignorance negatively affecting me by calling me a bad critic because “I didn’t critique you the way you wanted me to.”
Did you know that you don’t directly have to state something to imply/communicate it? I would understand your inability to comprehend that had it not been a communication technique for thousands of years. Yes, you did not directly state “your critique is invalid and stupid” just as someone wouldn’t directly state “you look horrible” when they say “Oh, you’re wearing THAT shirt?” I did write my reply under the assumption that you understood subtext, but clearly I am mistaken, so that is my fault.
What you speak of when you mention “my critique being irrelevant” is complete nonsense. Perhaps you do indeed seek to improve your style. That’s fantastic! However, critiquing your style specifically is not the point of my critiques, and it is foolish to think that it should be.
Let us take an example of food. Suppose I am a food critic myself and I seek to rate a dish. I am given one by a cook. It looks appealing, tastes nice, and overall is an enjoyable meal. However, when I go to post my critique of this meal, the cook specifically states “Don’t critique the entire meal, just describe the sauce. That’s what I want to improve.” This is similar to what you are doing right now, and it is an incorrect usage of a public critique. I’m sure anyone who actually understood the basic concepts of public criticism would understand this.
It is perfectly acceptable to seek to improve the animation style. However, my critique is not focused on this regard. No matter what you state your animation focuses on, my critiques are not meant to focus on individual aspects, but to review the entire product as a whole in order to allow audiences a factual perspective on this matter to see if it is worth their time or not. This critique is not JUST ABOUT YOU, but also about every other viewer on the site looking for an animation they might be interested in. I rate these animations accordingly, focusing on all aspects required for an animation to be decent. If you didn’t know, that includes more than just “style”.
My purpose here is not to teach animation, but to define what makes an animation good or bad. My goal is to define the qualities and flaws of animations in order for viewers to understand a general sense of knowledge over the quality of the product so that they may choose themselves whether they would like to view the product or not. If you want someone to instruct you on how to improve a style, I am certain you can find someone else who will tolerate your behavior. However, my critiques are not solely focused on your whims and desires, but of the general interest of the public.
In conclusion, you may consider this critique to be irrelevant, and if it really is the case where you reply with such ignorance and irritability, I strongly encourage you to do so. However, I must specifically highlight the point that this critique focuses on the overall performance (that doesn’t just include appeal if you didn’t know) of the animation rather than one singular aspect related to it. If I really did that, my critiques would be unreliable to describe the product as a whole.
If you really want a lesson, I’m more than happy to teach you the differences between basic CNC and professional criticism! CNC is a more personal 1-on-1 scenario where I would focus on individual aspects of your animation and tell you how to improve on what you want to improve on. Professional criticism is where I take your product and review it as a whole including every single aspect that relates to it. Yes, story and humor do not relate to it. However, your specific points concerning the focus on style are irrelevant to a professional critique. I do express my condolences, I was behaving as if I was talking to someone with adequate knowledge on the concepts of criticism, so I will be sure to adjust my future behavior. I do not need to defend myself to someone with inadequate knowledge of what is being defended.
Good day!
you’re part of some type of debate team irl
don’t lie i can tell you’re good at driving a point home lol
I wanted him to add on, and look into some specifics for me (My animation style).
I’m not good at being concise, but it’s clear that I have to work on that especially for his sake.
If the “point” he’s driving here is that I don’t know what CNC is, that I’m ignorant, egotistical, and angry, then he wrote all of his replies for nothing.
In which, he did.
He’s misunderstood me 3 times in a row. That’s probably my fault, but for his sake, he shouldn’t be making such wide assumptions.
Dude, I just asked you to critique my style. When I meant irrelevant, I meant it wasn’t what I was looking for. That doesn’t mean I won’t take everything else you said.
You still never critiqued my animation style when I asked. A simple no would’ve sufficed. Yet, you still choose to avoid giving me an answer. (This doesn’t mean you should change your review)
Let me say this briefly. Your criticism is fair. For this video in particular, despite me intentionally not putting effort in those categories, you made your entire critique on that. It’s professional, or whatever you name it to be.
That’s perfectly fine. Now Understand Me. I wanted you to add on more, to critique my animation style. I didn’t say change it. I just said critique it. I am asking you a PERSONAL (I think) question to help me improve my style.
There is nothing wrong about your initial critique. I just wanted you to add on to it personally so I can fix it.
Nothing about my reply asked you to change anything about the original comment. I want you to add.
Maybe I was wrong to call you an “ignorant critic”. Nothing about you as a critic is wrong, I guess. Whatever, I didn’t look into it. That’s pretty aggressive on my end, in which I’m sorry.
You’ve misunderstood my replies 3 times now. I was never talking about your initial comment. I get it, you’re giving a review based on the entirety.
That being said, you mistook my replies as:
1) Me being angry
2) My ego being too big
3) Me not knowing what CNC is.
You’re making very wide assumptions about my knowledge when you aren’t even sure of my context. Maybe that’s what you need to fix. You as a person, to make that clear.
Let’s see, what just happened?
1) Your critique
2) Me saying that you should instead critique my style and not as an entirety (I did not say you should change, remove, or fix your review)
3) You gave me an Ego Check, and Said I was too angry.
4) I gave some dumb remarks, but said again, I’m looking for some style critique.
5) You said I don’t know what CNC is, and that my behavior was unacceptable.
Perhaps I wasn’t being too clear. I would like you to personally add on and get into specifics with my animation style, and give me advice there, so I can improve that. This isn’t much of a complex request. You can always say no. I do not want you to change your review, or your ratings. I am not questioning how you critique. I just want you to help.
I find it humorous, the backpedaling going on here. About how I “mistook your replies” and the magnitudes of information you’re leaving out on your summaries of our discussions. Tell me, is it unreasonable to say one doesn’t know math if they fail to demonstrate adequate knowledge on the subject, yet they say they do indeed understand it? Humorous enough, this wouldn’t even be an assumption, but a certainty, if one demonstrates specifically their lack of awareness on this concept. We can safely say that a person who “says they know what they’re talking about” but doesn’t demonstrate legitimate knowledge, does indeed not know what they’re talking about. Let’s dive into what you define what I “mistook” was. 1. “Me being angry” Perhaps that was a stretch, the usage of the word angry, I apologize for it. I should have used a more precise word, such as defensive, annoyed, or irritated. Did you know that one doesn’t have to blatantly say “IM ANNOYED AAAAA” in order to convey through their language that they are annoyed? When one says “I’m not angry”, does that really mean for a fact they aren’t angry? If anything, it would be an assumption to believe they aren’t angry just because they said so themselves. But it is pretty funny, reading through your second reply and seeing all the times you have to keep asserting that you’re not angry. You made that point 5 times in that reply, by the way. 2. “My ego being too big” Not once did I mention your ego, and not once throughout this entire conversation was I in reference of it. If I were to pull your ego into reviewing this work or debating with you, that would indicate bias and be unprofessional. I have not done anything to indicate you have a large ego, and that has not been a concern of mine in the slightest since we started talking. I assume this is in response to the “you’re not a professional animator” comment, but I made this comment specifically in reference to “this isn’t your job, so what you produce may have some flaws”. In no way was this meant to insult you personally or imply you have a large ego, and I apologize if it was taken that way. 3. “Me not knowing what CNC is” I explained this through the math example, and I’ll explain it again. I didn’t assume. You say you understand CNC, but you clearly don’t understand the differences between CNC and other forms of criticism (as all throughout your replies, you get the two confused). If you did, you would have understood the type of criticism I gave rather than responding in the wya you did. This is not an assumption. In your remarks, you literally confused CNC with other forms of criticism. This is not assuming something is true, but rather taking evidence to establish certainty that this something is true. I did not assume anything in my replies in this regard. Let’s recap through the messages once again, but without bias or your selectivity. 1. The Critique. 2. Your response, which was the equivalent of “this wasn’t meant to be a high-quality production, I’m sure you know that since I said it so many times, You could perhaps critique this like how I intended it to be critiqued in the first place, read the context maybe?” Literally, anyone could see how defensive and annoyed this is. And, as I said before, just because you didn’t say “I’m angry” doesn’t mean you’re therefore not angry. That’s just lunacy to think such a concept holds validity. As it turns out, you don’t need to say “this critique is bad” to imply it. You did not ask for me to review it differently. Rather, you passive-aggressively said maybe that’s something I “should do” instead. As we’ve discovered through your work, what you intend to create and what you actually create are two different things. I understand you may not intend to be defensive or angry, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. 3. If you really assume my response to this is an ego check, then that is the real problem right there. In no way was I concerned with your ego in any way. I simply was focusing on the fact that I disagreed with how you stated I should make criticisms differently, and I gave an argument to demonstrate this point. As for the “saying you were too angry” bit, I never said you were “too angry”. I simply inferred from your previous passive-aggressive and defensive comment that you were irked by my criticism. This is what we refer to as an “educated guess”, where one makes an assumption based off of previous evidence. Not that I’m saying you don’t know what that is, I’m just defining that so you know for a fact what I’m referring to when I mention this educated guess, so we can be on even ground and have clarity. 4. I already talked about this so I won’t again, but yes, you made some remarks and ultimately said then that you wanted me to critique you with style in mind. 5. Not once did I say you did not know what CNC is. You’re making that point based on an assumption, you know. I also did not say that your behavior was unacceptable. You are attempting to put words in my mouth by misdescribing the circumstances. Maybe you don’t intend that and aren’t trying to do that, who knows? However, it’s clear that this is actually happening, that the circumstances are being misdescribed, whether that is intentional on your part or not. The difference between you and me on these assumptions is that you are making them freely and I am making them with established evidence. I understand you want me to focus on these specifics of animation style so that I may help you. Perhaps if you clearly asked for that rather than being passive-aggressive… Read more »
I can already tell that you have this perception of me as a complete Lobotomite.
Stop misunderstanding me, and making big assumptions. Please. It’s offensive, at worst.
I’m sorry if I’m not concise enough, but you really should adjust your future behavior to attempt to gather as much information as possible before you lecture me about something I already know.
My message was not about your critique. It was just a request.
Well, actually, me saying “If not, maybe you should read the context before you write an essay?”
Was probably the tellatale for you thinking that this was about your initial critique.
But, you at least now should know what I am asking for.
I hope you will understand this. This is my fourth time I’m asking after all.
Oh, and one more thing.
“Did you know that you don’t directly have to state something to imply/communicate it? I would understand your inability to comprehend that had it not been a communication technique for thousands of years.”
Did you also know whether or not I was implying it? You could’ve asked before you, admittedly assumed I was implying it.
Clearly, I don’t know how to be specific enough, and you aren’t patient enough to fully understand what I’m saying.
We’re both in the wrong here, and you’d only make yourself look worse if you choose to just walk away saying that I don’t know ____.
aight look you’re both cool, rational dudes
things were just taken a bit too blunt here, i don’t think anymore meant anything malicious
shake hands and kiss
sorry that was a bad joke im trying to lighten the mood im sarcastic by nature
do the shake hands thing tho
I’m dead tho this mans destroyed me
look man this is a 12 min long impresssive-ass animation regardless of what any 1 person things
not disregarding his criticms, that’s up to the reader really, but in general, you’re a very talented animator so don’t let harsh criticism bring you down a notch
harsh critisicm is only earned by material that is worthy of receiving it
I feel like harsh criticism is earned based on how someone chooses to critique, right?
IDK. This was old and I was probably set off because of it.
I see this conversation will go nowhere. My apologies. I see you will only further speak of how I “misunderstand” you, despite no evidence pointing towards this in the slightest as I have proven. But ignorance is bliss, after all, and it’s so much easier to spout nonsense than have an iota of reason nowadays.
Once again, it’s not a “big assumption” if you literally use facts to deduce this opinion. It’s just called being rational. If you’re going to learn anything from this, learn how to be that, please?
I apologize for lecturing you, as you clearly state you already know about these things. You should consider the acting field, you had me fooled for sure!
Though I will say this, you’re right about my patience. I definitely need to work more on being more patient when dealing with morons. I’ll be sure to improve myself in that regard.
Wishing you well, I do hope I didn’t make you too angry!
I didn’t finish typing lol
But I’ve gotta bring up a point. If you’re trying not to set someone off, no matter how true it is, I would like it if you’d stop saying everything thats on your mind.
You don’t have to make a comment without roasting me you know.
“You should consider the acting field, you had me fooled for sure!”
” I definitely need to work more on being more patient when dealing with morons.”
“Wishing you well, I do hope I didn’t make you too angry!”
It’s like you’re taunting me because you know you’re right.
Not denying that, what you’ve said is factual.
But still, have some decency will you? Like seriously, did you really think you weren’t going to set me off by saying I’m a moron? I don’t get it. You really like to nail in the fact that I’m a dumbass.
I am sure you would like it if I did a lot of things.
Ralph has made it clear this discussion has overstayed its welcome (and I don’t blame him, we’ve been pretty brutal). Let’s just cool down and relax, take a break from talking, shall we? I’ve got more important things to do, and I’m sure you do as well, so let’s just call this done and over, hmm? I think it would be better that way, no use in continuing a pointless conversation!
Once again, wishing you well! Have a nice day.
Just a thing I wanted to point out,
I don’t think you had to say that I was angry in the first place. If you’re trying not to anger anyone any further than you may already have, then you don’t elaborate on that fact. The conversation, or the subject matter did not become (or include) about emotion until you said: “You are really just angry…”
I didn’t see why you thought that would be helpful on expressing to me.
It doesn’t help when you feel like you need to express that you found it humorous to see me say I’m not angry repeatedly.
Anyways, I assume you don’t feel like you want to help me at all with all the stuff I’ve pulled.
You may point out whatever you wish, but ultimately, Ralph himself is asking for us to calm down and chillax about this scenario, and I am certainly going to be respecting his wishes. You may continue on with whatever this is, but I will be heading out now, for I have more important things to take care of than this.
Still, wishing you well! I do hope you have a great day.
Welp, if you’ve got nothing to say about that…
Like for real man, just this remark: “I am sure you would like it if I did a lot of things.” Is completely unnecessary. It only adds more fuel. Come on.
I really don’t have anything to say but
Black Lives Matter
….
….
Yo just a question, how would Shaz beat SMX in a dojo duel
Shaz would destroy me. He only needs to upload like, 3 seconds of video in order to surpass me. I’d get clapped.
PL Team Slave OwnerThis was impressive. Constant action, loads of angles, amazing animation, good soundwork as well as some info before the fight begins which is nice. There were areas where the animation was bad, but very few areas. An odd contrast to the amazing animation here. Visually the effects are what hold this together. The background is bland but there destruction of the enviroment which it done pretty decently. Effects done particularily pop though. Use of filters beyond opacity would really give this a boost on top of the visuals category, but this does all the visuals pretty averagely which is fine. Sometimes this ended up looking like a microsoft presentation with massive FPS fluctions. An idea FPS I would argue is atleast 20 for cinematic stuff. But this isn’t a game so 30fps isn’t needed, but this drops below 15fps it feels. All I gotta say about this is it is an impressive animation going well above the average. This is excluding the changing in styles through this cause you both mention that as well as the other styles go into flash and look very unfinished.
4/5