^ I lmao at this xD

I just changed my RHG weapons, she now uses a spear, wich it's not used pretty often (it's fun to animate), and this spear can create energy, and it'll release it as pulses of energy, or fire, or anything that has energy involved :D

I usually vote for the animation that entertained me more and nothing else.
i dont really care which is better

i dont like those sort of reasons of voting for them
eg: "the anim was much smoother", "his anim was longer", "his anim had angles in it"

all those are very unfair, i would vote someone by their creativity, what actually happens in the battle and how entertaining it was.

Quote from Hewitt

If you don't mind me asking, when an actual RHG battle commences, what is usually your criteria for voting? Is it the animator's skill (like more easing and stuff), their capability (I used ANGLES durrr), or creativity (my weapon wasn't used that way, but I DID).

And before you tell me that all three are equally important, I was just wondering about everything Sonoya and a few other said about not being cliche. In theory, you can make a fight that doesn't have much fighting and make it good, and win in the polls provided you make it appealing by adding a cinematic effect. Not all animations are awesome because of fight scenes right? So that's why I'm asking: If RHG fights were in the cinematic appeal of say the Castle series, would that be a viable criteria to be voted for?

to answer your question hewitt, it's different criteria for everyone.
Divided into actual categories I could say...
Beginners who have little to no knowledge of animation quality: Vote based on bias and entertainment.

Those who have gained abit of experience and knowledge in animation quality: vote based on cinematics, effects, flow, and at times bias.

Those who have looked passed the quality of animation and sometimes know what reels in votes and viewers: Vote based on entertainment.
I can tell you I'm in abit between the last 2 mentioned, take Phil's "Last Mages" for example. Last Mages was stunning, in both entertainment and quality factor, it's impossible for an animator with knowledge in the field to overlook these things, and sometimes point them out.
A good quality animation doesn't always mean entertaining, but if pulled off right with a good presentation(Like phil has been doing for the past...what? 5 years?), someone may go for both in a vote.

Quote from GroundXero

to answer your question hewitt, it's different criteria for everyone.
Divided into actual categories I could say...
Beginners who have little to no knowledge of animation quality: Vote based on bias and entertainment.

Those who have gained abit of experience and knowledge in animation quality: vote based on cinematics, effects, flow, and at times bias.

Those who have looked passed the quality of animation and sometimes know what reels in votes and viewers: Vote based on entertainment.
I can tell you I'm in abit between the last 2 mentioned, take Phil's "Last Mages" for example. Last Mages was stunning, in both entertainment and quality factor, it's impossible for an animator with knowledge in the field to overlook these things, and sometimes point them out.
A good quality animation doesn't always mean entertaining, but if pulled off right with a good presentation(Like phil has been doing for the past...what? 5 years?), someone may go for both in a vote.

Personally I look for multiple things in an animation, Flow, Force, All that shit, but the reason for the animations in the first place is entertainment, so even though Easing, GFX, angles, and whatever else is taken into consideration. I mainly focus on how much entertainment I got out of it. For instance, Lately i've been having this weird inner battle. About whether I like Terks animations anymore. After FL vs Pulse i lost alot of interest because it wasn't intense and it was slow paced and didnt bring as much entertainment as B.Y.E or Trucido, Here is a very scientific graph on my curriculum of voting on animations

Entertainment: 60%
Everything Else: 40%

This shit was studied by GRADE-A scientists, so take this shit seriously guys!

Quote from bl3u

For instance, Lately i've been having this weird inner battle. About whether I like Terks animations anymore. After FL vs Pulse i lost alot of interest because it wasn't intense and it was slow paced and didnt bring as much entertainment as B.Y.E or Trucido, Here is a very scientific graph on my curriculum of voting on animations

Entertainment: 60%
Everything Else: 40%

This shit was studied by GRADE-A scientists, so take this shit seriously guys!

Hot damn, son! A-grade scientists!

I think Terk's done enough fast-paced stuff like Trucido, Rushed and Shock for it to become somewhat repetitive to animate for him. I'm shooting in the dark here, but that sounds about right. What I personally liked about the FLLFFL vs Pulse animation was that it carried with it some suspense - instead of being whizz-bang-in-your-face action like 95% of other RHGs, it's more tense and slower-paced, and even though the fighters had jet-swords and laser balls of white death, you felt like the guys were human. They could be taken down and beaten up like regular people, instead of being invincible psuedo-Gokus like Tention or Nhazul, so it gave the battle more emotional weight.

There's nothing wrong with stick fights being crazy over-the-top battles, because those are awesome and all, but I feel like it's the one thing that people think stick figures are built for.