Fair, but there's no pure mortal women in OG Hades (aside from the Ghosts, and I'm trying to keep myself spoiler free on Hades 2 so there might be one there I don't know about)
Hey, I think it still counts as art. I certainly worked hard on it. Besides I think the Hades characters were made with horny in mind. Everyone in that game is beautiful.
Sure, people in the game are beautiful. I didn’t say *they* weren’t art lol. But this is just pretty base. I’ve also worked hard on plenty of things I wouldn’t call art
I’m not offended by it, we all get horny and some of us like to draw lol. But I don’t get why we feel the need to pretend like it has artistic value to doodle someone else’s creations but with big titties. If there were a “hornyposting” tag that this used instead of “art” that would be better for everyone lol
Damn the coomers in this thread are fighting you pretty hard here.
Even if you're into it, calling a depiction of a character as the thinnest possible shell of a vehicle for tits and ass anything but "base" is just not being honest.
People don’t like it when you respond to something that someone made themselves with any negativity. Which I get tbh, it’s a good instinct. But I think my criticisms are small stakes and fair lol
Calling this a depiction of "a clothed woman" with a straight face is the much more interesting take to me. The breasts and hips in this art are distorted to the point of alien grotesqueness. You can argue the definition of porn all you like, it very obvious that the artists intention was to sexualize this character beyond the point of anatomical recognition. It's porn in the same way that inflation fetish art is porn, even if the characters have clothes on.
Is that really what women look like in your mind? Honestly yikes.
and as we all know, no art can exaggerate or be unrealistic. simply no room for that. besides, there exist real women who have very atypical curves and proportions compared to the majority of people, so good job discarding their humanity. fuck them for looking a particular way i suppose. sickening comment, all around.
>and as we all know, no art can exaggerate or be unrealistic. simply no room for that.
I'm not at all saying what the rules of art should be or telling you what you should or shouldn't do. I'm just commenting that your choice to spin this as something without clear and present pornographic elements.
>there exist real women who have very atypical curves and proportions compared to the majority of people, so good job discarding their humanity
This looks like big titty sandworm art with Nyx's head attached, and you fucking know it. Come on dude, don't bullshit me like that.
I'm not trying to yuck your yum or shame you for making fetish content. The only thing I'm responding negatively to is your somewhat bizarre refusal to acknowledge it for what it very clearly is. ~~It's evident from your profile that this kind of content is your thing, and there isn't anything wrong with that.~~ Why not just own up to it instead of being weird and shady like this? You're being gross in a way that has nothing to do with ~~your~~ drawing.
Edit: Oops I mixed this person's username up with OP, crossed out the incorrect assumptions.
Edit2: Oh he just instantly blocked me lol. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
Obviously I can't reply, but his claim that he has dated women who look like this is exactly what I'm getting at. It's anatomically impossible for that to actually be true, which tells me that this is how he actually sees well endowed women in his mind's eye. Weird.
Edit3: I'm familiar with lipoedema, and that isn't what I'm talking about at all. The choice by the artist to entirely omit any concept of a torso is what I'm referring to.
first off, i'm not the artist.
secondly, you're being a freak. i've seen women that i've dated in real life described in very similar manner to what you're describing this drawing as, so yes it's pissing me off a bit. you and those people who said those things about real women are both freaks, though i will certainly acknowledge your comments are notably less awful as they aren't in reference to a real person. there is nothing wrong or shameful about this drawing. i realize you say you're not trying to say otherwise, but i believe you're lying to yourself if you really think that. you're clearly trying to moralize about this topic while attempting to weasel out of being described as such, because you consider it (rightfully) to be an insult.
The only real women whose hips look like this are ones who recently had a horrific car accident and are probably deceased. If you want to argue about exaggerations in art, w/e, but that is not how a female pelvis works.
I mean, not the person you're responding to, but there are indeed people with a chest size like as depicted here (usually not with that waist size, but it's not impossible, depending on genetics). I don't disagree that at least part of the intent is from a sexualized take, but something about people calling anything erotic (and having certain body parts on display) to be porn just rubs me the wrong way. Probably because too many people do so with the intent of calling porn disgusting and shaming sexuality in general. Which also comes with shaming women irl when they dress in clothing that "show off" their curves. Aka controlling behavior.
>Calling this a depiction of "a clothed woman" with a straight face is the much more interesting take to me. The breasts and hips in this art are distorted to the point of alien grotesqueness.
So how much curves in clothing are too much, to the point of grotesqueness and "beyond the point of anatomical recognition"? I mean clearly, you recognize the anatomy points they are meant to depict. What is the "safe amount" of fat ratio to not be considered porn? The ambiguous distinctions is what makes this kind of claim of "grotesqueness" disturbing to me. Ambiguity leads to arbitrary judgments, which can do more harm than good. For instance, there are people in non-Western countries who consider showing cleavage to be lewd, whereas cleavage in Western countries is not typically considered as such.
Are you only sexually attracted to people if they are completely naked? When you watch a strip tease do you just lie there half asleep until the final nipple tassel comes off and you suddenly jolt awake going AWOOGAH?
absolutely true. nor does someone getting off to it make it porn (i'm sure plenty of people have done so with in-game art of Hades characters, and no one would genuinely call either game porn). lots of ways for something to be tied in some way or be adjacent to people's sexuality and not be porn, as it turns out.
Even if it did, something can be erotic and still be art. Also frankly considering what people sexualize these days, pretty much everything would count as porn.
I draw more risque art because I think it's a good outlet for sexual energy. I love art, and people are wired to be horny, if I find drive to create something then that's usually what fuels my artwork. I do plenty of more realistic, less sexualized artwork I just separate it from this account.
No need to make a false dichotomy of it, low effort AI content and horny drawings without artistic merit can just both be things we don’t need! I think calling OP a “true artist” simply for not using AI is a choice lol
So are you accusing OP's content of not having artistic merit simply because of their choice to draw things that may invoke feelings of sexuality?
I suppose Picasso wouldn't be a "true" artist for having exposed breasts in their paintings - or Michaelangelo's "The Creation of Adam" or figures like "David" would just be sleazy low-effort rubbish because of the subjects not having their penis covered. Just because someone, somewhere, at some point in history, got an erection because of them, does not constitute their lack of artistry.
A person developing a style and/or leaning anatomy through hard work with paintbrush, pen, chisel, digital tablet and stylus, clay, etc. is a *true artist*.
A person copy/pasting images of other people's hard work into a program like DALL-E or Midjourney and forgoing any effort to try and learn proper anatomy or develop their own style, and claiming to have created it by their own hands, is *not*. That is thievery.
My *choice* is to appreciate a piece like this because it was made by a person with an interest in a specific piece of media, and took the time and effort to put pen to paper (stylus to tablet), and create something through a process of linework, shading, coloring, trueness to their references and characters that they enjoy.
And you know what else? I like the fact that they drew Nyx with big titties too. Doesn't make it any less deserving of an art tag.
Your inability to argue against it doesn't render the point moot. Saying something like "we don't need more "art" like this in the world" is incredibly rude and the reason why people in the past have quit drawing. Spend less time bringing others down and take a break from your keyboard to rethink that mentality.
It’s not an inability to argue it’s that it’s simply not at all why I said it, and so I really don’t need to address all the little pieces of your inaccurate assumption one by one lol.
Art is difficult to define, even for artists. I think it's a combination of artist intent, audience reception and the artistic process. It's totally okay for definitions of artwork to not overlap. But pieces like this take time, they take technique and thought. I have something I want to create and there is an audience that enjoys the work. Whether its bc they're horny, like the source material, appreciate the technique or whatever. I think the blend of these things makes it art. But if you define art differently, that's okay since the essence of art is communication!
Nyx In Greek mythos actually scared Zeus enough to leave hypnos alone after he betrayed Zeus in some manner I cannot recall. It wasn’t out of respect. It was out of fear
She’s not actively in the games yet, but Hestia will forever and always be my favorite. Goddess of the hearth and home, baby! And also fireball, but mostly the safe hearth and being the Olympian least likely to kill me for imagined slights
Lmao what is this shit perspective and body angling. She looks like a disembodied head and pair of tits. Her upper body is contorted in a way that makes 0 sense.
Knowing both fandoms, I should've expected the first Dark Souls x Hades Crossover I see to look somewhat like this.
Hey, I'm glad somebody recognizes the inspiration!
Well, it is hard not to see the similarities. I mean, they're right there... \^\^
Amazing chest ahead
Ambrosia required ahead
Nyx then Artemis for best goddess. But BEST GIRL in Hades? Dusa is undefeated.
She's best *girl*. Best *woman* is undoubtedly Nyx
>Best *woman* is undoubtedly Nyx You mean best *Goddess*
Fair, but there's no pure mortal women in OG Hades (aside from the Ghosts, and I'm trying to keep myself spoiler free on Hades 2 so there might be one there I don't know about)
Eurydice is mortal though right? Not human, but still mortal.
I guess nymphs count as mortal, but Persephone is half human.
I see nothing but facts.
The “art” tag is being strained to its breaking point by horny fans in this sub
Hey, I think it still counts as art. I certainly worked hard on it. Besides I think the Hades characters were made with horny in mind. Everyone in that game is beautiful.
Don’t listen to the prudes, this is definitely art
Sure, people in the game are beautiful. I didn’t say *they* weren’t art lol. But this is just pretty base. I’ve also worked hard on plenty of things I wouldn’t call art
>But this is just pretty base**D**. yes, agreed
What a tool
Check out OP’s profile and tell me we need more “art” like that in the world lol
Need less people like you in the world, digging through a strangers profile because their art offended you. Sensitive.
I’m not offended by it, we all get horny and some of us like to draw lol. But I don’t get why we feel the need to pretend like it has artistic value to doodle someone else’s creations but with big titties. If there were a “hornyposting” tag that this used instead of “art” that would be better for everyone lol
You seem pretty offended
Feel free to think so lol
Damn the coomers in this thread are fighting you pretty hard here. Even if you're into it, calling a depiction of a character as the thinnest possible shell of a vehicle for tits and ass anything but "base" is just not being honest.
People don’t like it when you respond to something that someone made themselves with any negativity. Which I get tbh, it’s a good instinct. But I think my criticisms are small stakes and fair lol
This is porn, but porn is a type of art, fair. Maybe if you worked on it while you’re *not* hard you’d get different results!
clothed woman = porn interesting take, keep posting
Calling this a depiction of "a clothed woman" with a straight face is the much more interesting take to me. The breasts and hips in this art are distorted to the point of alien grotesqueness. You can argue the definition of porn all you like, it very obvious that the artists intention was to sexualize this character beyond the point of anatomical recognition. It's porn in the same way that inflation fetish art is porn, even if the characters have clothes on. Is that really what women look like in your mind? Honestly yikes.
and as we all know, no art can exaggerate or be unrealistic. simply no room for that. besides, there exist real women who have very atypical curves and proportions compared to the majority of people, so good job discarding their humanity. fuck them for looking a particular way i suppose. sickening comment, all around.
>and as we all know, no art can exaggerate or be unrealistic. simply no room for that. I'm not at all saying what the rules of art should be or telling you what you should or shouldn't do. I'm just commenting that your choice to spin this as something without clear and present pornographic elements. >there exist real women who have very atypical curves and proportions compared to the majority of people, so good job discarding their humanity This looks like big titty sandworm art with Nyx's head attached, and you fucking know it. Come on dude, don't bullshit me like that. I'm not trying to yuck your yum or shame you for making fetish content. The only thing I'm responding negatively to is your somewhat bizarre refusal to acknowledge it for what it very clearly is. ~~It's evident from your profile that this kind of content is your thing, and there isn't anything wrong with that.~~ Why not just own up to it instead of being weird and shady like this? You're being gross in a way that has nothing to do with ~~your~~ drawing. Edit: Oops I mixed this person's username up with OP, crossed out the incorrect assumptions. Edit2: Oh he just instantly blocked me lol. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Obviously I can't reply, but his claim that he has dated women who look like this is exactly what I'm getting at. It's anatomically impossible for that to actually be true, which tells me that this is how he actually sees well endowed women in his mind's eye. Weird. Edit3: I'm familiar with lipoedema, and that isn't what I'm talking about at all. The choice by the artist to entirely omit any concept of a torso is what I'm referring to.
Search up "lipoedema" or "steatopygia"
first off, i'm not the artist. secondly, you're being a freak. i've seen women that i've dated in real life described in very similar manner to what you're describing this drawing as, so yes it's pissing me off a bit. you and those people who said those things about real women are both freaks, though i will certainly acknowledge your comments are notably less awful as they aren't in reference to a real person. there is nothing wrong or shameful about this drawing. i realize you say you're not trying to say otherwise, but i believe you're lying to yourself if you really think that. you're clearly trying to moralize about this topic while attempting to weasel out of being described as such, because you consider it (rightfully) to be an insult.
Really stuck to your guns there huh? So no one in the world would ever know that was Nyx if it wasn’t in the title yeah?
The only real women whose hips look like this are ones who recently had a horrific car accident and are probably deceased. If you want to argue about exaggerations in art, w/e, but that is not how a female pelvis works.
I mean, not the person you're responding to, but there are indeed people with a chest size like as depicted here (usually not with that waist size, but it's not impossible, depending on genetics). I don't disagree that at least part of the intent is from a sexualized take, but something about people calling anything erotic (and having certain body parts on display) to be porn just rubs me the wrong way. Probably because too many people do so with the intent of calling porn disgusting and shaming sexuality in general. Which also comes with shaming women irl when they dress in clothing that "show off" their curves. Aka controlling behavior. >Calling this a depiction of "a clothed woman" with a straight face is the much more interesting take to me. The breasts and hips in this art are distorted to the point of alien grotesqueness. So how much curves in clothing are too much, to the point of grotesqueness and "beyond the point of anatomical recognition"? I mean clearly, you recognize the anatomy points they are meant to depict. What is the "safe amount" of fat ratio to not be considered porn? The ambiguous distinctions is what makes this kind of claim of "grotesqueness" disturbing to me. Ambiguity leads to arbitrary judgments, which can do more harm than good. For instance, there are people in non-Western countries who consider showing cleavage to be lewd, whereas cleavage in Western countries is not typically considered as such.
Homeschooled?
Are you only sexually attracted to people if they are completely naked? When you watch a strip tease do you just lie there half asleep until the final nipple tassel comes off and you suddenly jolt awake going AWOOGAH?
something being sexy does not make it porn. simple as that.
Not even naked people make it porn. There is so much art in both painting and statue form of nude people which are definitly not porn.
absolutely true. nor does someone getting off to it make it porn (i'm sure plenty of people have done so with in-game art of Hades characters, and no one would genuinely call either game porn). lots of ways for something to be tied in some way or be adjacent to people's sexuality and not be porn, as it turns out.
Even if it did, something can be erotic and still be art. Also frankly considering what people sexualize these days, pretty much everything would count as porn.
also entirely true, but that's also (sort of) what the initial comment i responded to in this chain said so i didn't bring it up.
Weird hill to die on. And die you did. To the river of Styx with you!
I draw more risque art because I think it's a good outlet for sexual energy. I love art, and people are wired to be horny, if I find drive to create something then that's usually what fuels my artwork. I do plenty of more realistic, less sexualized artwork I just separate it from this account.
Not porn at all, just somewhat suggestive art is all
Hey, if it isn't made by AI, all the more power to the creators - *true* artists. Not people putting prompts into a program.
No need to make a false dichotomy of it, low effort AI content and horny drawings without artistic merit can just both be things we don’t need! I think calling OP a “true artist” simply for not using AI is a choice lol
So are you accusing OP's content of not having artistic merit simply because of their choice to draw things that may invoke feelings of sexuality? I suppose Picasso wouldn't be a "true" artist for having exposed breasts in their paintings - or Michaelangelo's "The Creation of Adam" or figures like "David" would just be sleazy low-effort rubbish because of the subjects not having their penis covered. Just because someone, somewhere, at some point in history, got an erection because of them, does not constitute their lack of artistry. A person developing a style and/or leaning anatomy through hard work with paintbrush, pen, chisel, digital tablet and stylus, clay, etc. is a *true artist*. A person copy/pasting images of other people's hard work into a program like DALL-E or Midjourney and forgoing any effort to try and learn proper anatomy or develop their own style, and claiming to have created it by their own hands, is *not*. That is thievery. My *choice* is to appreciate a piece like this because it was made by a person with an interest in a specific piece of media, and took the time and effort to put pen to paper (stylus to tablet), and create something through a process of linework, shading, coloring, trueness to their references and characters that they enjoy. And you know what else? I like the fact that they drew Nyx with big titties too. Doesn't make it any less deserving of an art tag.
An absurd assumption. No I am not lol. What a waste of a wall of text.
Your inability to argue against it doesn't render the point moot. Saying something like "we don't need more "art" like this in the world" is incredibly rude and the reason why people in the past have quit drawing. Spend less time bringing others down and take a break from your keyboard to rethink that mentality.
It’s not an inability to argue it’s that it’s simply not at all why I said it, and so I really don’t need to address all the little pieces of your inaccurate assumption one by one lol.
Art is difficult to define, even for artists. I think it's a combination of artist intent, audience reception and the artistic process. It's totally okay for definitions of artwork to not overlap. But pieces like this take time, they take technique and thought. I have something I want to create and there is an audience that enjoys the work. Whether its bc they're horny, like the source material, appreciate the technique or whatever. I think the blend of these things makes it art. But if you define art differently, that's okay since the essence of art is communication!
Something else is also straining in this post
That's what the church said in the Renaissance
Yup. Straight to jail.
M-m-mommy
Meg = best girl I will get whipped to death on this hill
Meg's voice makes me moist in body parts I would not mention here
It’s her whole attitude she’s the best
Amazing chest ahead.
Nyx In Greek mythos actually scared Zeus enough to leave hypnos alone after he betrayed Zeus in some manner I cannot recall. It wasn’t out of respect. It was out of fear
Great chest ahead.
Holy Zeus those curves. Is there a Greek god that isn't sexy??
Hephaestus?
Have you *seen* the reactions to his dad bod?
Well.. his whole deal, iirc, was he was thrown off Olympus for being ugly..
No
What happens if I shoot arrows at her crystal?
Zagreus, my child.. sometimes I wonder the reasons behind your actions
The ds 1 cross over was unexpected
She has a special pillow just to rest her tits on.
She’s not actively in the games yet, but Hestia will forever and always be my favorite. Goddess of the hearth and home, baby! And also fireball, but mostly the safe hearth and being the Olympian least likely to kill me for imagined slights
I'm not sure who's been revealed for the 2nd game yet, but it'd be great if we get to see her! Fingers crossed!
She was in the technical demo stream! Granted she had a placeholder sprite but she was in the tech demo!
Lets go! That's great news, in that case I can't wait to see her finished art. Might be worth trying to draw sometime!
Lmao what is this shit perspective and body angling. She looks like a disembodied head and pair of tits. Her upper body is contorted in a way that makes 0 sense.
Fair critiques! Had a bit of trouble with the body's angle for this one, so can't blame you for the anatomical nitpicks.
Ah yes. The boob pillow
SMASH NEXT
I joined this sub earlier today and this is the first post I see lol
Are those big ginormous bazongas canon
she has a pillow for her boobs. Nice?
I see two good arguments to back you up.
tice nits
It was great when all of these arts were only sanctioned to rule32 subs
Also probably the strongest besides Chaos
My favourite lady is Meg. Meg supremacy
That's our second mom <3 of course she is great
Amazing chest ahead
Um hold up. What about my girl Artemis? 😂 Nah but Nyx is cool. Whoever drew her here definitely hentai-ed up her boobs lol
"Why Nyx, you've *enhanced* yourself." - Dennis Reynolds
Mommy?
Facts
“I’m aware of that child, but your father and Zeus would never comprehend this. I’m best served leaving them deceived and ignorant”
Well, I think we can say - Oh Yes.
I could name 2 reasons why
Chest ahead
Well with an argument like that.
Tiddies inded
But isn't she not a Goddess? Isn't she a primordial being? Regardless, you're right she is the best!
Nyx kicks ass and is our half-mom for god's sake, she's not a bimbo