Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Also, page 141 (RMB) shows the interior of the Arcology, at the top (you can see the sky, not that it matters if this is artificial or not) - the outer wall is curved.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:Also, the art on page 141 of RMB (not sure if the same art is put into RUE somewhere, haven't looked) is an interior shot and CLEARLY shows that the outer wall is CURVED, not flat.
Greetings and Salutations. Hmm ... I took that as more of part of the ceiling of the building itself (with a lowered rim/protrusion along the edge, sort of like we see on the building in the image at the lower right of the page), but as I look at it closer, I think you're right, as some of the shadings do have a cloud-like look to them. Of course, I already admitted the interior art made it look rounded, and I also believed the image on page 140 of the main book was rounded, so my admitting that doesn't change much.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:All the art shows that it is a cone.
Only if we agree that "square edges" (your term) and rectangle shapes are cones ... which I don't think you're going to convince me, nor do I think it will convince some (I'd hope most) others.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:For it to POSSIBLY be a pyramid, we'd have to assume that every time it has been depicted (every single time), we've been looking DIRECTLY at the one of the flat sides. Which seems rather unlikely. In at least ONE of these shots, if it was a square or triangular pyramid, we'd have seen an angle where we were looking at where two of the flat sides met. And yet that's never been shown.
Well, some of the time it's been a cone, such as in RMB. CWC and Aftermath show "square edges" and straight lines on the sides. If we take that RMB depicted a cone shape, but was sometimes misinterpreted by fans as a pyramid (as we can see others have definitely interpreted it as such), then it doesn't seem unreasonable to believe that more people than just those in this thread have had that impression. If we say, for instance, the artist of CWC took it as a pyramid, then he'd draw it as such. This image can then influence others. The image from CWC I mentioned earlier is the one that sticks in my wife's head the most, for instance. So the artist of Aftermath can just as easily be influenced by the very large image in CWC.
I don't find the concept of artists being influenced by other artist's work as "unlikely," especially when (at this point) we're talking about 2 pieces of artwork vs. 1 piece prior. That's not as large of a pool as you're trying to indicate. More so, using a similar angle to what someone might consider an iconic piece I don't find that unreasonable either. Changing the angles doesn't really serve much purpose unless you're specifically trying to prove it's a pyramid and you believe "square edges," straight lines for sides, and a rectangular shaped top of the structure don't convey that image because some people might mistake those characteristics of a cone (which I wouldn't have thought possible before this thread). *Shrugs.* In my experience, people often do things similar to what has stuck in their mind (which can be influenced by previous art) unless they're trying to make a point. In this case, I don't think anyone needed to make a point, because they probably didn't even consider that this was a question.
Do I think Chi-Town is coned? Yes. Do I think every piece of art shows it as such?
Farewell and safe journeys.
