Hearthpwn

Among the many interesting mechanics and new meta game that comes with GvG comes another attribute blizzard is known for achieving quite well, art design and ascetics. However in this game not all cards are equal in terms of usefulness and stats as well as artistic flavor, while subjective there's no denying that some cards either just have flare, flavor or just an extra element to them. I'll cast my vote and wish to see what everyone else thought.  I'll divide each into two sections with a few honorable mentions. The over all best/worst non-legendary card artwork, and best/worst legendary design. Keep in mind while you may mention the golden art work this is based on the basic card design.

While a majority of the cards look great and the taste of the observer is to be accounted for, some look exceptionally fine and others just seam difficult or disappointing to look at. So please agree, disagree or tell me what you thought looks great and/or not so great.

---Best---

--Best non-legendary card art--

Winner.) Lost Tallstrider  What can I say about this card that just isn't stellar!! This card alone is by far my favorite card in terms of artwork. The most appealing part of this card is the charm, its a giant bird (those ones you hated killing in the barrens) that struts around with a gun, ammo belt, goggles and a derpy face tongue hand too boot. In terms of design the card looks great and the back ground clouds and mountains really bestow that barrens nostalgia feel. I picked this card in arena a few times just because it looks so amazing (and its a reverse yeti).

Honorable Mentions

Piloted Sky Golem While the golden version of this card is absolutely stunning with this pivoting animation, the basic version of this card is not only majestic in it's unusual choice of color gradients through out the back ground of the card. The golem it self has attitude, a skull face that really screams out goblin tech and just a fearsome stature. This is definitely my second choice.

--Best legendary card art--

Winner.) Iron Juggernaut Wow! the amount of detail captured in this card is just captivating! The flaming sparks, illuminated portions and dreadful mechanical scorpion like look feel like a fantasy steam punks wet dream, something out of a sci fi movie. The golden card blade sparks also look sweet but on it's own, the card is just a pleasure to look at. Bonus points for the burrowing mine to look like a star craft unit.

Honorable Mentions

Flame Leviathan It's a shame this card sucks so much because the card looks amazing, sort of like a still from death race. The fire effects look great and the depiction of motion and urgency really brings this lame loot pinata of a first Ulduar Boss to epic proportions. It's a shame this card will hardly see play.

Bolvar Fordragon Like Flame Leviathan this card looks utterly epic in terms of color contract, scene depiction and just utter epicness. It's a sad feeling I voted to reveal this card before Mal'Ganis as he turned out to be so ass. Another questionable thing about while the mechanic is rather new and interest, you deny your opponent form admiring the card art for a majority of the game since it's designed to sit in your hand all game. Much like the paladin vs shaman/priest match up for Tirion, he'll sit in the paladins hand until the very last moment of the game avoiding hex/mind control. 

---Worst---

--Worst non-legendary card art--

Winner/Loser.) King of Beasts I'm sure this isn't a surprise to anyone, it's hard to point out what makes this card so unsettling to look at but it's just... ugly. Perhaps the point of view or angle of the picture hurts this card but it's so ugly I imagine people will DE it if they don't plan on running it ever. At least its an awful card so we shouldn't see it often, unless it's certain arena drafts. I must also add, both Kripp and Trump in their separate card reviews noted on the poor quality of this card.

Honorable Mentions

Puddlestomper While I love shaman and plan to run murlocs, one thing i'm not excited about is actually looking at this card in my hand. The art work has a similar design to King of Beasts, while Leeroy and kill command look charming and funny in their cartoony design from Penny arcade's Gabe, this card hits the uncanny valley of just unsettling to look at. At least you are encouraged to sacrifice it removing it from sight.

Stonesplinter Trogg Similar to the same reasons as above, I just really dislike how this card looks. It's cool in it's own right for being a hideous beast by design but while the burly rockjaw trogg looks fearsome and cool, this card is just rather bleh.

--Worst legendary card art--

Winner/Loser.) Troggzor the Earthinator Troggzor suffers the same odd art style as his miniature trogg brothers. It's a real shame because the effect of this card is very good and I'm also excited to play this card solely for it's stats. The ability is cool enough to make up for its poor design but it's just a shame a card that will probably see a lot of play for countering spell heavy decks looks o odd.

Honorable Mentions

Mal'Ganis While a neat card mechanically and thematic to the warcraft lore, warlocks specifically, I can't help but really wonder why this card looks so plain or generic. Perhaps my visions of Warcraft 3 dread lords gave me expectations of demonic eyes and stout stature but he seams rather plain. Not insultingly bad, just generic.

I like the Wee Spellstopper. It's so cute XD

My favorite would have to be Mogor the Ogre just a fan of the general look and colours of it.

Quote from DarkTycon »

Winner/Loser.) King of Beasts I'm sure this isn't a surprise to anyone, it's hard to point out what makes this card so unsettling to look at but it's just... ugly. Perhaps the point of view or angle of the picture hurts this card but it's so ugly I imagine people will DE it if they don't plan on running it ever. At least its an awful card so we shouldn't see it often, unless it's certain arena drafts. I must also add, both Kripp and Trump in their separate card reviews noted on the poor quality of this card.

His face is far too flat, and his expression looks as though he's disgusted by something just awful off-screen.  I can't help but wonder if he isn't looking at a picture of himself.

Annoy-o-Tron, Crackle and dummy are terribly bad (some of them, however, deserved that).

Bolvar, Iron Juggernaut (golden, plz) and Gahz'rilla are freaking cool.

Quote from GrimmRec »

It might be subjective Archangel, but for example the Flame Levi is not only a terrible card, but it is a generic looking tank-thing to boot and has nothing to do with mages, lore-wise, game-wise or any other wise. I honestly would like some of what the artist was smoking.

Above you stated that you like neptulon the most. Couldn't that be said about him and shamans? I'm not that good with wow lore though.

Quote from GrimmRec »

I registered just to tell you that you have a terrible taste.

(j/k, was meaning to for a long time)

But seriously, most of the wacky art is just dreadful. In the original Warcraft (3 and FT), goblins were a bit crazy, but it still fit the setting. WoW kinda ran away with that and unfortunately HS is continuing with making it even worse.

Best? Hard to say, lot of the reused art from previous blizz works is kickass, golden Neptulon might be my favorite.

edit: typo

oh man i just see golden neptulon for first time and .. that totally wins it for me
to the @OP
i agree on some stuff (king of the jungle and troggz are ugly) but it's beyond me how flame leviathan is good looking and how Puddlestomper is bad looking.. Also Mal'ganis? SRSLY? you should check his golden version for more of a shadowflame looks

my favourites are
<- My avatar

Kezan Mystic (idk if goblin can be drawn to look more beautiful than her)
Ogre Ninja - best looking ogre hands down
Floating Watcher 
Glaivezooka
Vol'jin

you really missed out some amazing looking cards while mentioning bad looking cards like flame leviathan

Best: Vol'jin

Worst: The wannabe savannah highmane

Quote from Mister_Smith »

Okay seriously how the fuck did that NOT easily win?

I agree. I'm gonna craft 2 golden versions of that straight away.

I don't dislike many threads but this art-work thread is terrible. Many of the cards you mentioned are cool looking and you certainly missed a lot of great ones that people above have probably mentioned. I was mildly hurt by your Puddlestomper critique as its one of my favorites to look at. Hes just do disgruntled and hes totally gonna stomp in your puddle. I love it. *tears*

the problem with Mal'Ganis is he doesn't have a background.  Where is he?  Sitting in a photo booth?

Quote from Wraith421 »

the problem with Mal'Ganis is he doesn't have a background.  Where is he?  Sitting in a photo booth?

I like Mufasa artwork.

I'd say Iron Juggernaut is the coolest looking.

Flame Leviathan's look is unimpressive both as an in-game boss and a card.

No offense to the artist but King of Beast does look more comic than royal. Love Iron Juggernaut for the details of the image.

Best: ogre ninja

worst: Christmas tree of life

on king of beast: inbreeding was a common practice among the aristocracy 

Echo of Medivh is THE WORST art in whole game, not only GvG. I looks like screenshot from WoW

I really don't like Quartermaster, King of Beasts, Spider Tank's art.

I really like Gallywix, Iron Sensei, Demonheart, Madder Bomber.

Quote from HESJ »

Well, guys, I think I got it. After staring at King of Beasts and throwing up a little in my mouth, I finally know what makes him look so... 'weird'. What's wrong with the art of our feline friend is the shading. The 'left' half of the card's artwork is covered entirely in shadows, while his face and forelegs are completely endulged in some kind of light source, so there aren't really any 'hard' shades to differentiate the relief in it's face, so it looks really just straight out flat as hell. In short, the part the artist wanted us to focus on lacks contrast, which is a shame. I think if a decent photoshopper were to add a little more contrast in it's face and generally the front half of it's body, making the lights a little more subtle, he could look like a King of Beasts. But like this, he just looks like some derpy little housecat. 

Talked to a friend who is a very well known artist (painter) about this picture to get their opinion.  This is what was said:

The forehead of the lion looks more like that of an ape.  The ear is too small and too far away from the face.  Lions don't have those cheekbones, again more like an ape.  The snout should be much longer, less flat.  The arm size of the lion is far too exaggerated.

Also said:  "A very bad job".

Golden Mal'Ganis is pretty cool: