安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题
It's well made, for sure, but I personally just don't see this working stylistically in TF2.
I understand it's a very popular contribution but really, I don't see it fitting. I also know that Frozen Aurora is in the game, and I really don't think it should be, but yeah.
Well made, but not for me.
IT'S SPACE AND I LOVE SPACE!!!!
and even more with the combination of blue and purple
good job
I also appreciate your honesty. Honestly, IMO, it should be a standard to show the different wears on the Workshop page, but I don't work at Valve and we pretty much know for the majority of war paints the lower wears are just going to look worse, so... eh. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The reason, however, I ask war paint creators to show off the different wears is because of two reasons: 1) They'll make up 4/5 of the possible skins floating around in circulation, and 2) While they usually do look worse, it's varying degrees of just how bad it actually is. For example, the Damascus & Mahogany, Kill Covered, Hazard Warning, and Bamboo Brushed skins look semi-decent at lower wears, but Croc Dusted and Quack Canvassed are absolutely atrocious at Field-Tested and below (This is all my opinion, plz don't crucify me).