>>112857348. Flat soles, but not into the realistic face
>>11285740Does the promotional face look better in your opinion?
Looks fine, clothes hide the joints nicely but 1/6 so not interested. But if you are get off the fence and grab her. No need to keep asking.
>>11285770Would she look good on a shelf on her own though?
>>11285770Well she costs 200 bucks.
>>112857347+ meltzer stars, best toy ever held in the tokyo dome.
>>11285760nta but I think the face on the right is better. The left face is too doll like
>>11285865Yeah me too. The manufacturer changed the face at the last minute without informing everyone who preordered her. Kinda scummy but turned out to be a happy accident I guess
>>112857345/10Besides liking the shorts, the rest of the design is boring to me.>>11285862kek
>>11285910think she would look better with a cape?
>>112857345
So on the fence about her.
>>11285734How much is she?
>>11286831Around 180
>>11285734I don't know who this character is, but her visual design is so boring & bland. She looks like one of the million generic asian girl images spewed out from Chinese AI slop "artists."
>>11286901Other way around probably. She's from a show which aired in the early 2000s.
>>11285785Yeah, it looks good.With toys I feel you either have one, two, or too many. One or two interesting figures is a cool conversation piece, more than two and it's "this guy has a collecting problem".Just my opinion though.
>>11286925Cool thanks
>>11285760Right. She looks sickly otherwise
>>11287000Same face but different pupils
>>11285734
Bought her hopefully i dont regret it
>>11286901Racist
