Support NeoGAF

[Planet]

In your redesign you aligned the 'Ins' with the front of the O and the 'mniac' with the back of the O. That's why your redesign is simply wrong.

At least you are trying to make your point instead of repeating over and over again how I would be chucked out of the arts course in elementary school for daring to voice my opinion.

I still have to disagree though, because the way my brain perceives it, the letters INS and MNIAC are flat and aligned with the "camera", but the O is tilted to the left. So the way I put it makes the flat letters keep equal distance from the outermost corner of the threedimensional shape, being the frontal part of the O to the left and the back side to the right. If I knew how to do such stuff I would visualize it, but alas...

Anyway, they chose to do it they way it is and I will learn to live with it.

 

[Sande]

If you view the O as a 3D object and the rest of the letters as flat, you have to decide on which 'depth' the flat letters are compared to the O. In the original logo the flat letters are on the same depth as the back of the 3D O. That's why the left side of the O (the front side) seem closer to the 'Ins' part. This is correct, because that's how things work in 3D space.

In your redesign you aligned the 'Ins' with the front of the O and the 'mniac' with the back of the O. That's why your redesign is simply wrong.

You're thinking the 3D situation wrong. Moving the O back to front wouldn't move it sideways or affect the spaces on either side. You must be thinking of a skewed O moving on an skewed axis.

Left to right alignment would obviously be centered and back to front alignment would only affect the apparent size.

This isn't to say that the spacing should be changed, just that your argument against it doesn't hold water.