For me, designs are successful based on the impression and experience they give people. The cyber truck to me gives off a futuristic vibe, it's intentional, it's a design that knows what it wants. Minimal polygons, minimal rounded edges. Uncommon material/finish. Visually striking, unique, memorable.

I think the Aztec isn't a good design because it wants to be futuristic but doesn't go far enough. Because it's trying to retain some traditional elements it looks like design by committee.

My impression is the pt cruiser and SSR were intended to be modern takes on retro/classy designs from say, the 50s. In the sense that they're curved they succeed, but the curves are in the wrong places and the curve radiuses are wrong. They look bubbly. They look like toys. The effect is amplified because they don't have a lot of the fine detail that was present on old cars.

[–] freebee@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

a design that throws any modern safety feature in designing overboard is a bad design. It's ugly, and it will age even uglier. It's an incredibly dangerous design for anyone not inside it, it should be banned.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

To clarify I'm talking about aesthetics. I'm not defending anything safety wise. But that's an unrelated argument from "it's ugly".

It's clearly an emotionally charged object, which is why in one of my other comments here I said I'd probably accept a pt cruiser instead, just because people make the instant connection between the truck and elon musk.

[–] freebee@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

It stands out, it's recognizable. I guess that works for some people, I personally think it's ugly. I stylewise somewhat get that the low-poly idea has an appeal to people, but then the no rounded corners and the choice of material totally kills it for me.