Why the art looks "bad"

Re-explaining why the new art looks "awful" since people still want to hate on it.

The old artist preferred work with colour, the new artist prefers to work with line and shape. Artstyles can tell you a lot about the artist, and to me it's very apparent that each artist prefers a different part of the process. The old artist seems to prefer colouring and shading, whereas the new artist prefers lineart.

Neither artstyle is objectively bad, and neither is objectively better than the other.

It's just that the old artist had very bland, simple lineart, because he needed to save time in order to do gradients and shade properly, since he does soft-shading a lot more.

The new artist doesn't need to do soft-shading, nor do they have the time, because they put a lot more effort into their lineart. The lineart varies in weight a lot more, and they use harsher colours, which also adds a lot more contrast in comparison to the older art, where everything is a lot more blended and lighter.

Instead of soft-shading, the new artist uses a lot more harsher shadows, that tend to follow the lineart. Styles with heavy lineart and flatter colours are actually better for action-oriented comics because the shape and direction of movement tends to be a lot easier to follow in fight scenes.

It's so jarring because the old artist tended to paint in a way the blended everything together, which isn't bad. It just gives this sense of "everything belongs together".

The new artist, however, prefers clarity and tries to make each thing distinct from each other (again, not a bad thing). They also work with values a lot more, and there's more contrast., hence why the colours looks so different.

Yeah, that's it. It's really that simple.