@simon_four_fingers Ok, I do think you’re seeing this very much as either black or white. Designing a car that isn’t a mishmash of other brands’ design language isn’t the same as designing something that doesn’t look like a car.
It’s interesting to see how this design in particular seems to be an opinion splitter though, to me it is hard to see that some see this design as being successful and not copying any more than most other cars out there, as to me it is both sloppy and totally lacking in an identity of its own. It might go on to sell well, but it is not the kind of car that will form what we in the future will come to think of as being ‘Kia’. A design process is a compromise between many stakeholders and designers will not always get their way, in this one it is as if they weren’t even involved in the process. We have to aim high to end up above average.
It is interesting to how it is splitting people. I see elements of the design that take after other cars, and yeah they are heavy infulences. This package isn’t reading like some of the junk out there, (take a rich guy + wants stupid fast supercar + mash up direct translations from other supercars = another failed supercar company) .
I push for the best that I can do with anything I work on. I also try to not give in to what is wanted and shoot for what is needed (and the rest of the cliché things one can say).
I’d disagree - brands aside look at the feature sets of the vehicles. This lined up next to the Genesis (which for all intents and purposes is it’s sistership) have far more in common with the big ship echelon than they do the Toyota Avalons
Toyota, Honda, and Nissan do not offer ANYTHING in the full size sedan, RWD format. The Avalon is just a fat Camry.
These cars are specifically marketed as luxury, which even if nothing about the word “Korean” sounds luxurious, they are marked up as a premium brand - which still puts it into competition with the likes of Lexus, Infiniti, etc.
It isn’t a direct competitor to the German elite, but the people who spend $50k on a fat luxury car are typically not younger buyers. They’re executives, retirees, and people who make enough money who want to spend $50k on a car that in no way shouts “Hey I’m driving a BMW and I’m better than you” - they just want something well appointed for $10k less then a competitor.
The new Azera is much more of competition for that upper-mid Sedan where cars like the Acura TL, G35, etc usually play.
Thanks for bringing that one up Ray. I really like the new Fords, but I don’t like that they are so close to their in-house counterparts. The new Explorer looks an awful lot like the new Land Rovers, this looks like an Aston. (Even though it does look good)
But, is it copying or being inspired by if it comes from a product within your own company (in a round about way)?
Other thing is 2 luxury cars can have 2 different markets. There are bland-looking cars with all the nice features at a reasonable price and there are the ones with strong identity and the “Look at me” badge. That`s two very different selling points for two very different buyers.
I too was disappointed with the Ashton Camry Ford. Not because it’s bad but because it’s not very fresh.
You can differentiate more, still have broad appeal, and have a stronger brand. I think that’s the frustration Richard has. I have it too. In a sense, ugliness is preferable to ‘sameness’ (anyone read The Giver?), because it gives us variety.
EG Subaru used to do some quirky, but interesting stuff. Now they just look like new forerunner/prius mash-ups. Not beautiful or unique.
At least Kia does a decent job of knocking things off. Heck, the new Forte looks better than the Civic, like what the Civic could have been with better proportions.
Polarizing designs that don’t sell might be great designs, but sh*t products.
If you go out of business with an amazing design you can’t sell, design is no longer a value proposition, it’s design for art sake. That’s why cars are products and not sculptures.
Designers might respect you for your difference, but if you miss your target market (which again is OLD PEOPLE).
Cadillac shifted their viewpoint to try and attract younger buyers who aim for the BMW crowd. That’s why you see CTS-V’s burning around the Nurburgring, but not any Genesis or Azera sedans.
Somewhere in a board room in Korea there’s a picture of an old person with a picture of this car underneath it on a trend board. Next to that poster is a picture of a Veloster and a hipster. It’s not racist, it’s just standard auto marketing response.
I guarantee you people on the street would say “wow thats a nice car sir!”
First sentence of the article, and someone touched on it before as well: it’s only for the Korean market. 99% of cars on the road in Korea are made in Korea. In 2011, something like 4000 foreign cars TOTAL were sold in a country of 65 million people.
This is partly due to their trade agreements but also because the culture their is to buy Korean. This ugly barge will sell, and probably quite well. Their market is older rich Koreans who have lived through the Korean war, and seen their country go from lowest of the low to an economic and technological powerhouse. They will buy this to support what they worked so hard for.
HOWEVER, it is a sign of wealth to buy a foreign car there, so perhaps only the most patriotic will buy it. Actually, government fleets for sure. done.
Oops. must admit I didn’t read the article. The link was more for the pictures and I wanted to link to something that was in English. The original article I read claims it actually will be introduced worldwide, but that Kia hasn’t set any dates for this yet.
Sorry, I didn’t word that statement very precisely. What I meant to say is that I believe a spectrum of stuff in the world, ranging from beautiful to ugly, is preferable to sameness. I would also rather have a square white box than a flamboyant flash-in-the-pan product, but if everything was a square white box, the world would be a much less interesting place. The ugly helps us better appreciate the beautiful.
Sometimes sameness looks pretty good (the Forte), but often sameness is an indicator of laziness and that laziness is inherent in the product’s soul and details (EG the new Subaru).