I am unsure what the issue is. If you feel that they were overpriced, than my suggestion is to not buy one. If you just felt like they shouldn't be called Animations, then it might have gone better if you worded it as though you considered an animation to be smoother or longer. However, the direct assertion that they "are not animations" will be received poorly, because you're telling the artist they're wrong about their own stuff and it just comes off as rude.

But even if it didn't, it's not really "constructive criticism". He is marketing two frame images, and it's really very obvious that they are only two frame images. You didn't mention how he might improve them, you just said they weren't animations. Which, okay, let's say I'll agree with you there, they're not animations. But I don't see how that changes anything at all. Say something like "I think reducing the frame rate would be beneficial since these are not fluid" (example; not a real criticism). To be constructive criticism, you gotta tell them what you think is off, and it's nice if you also say how it could be done better. I really only saw you say "they're not animations" and that just seems more like you disagree with the concept he's selling (which is okay too, but that tends to be a personal thing).

I am also confused as to why they are lazy, since he previously only did avatars that had one frame. Isn't that lazier than two frames, or is calling it an animation what makes it lazy?


Anyway, I found your argument faulty, but idk if I'm impartial. I try to be, so I analyzed it with as little bias as I could muster. Maybe you can do the same for me? :0