I mean no offense here; but India does not deserve this in its newer design.
Would I be out of order (as it were) to suggest that the Foster model is being scrutinized but for of its location geographically? I suspect so.
Why American and European developers aren't smashing down Lord Foster's front door to snatch a totally choice design such as this eludes me just as much. And how, if I may respectfully inquire, is this new render a stack of unidentifiable objects? This lovely thing positively *shrieks* symmetry, unlike the previous rendition...and, as long as we're dropping names, Koolhaus's outrage planned for Jersey City. IMO, *ordered*, yet soothingly abstract geometry is precisely where the beauty of this design makes the whole a FTW deal, *location aside*. Which leads me...
...to my point about India: It has been suggested in this thread that Mumbai is having problems harnessing enough electric power simply to keep up. This is one salient point among many that can be legitimately broached in argument against foisting ultra-modernity upon a hodgepodge of traditions that still seem to languish in the Industrial Revolution era.
IMO Mumbai is simply trying too hard to be like Dubai and Shanghai (rhyme + apropos analogy =
). Designing supertalls, however subjectively pleasing or nauseating, ought not to be the measure of how any mega-city awash in technological bounty stakes its claim on the global stage. Nor should it be any sort of indicator of how a still-underdeveloped country's culture and society reconciles their ancient, storied past with their legitimate struggles to conform to the 21st Century.
Long Story Short: Amazing render...completely wrong location for many honest reasons.