Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: pecenipicek on December 22, 2005, 05:54:36 am
-
Well, i have to say, some of the hi-poly meshes have completely lost the feel of FS2. for example, the Orion(Bobboau, Stratcomm or Vasudan Admiral, not sure, it had both awesome modelling and texturing), it completely lost the feel of a effin' huge ship which could kick arse from Earth to Vasuda Prime and back, it now just looks... wrong. dont get me wrong guys, all those are nice models and meshes, but most of you people HTL-ing have completely missed the FS2 feel to the ships.
as fine examples of awesome hi-polying, the Aeolus, Levy, Fenris, Deimos, Perseus, Serapis(spelling?), Herc mkI, Myrmidon.
most awesome meshes that managed to retain the FS2 feel to it, without straying too much in the "artistic freedom" area, whilst retaining full beauty of them :) (these are in the mediavp's)
as bad examples... well, for one the hi-poly Hecate which someone is doing... Quad turrets? a terran ship so smooth? the hell no.
the Moloch which is gettign hi-polyed? it looks exactly like the ingame model with a few bits attached. simply not working for me.
the Erinyes which is already in the MediaVP's. the texturing is SO UTTERLY WRONG it cannot be described by words. the nose simply kills it for me.
those that werent reffered to as being in the media VP's are from the FSU forum...
your thoughts people?
-
Well... I like the Hi-Poly-Ships...
For me, those ships didn't kill the FS2-Feeling... Just.. Enhanced it...
-
Me likes them too, just one thing I don't understand. What excatly is the real "feel" of Freespace 2 ships ? How that feeling could be described ?
IMO the current HTL Ships are massive imrovement over the "old" ones, both visually and technically.
-
most of them are, but my line of thought is that some simply do not touch the FS2 feel exactly, especially the ones adding some things never seen or mentioned in FS2(the hecate quad turrets for example), and oftentimes, some HTL-ers go completely overboard with hi-polying...
-
Well. I'll have to admit the quad turrets kinda suprised me. Too much Star Wars like, maybe.
-
One thing to remember is that the HTL ships are completely optional so if you don't like some of them all you have to do is extract the old versions from Sparky.vp and compile a new media VP which you give priority over mv_models.vp.
Pretty simple really and it allows you enjoy the models you do like.
Personally I've liked all the high-poly models better than the original versions so I use them all even in the cases where I think there could be improvements.
-
To quote the (in)famous Darksaber: "If you don't like it, make it yourself."
-
I have to say I somewhat agree with pecenipicek...
HTL models are all great models, I have nothing against them... It is important to remember that some HTL models might feel un-FS2-ish because they are different. Orion for example, good looking model, different from the original. That should not be. All that time we have played with vanilla models, and then we get same ships with slight differences. And you can sense that something is wrong (that may be a strong word), it is not something obvious, but you still feel it.
Another thing is that to some people, polycount=quality. Low poly model can still be good (original Aten still fits with HTL Fenris). I feel I must metion how I hate the "wing it!"-comments new models often recive. But I just dont understand adding "detail" just for the sake of upping the polycount.
But back on topic...
HTL Fenris is a good example of good HTL-ing. It still feels like the good ol' Fenris/Leviathan just like the HTL Orion doesn't. There is no humbug additions in Fenris. I again remind you I think there is nothing wrong in the Orion model itself, it just is different from the original.
What concerns me is this: Are FS models becoming "modernized"?
Consider the new BSG series for a moment and compare it to the old movie... What did they do to the ships? I liked the old Galactica, and the new Cylon Raider is just hideous (old one is one of the best spaceship models in existance). Are FS models evolving?
All the HTL model changes have been discussed in these boards. Minor changes in some models have been accepted. "It's just a small change, and it looks cool" (I too have thought like this on occasion). But what was not considered, is that when there are a number of these minor changes, how do they change the look of the game when compared to the old game? And is this change good?
Another concern of mine: Will the modellers see this as hostile topic and get angry at us who think differently?
Don't! There are many HTL models that really look good while still maintaining the rugged FS2 feel.
-
As I said there's no reason why you can't use the old models until someone who feels similarly gets around to making the ships you feel are wrong. :)
-
What karajorma said.
Personally I don't "feel" anything when I see them. I just know what they are and that's good enough for me. The fact that they look way much better than their old low-poly models is just simply for graphics sake which is much better as far as I'm concerned. I still get the same message, as I used to.
-
I have seen a number of things showcased around here that have deviated too far from the old designs, but I think all the high poly models currently in the vps are pretty faithful to the originals. I like them all so far.
That being said, I don't use the Orion model, but not because the model is too different from the old one. There is an issue with the placement of some subsystems on that ship, which is making one of my missions a lot harder than it should be. This should be an easy fix though.
Another thing is that to some people, polycount=quality.
This is true. I think some of the fighters in particular have too high polycounts considering their size and/or level of detail. In many cases though it's really the textures that are the problem. Some of the new models are very good but are still running off the old textures, so as a result they look almost the same as the originals. I think these will look far better once their textures are improved.
-
I think some HTL ships could be changed a bit. Like a Herc or Ulysses, for example. Why make it all shiny and brand sparkling new, when you could make it look like a P.O.S., complete with battle scars and damaged hull? Keep in mind those ships are 30+ years old. Maybe I'd like to fly a worn down herc once in a while. The shiny herc does look awesome though...
-
If you want people to make HTL versions of ships, you have to be prepared to allow them artistic freedom to do so. Not like people get paid for this, after all.
-
Another thing, take a look at a random HTL thread, Galemp's Dis for instance, the thread has 1,111 views vs 39 replies.
So, here is the way I think, if you haven't posted to tell the moddeler what, why and how the model needs to be changed, your opinion does not count. It's not like we can read your minds to see what you like and dislike.
-
I for one think that Bob/Galemp's Orion makes it far more intimidating, and gives it a better sense of a 2 km long warship. Recalls modern-day aircraft carriers, only on a larger scale. And the Hecate that I have in the media VPs doesn't have quad turrets, and who cares if it's that smooth? So is the Deimos, and that's one of the ones you praised. Hell, the stock model for the Hecate was smooth. It's been influenced by Vasudan design. Get over it. And yes, to repeat what's been said, if you don't like it, make your own.
-
I think some HTL ships could be changed a bit. Like a Herc or Ulysses, for example. Why make it all shiny and brand sparkling new, when you could make it look like a P.O.S., complete with battle scars and damaged hull? Keep in mind those ships are 30+ years old. Maybe I'd like to fly a worn down herc once in a while. The shiny herc does look awesome though...
The design is 30 years old. Given the survivability rate of fighters in FS1 and FS2, I'd be surprised if many of those ships would have survived unaltered (or unreplaced by newer manufactures). Plus, why would they leave a fighter with a damaged or scarred hull?
EDIT; although both already have damage anyways on the V maps. For one thing, the Ulysses has a number of bullet-scar type details on it.
-
The only HTL ship I dislike is the Deimos, the tech descroption specifies it as sleek, but then there are great big armour belts along the sides of it.
-
The design is 30 years old. Given the survivability rate of fighters in FS1 and FS2, I'd be surprised if many of those ships would have survived unaltered (or unreplaced by newer manufactures). Plus, why would they leave a fighter with a damaged or scarred hull?
Running out of money, perhaps? I dunno. I just want to fly a damaged fighter. Maybe those decals can do the trick...
-
Running out of money, perhaps? I dunno. I just want to fly a damaged fighter. Maybe those decals can do the trick..
(quotes went funny, I'm assuming this is the relevant bit)
Sure, I have no objection to damaged skins. But just not for the default HTL model.
-
I'll be honest, threads like this one really tick me off. And it's not because people disagree with an implimentation of a model, it's because we (be that Bob, or Galemp, or Raa, or FireCrack, or WeatherOp, or Raven, or Nico, or myself, or anyone else who spends their free time to build these things) get crap no matter what we do to improve them. If you still want the old Orion, it's a two minute job to extract it from the retail VPs and we don't have to hear about it. If you want to make a high poly one yourself, then please do so. If you want to make suggestions about how to improve them, then that's great too. Every person I listed, besides maybe Nico (who's the best moddeler among us anyway) actually takes that sort of thing into consideration (not that you'll see it necessarily, but we do listen and often try them out). Simply saying that something "is bad" is helpful to no-one. Especially when people say polar opposite things and expect everything to be perfect.
Oh, by the way, one damaged ship is fine, but if you apply it to the HTL model, you wind up with every instance of the class being damaged in the exact same way.
-
No no SC.
I scrutinize[/i] you for your work. Bad SC. Making superior models only for them not to be like I want them to be in my super imagination of how things should be.
Honestly, I don't know why we haven't spanked you already.
-
okay, to prevent any confusion here and possible "insults" flying my way.
i really appreciate the stuff you people did for FS2, most of you modelers made truly awesome models, and most of the models in the Media VP's are true to their feel. this rant is more directed to the guys doing some... unfitting models in the FSU section.
about the "do it yourself" way. i seriously thought of it. i actually am quite good at keeping stuff low-poly, but i terminally suck at texturing. i was thinking about doing either the Moloch or HercII, but i simply do not know how to get a decent outline to start with.
whenever i tried, i was cleaning up the mesh, and in the process almost always broke the UVW mapping. which oftentimes made me quit that.
perhaps i will try and do a HTL mesh. perhaps.
but, Prophet worded it the best. my whole feeling for FSU.
i know i can punt files out of the Media VP's if i want to. i seriously thought about that, but i didnt do it for the simple fact of being able to rant about it. [end sarcasm :p]
-
I think that what MrBig101 meant with the "damage" thing was that old ships should have the kind of "worn out" look. Like how a new car is all shiny and stuff, but a 10 year old car does not shine and has perhaps small dents and such.
But about this model business... What the hell is wrong with you people?
When someone questions something here. Some people immediatley lash out with comments like StratComm up there. Can someone please point out to me where has someone given crap about the hard work he or someone else has done?
Did anyone considered the issues I presented? There are many questionmarks in my previous post. I want to belive that this is a place where people can ask questions and make comments about things. Instead those whe are brave enought to bring their opinions in to light are met with "do it yourself because you don't like what I am doing" -response. Even thought the asker has nothing against the hard work people are doing. Like pecenipicek's and my posts seem to indicate. You read them, did you?
if you don't like it, make your own.
I DO like them (HTL models), like it says in my previous post. And pecenipicek also seems to like them (mostly), if I am not misunderstanding. You read those posts, did you?
I will risk my sanity and ask one more question (yes I am quite insane).
What does HTL stand for exactly? Is it upping the polycount of the old design.
Or is it upping the polycount of the old design by adding/changing stuff that does not exist in the old model to make the model look cool in the eyes of some people. (That was not meant to be hostility towards the modellers. It would propably look cool in my eyes too, but if it is different it will bother me.)
Answer that and I will go away and leave those of better kind to make this community thrive without my tainting influence.
Prophet
- The miserable little bastard who doesn't like what the models around him are like and want's them changed regardless of what other people feel.
-
Considering that you claim to be some kind of good modeller, pecenipicek, why don't you just fix them yourself instead of whining months after they were made?
The models that are in the mediaVP were released because the authors felt that they were done, or got tired of working on them and handed them off to someone else to finish. There are actually a couple of models that haven't been released (By Nico) because he never felt that he finished them. (ad actually, he definitely did listen to people...he was who I first thought of when thinking about how to respond to this thread. In working on the Moloch, he received some complaints about the double-prow he'd given it, and so made teh gap between the front thingies smaller.
Edit: this kind of thing pops up ocasionally, when a HTL model is made, but generally it's in the context of doing something about it...not "the texturing is WRONG". But altogether, since you aren't really complaining about the mediaVPs, and not complaining about models still in development, I'm not sure I see what this thread is supposed to do except generate negativity against new models. Because obviously, you can't please everybody with the same model designs.
-
But about this model business... What the hell is wrong with you people?
When someone questions something here. Some people immediatley lash out with comments like StratComm up there. Can someone please point out to me where has someone given crap about the hard work he or someone else has done?
Did anyone considered the issues I presented? There are many questionmarks in my previous post. I want to belive that this is a place where people can ask questions and make comments about things. Instead those whe are brave enought to bring their opinions in to light are met with "do it yourself because you don't like what I am doing" -response. Even thought the asker has nothing against the hard work people are doing. Like pecenipicek's and my posts seem to indicate. You read them, did you?
:yes:
I so expected the usual indignant responses to show up at some point. :p
I will risk my sanity and ask one more question (yes I am quite insane).
What does HTL stand for exactly? Is it upping the polycount of the old design.
Or is it upping the polycount of the old design by adding/changing stuff that does not exist in the old model to make the model look cool in the eyes of some people. (That was not meant to be hostility towards the modellers. It would propably look cool in my eyes too, but if it is different it will bother me.)
Answer that and I will go away and leave those of better kind to make this community thrive without my tainting influence.
It stands for hardware transform and lighting, a feature that was added into video cards a few years ago, but makes no sense at all in this context. I hate that name "HTL models" myself. High poly models is much more appropriate. I guess they are supposed to add details to the originals (like stuff that was previously part of the textures) while still sticking close to their overall design/shape.
As I said earlier, I think all the currently finished models are pretty good in this respect (not sure why the new Orion and Hecate are taking the flak, as those look pretty close to the originals to me), but there were some WIP models posted around the forums that change the basic shape of the original, which is going too far in my opinion.
-
You know, that "indignant response" as something that I'm more than happy to step up and take. I do get very tired of people sitting up on their high horse saying how little things fit their idea of what is and is not Freespace when I, along with everyone else who's been contributing to the Media VPs, want to do just that. I think people have a hard time remembering that what is done whan a ship is given a full high-poly treatment is not to preserve the original lines exactly, but to do what the modeler thinks the original artist would have done had :v: had effectively unlimited polygons to work with. And I'll get on this rant again; I keep seeing polycount trumpeted as either a huge benefit or some huge cost; the reality is that polycount is not that big of an issue as long as you aren't trying to use wireframe. There are now 8k+ poly asteroids in mv_models, and I have not yet heard a peep about performance issues. Period. The difference between a couple of hundred polygons is really insignificant. But that's not even my point; I don't mind AT ALL to have models critiqued when they are in WIP, but don't rant on something that's already done. That's all I'm saying, and all I feel that needs to be said. To everyone involved in this discussion.
-
I think that what MrBig101 meant with the "damage" thing was that old ships should have the kind of "worn out" look. Like how a new car is all shiny and stuff, but a 10 year old car does not shine and has perhaps small dents and such.
They kind of have that already, though.
-
You know, that "indignant response" as something that I'm more than happy to step up and take. I do get very tired of people sitting up on their high horse saying how little things fit their idea of what is and is not Freespace when I, along with everyone else who's been contributing to the Media VPs, want to do just that. I think people have a hard time remembering that what is done whan a ship is given a full high-poly treatment is not to preserve the original lines exactly, but to do what the modeler thinks the original artist would have done had had effectively unlimited polygons to work with. And I'll get on this rant again; I keep seeing polycount trumpeted as either a huge benefit or some huge cost; the reality is that polycount is not that big of an issue as long as you aren't trying to use wireframe. There are now 8k+ poly asteroids in mv_models, and I have not yet heard a peep about performance issues. Period. The difference between a couple of hundred polygons is really insignificant. But that's not even my point; I don't mind AT ALL to have models critiqued when they are in WIP, but don't rant on something that's already done. That's all I'm saying, and all I feel that needs to be said. To everyone involved in this discussion.
Sorry, but that makes no sense. Isn't the whole FS upgrade project basically a perpetual WIP? I don't see how anything can ever be finished to absolute perfection in that sense. There is always room for improvement. I generally make any suggestions I have in the model's WIP thread, but sometimes one might not notice the thread and only see it in the game after it has made into the vps.
I see your point about the polygons though, and the new asteroids are fantastic since they actually look way better than the originals in the game. It's more an issue of whether the polys are being put to good use than their actual quantity.
-
Sorry, but that makes no sense. Isn't the whole FS upgrade project basically a perpetual WIP?
I'd say no, with the caveat that completion is very much down to individual satisfaction. But I don't think there's any way you could run any sort of project if individual pieces of work were never signed off as completed.
-
Probably not the right place to post, but on the topic of "damaged older ship textures":
- Remember, even through this is 200-300 years in the future, these are still spaceships and space is still space. Fighter craft here and now require an ungodly ammount of maintanance to make sure they are in working order, and rest assured any noticable dings and dents are going to be worked over before ANYONE thinks about flying that plane.
The rules that apply to cars and other less sophicticated equipment does not apply to spaceships and their ilk, or even modern fightercraft.
On Topic:
-Although I respect and understand the topic creator's qualms, I really must salute the Hi-Poly modders for their work and in keeping so much with the original feel of the ship designs. I imagine working on someone elses design is probably MORE difficult than building one of your own, since you're working within boundries set by the game and legions of rabid fans (of which, I'm sure, you are the most rabid). There has not been one reworked model that I have not liked.
-
I've noticed the biggest rumblings are with ships that are heavily tile mapped. The Fenris pretty much had its own map already, as do all of the fighters. But the Orion and Hecate, all they had going for them was the now relatively low poly design, nothing really to go on. So there people see, in different ways, how it could have been improved. On the Fenris you clearly see a part that should be greebled, but on the Orion, it's not clear at all what parts should be extruded or redone.
-
The title of this thread shows nothing good could come out of it. I mean..."A rant upon some upgraded ships people have done in their spare time and released to the community without compensation out of the goodness of their hearts". Yeah...those bastards...taking away from the feel. It's not their fault, it's your fault for downloading the models. I could understand a "dicussion on HTL ships" or "some criticism" but good God...a rant over how some of you don't like free stuff you don't have to take. A rant...
-
Sorry, but that makes no sense. Isn't the whole FS upgrade project basically a perpetual WIP? I don't see how anything can ever be finished to absolute perfection in that sense. There is always room for improvement. I generally make any suggestions I have in the model's WIP thread, but sometimes one might not notice the thread and only see it in the game after it has made into the vps.
I see your point about the polygons though, and the new asteroids are fantastic since they actually look way better than the originals in the game. It's more an issue of whether the polys are being put to good use than their actual quantity.
Well...what's the solution then?
I'm not saying that the opinion is bad, just that it seems like it'd (this thread) be a little discouraging to the people who spend hours working on the models, and doesn't seem to serve much reasonable purpose besides...
Edit: Clarification.
-
But about this model business... What the hell is wrong with you people?
When someone questions something here. Some people immediatley lash out with comments like StratComm up there. Can someone please point out to me where has someone given crap about the hard work he or someone else has done?
Stratt's point was this: "Where were all of these opinions and complaints when the models were being made?"
And he's right. Modellers get such little feedback from the community when we're showing off models, and as a result we finish the models as we think they might look. Then everyone start's flailing their arms and screaming herasy because it differs a little from the 500 poly model that was in game.
Another of my peeves is when people take a model that has little to no detail on it (Orion, Aeolus, etc.) and compare the high poly job it gets to that of, say, the Fenris, which has the best and largest maps of any ship and that lets you *clearly* see what should be added to it.
Those kinds of posts aren't helpful... If people don't want any divergence from the initial design they shouild stick with the original models. Anything we do to try to add detail and interest to the meshes is almost always met with people screaming that the meshes are changing too much. And it's annoying at times, frankly.
-
I'd say no, with the caveat that completion is very much down to individual satisfaction. But I don't think there's any way you could run any sort of project if individual pieces of work were never signed off as completed.
But if there is an otherwise legitimate gripe about a model, should it not be considered just because a model is already in the vps? I don't see why this should matter at all. And in practice it doesn't anyway; content in the vps is updated all the time. I'm sure that, for example, the Orion engine placement issue I mentioned earlier will be fixed at some point given that it alters gameplay.
On a side note, one thing I just noticed is that the rearmost big turret on the Hecate (a model that I think is otherwise very well done) is too small compared to the others. I think I can guess what the justification for this was, but it's based on what is almost certainly a small Volition bug in the original ships.tbl, so maybe it should be changed to be the same size as the others like it was in the original model.
Well...what's the solution then?
I'm not saying that the opinion is bad, just that it seems like it'd be a little discouraging to the people who spend hours working on the models, and doesn't seem to serve much reasonable purpose besides...
I would respond to the criticism on its own merit instead of bringing up all the attitude. I don't think the two posts under scrutiny were just complaining about everything and really deserved this sort of response (well, pecenipicek's comment on the Erinyes was definitely OTT, but most of the other points made were still worth discussing), even though I don't agree with what they're saying as far as the current models go.
-Although I respect and understand the topic creator's qualms, I really must salute the Hi-Poly modders for their work and in keeping so much with the original feel of the ship designs. I imagine working on someone elses design is probably MORE difficult than building one of your own, since you're working within boundries set by the game and legions of rabid fans (of which, I'm sure, you are the most rabid). There has not been one reworked model that I have not liked.
Agreed. :yes:
-
Hi poly FS model upgraders > Pecenicepek
If you want to complain - go make them yourself and see how hard it is to pick up from where :v: left off.
(I've actually tried it before, so dont say I dont know)
-
Modellers get such little feedback from the community when we're showing off models, and as a result we finish the models as we think they might look. Then everyone start's flailing their arms and screaming herasy because it differs a little from the 500 poly model that was in game.
Keep in mind that only the people who don't like a new model will start a ranting thread about it. The majority of people who like it will download it quietly and use it, a few will post some praise in the release thread. The supporting masses stay quite.
If you want to know what the opinion of the community is on something, make a poll.
And I'm referring to the old poll that was started by TrashMan about his new Orion vs. Bob's/GE's Orion vs. :v:'s Orion. The result was clearly in favour of the version that is now in the media_vp, although a lot of people are complaining about it.
I've seen to many good modelers being turned down by rants from a few people.
Everyone needs to remember: All the modelers here are working on this for free in their free time and sharing it with us out of their generosity. No one is forcing you to use any of their work. If a modeler decides that the Orion should have a huge pink bunny rabbit on the bow, he's free to do that.
-
Considering that you claim to be some kind of good modeller, pecenipicek, why don't you just fix them yourself instead of whining months after they were made?
Whining? Months after its been made? let me remind you i was banned for a better part of this year and the fact that i will not actually modify any models made by anyone here in the modelling sense. (perhaps fixing some textures, but for general taking care of models and getting em to work correctly in FS2, well, i dont have the patience to mess around with the POF-data...)
The models that are in the mediaVP were released because the authors felt that they were done, or got tired of working on them and handed them off to someone else to finish. There are actually a couple of models that haven't been released (By Nico) because he never felt that he finished them. (ad actually, he definitely did listen to people...he was who I first thought of when thinking about how to respond to this thread. In working on the Moloch, he received some complaints about the double-prow he'd given it, and so made teh gap between the front thingies smaller.
you're making it sound like i said that some models should be removed from the media VP's, whilst i made no such claim
Edit: this kind of thing pops up ocasionally, when a HTL model is made, but generally it's in the context of doing something about it...not "the texturing is WRONG". But altogether, since you aren't really complaining about the mediaVPs, and not complaining about models still in development, I'm not sure I see what this thread is supposed to do except generate negativity against new models. Because obviously, you can't please everybody with the same model designs.
i know that you cant please everybody.
Hi poly FS model upgraders > Pecenicepek
If you want to complain - go make them yourself and see how hard it is to pick up from where :v: left off.
(I've actually tried it before, so dont say I dont know)
are you challenging me to try to upgrade some FS model?
i know how hard it is, you think i didnt try it at least once in these almost two years of my 3D working?
my entire point to this thread was that altough some modelers missed the original feel a bit, and some models have a "bit" bad texturing job, most of the models and textures in the media vp's are capturing the FS feel to it quite nicely, some are thoroughly great.
my problem is more with the models that put details that simply arent there. okay, "artistic freedom" and all that, but where do we draw the line?
also, for giving comments about the models while they were done... well, i was kinda... banned from here and when karajorma said to me that everyone banned was unbanned, i decided to come back. i would have commented gladly whilst they were being made. if i could.
now, a little question for anyone doing hi-res textures, how do you people do them actually? what my limited grasp of PS tells me, it looks like the textures were first enlarged and then whoever made them fixed all the jagged edges that came to be. just my thought :)
-
From what I can remember, Lightspeed used the originals as a template, and actually rebuilt the texture from the bottom up, so the main image isn't enhanced as such, simply used as a template :)
Not sure though, you'd have to ask lighty.
-
From what I can remember, Lightspeed used the originals as a template, and actually rebuilt the texture from the bottom up, so the main image isn't enhanced as such, simply used as a template :)
if so, i'm very afraid :shaking:
-
I would respond to the criticism on its own merit instead of bringing up all the attitude. I don't think the two posts under scrutiny were just complaining about everything and really deserved this sort of response (well, pecenipicek's comment on the Erinyes was definitely OTT, but most of the other points made were still worth discussing), even though I don't agree with what they're saying as far as the current models go.
Thanks CP5670 :yes:
That means a lot to me. And you even disagree with me without getting angry! :yes:
Stratt's point was this: "Where were all of these opinions and complaints when the models were being made?"
And he's right. Modellers get such little feedback from the community when we're showing off models, and as a result we finish the models as we think they might look. Then everyone start's flailing their arms and screaming herasy because it differs a little from the 500 poly model that was in game.
Consider that not all people are able/want to check these boards daily. And when not checking the boards daily, you end up with lots of unread topics. And then you may miss a topic alltogether. Or if you are busy, you may have to just leave some topics unread. And when you see that some model has a part on it that is clearly different, it understandably attracts attention. Then couple of people (everyone, as you say) ask about it, and they get stoned to death?
Another of my peeves is when people take a model that has little to no detail on it (Orion, Aeolus, etc.) and compare the high poly job it gets to that of, say, the Fenris, which has the best and largest maps of any ship and that lets you *clearly* see what should be added to it.
Those kinds of posts aren't helpful... If people don't want any divergence from the initial design they shouild stick with the original models. Anything we do to try to add detail and interest to the meshes is almost always met with people screaming that the meshes are changing too much. And it's annoying at times, frankly.
You really are touchy are you? :wtf:
This topic has been about small things in couple of models. So don't you come screaming (that is the word you used) about how people thing meshes are crap.
-
You know this arguement should be about the people who like the stuff we make then at us. As Col. Fishguts said, If I wanted to add a big pink bow to the top of the Moloch I would. Whether you guys would like it I don't know( I hope not. :shaking:) But, the thing is, we can't force you to like it. But, majority wins everytime.
-
Stratt's point was this: "Where were all of these opinions and complaints when the models were being made?"
And he's right. Modellers get such little feedback from the community when we're showing off models, and as a result we finish the models as we think they might look. Then everyone start's flailing their arms and screaming herasy because it differs a little from the 500 poly model that was in game.
Consider that not all people are able/want to check these boards daily. And when not checking the boards daily, you end up with lots of unread topics. And then you may miss a topic alltogether. Or if you are busy, you may have to just leave some topics unread. And when you see that some model has a part on it that is clearly different, it understandably attracts attention. Then couple of people (everyone, as you say) ask about it, and they get stoned to death?
That is not the modeller's fault. If you don't show up and offer your opinion then your opinion isn't able to be considerred. And requesting changes after the model is done will only get you ignored, since all of the work that had to be done to get the model done is not wanted to be repeated.
Another of my peeves is when people take a model that has little to no detail on it (Orion, Aeolus, etc.) and compare the high poly job it gets to that of, say, the Fenris, which has the best and largest maps of any ship and that lets you *clearly* see what should be added to it.
Those kinds of posts aren't helpful... If people don't want any divergence from the initial design they shouild stick with the original models. Anything we do to try to add detail and interest to the meshes is almost always met with people screaming that the meshes are changing too much. And it's annoying at times, frankly.
You really are touchy are you? :wtf:
This topic has been about small things in couple of models. So don't you come screaming (that is the word you used) about how people thing meshes are crap.
1) I wasn't screaming. Stating politely my opinion. You are free to not comment, you know?
2) It does bother me, yes, that so many complain that the models diverge too much from the original, be it a triangle with thrusters, or a cube with other cubes sticking out of it, that the original model was.
3) And I never said they were crap. Is someone's true feelings finally coming out?
-
This thread can only degenerate without any real point to be had. However you slice the unsatisfaction with anything that has gone through public opinion trials, the answer is always "Don't like it - do it yourself". That's the end of discussion.
Might I suggest a lock?
-
Seconded.
EDIT: Didn't want to add another post to further the life of this thread, but in response to the one below this. I'd like to add that I love all the new hi-poly ships. Maybe I'm just weird, but I love the new Orion, the Herc, the Apollo, the Medusa, etc. (I'm infatuated with fs1...)
-
Well, before it does get locked, I'd just like to say that I like all the HTL ships and you guys are doing a fine job :).
But, Different skins corresponding to damaged ships... there's an idea...
-
That is not the modeller's fault. If you don't show up and offer your opinion then your opinion isn't able to be considerred. And requesting changes after the model is done will only get you ignored, since all of the work that had to be done to get the model done is not wanted to be repeated.
There is no one blaming the modellers. You are completely missing the point.
1) I wasn't screaming. Stating politely my opinion. You are free to not comment, you know?
2) It does bother me, yes, that so many complain that the models diverge too much from the original, be it a triangle with thrusters, or a cube with other cubes sticking out of it, that the original model was.
3) And I never said they were crap. Is someone's true feelings finally coming out?
1. You were the first to mention the word. And ofcourse I could see that you were not being hostile, but I was angered by your statement that people are screaming the models are bad. They aren't, and they aren't.
2. Ok. It bothers you too then?
3. Do not go putting words in my mouth! (so to speak)
I have again and again very clearly stated that I do like the new models. But someone keeps turning this thread in to a attack against the models and modellers.
I was, at first, interested to know why some designs were changed so that it was obvious no matter how few polys the original model had. But since I cant express my point clearly enought (or you can't or won't see it) there is nothing I can do. Yet again nothing good came from this. Case closed. Have a merry christmas.
-
If anyone decides to have a shot at working on the existing models: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/board,120.0.html
Part of the reason that threads on upgrading retail art were moved there was so that people could find, keep track of, and discuss them in one place without having to search all across the modding and Gen. Freespace forums.
-
A weird thread, this one. Kinda reminds me of Field Of Dreams, although only the negative part. Let's see..., hmm.. Some pretty darn quotable stuff here, boys and girls. For instance, "if you haven't posted about this before, your post doesn't count". Wow. So there's an optimum moment in the space/time continuum when posts can be made? Wow. Posting after that moment nullifies a persons opinion? Wow. I gotta hand it to ya.
Oh ya, the Field Of Dreams stuff, you ask? "Build it, they will come." That's the quote, anyways. I wonder if anyone of you guys're familiar w/ the term neophilia? It's a medical term depicting a fetish for everything that's labeled 'new'. A person suffering from neophilia considers everything that's new to be the absolute best, sacrosanct and above criticism. Oh btw, a neophile is ill, y'know. Just a thing to keep in mind, I guess.
That said, seemingly some of the HT&L models are hi-polied just because. Oh ya, I agree w/ the OP.
Merry christmas to all who celebrate it!
Cordially,
-Selectah
-
A weird thread, this one. Kinda reminds me of Field Of Dreams, although only the negative part. Let's see..., hmm.. Some pretty darn quotable stuff here, boys and girls. For instance, "if you haven't posted about this before, your post doesn't count". Wow. So there's an optimum moment in the space/time continuum when posts can be made? Wow. Posting after that moment nullifies a persons opinion? Wow. I gotta hand it to ya.
Not that it doesn't count, but that it will fall on deaf ears, as the model in question is finished and distributed, and not likely to be changed.
That said, this thread was motioned to be closed twice, and i think I shall grant the motion. If Flipside thinks it should be open, he's more than welcome to reopen it.
-
It's been hovering on the edge for a while, so probably best if I don't.
At the end of the day, the whole FSU's motto is 'if you don't want it, don't install it'. And another good motto is 'Can't please everyone' ;)