Hard Light Productions Forums
Community Projects => The FreeSpace Upgrade Project => Topic started by: Akalabeth Angel on October 25, 2011, 03:55:21 am
-
I don't get redoing models that have already been done when there are some models which have never been done, but anyway. People are free to direct their efforts how they wish
Believe it or not, there's actually other people making models aside from myself, and most of the ships have been upgraded or are in the process of being upgraded already
Believe it or not I've looked at the "status" post and I know that other models are being worked on and some are not being worked on at all. A good dozen of them. Of course some of them are dead boring but some of them are not.
As for the model itself, there's obviously some good work put into it and some very nice details though I would agree with the sentiment that it's a bit too rounded. HTL for FS2 retail ships should in my mind be about increasing detail not redesign because if you do redesign, then I believe you sorta need to redesign everything. It's like the new star trek movie, the new enterprise was obviously similar to the old one but was essentially a new redesign. And to make that design work they made an entirely new fleet to go along side it. Point is, the FS1 terrans are boxy, generally ugly ships. If you want them more rounded, the whole fleet should become more rounded.
I'm doing this Leviathan in the exact same style I've done the Medusa, am doing the Apollo, and Ursa.
Yeah, that's cool and I respect that view point.
Though personally as an artist I would disagree with the approach. I think if a person chooses to make their contribution by updating existing canon designs they should work within the confines of the established aesthetic and not take too many artistic liberties. To me it seems more like a service, wherein an artist devotes time and effort to improve upon what has already come before instead of using the opportunity to change it in a manner they see fit. If an artist wishes to share their original vision it should be confined to new, custom-designed ships.
And all that being said I know this isn't the first example and it certainly won't be the last, I know the original HTL deimos had me rolling my eyes when I saw these huge pipes near the rear engines. It's like what is that stuff?
But anyway, that's all I'll say about that.
If he were redesigning the Fenris I'd be screaming bloody murder right along with you, but I think you have the wrong analogy here. It should be Fenris:Leviathan::NCC-1701:Refit (http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/constitution-refit.htm). The original Levi was indistinguishable from the Fenris, which just about everyone agrees should be changed. The recolor was a cheap but powerful change. The most recent edit, adding armor plates, made a certain amount of sense but covered up some of the ship's more interesting details. You can quibble about the details, but a certain amount of redesign is necessary.
It wasn't necessaryin FS1 to have a separate mesh for two different ships and it's not particularly necessary now I woudl argue. It's desirable perhaps, in the view of some people. But necessary? No. Even so, my main quibble is that it seems to take liberties with teh FS1 utilitarian aesthetic. To meit seems as though it would fit better as a reconstruction period upgrade to existing designs
-
It wasn't necessaryin FS1 to have a separate mesh for two different ships and it's not particularly necessary now I woudl argue. It's desirable perhaps, in the view of some people. But necessary? No. Even so, my main quibble is that it seems to take liberties with teh FS1 utilitarian aesthetic. To meit seems as though it would fit better as a reconstruction period upgrade to existing designs
The reason was lack of time, it's the same reason the Cain and Lilith share a model, which was NOT what they actually wanted iirc.
-
We've been over this a hundred times: The FS games are too old to ever possibly display what V would have done. You can keep the general shape, but that's about it. Aside from that, it is absolutely impossible to truly say what V would have done, because they did not have the technology to do it.
The FSU also suffers from DNF syndrome. People have been imagining what these ships should look like for years, and no model will ever match what they have in their heads. It's also frusterating when non-HTLers (NOTE: did not say modellers) pop in and tell us what should be done... Go check the Sobek thread. Someone requested that I make the head a solid pece of armor and at the same time add a crescent shaped gap in the middle... The brain, when never practically applied, can easily make mpossible expectations.
-
We've been over this a hundred times: The FS games are too old to ever possibly display what V would have done. You can keep the general shape, but that's about it. Aside from that, it is absolutely impossible to truly say what V would have done, because they did not have the technology to do it.
I've read this argument a thounsand times already, and it always fails to convince me. To be honest it sounds like a poor excuse to give yourself (not you specifically, but some modelers in general) carte blanche to do whatever you want when HTLing ships (which you can anyway, it's your work after all).
Yeah no one can predict what they had done if they had more "tech", but I think it is a disservice to V's artists to say that they did what they did because of tech issues:
They stretched to the limit the tools that they had, and it shows in their work that they had something very specific in mind, in terms of both style and details. It was a very smart work. Their tile work is very well thought of in most ships (I touched on this regarding your Rakshasa, but of course it was rebuked with the same comment that you make here), the way they manipulate the textures they have to hint at more advanced designs is masterfull. The same can be said in terms of their poly work (its amazing the difference that moving a couple of vertices around can have, in terms of the shape you are going to perceive, when you have a limited number of polys to work with).
Amazing artists to say the least.
Not all is bad things: you mentioned the Hatshepsut before, as being a good example of how good things can turn out when you release yourself from the "cannon stigma". And I agree! The Hatshepsut is a great HTL of the original. But ironically, I find it is very connected to what it was before: you kept\expanded on the ribbing on the lower section, the neck, and all the other parts that were very iconical of the Hatshepsut. It also feels FS2 era Vasudan.
And on top of all that its a Destroyer, which means that due to the technical constraints you mention all the time, it would be natural that it would leave a lot more to the imagination.
There's other great examples: VA's HTL jobs are always great, the current Deimos (although its a bit dated), the Cain (with the exception of the teardrop instead of the iconic pentagon), the majority if not all of the incoming shivan fighters.
I don't think the mindset to go is "The FS games are too old to ever possibly display what V would have done", but rather "Ok V did this, let me observe very thoroughly and then figure out why they did it like this".
Like I mentioned before in this post, people can do whatever they want with their work. And I actually give you guys a lot of credit for what you do.
-
(which you can anyway, it's your work after all).
I stopped reading after this, there nothing more to say or argue about.
-
It's all a matter of taste... I always thought that the Leviathan was one of those ships that didn't need a better version, but hey. However given that it is Hades doing it, I'm betting it will take so long that it won't make a big difference anyway ar ar ar ar.
-
Stop debating HTLing methods in topics about a specific model. As we've said so many times... if you don't like a model, make your own. FSU will use whichever the community votes is best.
-
Yeah no one can predict what they had done if they had more "tech", but I think it is a disservice to V's artists to say that they did what they did because of tech issues:
They stretched to the limit the tools that they had, and it shows in their work that they had something very specific in mind, in terms of both style and details. It was a very smart work. Their tile work is very well thought of in most ships (I touched on this regarding your Rakshasa, but of course it was rebuked with the same comment that you make here), the way they manipulate the textures they have to hint at more advanced designs is masterfull. The same can be said in terms of their poly work (its amazing the difference that moving a couple of vertices around can have, in terms of the shape you are going to perceive, when you have a limited number of polys to work with).
Amazing artists to say the least.
This is where it gets fuzzy... I do not doubt that V has talent, but you have no objective way to make the above claims. Sure, V may have done some things for a reason, and they DID do somethings due to a poly limit... which is which is impossible to determine. Your best bet is to maintain the general shape and add details that make sense.
Also, to assume that poly limits were not a primary driver in the design of ships for that era is a little naive. Now, I'm NOT saying that V wanted the hex shape on the Cain to be a circle, but that's as close as they could come... what I am saying is that V may have gone with a hex design because 1) It looks good, and 2) It fits in the poly budget. We do not have to worry as much about number 2 anymore, so varying from the retail needs to happen.
The Hatty works because it varies A LOT from the original. Take a look at it, especially the bottom... it oozes artistic license. Ragingloli (btw, I got it in game and turreted it, but detail0 credit goes to him) did an awesome job that could not have been accomplished if we followed the constraints that some of the community wishes us to follow.
Also, if all we did was flesh out designs that V already put in place, then we would be at the same crossroads with the purist because it would not be how *they* thought it should be fleshed out.
I welcome suggestions... on the Rak I made adjustments based on feedback, and even PM'ed people who gave it why I was going the direction I was. Just understand that whenever you beat the ol' V-would-not-have-done-that drum, you have no evidence to support that in the slightest.
-
We've been over this a hundred times: The FS games are too old to ever possibly display what V would have done. You can keep the general shape, but that's about it. Aside from that, it is absolutely impossible to truly say what V would have done, because they did not have the technology to do it.
It's not about what volition could have done it's about what volition DID do.
As I've stated above, I find that when a person does an HTL model it's about providing a service to the community, it's not a place to showcase personal artistic tastes. To my way of thinking there's an unspoken obligation to follow as close as possible to the original Volition vision. Not what you think their intent was, not what you think they would have done had they done it now, but what they did do with existing technology.
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible. And in that regard, it's self-serving not serving the needs of the community which is what the upgrade project should be about. If people want to showcase their creativity do so in a third party campaign with a new ship.
And yes, if I don't like I model I should just do one of my own but I know from experience that my strongest suit is never the details. In any design or any drawing I've done I've usually done good with the basic shape but once I hit the details I jump the shark (just like the fonze). So, until I overcome that shortcoming I'm not going to contribute to a project which is all about adding details.
And even if I did choose to contribute, my desire would not be to get into a competition or a popularity contest with another modeller. It would be as I said to provide a service and in that regard I would pick up one of the ignored projects not try to re-invent the wheel or fix what isn't broken.
(And yes I did I say I was done in my previous message, but since this thread has been split and is no longer raining directly on Hades' parade I cansay a little more).
-
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible.
You make it sound as if we have some sort of agenda, I daresay even perhaps demonizing us.
-
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible.
You make it sound as if we have some sort of agenda, I daresay even perhaps demonizing us.
I doubt that was the intention. More likely a comment on the special position the MediaVPs have as technically non-canon, but near universal elements of FS2 in 2011.
-
I don't see all the time and work these people are contributing (for free) to make one of our favorite games look kickass as self-serving at all.
-
I don't see all the time and work these people are contributing (for free) to make one of our favorite games look kickass as self-serving at all.
Yeah.
-
Akalabeth Angel, I must say that your post is totally off. Your rules for HTLing would limit us to rounding up retail models. You said, very literally, that we should not do what we think would have done, but what V did do.
If we only did that, then many ships could only be rounded off, with a few being able to have details as implied by their textures. Would you suggest I model in the details of a tile mapped ship? Just 'tile' geometery across the ship? Of course you wouldn't, it would look stupid.
So to some extent, we absolutely MUST attempt to predict what would have happened if V had our technology. How much we predict is up to the artist, but it still needs to be done.
Oh, and +1 to you being a total asshat by saying us spending hours of our freetime modelling, texturing, and tolerating unappreciative forumites is self-serving.
EDIT:
Also, look at professional examples. Look at the differences from DOOM 2's enemies to their upgrade in DOOM 3. Or Duke3D to DNF. Or the vortigaunts from Half-Life to HL2. Or Lara Croft from the original Tomb Raider to the more recent releases. They all feature major details either changed, added, or removed from their previous iterations with no sign that they were ever intended to look that way. The developer had new tech available and just plain used it, as fleshing out details from the old version would not have yielded anything worthwhile.
-
Hey here is a good heuristic for you guys to apply:
If the person talking doesn't do anything related to what you're doing, ignore them and do whatever the **** you want
-
If the person talking doesn't do anything related to what you're doing, ignore them and do whatever the **** you want
Solid advice.
-
This is where it gets fuzzy... I do not doubt that V has talent, but you have no objective way to make the above claims. Sure, V may have done some things for a reason, and they DID do somethings due to a poly limit... which is which is impossible to determine. Your best bet is to maintain the general shape and add details that make sense.
Also, to assume that poly limits were not a primary driver in the design of ships for that era is a little naive. Now, I'm NOT saying that V wanted the hex shape on the Cain to be a circle, but that's as close as they could come... what I am saying is that V may have gone with a hex design because 1) It looks good, and 2) It fits in the poly budget. We do not have to worry as much about number 2 anymore, so varying from the retail needs to happen.
I don't think I was clear on what I was trying to say, so I'll try again :)
I'm not defending a view of "we can't\can predict what V would have done". Rather I'm defending a way that is "ok this is what they ended up with".
It is obvious that their end result is dictated by the possibilities they had back then. It always is. The process always stamps itself on the end product.
However, whatever the reasons, the fact is the Cain ended up with a pentagon on the side, which is, no matter how you like it, a strong design element (I mean in the visual perception way of things, not taste). The same can be said about the Rakshasas repeated ribbing on the front and back sections, or the hatshepsut's neck, the Sobek's horizontal rythm on the neck and pink "stuff", or the hecate's "face", among other things.
And the same logic applies in terms of texturing: I think I mentioned before that I'm displeased with some shivan ship's lack of contrast in the greys that were present in the originals.
I also see some ships having uber clean textures, when FS's style is clearly very "grungy" and dirty.
And I really believe those elements should be respected. And some times they are, even with added "artistic liberties":
The Hatty works because it varies A LOT from the original. Take a look at it, especially the bottom... it oozes artistic license. Ragingloli (btw, I got it in game and turreted it, but detail0 credit goes to him) did an awesome job that could not have been accomplished if we followed the constraints that some of the community wishes us to follow.
Of course it varies a lot fromt the original, but it also follows very closely the original's visual rythms, and THAT is why it works so well.
Also, if all we did was flesh out designs that V already put in place, then we would be at the same crossroads with the purist because it would not be how *they* thought it should be fleshed out.
Please don't mistake me for a "purist". I am not. I'm all for artistic license, within proper boundaries (explained above).
I welcome suggestions... on the Rak I made adjustments based on feedback, and even PM'ed people who gave it why I was going the direction I was. Just understand that whenever you beat the ol' V-would-not-have-done-that drum, you have no evidence to support that in the slightest.
Don't take what I say as a personal attack on you or your work. It isn't.
And like mentioned before: agreed, I have no evidence to support what V wouldn't or would have done. That's why I think its imperative that we respect what is.
-
Okay, I see where you are coming from.
-
Another perspective on HTL'ing:
HTL = Harder To Lube (http://i.somethingawful.com/forumsystem/emoticons/emot-argh.gif)
-
Hi guys, I'm working on an HTL TC2. This is the general outline, I'll add details (read: greebles) later
(http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/274/htltc2.jpg)
Kidding aside, I suspect that if we imposed restrictions as severe as some people are suggesting and told people that if they were interested in artistic expression they should **** off from HTL and go make original models, we wouldn't have nearly as many HTL models as we do now.
Before anyone says that would be preferable, I'll point out that if you really think so and are not simply indulging in hyperbole you can go ahead and copy the retail .pofs into the /data/models folder of your mediavps directory. They'll override anything in the .vp archive.
-
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible.
You make it sound as if we have some sort of agenda, I daresay even perhaps demonizing us.
I'm not suggesting that anyone specifically has an agenda, what I'm suggesting is that there are two ways to go about things:
1. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it better
2. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it the way I think it should be
To give an analogy, let's say the work of a famous painter has degraded over time. The colours have faded, etcetera. So a museum commissions a team of restoration artists to bring back the colour and shine a bit more. Yes, I know it's not a direct analogy. But the point is that those restoration artists are improving the quality of a painting by cleaning it up, they're working within the confines of what has already been established. They're not changing colours here and there, not giving someone a mustache when he was clean-shaven, adding a tree where there was none, etcetera.
That's what HTLing is to me. Restoring old dull art to modern standards. In it's day it was a brilliant model, now, it's lost its luster. The point is to restore the model to its original luster (ie fancy enough that in modern day it has the same appeal as it did then), the point is not to repaint the painting.
And my intent is really not to single anyone out or to kill anyone's creative motivation. My intent is to help ensure that a Demon remains a Demon, or an Apollo remains an Apollo. Because honestly as a player, the more models start to deviate from what's come before, the more I want to turn off the media VPs. And it's no where near that point yet. But certainly some things have had me scratching my head in the past. Fortunately, they've been mostly minor.
Oh, and +1 to you being a total asshat by saying us spending hours of our freetime modelling, texturing, and tolerating unappreciative forumites is self-serving.
Please re-read my post. I did not suggest that any one particular person is acting in a self serving manner. I was speaking in a general sense, that is IF someone's contributing to a project because they want to put their artistic stamp into a wide a consumption as possible THEN IN THAT CASE they're being self serving.
Is anyone doing this? I don't know. I'm not a mind-reader.
The statement is less an accusation and more a practical understanding of why some individuals may want to "contribute".
I mean if an artist is less interested in creating art and more interested in having their artwork consumed by as many people as possible then it goes to reason that they would contribute art where it's bound to be consumed by the most amount of people possible. The media vps would be a prime example of where to contribute. As would super-popular campaigns for example.
And because people have problems understanding what I'm saying, I reiterate that I'm not suggesting that anyone is doing this, I'm simply saying there is the danger of an artist acting in a self-serving manner when the SCP and the SCU should be about serving the needs of the community.
EDIT:Also, look at professional examples. Look at the differences from DOOM 2's enemies to their upgrade in DOOM 3. Or Duke3D to DNF. Or the vortigaunts from Half-Life to HL2. Or Lara Croft from the original Tomb Raider to the more recent releases. They all feature major details either changed, added, or removed from their previous iterations with no sign that they were ever intended to look that way. The developer had new tech available and just plain used it, as fleshing out details from the old version would not have yielded anything worthwhile.
A demon's a demon.
The aesthetic has not changed. A revenant is still a skeleton with two rocket launchers. A succubus is still a fat thing with gun arms.
My qualm is when you have a utilitarian-styled Earth fleet and you make it look more advanced and less utilitarian.
Or if there's a Shivan fleet that's more organic-machine chaos and it's instead made to look more demonic (Someone mentioned a pentagram for example?).
And your Doom analogy is flawed for another reason. They're separate games. Freespace 2 is Freespace 2.
A better analogy is the original Star Trek series and the original Star Trek series with improved effects. The ships look better, but they're unchanged. Now obviously, there should be room for artistic license as that's the primary motivator but there should be limits as well.
Now if someone wants to REMAKE freespace with their own vision then go ahead, just as JJ Abrams remade Star Trek with his own vision.
Hey here is a good heuristic for you guys to apply:
If the person talking doesn't do anything related to what you're doing, ignore them and do whatever the **** you want
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/GVF_Anouke
and
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=57640.0
Or if you're talking about contributing to the community at large in a community-serving manner then here:
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/User-made_Ships
90-95% of every ship entry on that page was entered by me. Along with all the pictures for those entries as well.
Though of course you're probaly going to come back and say "oh, but you're not doing COMMUNITY models specifically for the SCUP" well I don't care. Part of being a community is that everyone gets a voice.
Oh and by the way does "making a meaningful contribution to a discussion" count? Because a lot of your posts I've noticed are 2 bit attempts to kill conversation. If you want to join in a discussion, join in. Don't try to invalid people's opinions from the peanut gallery.
-
I'm not suggesting that anyone specifically has an agenda, what I'm suggesting is that there are two ways to go about things:
1. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it better
2. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it the way I think it should be
I really wasn't going to get involved in this one.. but this must be pointed out...
These two options? They are inseparable. It is 100% impossible for me to make a model and it not end up how I think it should look. Plain and simple.
Number 1 is generic and open to interpretation.. which is why we are having this discussion. You can not define that. In theory it's nice.. but in practice, it doesn't work or mean anything. In practice, I have to add what I think looks best in order to achieve "better".
Regardless, we've had this debate so many times that it's just sad. No one is going to change their minds either. (I don't know why you all keep trying.)
We in FSU have tried to make our criteria clear and defined. We are not going to limit people's creativity either. They can make a model however they please. If it...
- Is clearly the ship that it's intended to be an upgrade of
- Fits within the retail defines (Right size, turrets/subsystems in the same locations, etc.), or is close enough to be worked on
- Is a clear upgrade and/or generally of good quality
- Has no other competing model or is voted most popular by the community
There may be some other things I forgot, Zacam can correct me on that if he wishes. But since we can't define "Taking Volition's model and make it better" that will not be added as a limitation. Though I would be interested to see you define that without throwing in your own personal bias of what you think is better.
-
Regardless, we've had this debate so many times that it's just sad. No one is going to change their minds either. (I don't know why you all keep trying.)
Why does it always seem to be about Hades' models though?
-
Kidding aside, I suspect that if we imposed restrictions as severe as some people are suggesting and told people that if they were interested in artistic expression they should **** off from HTL and go make original models, we wouldn't have nearly as many HTL models as we do now.
The Iceni is a good example of following these mentioned restrictions. Hilariously people have said they don't like it because of that.
Before anyone says that would be preferable, I'll point out that if you really think so and are not simply indulging in hyperbole you can go ahead and copy the retail .pofs into the /data/models folder of your mediavps directory. They'll override anything in the .vp archive.
In such a case there is also the "No Mod" option in the Launcher - less time consuming for the same results.
-
Regardless, we've had this debate so many times that it's just sad. No one is going to change their minds either. (I don't know why you all keep trying.)
Why does it always seem to be about Hades' models though?
Because haters can't handle the coolness.
The Iceni is a good example of following these mentioned restrictions. Hilariously people have said they don't like it because of that.
The Iceni is a lazy, lazy job. It's just the retail model rounded out a bit and with baked glows. It does not add anything to the design that would really make it cool, or distinctive. If that's the kind of HTL job you want, you should just create some glow and normal maps for the retail models and be done with it.
-
Regardless, we've had this debate so many times that it's just sad. No one is going to change their minds either. (I don't know why you all keep trying.)
Why does it always seem to be about Hades' models though?
It's not. Rga's threads get a lot of this as well. See also the Ma'at thread, the Arcadia thread, and many others in the past.
-
Oh. I guess he's just the active one then. Carry on. :P
-
I'm not suggesting that anyone specifically has an agenda, what I'm suggesting is that there are two ways to go about things:
1. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it better
2. I'm going to take Volitions model and make it the way I think it should be
I really wasn't going to get involved in this one.. but this must be pointed out...
These two options? They are inseparable. It is 100% impossible for me to make a model and it not end up how I think it should look. Plain and simple.
There is a difference between:
Change for the sake of improvement
and
Change for the sake of change
And yes, it's subjective. And yes, it's personal opinion. And that's why I say it's the obligation of the artist to be conscious in their creative process to not stray from the original design and aesthetic. Is this definable? No, I've never asked it to be. I don't expect there to be a list of rules or criteria to follow, I simply voice the opinion that HTL models should be improvements not reinvisionings of the original design. And is that definable? No it's not either, but change for the sake of change starts with the thought "Volition did this wrong, I'm going to do this instead" as opposed to "I'm going to build upon the foundation that Volition has already laid down" and as I say, that's the obligation of the artist (from my point of view).
Why does it always seem to be about Hades' models though?
Because haters can't handle the coolness.
I don't hate anyone's work. Nor do I throw dismissive labels on people to try to invalidate their opinions.
As for why this was born from Hades work is simply because his thread was at the top of the page and it's the first one I saw that brought the thought to mind. Nothing more. It's not about any one individual artist nor about any one individual piece of art.
-
In regards to the Iceni, I don't think V gave us a lot to work with. The model itself was, while unique among Terran ships, very lazily textured, seeming to be nothing but tiles. IMO it really needs re-imagined to be properly redone. The textures don't really give anything to go on.
One thing I do know though, is going after someone for redoing something when it's still a work in progress and even they aren't satisfied with it yet is foolish. Constructive criticism is what we need, not, "You changed it too much. It sucks!" ESPECIALLY when the modeller hasn't even completed the model yet and it is still subject to much change. So in a WIP picture, you don't like something. Whoop de doo. Either explain what it is about it that you don't like and how you think it could be improved upon, politely say you don't care for it this way but can't quite explain why, or STFU and wait to see what it looks like when the whole model comes together before you start pissing and moaning about it.
Just my two cents' worth.
-
And yes, it's subjective. And yes, it's personal opinion. And that's why I say it's the obligation of the artist to be conscious in their creative process to not stray from the original design and aesthetic. Is this definable? No, I've never asked it to be. I don't expect there to be a list of rules or criteria to follow, I simply voice the opinion that HTL models should be improvements not reinvisionings of the original design. And is that definable? No it's not either, but change for the sake of change starts with the thought "Volition did this wrong, I'm going to do this instead" as opposed to "I'm going to build upon the foundation that Volition has already laid down" and as I say, that's the obligation of the artist (from my point of view).
Name a model that you think was changed for the sake of change and I will name you the artist who felt that the changes made did not stray from the aesthetic of the original design but were improvements upon the foundation layed out by the original model.
And therin lies the problem. What you think is "change for the sake of change", the artist thought "this really adds to what I think Volition was trying to do".
Are you willing to acknowledge that the problem isn't the artists, but it is instead that everyone has their own differing opinion on what builds upon Volition's foundation.
-
Just close this topic already. It serves nothing but pollute the air further since nobody's going to get swayed either direction. If Akalabeth Angel thinks as he does, let him. Don't let it become a problem. If he ever contributes to FSU directly, he's free to do his work however he wants. Until then, carry on as usual.
-
Though of course you're probaly going to come back and say "oh, but you're not doing COMMUNITY models specifically for the SCUP" well I don't care. Part of being a community is that everyone gets a voice.
Oh and by the way does "making a meaningful contribution to a discussion" count? Because a lot of your posts I've noticed are 2 bit attempts to kill conversation. If you want to join in a discussion, join in. Don't try to invalid people's opinions from the peanut gallery.
Hey bro don't take it personally, we've just had this discussion a thousand times already and reached a conclusion. Opening it up again is just going to lead to the same conclusion which is
do whatever the **** you want, take whatever feedback you like
So pretty much
Just close this topic already. It serves nothing but pollute the air further since nobody's going to get swayed either direction. If Akalabeth Angel thinks as he does, let him. Don't let it become a problem. If he ever contributes to FSU directly, he's free to do his work however he wants. Until then, carry on as usual.
this
-
Perhaps so.
The point is, which is clear from this thread, is that people have differing opinions. The sooner everyone learns to accept other's opinions, the sooner this will be more enjoyable. Currently, the feedback process for any WIP model is usually littered with subjective comments from people upset about how it's been done wrong.
There have been some outstanding feedback posts that pointed out issues with respect. I'll continue to point out those posts until people get the point. Starting a large debate because a model doesn't meet your personal criteria of a good upgrade will always end up like this thread.
I'm going to end this week's bit of drama so that we can all go back to fun modding over the weekend.
-
Akalabeth Angel and Raven2001 I think both have pretty sensible points of view here. :) (Not saying no one else does, but it's feeling a little too 'them-against-everyone-else' for my liking. :p )
And BTW can we PLEASE retire the whole 'haters gotta hate' concept? It's just stupid, and I have only ever seen it used on this forum to create a convenient strawman to rip into and/or ignore in a most inflammatory way. I've been a part of this community for a very long time now and I have never seen anyone who is simply 'a hater'. Poor communicators and occasionally rude people sure, but never just 'a hater'. If people are posting anything about a model then they're doing it because they have an opinion on the matter, and as users of the MVPs, I would say they have a stake in the model too. Their opinions warrant consideration because they may well be held by other stakeholders who do not say anything. (Possibly from fear of being branded 'a hater' btw)
===
Anyway from what I can tell, everything being talked about here really comes down to whether or not a HTL job preserves the essence, or feel of the ship it is an upgrade of. There is no hard and fast rule of what changes will cross that line on any given ship, because each ship has different key aspects that combine to give the ship that feel. As such, sometimes you can find cases where quite large changes don't overly affect the feel of the ship, and others where relatively small changes will quite radically alter it. The more these key aspects are altered, the more you depart from the established feel of the ship, and hence the more people will feel it has crossed that line, and no longer fully captures the feel of the ship.
Now, the line itself is different for different people, and this is where most conflict over a given HTL job will arise, with some people having a very lax line being willing to accept say, 'loads more greebles a vaguely similar profile and colour scheme as the original', and others wanting 'something that carries over as many of the key aspects as possible'. Note that this latter category does NOT, and I really, REALLY mean does NOT imply that all they want is a retail model with a recess or extrusion added here or there, or they 'want to keep their precious tile maps'.
It is also never a case of 'you can only please one of the two groups', because it's perfectly possible to create a very high detail model that both groups will accept as a good HTL without a peep, and it's also possible to create a model that fits most aspects of the original so well that the ones where it deviates can be overlooked. These two possibilities are what I think the FSU should ideally be all about. We're here because we like the Freespace universe, and that in general includes the feel of the ships in that universe. If you want to build a ship that takes artistic liberties that might look spectacular but break the feel of the original in too many or too significant ways, then the ship should be in FS modding and not the FSU.
===
Ok so for some examples:
The Cain/Lilith:
Here I would say the model and textures are undeniably superb. It is an absolutely excellent HTL job and carries over almost all the key aspects very well, and most of those which it doesn't can be overlooked because the rest of it is just so freaking awesome. However, I would also say that the pentagonal missile launchers were definitely an important apsect of the original, and I do think it's a shame they weren't carried over with the same attention to detail as the rest of the model. The teardrops I feel make it look too streamlined for a shivan ship, and the textured-on pentagon doesn't really undo that nor fully capture that aspect.
Now, a lot of people have noted this and mentioned not liking it in one way or another - and notice how it's almost invariably focussed around this aspect of the original that was most departed from. People who have a more lax 'line' don't mind it at all, but NEITHER would they mind if it were something more in line with the original aspect of a 'pentagonal pit with a missile launcher in it'.
Hades' WIPs of the new Levy model: (Sorry dude - don't mean to pick on you, but I think it does let me nicely illustrate these points! :) )
Now obviously this is purely based on the WIP shots, which right off the bat is a bit unfair since the model has little chance to do the whole 'it's so freaking awesome in some aspects that I can overlook the aspects it breaks' thing I've previously mentioned. That aside though, let me firstly say that YES the model is truly honestly, already a very cool model. Hades has proven time and again that he can model very well, but the quality of the model is not the point here. It's all about the feel, and in that regard there's a lot to be said.
The first issue is the shape of the whole centre section. It's segmented, and quite differently shaped to the original. Where the original had an imposing 'sheer ironclad fort' sort of feel to the tower, the curved and segmented look conveys much more of an 'armoured core' kind of feel, which is pretty far departed from the original feel of that aspect. Secondly the original engine block was an octagonal prism in basic form, with no hint of curvature, whereas this one forms a smoothly curving surface over the top and bottom, which definitely breaks that aspect. Thirdly, the trapezoid mechanical recesses on every face of the top and bottom tower are completely and utterly gone, which again I would say definitely breaks the feel of that aspect.
As such, given the extent to which the model has departed from the feel of the original I don't think that in its current direction it would be suitable for the MVPs. It probably will be an utterly fantastic model, but at the same time it's just not going to feel like the Levy for too many people. (That said, I must say that the Levy model that somehow got into the current MVPs is pretty terrible! Sorry Galemp, but really! It's like someone tried to hurricane-proof it with steel plates or something. :p )
The Iceni:
This is an interesting one because model wise it's great! Sure it could have more detail, but what's there is still quite nice. The original model (as with a lot of FS2 ships) doesn't give a whole heap to go on, but what was there has been very distinctly maintained and given a facelift. Given the model alone, it clearly captures the feel of the original. Where it falls down pretty miserably is in the textures. (Mostly my fault. :( ) Really it deserved a custom painted UV map, but all it got was a bake of the tile mapping it had been given. Texture tiling does have its place, and to be fair this WAS a pretty good job of it, but in this case it's also far inferior to a painted UV map. If it were not for the fact that it's FAR too dark overall (a broken aspect), you'd be hard pressed to spot that it's a HTL model since the textures hide just about all the detail. In this way it breaks the feel of the original by significantly altering the colour scheme. The tiles applied to the details introduce a sickly greenish tinge that looks very different to the relatively bright but also drab colours of the original.
Seeing as there's no alternative model around and the model IS still better than the original, it may as well stay - but it would be really nice if someone could give it a nice new map sometime. :p
-
If everyone were able to give feedback at that level of quality this would be a different matter, but frankly you just make me think that model feedback should be handled entirely internally.
Granted my angst about extra graphics spaceships in my ten year old video game is not all that intense so maybe I'm not invested enough to fully appreciate the need for threadnoughts here
-
The best feedback-getting approach depends on the person. Feedback threads definitely have their place.
And this thread got locked? Did I unlock it by posting in it or something? o_O
Oh well - if it goes downhill I'll lock it myself, but I'd like to leave it open for now.
-
Like I said, and like VA said.. it's a matter of differing opinions.
And as Battuta alluded to.. the bigger problem is that people are flat out rude, or just plain mean in model feedback threads. I've talked about this many, many times. If people learn to give CONSTRUCTIVE (rather than destructive) criticisms.. this issue would be so small.
(This is me speaking in this part, not FSU.) If someone gives rude or mean criticisms.. as far as I'm concerned, they no longer have any say in the model in question. After the terrible Arcadia thread.. I decided this: For my own projects, if the criticism isn't constructive, I'm just going to ignore it. I'm not going to consider it at all. This is me personally making a stand for more thought out feedback posts. Take from that whatever you like.. but rest assured, that I end up ignoring about 80% of the feedback posts around here because they are poorly written.
Why can't we kill this thread now?
-
Leave this thread, I'm sure there's people waiting to say something anyway.
-
(This is me speaking in this part, not FSU.) If someone gives rude or mean criticisms.. as far as I'm concerned, they no longer have any say in the model in question. After the terrible Arcadia thread.. I decided this: For my own projects, if the criticism isn't constructive, I'm just going to ignore it. I'm not going to consider it at all. This is me personally making a stand for more thought out feedback posts. Take from that whatever you like.. but rest assured, that I end up ignoring about 80% of the feedback posts around here because they are poorly written.
yup
-
As a further note:
Noticed a lot of flaming going on the boards here lately and it seems to all orient around the same thing. This has lead to a lot of negative distraction and really has made a thread like this kind of needed right about now.
How to give:
First off the work of FSU relies heavily on the work of team members and contributers and as such involves a great deal of time and effort on their part. So opening up a comment with something along the lines of "I don't like it" or "Its deviated too far from retail and I hate it" are widely seen as slaps to the face by the artist and isn't a good way to get their attention. Instead open up with identifying something you like about what the artist has done before moving on to things that you think could be improved. This tells the artist what was well received and limits the sting of negative feed back. Keep in mind too much negative feedback has only a few possible outcomes either the artist feels their work is not going to be appreciated and gives up or they get defensive. It's important to strike a balance of feedback to both encourage the artist to continue and to take suggestions seriously.
Next are comments that are bland in nature, simply stating one does not like it is useless to the artist and better kept to oneself. If you have parts you don't like be specific and if possible make suggestions as to how those parts may be improved. This gives the artist more info to work with when soliciting feedback and might possibly spark a whole new constructive rampart.
Last is timing, Telling an artist they need to go back to mesh building when they are well into other phases of the project is just insulting. It's like telling them to throw out everything they have done and start over to some degree. Instead limit your commentary to the phase at which the project is currently on. If you were too late to give commentary at the earlier stages of development that is your own fault and should not be passed onto the artist with only one exception. The artist didn't post a screen shot or status update before moving to the next phase. This is the ONLY time commentary about a previous phase of development should be acceptable.
How to take:
People have opinions and no matter what you do some one is not going to like what you have done to the retail design. Take criticism for what it is and try not to make it personnel. Sure you are going to get useless and sometimes overly negative criticism but this is the stuff you need to learn to ignore to keep your own sanity and vision for the project on track. Getting in a pissing match with someone over stupid comments is a waste of time and effort better spent doing other things. If necessary let a moderator know of any overly zealous trolling and let them deal with it.
Always keep a look out for good ideas and don't be afraid to even try a few you might think are stupid at first. Sometimes you may not like the result you get but you still may find a few good things that can be incorporated into your work that you may have not thought of before. Always keep a backup of your previous work when trying out new ideas that way you can easily revert to a previous point if it doesn't turn out well. I like to save multiple stages of my work as I go along just in case I don't like how something goes.
Keep in mind it is impossible to make every one happy but it is possible to get a balanced reaction of the community if you view criticism with an open mind. Discard the bad and some what extravagant suggestions and look for the intelligent well thought out opinions. These are the ones that have weight and should be taken seriously in the end.
-
Why can't we kill this thread now?
It's serving a valuable role as a cesspool for 'comments' that might otherwise end up in WIP threads.
-
Until the next time someone is, shall we say, less than enthusiastic about a given change. Then the entire discussion will start again.
So, given that all that has been said was just a rehashing of earlier arguments which we (as FSU) already have made our decisions about, this thread should die.
-
Akalabeth Angel raised a lot of fair points and got a ton of crap for it. He didn't say anything inflammatory and explained his points when people immediately assumed the worst. The attitudes I'm seeing here suggest he's been dubbed a hater and it is therefore totally ok to ignore him, and in Pomposity's case, make fun of him with a stupid picture like that.
Yes this thread has become a cesspool, but not because of 'comments that might otherwise have ended up in WIP threads'.
-
Unlocked again, because moderators talking amongst themselves isn't fun.
As far as I am concerned, everything about this topic has been said. What it boils down to, for me, is differences of opinion regarding artistry; as such discussions cannot really be decided by rational means (them being all about taste, in the end), and given that FSU has a policy in place for these issues, I do not see a benefit in allowing a topic as inflammable as this one is to stay open for a great length of time.
If there are issues with our policy, those can and should be discussed.
If there are issues with the general tone of a given comment on a given WIP, those can be discussed, but should best left to be handled by moderators and the actual modellers whose work is being criticized.
But a general discussion about "Let's make some rules for what is a good HTL job", that, I believe, is supremely futile, and should not be allowed to fester.
-
Well, since this topic exists, I'm guna ask a noob question: What does the acronym HTL stand for and what does mean to HTL a model? I know it has something to do with making a model more detailed and bringing its textures up to date but can anyone fully explain what's involved or at least give an overview?
-
Akalabeth Angel raised a lot of fair points and got a ton of crap for it. He didn't say anything inflammatory and explained his points when people immediately assumed the worst. The attitudes I'm seeing here suggest he's been dubbed a hater and it is therefore totally ok to ignore him, and in Pomposity's case, make fun of him with a stupid picture like that.
Yes this thread has become a cesspool, but not because of 'comments that might otherwise have ended up in WIP threads'.
Please take this as a friendly disagreement.
Angel's point, or what I presume he meant, is fair and obvious. Your points are also fair, but you are saing is not what he said. What he actually said opened him up for ridicule, and he deserves no quarter for it. He asked me to reread his post, so I will:
As I've stated above, I find that when a person does an HTL model it's about providing a service to the community, it's not a place to showcase personal artistic tastes. To my way of thinking there's an unspoken obligation to follow as close as possible to the original Volition vision. Not what you think their intent was, not what you think they would have done had they done it now, but what they did do with existing technology.
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible. And in that regard, it's self-serving not serving the needs of the community which is what the upgrade project should be about. If people want to showcase their creativity do so in a third party campaign with a new ship.
Angel believes that some of us, namely Hades, is taking too many liberties with V's original design. He then, using no uncertain terms states that taking such liberties is to take advantage of the mediaVP's and in tha regard is self-serving, which is uncalled for and wrong.
Now maybe he did not mean to make it a pointed statement. Which is fine, but he chose to then take the self-important stance and tell me to re-read his post, instead of just correcting himself.
We have every right to disagree with him in a professional matter. And you'll notice that when it came to what constitutes a proper HTL, most of us were, myself included. I called him an asshat when he truly deserved it.
The frusteration also comes with the acknowledgment of a few facts:
1) Volitions ships do not provide enough detail to do anything but add details where the texture indicates, or round surfaces that should have been, so some artistic liberty MUST be taken if you wish to have more than that.
2) The line at which too much is too much is impossible to determine objectively.
I'll bring up the Hatty again. Few would argue that it is a suitable upgrade. It is also completely covered in details that are in NO WAY implied by V. So it IS acceptable to go outside of "what V DID do", you just need to be careful.
Angel's original critique of Hades model was fine. He gave high points and expressed his opinions as his opinions. After that, he earned every last bit of critique.
-
Well, since this topic exists, I'm guna ask a noob question: What does the acronym HTL stand for and what does mean to HTL a model? I know it has something to do with making a model more detailed and bringing its textures up to date but can anyone fully explain what's involved or at least give an overview?
HTL = Hardware Transformation and Lighting (wiki it up)
HTL has absolutely nothing to do with models or textures per-se. But that acronym stuck because high-poly models and high-res textures became available when FSO engine was modified to support HTL. In almost any other context than FSO, speaking of HTL while meaning high-poly models or high-res textures would only lead to very puzzled people.
-
See, we're all selfish. Every single one of us expects the MediaVPs to match our own personal vision of upgraded Freespace. Artists and Commentators alike. No one is willing to compromise for the sake of the community project without throwing their hissy fit and making sure they are heard... and I'm pretty tired of dealing with that.
However, I will note that the artists are pulling the weight and doing the work. And you know what? I think that gives them more of a say. But that's just me (Not FSU).
That's why I will consider the suggestions of those who can post with tact and respect and ignore the rest.
-
Couldn't be arsed to give my opinion, but I feel I have to say this.
Artists OFFER to the community to spend their own free time into making models and textures. That gives them the absolute and unswerving right to express artistic license in their work, as it is the right all artists deserve. Anyone trying to deny them this fundamental right should be shot on sight.
-
I'll fire off one last post anyway to address a few things that were said while I was sleeping.
One thing I do know though, is going after someone for redoing something when it's still a work in progress and even they aren't satisfied with it yet is foolish. Constructive criticism is what we need, not, "You changed it too much. It sucks!" ESPECIALLY when the modeller hasn't even completed the model yet and it is still subject to much change. So in a WIP picture, you don't like something. Whoop de doo. Either explain what it is about it that you don't like and how you think it could be improved upon, politely say you don't care for it this way but can't quite explain why, or STFU and wait to see what it looks like when the whole model comes together before you start pissing and moaning about it.
I find that thinking a bit bizarre myself. You want people to restrict criticism until a model is finished? That's the absolute WORST time to tell someone you don't agree with something. And it's also counter to common logic, because the precise reason a person posts WIP pics is to get feedback as it goes along. Or, at least I HOPE that's why such pics are being posted. If an artist is only posting stuff along the way just for the sake of praise and adoration I'm afraid they have a few insecurities that they should begin working to address. (And no, I am not saying that is the case with anyone).
If everyone were able to give feedback at that level of quality this would be a different matter, but frankly you just make me think that model feedback should be handled entirely internally.
Community members should not be faulted for their inability to properly communicate their ideas. And verbosity is not necessarily quality. Regarding the leviathan several posters have simply said the same thing VA said with just less words. Posts of such length also create the opposite problem of people ignoring them altogether. When reading the thread I skipped over it entirely and then only later came back to read it. That isn't to say that VA post isn't both helpful and informative but to dismiss other people's opinions because they don't match the same length or level of detail is a disservice.
Similarily, restricting a COMMUNITY project to the overseeing of an ELITE few would likewise be a disservice.
As I've stated above, I find that when a person does an HTL model it's about providing a service to the community, it's not a place to showcase personal artistic tastes. To my way of thinking there's an unspoken obligation to follow as close as possible to the original Volition vision. Not what you think their intent was, not what you think they would have done had they done it now, but what they did do with existing technology.
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible. And in that regard, it's self-serving not serving the needs of the community which is what the upgrade project should be about. If people want to showcase their creativity do so in a third party campaign with a new ship.
Angel believes that some of us, namely Hades, is taking too many liberties with V's original design. He then, using no uncertain terms states that taking such liberties is to take advantage of the mediaVP's and in tha regard is self-serving, which is uncalled for and wrong.
Now maybe he did not mean to make it a pointed statement. Which is fine, but he chose to then take the self-important stance and tell me to re-read his post, instead of just correcting himself.
I'm sorry RGA, I realize you're simply getting overly defensive but do NOT speak for me.
You need to understand that a discussions can be prompted by a model without being about that individual model. You also need to understand that reservations about a model can lead a discussion to address a larger phenomenon as a whole without specifically saying that any individual project is a symptom of that phenomenon.
Or in more simple terms,
Yes this discussion was born because of Hades Leviathan. Am I singling him out? No it's simply the first thing I saw.
And yes this discussion thereafter was taken by me into a broader direction, but at no time did I make an accusation about hades. I don't know his intent. Nor do I claim to. Perhaps my post was left open enough for people to mistakenly INFER that I was slamming hades but that was never the case. I simply recognize the fact that the FSU can serve as a vehicle for self-service rather than community-service and that there is the danger that someone may approach it in that way.
Some people seek approval because they don't approve of themselves. And contributing to a high profile project, whether a community based one or a very popular one is the best means to get the most approval. And furthermore, the more artistic license someone takes with any given project, the more that approval specifically targets them. So in that way, a community project can be a vehicle for self-service. Am I talking about you or any one person? No.
But I work, professionally as an artist. In television animation to be precise. And I've seen people put their own "artistic touch" on a scene that was neither mandated by the show, nor was it in support of the show's story. In fact, such work often detracted from the show as a whole both because it was a needless distraction from the main action and also because it took unecessary time and effort which consequently took away from that artist's other work.
So believe me, when I say that I understand some artists use high profile projects for self-serving reasons and that 'artistic license' may lead them to lose the original vision. And again, I am not accusing, nor do I believe that any one person is doing this. I'm barely familiar with anyone's work, let alone any one artist so I don't even have the grounds to make such an accusation.
And by the way, incidentally I looked at Hades' medusa and it looked great as far as I could tell. I didn't make a direct side by side comparison for example but the fact that I didn't means it probably captured the same feel.
Artists OFFER to the community to spend their own free time into making models and textures. That gives them the absolute and unswerving right to express artistic license in their work, as it is the right all artists deserve. Anyone trying to deny them this fundamental right should be shot on sight.
Yes and as a community project that impacts all, the community has the right to voice their opinion about any such artistic endeavour.
However, I will note that the artists are pulling the weight and doing the work. And you know what? I think that gives them more of a say. But that's just me (Not FSU).
People contribute to the community in all manner of ways and their inability to contribute in a specific field should not invalidate nor lessen their opinion in that field. At most it gives them less technical grounding to address the specifics.
-
EDIT: I need to preface this post with it's intent... Your original statement was not written in a way that accurately conveys what you meant. You simply cannot fault myself or the others for seeing it as they did... Because that's what you wrote. Your above post better explains it. Do that next time, instead of faulting others for what you wrote. The examples below are just points to highlight the path of logic that your original post implied.
You misunderstand... Hades was the example of you expressing your feelings to the liberties taken with some models.
For you to make the statement you did about a current trend is to apply it to someone, or a group of people. If your statement does not apply to anyone in anyway, then why did you make it? You stated that for someone to take such liberties is self serving... So answer these questions as directly as you can:
1) Who is taking such liberties in your opinion?
2) How does literally saying that taking such liberties is self-serving not then apply to that person?
You clearly feel that some are taking these liberties... If no one was you wouldn't have said it.
You need to abandon that defense. You said something you either didn't mean or now regret, so just apologize.
-
You misunderstand... Hades was the example of you expressing your feelings to the liberties taken with some models.
For you to make the statement you did about a current trend is to apply it to someone, or a group of people. If your statement does not apply to anyone in anyway, then why did you make it? You stated that for someone to take such liberties is self serving... So answer these questions as directly as you can:
1) Who is taking such liberties in your opinion?
2) How does literally saying that taking such liberties is self-serving not then apply to that person?
You clearly feel that some are taking these liberties... If no one was you wouldn't have said it.
Again, please don't speak for me. You don't know my thoughts.
But in an effort for you to better understand where I'm coming from, please re-read my above post. I added a portion in the response to you.
Or heck I'll put it here for you:
Some people seek approval because they don't approve of themselves. And contributing to a high profile project, whether a community based one or a very popular one is the best means to get the most approval. And furthermore, the more artistic license someone takes with any given project, the more that approval specifically targets them. So in that way, a community project can be a vehicle for self-service. Am I talking about you or any one person? No.
But I work, professionally as an artist. In television animation to be precise. And I've seen people put their own "artistic touch" on a scene that was neither mandated by the show, nor was it in support of the show's story. In fact, such work often detracted from the show as a whole both because it was a needless distraction from the main action and also because it took unecessary time and effort which consequently took away from that artist's other work.
So believe me, when I say that I understand some artists use high profile projects for self-serving reasons and that 'artistic license' may lead them to lose the original vision. And again, I am not accusing, nor do I believe that any one person is doing this. I'm barely familiar with anyone's work, let alone any one artist so I don't even have the grounds to make such an accusation. I just recognize that there is that potential and that people should be wary of it, even the artists themselves.
-
Please take this as a friendly disagreement.
Angel's point, or what I presume he meant, is fair and obvious. Your points are also fair, but you are saing is not what he said. What he actually said opened him up for ridicule, and he deserves no quarter for it. He asked me to reread his post, so I will:
As I've stated above, I find that when a person does an HTL model it's about providing a service to the community, it's not a place to showcase personal artistic tastes. To my way of thinking there's an unspoken obligation to follow as close as possible to the original Volition vision. Not what you think their intent was, not what you think they would have done had they done it now, but what they did do with existing technology.
To take liberties with a design is to my mind to take advantage of the media vps in order to get your artistic vision to as wide as possible an audience as possible. And in that regard, it's self-serving not serving the needs of the community which is what the upgrade project should be about. If people want to showcase their creativity do so in a third party campaign with a new ship.
Angel believes that some of us, namely Hades, is taking too many liberties with V's original design. He then, using no uncertain terms states that taking such liberties is to take advantage of the mediaVP's and in tha regard is self-serving, which is uncalled for and wrong.
Now maybe he did not mean to make it a pointed statement. Which is fine, but he chose to then take the self-important stance and tell me to re-read his post, instead of just correcting himself.
We have every right to disagree with him in a professional matter. And you'll notice that when it came to what constitutes a proper HTL, most of us were, myself included. I called him an asshat when he truly deserved it.
I do think he has a valid point there though - I've thought about that myself from time to time. As he specifically points out, this is not to say it definitely has or is likely to soon happen, but the point is that as FSU staff we can commit things straight to SVN, and I think that ability is important to keep in mind so that we DON'T take advantage of it. This has always been the case, and in the past unpopular changes that went through got reversed by popular demand. Nothing wrong with that.
However my concern is with how hostile people on this board seem to have become. There have been many times when I and others like BW have hesitated to give honest opinions of a WIP simply because of the likelyhood of it causing another 'hater' branding - something I've seen other FSU staff participate in far too much of in recent times. As such, the avenue for that 'popular demand' feedback is reduced to the point where my worry is that it will no longer have an effect, and unpopular changes could be pushed through all the time.
Has this happened? No I don't think so, but I do think it's worth bearing in mind so that it does not happen. :)
I'd also really like the people on this board (FSU staff and posters alike) to abandon the whole stupid hater branding attitude. I'm going to be watching for it in future because it's flaming and should be treated as such.
The frusteration also comes with the acknowledgment of a few facts:
1) Volitions ships do not provide enough detail to do anything but add details where the texture indicates, or round surfaces that should have been, so some artistic liberty MUST be taken if you wish to have more than that.
2) The line at which too much is too much is impossible to determine objectively.
I'll bring up the Hatty again. Few would argue that it is a suitable upgrade. It is also completely covered in details that are in NO WAY implied by V. So it IS acceptable to go outside of "what V DID do", you just need to be careful.
Oh I'm definitely not saying that 'you should only add detail where the texture or geometry implies'. I'm talking about keeping the feel of each ship through preserving the key aspects.
An example would be the Aten. I made some pretty big changes to the underbelly but did not much change the feel of the top - just more clearly defined it, with the reason being that the overall look of the topside was definitely a key aspect of the original, whilst the underside was not.
It's the same deal with the Hatty - the key aspects are all beautifully maintained, and then loads of detail and artistic license are employed to great effect - resulting in something pretty spectacular. The same can be said of your Sobek - you've obviously put a lot of care into preserving the key aspects of the Sobek design, and have then added a lot of artistic license around that. This is what I think HTLing should be all about! :)
A HTL job can employ artistic license AND/OR effectively carry over the feel from the retail model. Models that do both are pretty much universally liked. Models that do just one will not be as popular: If they don't carry over the feel from the original they're unpopular among people who liked that feel, whilst if they don't employ artistic license then they're a bit of a bland upgrade.
-
OK, I've seen enough.
Everyone's made their point multiple times.
VA: The things you have to say to the FSU staff, should probably be in internal and not out here in public.. because while I agree with what you are saying, you are also serving to encourage certain kinds of posting that I find quite harsh.
I really want to request that if any other moderators have anything else to add to the FSU staff.. it should be on internal. This thread has seen enough hostility and really needs to be closed.