Latter. Not ladder.
And you're wrong again. FSU lends itself to retaining Retail Playability (in terms of the mechanics and most definitely the story line) of the Campaign (especially in terms of maintaining it's balance), while providing upgrades to the visual or model experience. By the logic of your argument, changing the colors of the Subach is a game breaking floodgate. Making a bitmapped weapon use particles, would be a game breaking change.
The beam-glows as a visual representation of the beam impact nothing save for visual aesthetic. Not only is the effect different than retail, but it's sizing is in accordance to preference and aesthetic taste. And that is something that can and will differ from person to person.
Nothing stops anybody from deciding to plug in the retail numbers for the beam-glow radius into an TBM and having fun. But for us, and for me, those sizes just don't work with the current effect or the beams that are in the MediaVPs. And we've already established that the beams themselves are retail sized and that (unlike 3.6.8/3.6.10) behave in retail fashion.
Any psuedo-science conversation is exactly that, merely side conversation that is not in fact actually having any bearing on the decision, because the decision was made based on visual aesthetic, not psuedo-scientific notions. Those I only just came up with in a response to Valathils not-so-serious post and as such, is a not-so-serious answer and is further ended with a (In my opinion), which I am able to keep personal opinion separate from professional direction, so don't read so much into it and assume that it's driving the professional mandate of the rest of the team, k? Especially when you then follow with your own in citing that it's "set 100s of years in the future" and then make a conjecture as to where it's science will stand at that point in time.
And no, canon is not wrong. Nobody ever said it was. But if canon was the only thing to go by, and if was never to be touched, this project wouldn't exist because there would be no updated higher poly models or effects to play with. How they get played with, and what the end results are, the opinions will vary from person to person and that's not really something that can be argued. All we can do as a team is try and incorporate all the suggestions and all the feedback and all the submissions that are made and try to ensure they they are playable by one and all. And not everybody is going to be happy about it. We're not trying to make everybody happy. Just so long as at the end of the day, it works and that the largest number of people are willing to deal with it (and preferably enjoy it), then we've made our goal.
So, basically, if it comes down to you as a solitary individual not liking what the end result of the collaboration is, you're free to make and post your own works based on your opinion that those that are like minded can enjoy. But we ARE trying to take your feedback into account as much as possible and we HAVE listened to you, so try not being so dramatic with the reaction, okay?
Poll
