Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,077
# 41
01-29-2013, 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
All of that stuff makes it difficult to outsource. There are many iterations, many things need to be double, triple, octuple checked, and when something breaks, there needs to be someone to debug/fix it who knows what they're doing.
So teach me Taco!
http://i1151.photobucket.com/albums/o633/centersolace/189cux9khvl6ojpg_zpsca7ccff0.jpg

So inhumane superweapons, mass murder, and canon nonsense is okay, but speedos are too much for some people.
Republic Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 808
# 42
01-29-2013, 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post

All of that stuff makes it difficult to outsource. There are many iterations, many things need to be double, triple, octuple checked, and when something breaks, there needs to be someone to debug/fix it who knows what they're doing.

There are complaints out there on model geometry, texture issues and other model-related issues that have been around for over a year.

Sometimes longer.

Given the number of ships released in a year (up to date, not very many) one has to wonder where bug-fix is on the priority list. Somewhere near the bottom one assumes.

It's like this with other aspects of the game too. It's almost like Cryptic has a "if it is live it is utterly perfect and the problem is you" attitude twords bug-fixing.
-------------
ISE ISE Ba-bee. "If you got the Borg yo... I'll solve 'em check out this shot while my torpedos dissolve 'em"
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 867
# 43
01-29-2013, 11:05 PM
I would just like to point out that of all these things, the only one I ever noticed (and it bothered me) was the asymmetry on the Galaxy Dreadnaught. Asymmetry bugs me a lot and is easily noticeable. The lack of Ten Forward also really pops out at me.


I should also add that, while I think perceptions of "errors" in the models should be discussed, the fact of the matter is that many aspects of these models is somewhat open for interpretation. For instance, the Galaxy class is my favorite ship, but as already pointed out, the models themselves are somewhat inconsistent and certain features are never clearly visible on screen.

That being said, the Galaxy class ship model is, for the most part, pretty good considering the time constraints. I just hope that the artists can give it a nice facelift when they release the planned bridge set.

I disagree with the original poster that STO's models are "terrible". In fact, I think some are incredibly detailed and the amount of modification they have made based on player feedback is astounding.

But the Galaxy is so iconic that it really needs to be the best model in the game, with the awareness that several disparate models of the ships exist.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,192
# 44
01-29-2013, 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicalspock View Post
I would just like to point out that of all these things, the only one I ever noticed (and it bothered me) was the asymmetry on the Galaxy Dreadnaught. Asymmetry bugs me a lot and is easily noticeable. The lack of Ten Forward also really pops out at me.


I should also add that, while I think perceptions of "errors" in the models should be discussed, the fact of the matter is that many aspects of these models is somewhat open for interpretation. For instance, the Galaxy class is my favorite ship, but as already pointed out, the models themselves are somewhat inconsistent and certain features are never clearly visible on screen.

That being said, the Galaxy class ship model is, for the most part, pretty good considering the time constraints. I just hope that the artists can give it a nice facelift when they release the planned bridge set.

I disagree with the original poster that STO's models are "terrible". In fact, I think some are incredibly detailed and the amount of modification they have made based on player feedback is astounding.

But the Galaxy is so iconic that it really needs to be the best model in the game, with the awareness that several disparate models of the ships exist.
Lockboxes make money now, not the gimped Galaxy with its horrid stats that noone buys. Hence, with limited time the Art team probably has, its safe to assume that Galaxy is on the very bottom of everything in STO. Sad, but most likely truth.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,037
# 45
01-29-2013, 11:29 PM
I still wouldn't mind seeing the shooting model version of the Nebula-class, but that'll never happen.
---------------------------------------------------
U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-91771 - Nebula-class
Commanding Officer: Captain Pyotr Ramonovich Amosov
Dedication Plaque: "Leave nothing unattempted" - James Cook
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,035
# 46
01-30-2013, 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by amosov78 View Post
I still wouldn't mind seeing the shooting model version of the Nebula-class, but that'll never happen.
The absence of that version is what keeps me from purchasing the FMs for a Fleet Nebula.
The crazy thing is...look at the Venture deflector.
If the Venture skin became available on the Nebula, the ship would look a whole lot more like the filming model and would probably convince me to purchase both, the Fleet Nebby and the Venture skin.
Empire Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,202
# 47
01-30-2013, 02:05 AM
I have a solution for you: don't zoom. And Tada, it's solved.

I see no such akward details on the latest ships though, so I guess that it will get fixed eventually when they have time for this.
Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 444
# 48
01-30-2013, 03:36 AM
These very minor cosmetic aspects SHOULD be on Cryptic's list... but in the lower ranks of it

STO way too many major bugs (e.g., ongoing issues with private challenge matches, flickering textures etc.) to dedicate a DEV to smth insignificant as this now.

Note: Some of you REALLY play the immersion-card here??? OMG, folks... Being in an STF with a borgified Ferengi Marauder, a Breen ship, a Dominion ship and a Tholian cruiser - ALL miraculously captained by Starfleet officers - completely killed off the last bit of immersion looooong ago...
STOWiki admin.
Lieutenant
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 51
# 49
01-30-2013, 08:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tacofangs View Post
I think one thing that many people overlook when they say, "Just have fans build it!" is that everything that goes into the game has to be built in specific ways. Ships more than most, as they are basically a character. They need to not only fit into a triangle count, and a material count, but they have to be split up into multiple parts, with pivots in specific locations for customization. They have to have all of their UVs set up in a way to work well with multiple different materials. They have to be set up with nodes for every phaser strip, blinky light, photon torpedo launcher, and tractor beam. They have to be named in specific ways, and a million other things I'm sure I don't know about since I'm not a ship artist.

The point being, making a ship for OUR game, is a much more involved process than just making a good looking model in Maya for renders.

All of that stuff makes it difficult to outsource. There are many iterations, many things need to be double, triple, octuple checked, and when something breaks, there needs to be someone to debug/fix it who knows what they're doing.


are ya'll EVER going to fix the fleet emblem issue on the assault cruiser (sovereign)?

the port side (left) fleet emblem is jut a mirror of the one from the right side. and as such it displays BACKWARDS from how it is supposed to look.

its been like this since the assault cruiser came out, and still has never been fixed or even addressed (as far as I know).
"We are the Perfect World. Life as you know it is over. We will add your monetary distinctiveness to our own. Your player base will adapt to service us. Resistance is Futile."
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 855
# 50
01-30-2013, 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulleatherjacket View Post
So what you're saying is, you guys will get to work on it right away?
No. What he is saying is, "We're fine with the way the ships look. We have no intention of fixing up the older models."
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:45 PM.