Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 101
07-13-2010, 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_86
To be frank Capn i think that is a pretty poor response. If your going to do something do it properly, It looks awful! Added to that we cant use custom LRSV arrangements yet? When will that happen? Im just gobsmacked that youve created models for the saucer seperation on the exploration cruisers, but creating a smoother featureless armour model is a step to far?
CapnLogan:
(the tone here is not angry, ****ed or anything of the like, just saddened curiosity)
Im sorta curious about this as well... Why no allotment to create a second model? or make it look right? does this have to do with the polygon quota? time spent? or what? I agree, its kinda strange to go through all the effort for the different ships to clean them up and make em look nice (and you have done a fabulous on them), then not on this, another iconic feature.

Edit: just saw the previous complete post on why. saw the quota info.
I still the the quota stuff sucks... would like to have a correct model on this. And my why do everything else FANTASTIC and this one halfway... comment still stands. is there a possibility to build the new models later down the road?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 102
07-13-2010, 12:33 PM
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 103
07-13-2010, 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnLogan
I love all of you fans and I hope that this inconsistency can slip for a little while.

In the meantime I'll keep slipping in fixes wherever I can - starting today with the Sov.
I think that's perfectly understandable. Perhaps a good compromise is to get the textures to look as close to the official "Endgame" model as possible?

Also, I asked this in the Galaxy thread, but this really applies to all the Starfleet ships: is there any intention of adding more Starfleet pennants that display our ship's name and registry besides just on the saucer top and bottom (and sometimes warp nacelles)? It's a little thing, but it really adds a lot to making these ships feel like MY ships, even if I see another of the exact same class.

For instance, you can see that the name of a Galaxy class vessel is also displayed below the forward torpedo launcher, and the registry number is listed (in yellow) in front of the main shuttle bay doors, on the warp nacelle pylons, etc.

http://www.siwiak.com/archives/asdb/...alaxy_side.jpg
http://ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/...t-top-jein.jpg
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 104
07-13-2010, 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnLogan
Hmmm, I can't find them on pylons either in any reference imagery. I'll keep lookin around though.
This is the only one I can find:
http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars...e-sheet-11.jpg
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 105
07-13-2010, 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnLogan
Yeah man, sorry. I wish I could give you a better response but then I'd just be lying.

I agree that it would be really cool to have new models and textures for ablative armor and all, but I honestly don't think it's worth allotting 3 weeks of modeling and texture work for an ability that many players will never even use that is only on screen for about 30 seconds at a time. The man hours it would cost, not only from artists, but programmers and FX creators would cost Cryptic thousands and thousands of dollars to get this graphic looking more like the show.

Not to degrade the Interpid or Ablative Armor ability, I'm a HUGE voyager fan, but there's only 2 of us on ships and we've got a LOT of stuff to get done.

I love all of you fans and I hope that this inconsistency can slip for a little while.

In the meantime I'll keep slipping in fixes wherever I can - starting today with the Sov.
I understand that you feel the same. And please dont get me wrong capn i think your amazing, youve worked up a storm on the **** poor weak models that shipped at launch. BUT, if you couldnt do it properly, you shouldnt have done it at all... the armour texture is quite poor like its been done in paint. It seriously looks like a modders attempt at armored voyager from star trek:legacy. I just feel that if you couldnt do it properly you should of gone for the warship voyager variant ( http://media.photobucket.com/image/w...p_voyager2.jpg )

As it stands its a slap in the face, and i really hope you take away some of the sore feelings and put them on Dstahls desk.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 106
07-13-2010, 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconius View Post
CapnLogan:
(the tone here is not angry, ****ed or anything of the like, just saddened curiosity)
Im sorta curious about this as well... Why no allotment to create a second model? or make it look right? does this have to do with the polygon quota? time spent? or what? I agree, its kinda strange to go through all the effort for the different ships to clean them up and make em look nice (and you have done a fabulous on them), then not on this, another iconic feature.
touché. Let me tell ya LOL I spent the last two straight weeks working almost exclusively on saucer sep with 2 programmers and 1 FX artist. Along with a few other randoms thrown in here and there. It just ended up costing a whole lot of time to get the tech working, get the new art created and all put together, which in turn also means a lot of money was spent. It'll be really hard for me to pull enough teeth to get them to let us do Ablative Armor the way it should be done.

However!! Keep in mind that the only reason we are getting properly modeled galaxy, and saucer sep is because of FAN DEMAND!! I'd LOVE to go back and make some kick ass ablative armor models!!! I spent hours staring at Drex Files pics of it, and did my very best to make my new texture look as close as I could to the Drex version within the parameters that were set before me.

I'll be sure to make this an issue at the next meeting and I'll see what kind of hope there is for a more appropriate effect in the future.

So it's not so much polygon budgets, or data budgets, but I'd say that it's mostly because our team is shrinking, and we still have to continue to put out a lot of other content for the future, that it will be really hard for me to get the political pull to get a couple programmers, an FX guy, and myself a couple weeks to make new models for this cause.

But if enough people complain about it *wink wink*
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 107
07-13-2010, 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_86
I understand that you feel the same. And please dont get me wrong capn i think your amazing, youve worked up a storm on the **** poor weak models that shipped at launch. BUT, if you couldnt do it properly... the armour texture is quite poor like its been done in paint. It seriously looks like a modders attempt at armored voyager from star trek:legacy. I just feel that if you couldnt do it properly you should of gone for the warship voyager variant ( http://media.photobucket.com/image/w...p_voyager2.jpg )

As it stands its a slap in the face, and i really hope you take away some of the sore feelings and put them on Dstahls desk.

I agree with this one as well.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 108
07-13-2010, 12:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MightionNY View Post
Your picture link is 403.
You can blame that on Bernd the guy who runs EAS. He can be very odd that way sometimes.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 109
07-13-2010, 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnLogan
touché. Let me tell ya LOL I spent the last two straight weeks working almost exclusively on saucer sep with 2 programmers and 1 FX artist. Along with a few other randoms thrown in here and there. It just ended up costing a whole lot of time to get the tech working, get the new art created and all put together, which in turn also means a lot of money was spent. It'll be really hard for me to pull enough teeth to get them to let us do Ablative Armor the way it should be done.

However!! Keep in mind that the only reason we are getting properly modeled galaxy, and saucer sep is because of FAN DEMAND!! I'd LOVE to go back and make some kick ass ablative armor models!!! I spent hours staring at Drex Files pics of it, and did my very best to make my new texture look as close as I could to the Drex version within the parameters that were set before me.

I'll be sure to make this an issue at the next meeting and I'll see what kind of hope there is for a more appropriate effect in the future.

So it's not so much polygon budgets, or data budgets, but I'd say that it's mostly because our team is shrinking, and we still have to continue to put out a lot of other content for the future, that it will be really hard for me to get the political pull to get a couple programmers, an FX guy, and myself a couple weeks to make new models for this cause.

But if enough people complain about it *wink wink*
I vehemently support fixing it!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 110
07-13-2010, 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_86
I understand that you feel the same. And please dont get me wrong capn i think your amazing, youve worked up a storm on the **** poor weak models that shipped at launch. BUT, if you couldnt do it properly... the armour texture is quite poor like its been done in paint. It seriously looks like a modders attempt at armored voyager from star trek:legacy. I just feel that if you couldnt do it properly you should of gone for the warship voyager variant ( http://media.photobucket.com/image/w...p_voyager2.jpg )

As it stands its a slap in the face, and i really hope you take away some of the sore feelings and put them on Dstahls desk.
First off - that Warship is BAD ASS!

Secondly - yes. I'm not terribly happy with how it looks right now. I do have a couple of weeks ahead of me dedicated to polish and I've got plans to go back and at the very least hit this texture again. I had 4 hours to get this thing done before pencils down a few weeks ago, but was promised time to go back and spruce it up (AKA re-do it)

So at the very least, you'll see some improvements on how it currently looks, but I doubt we'll all get the REAL fix that we all want any time soon.

*flame on!*
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 12:03 AM.