Posts: 2,643
Threads: 217
Joined: Dec 2009
Staff roles: Forum Moderator
(06-25-2016, 01:05 AM)Barb Wrote: I mean if most of the players don't see a problem, then so be it.
People don't see a problem because they aren't trained to see problems. They're excited to see a new model that clearly took more than a few hours to make and get hyped up about it because new content is always novel and cool. That's not a problem, per se, and in fact is probably a good thing, because it encourages devs to continue to do their work, but the majority of the community are not devs because they are not qualified to be devs.
For example, I was recently accepted onto the storyline team, and there were a lot of things I thought were very much "common sense" with regards to the story that won't ever be happening, and the reason those things won't be happening are actually pretty good, but I had to have them explained to me first; I had to be "trained" to do the job by learning the ins and outs of the pre-existing standards and thinking. Tl;dr, thank God that Discovery isn't a democracy.
(06-25-2016, 10:30 AM)Croft Wrote: Condescension is the calling card of an inflated ego and has no place in a feedback thread.
We are asked for our opinions here and to give feedback based upon them, many of us are not modellers so we don't look at models with the same eye for detail. Belittling said feedback serves nothing but to put folks off from giving it and I dare say modelling for a silent community would be far harder.
Fair points. However, do also consider that being condescending towards and belittling of the developers who do look at submissions with the eye for detail that qualified them for their positions in the first place is equally offputting, and will result in nobody modelling, and eventually no community to model for.
Yes, it's the model the Order does want. Are there problems? yes, and Durandal pointed them out because it's his job to do so. So instead of going ham wild, how about we wait and see about fixing those problems Durandal mentioned to get it up to snuff?
Calling him condescending and having an inflated ego does not fix this model, and while Durandal can be a bit harsh it's his friggin job to go through every goddamn model submitted and look them over. He looks for those details for Quality Assurance. he didn't find assurance. Things need to be looked at.
We'll talk to Unlucky and see if we can't iron out the problems with the model, before going wild on people, mkay?
Natsumi Hideyoshi (The Order) | Alexis Hunter (Liberty Navy) |
I'm actually considering throwing in the towel and putting my talents to use on something else because of the responses received in this thread. That's generally not a good thing to say publicly because I'm sure that more than a few of you would have little issue with a @Durandal free devteam, but I'll try to touch on the legitimate concerns about higher quality standards here.
(06-25-2016, 01:05 AM)Barb Wrote: Maybe you're criticizing a little bit too much, I mean if most of the players don't see a problem (because they're not into modeling), especially if there are people who even wants to buy and fly it, then so be it. It's still going to be better than the current model right?
My job is to criticize people's work so that they can improve their skill and have more of their models accepted into the mod. Quality standards are important; does anyone remember the old Virage, Liberty Carrier, or Falcata? Those weren't imports, they were home grown models from a different era,one we're trying to move away from.
Look at it from a pragmatic standpoint; Freelancer isn't getting any younger. While some people personally may not have an eye for detail others do, and its difficult to advertise a mod when the first thing they see is assets that even an indie devteam releasing early access games on steam wouldn't accept.
(06-25-2016, 10:30 AM)Croft Wrote: Condescension is the calling card of an inflated ego and has no place in a feedback thread.
We are asked for our opinions here and to give feedback based upon them, many of us are not modellers so we don't look at models with the same eye for detail. Belittling said feedback serves nothing but to put folks off from giving it and I dare say modelling for a silent community would be far harder.
This one actually hurt on a very personal level. The calling card of an inflated ego would be running around behind his back and laughing about it with other people of my (very modest) caliber. It would be publicly berating Unlucky and his work. I'm not attempting to belittle anyone's work or their feedback. If I were, that post wouldn't have been as long as it was, it wouldn't have been as neutral in tone as it was, and it would not have contained instructions on how to avoid the issues outlined in said post.
I'm aware that there is a very thin line between constructive criticism and condescension, but I'm not crossing that line, I'm not towing that line, I'm just trying to help, man. This ties right in with what you said about people not having the same eye for detail as modelers. First of all, you don't need to be a modeler to have an eye for mistakes and conversely being a modeler does not mean you DO have an eye for them. I broke things down and explained them very clearly in my post, in a way that people who are not 3d artists could understand. I happen to think teaching people is better than leaving them in the dark.
(06-25-2016, 12:02 PM)Jinx Wrote: Well - truth be told - I think it was stated by the devs that the current Geb model is "unbalancable" (i do not agree with it, but i do not balance stuff...)
That should be enough reason to go for another model - even if it is inferior in looks and design (which is kind of a matter of taste) ... IF that new model can be considered "balancable".
This is true, and would be the case if the issues with the model presented here were not so extensive. If nobody brings anything else to the table I may not have any choice but to add it in, but that's the nuclear option here.
(06-25-2016, 12:02 PM)Jinx Wrote: quite frankly .. and i think i can say that .. since i made the current one .. )[/size] has an OK mesh (my own opinion) - but pretty poor texturing (what can i say ... its was one of the very early models)
I actually agree. I'd accept a reskin and slight remodel (to add some girth) to the current model, but that would require your permission if anyone else were to do it.
(06-25-2016, 12:02 PM)Jinx Wrote: The result of standards set too highly is that you may end up with no alternative at all. You sometimes have to take what you can take or you may run out of modellers.
As I already said, I don't think teaching people the basics of modeling and texturing and expecting them to adhere to them is asking too much. It doesn't take much effort to go the extra mile and make sure your textures line up correctly and your smoothgroups are set properly. What's more important is that improvement is something that any modeler who takes pride in their work aims for, and advice on how to do so is all that I was trying to convey.
The condescension remark was actually aimed at Thyrzul for his little "Low standards" piece and not at Durandal for providing constructive critisism, my bad for not making that clearer.
My point still stands though. That I do not have the expertise, nor were caring enough at that time to detail why I think his texture jobs are bad* and offered no tips for improvement like how Durandal did, to turn my comment from condescension into constructive criticism, is an other thing, of course I accept the remark because of that.
*Not bad actually, rather lazy, I noticed that on his texture jobs he textures certain details quite well, while leaving other parts so horribly underdetailed the whole just feels unfinished. Plus what Durandal said.
This model? Not ideal, however it is best bunch out of extremely limited basket. I am quite irritated at Durandal's "we do not need any more Osiris like models". Sincerely, while you do make some fair points about mesh and texture, this is outright against what Order shipline actually is.
The compromise which in my honest opinion should be done here is to accept this model, give it for someone else to texture (Not exactly Unlucky's specializations through after some time he will surely do better) and put it into the game. Give it some quick look through some of its polygons if you want to and have time.
Question we should be asking is: whether someone can come up with better model than this in REASONABLE ammount of time, that fullfils quality test AND expectations of Order| concerning its general shape and main features? Propably not. I've been looking for modeller for this particular task since 2014. Robert had to unfortunatelly quit. Unlucky provided something that I and many others would gladly fly ingame.
Current model is unsuitable either looks-like or balance-wise, no matter what are you going to do with it.
(06-27-2016, 11:09 PM)Omicron Wrote: I've been looking for modeller for this particular task since 2014. Robert had to unfortunatelly quit. Unlucky provided something that I and many others would gladly fly ingame.
For the record. Did not quit. But very busy with non disco related stuff.I have the base geometry set up. Just not at a point where I want to post stuff publicly yet.
I'm not too fond of this model to be honest. Those four hangers and the shape of the ship remind me more of something from liberty and the black and yellow stripes I don't think are necessary.
It's been years in the story since the Order left liberty with the original Osiris plans and years since the first carrier, so I find it only natural that the designs in the shipline can deviate to new things. The Onuris is one of my favorite ships and the only thing resembling it to the Order is the cockpit really, so experimenting new designs I think is a good thing.
In regards to the design of the current carrier. I'm not 100% sure where the concept with the rotating tubes came from, but while that was being developed we also wanted to create an Order super-weapon ship with a large cannon based on Nomad technology that could be used against them, and that's where the tubes came from. The idea of a large gun-ship, where literally half the ship is the forward firing super-weapon then somehow turned into multiple of the tubes being used to launch fighters. That of course never happened since it would have given the Order a hilariously powerful ship that only one person would have had.
As things stand now, I still like the current carrier and I think it's better to do things properly, even if it means more re-modelling, rather than pushing the current model out if it doesn't meet all the requirements. Keep in mind, I'm not familiar at all really with how the ships are currently balanced.
The current model has no rotating tubes - that sounds like some crazy made up thing. They were meant to be kind of like torpedo tubes for fighters to allow very quick launches. Because the order fighters tended to be rather triangular (front profile) the tubes would have a similar shape - and because triangular shapes do not stack well when you simply but one over another - and because in space ... it really doesnt matter too much - two of them are at a 40 degrees or so angle.
this here is the drawn concept work for the carrier.
so that is just a little information - to clear up rumors.