yes i did - if you read the reply you quoted you'll see i was directly replying to Viking about his point with the weapons design
how does ED compare to SC ?
- Thread starter inquisiteur
- Start date
yes i did - if you read the reply you quoted you'll see i was directly replying to Viking about his point with the weapons design
I've not really got into TNGS I guess the panel format just puts me off, and they do seem to struggle sometimes straddling the lines between hamming it up for the camera/taking the **** and providing constructive feedback.
10 for the chairman is good from the horses mouth info and I still quite like WMH, though I preferred the feel of the old "studio" i.e. desk.
A bit more of a Q&A thing by David or Michael here would be good but I couldn't imagine them doing any SC type format other shows.
10 for the chairman is good from the horses mouth info and I still quite like WMH, though I preferred the feel of the old "studio" i.e. desk.
A bit more of a Q&A thing by David or Michael here would be good but I couldn't imagine them doing any SC type format other shows.
I think they'll do that Q&A for ED in time, perhaps coming up to the beta where much of the alpha work is done and they are really wanting to promote the game features.
I like the 10 for the chairman thing on SC as a concept but each week there are similar questions especially on the matchmaking/PvP slider etc etc and each week he answers these questions and im left with confusion over the system from the week before or the before that, its clear its a very complicated process that as a process not been utterly hammered out yet and maybe CR isnt explaining it terribly well on camera - theres still a lot of uncertainty in the details which i suppose is understood at this stage?
Anyways id love to see DB and MB do a Q&A session also - its good for the promotion for sure. Think DB comes across really well in the videos he has done - really genuine and kid-excited about the whole thing as well as that "geeky competence" that he'd probably be mortified to read here.
Yeah tea time with David doing 10 questions and answers would be nice. Maybe about beta time he will. Would indeed help promote the game.
Think that would be quite funny actually.
High tea with DB!
Chris Roberts is always supping out of some coffee cup, maybe DB with bone china and cucumber sandwiches might be a funny counterpoint there
Perhaps a section on this weeks best jumpers by Ashley could be a counter point to Mark Skeltons "hazy thoughts" on WMH.
High tea with DB!
Chris Roberts is always supping out of some coffee cup, maybe DB with bone china and cucumber sandwiches might be a funny counterpoint there
Perhaps a section on this weeks best jumpers by Ashley could be a counter point to Mark Skeltons "hazy thoughts" on WMH.
Yeah tea time with David doing 10 questions and answers would be nice. Maybe about beta time he will. Would indeed help promote the game.
Wait! What?
You mean David and Michael should answer questions from the community in a video format like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9612CgOr3lE&feature=share&list=PL7glm5rbPHKyBblUEjmm2PFkwJ4ykuz6s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjVuZ2DDpS8&feature=share&list=PL7glm5rbPHKyBblUEjmm2PFkwJ4ykuz6s&index=1
http://youtu.be/O6z5OK8J5pg
http://youtu.be/lWpa9acEeZs
http://youtu.be/h-bEn2aLJ7U
http://youtu.be/QDurmITXzRM
http://youtu.be/QJGUvr-uBRA
http://youtu.be/yrv3yC3wrg8
http://youtu.be/VsBPDnHiTi8
http://youtu.be/7ue87r4zPcE
http://youtu.be/Sz5aeV-G7DE
In terms of video updates that's pretty much all they did last year!
I actually mentioned here in the forums that they should probably be called Q&As rather than Dev Diaries or Progress reports, since Dev Diaries usually shows more visual footage of the game in a WIP stage. Something I personally would have liked to see more of during the development of the game. I LOVE the Double Fine videos for this very reason.
You mean the Anvil Aerospace Albatross from Team Catapult?
Sorry I have to go on a rant here
The early drawings are really lol and painfully crude but the rendering looks nice actually. It's a good design. It's pretty complex also. I liked it best out of all the other ships, it had elegance and flair. It looked radically different from different angles! I thought that alone was pretty interesting.
The other designs where the usual standard, blocky and martial teenager appeal stuff.
There is nothing wrong with 3D modelers who can't draw. Sure it's a bad sign, because great artists usually hone their craft and excel in multiple disciplines, but these are amateurs who aren't paid. If it's their hobby, they might just skip some of the huge time investments it takes to become a master in a craft.
To criticize them like that is both unprofessional and despicable, because if you get creative, you put something of you out there. And if you manage creatives, you are always polite and respectful and never mocking.
It's a good design, just badly drawn over! If you draw the same design once good and once badly, does it make the design any better or worse?
What kind of arrogant and haughty douchebags are they that they "demand" every team to deliver them professional grade presentations so they can lord over? It just shows they are ether so spoiled or don't have talent themselves if they can't SEE past the superficial. Now I know why the SC ship designs look the way they do.
And you draw fast to to communicate an idea fast. Then you get input and correct and refine more and more before starting to model. I've seen people who can create great drawings deliver horrible sketches as a first draft. On the other side, someone without talent will be more self conscious and try to mask a bad design by making it more refined from the start and invest too much time into a first draft. The annotations where OBVIOUSLY NOT meant to be deliberately insulting. Unless you count a lack of talent or time to be an insult.
/rant
Just my personal opinion
Sorry I have to go on a rant here
The early drawings are really lol and painfully crude but the rendering looks nice actually. It's a good design. It's pretty complex also. I liked it best out of all the other ships, it had elegance and flair. It looked radically different from different angles! I thought that alone was pretty interesting.
The other designs where the usual standard, blocky and martial teenager appeal stuff.
There is nothing wrong with 3D modelers who can't draw. Sure it's a bad sign, because great artists usually hone their craft and excel in multiple disciplines, but these are amateurs who aren't paid. If it's their hobby, they might just skip some of the huge time investments it takes to become a master in a craft.
To criticize them like that is both unprofessional and despicable, because if you get creative, you put something of you out there. And if you manage creatives, you are always polite and respectful and never mocking.
It's a good design, just badly drawn over! If you draw the same design once good and once badly, does it make the design any better or worse?
What kind of arrogant and haughty douchebags are they that they "demand" every team to deliver them professional grade presentations so they can lord over? It just shows they are ether so spoiled or don't have talent themselves if they can't SEE past the superficial. Now I know why the SC ship designs look the way they do.
And you draw fast to to communicate an idea fast. Then you get input and correct and refine more and more before starting to model. I've seen people who can create great drawings deliver horrible sketches as a first draft. On the other side, someone without talent will be more self conscious and try to mask a bad design by making it more refined from the start and invest too much time into a first draft. The annotations where OBVIOUSLY NOT meant to be deliberately insulting. Unless you count a lack of talent or time to be an insult.
/rant
Just my personal opinion
Last edited:
You need a experience PG prgrammer. Or a team member who drop its current task for that.
It could be a parttime job or a small sub team.
That the cost. All cost need to be acounted for.
LT is different kind of game.
SC is a game with a huge amount of hand made art assets.
Triple A games have even more enormouse budged but that is wen 100++ studio works on it.
Also a lot of time goes into refine and optimize and polish one art asset. The more money the more time a asset gets to be done from very baic to well to very high polished.
The difference is those " its done wenn it done games" where the do a equal size project to a clone game with a two year deadline.
So there is large difference in assets kwality from basic to decent to very high polished.
Same goes for PG. From very badic algoritmes. To very compex take every aspect of realistic factors into acount PG result.
This must be tested if there arent very strange results.
Some assets like stat back drop or in fps the flora is a very good candidate for PG tech solution.
But everything can be done the PG way but it much more difficult to get that kwantity with equal handmade result.bij a artist with talent and the time to do his creative artistic thing.
I have seen very impresive PG results decades ago. From the demo scene.
But never in games.
It difficult to compare different games as the have different needs.
It like comparing gears of war vs Crysis.
Comparing is imposible there is no game implemented in both ways.
You mean the Anvil Aerospace Albatross from Team Catapult?
Sorry I have to go on a rant here
The early drawings are really lol and painfully crude but the rendering looks nice actually. It's a good design. It's pretty complex also. I liked it best out of all the other ships, it had elegance and flair. It looked radically different from different angles! I thought that alone was pretty interesting.
The other designs where the usual standard, blocky and martial teenager appeal stuff.
There is nothing wrong with 3D modelers who can't draw. Sure it's a bad sign, because great artists usually hone their craft and excel in multiple disciplines, but these are amateurs who aren't paid. If it's their hobby, they might just skip some of the huge time investments it takes to become a master in a craft.
To criticize them like that is both unprofessional and despicable, because if you get creative, you put something of you out there. And if you manage creatives, you are always polite and respectful and never mocking.
It's a good design, just badly drawn over! If you draw the same design once good and once badly, does it make the design any better or worse?
What kind of arrogant and haughty douchebags are they that they "demand" every team to deliver them professional grade presentations so they can lord over? It just shows they are ether so spoiled or don't have talent themselves if they can't SEE past the superficial. Now I know why the SC ship designs look the way they do.
And you draw fast to to communicate an idea fast. Then you get input and correct and refine more and more before starting to model. I've seen people who can create great drawings deliver horrible sketches as a first draft. On the other side, someone without talent will be more self conscious and try to mask a bad design by making it more refined from the start and invest too much time into a first draft. The annotations where OBVIOUSLY NOT meant to be deliberately insulting. Unless you count a lack of talent or time to be an insult.
/rant
Just my personal opinion
your link is taking to a different team.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scvwN6u2mwM#t=2233
I thought the idea was good also. It reminded me alot of ships like the dropship in aliens and the defiant from deep space 9.
The best bit is Mark Skelton pompously talking about how they take everything they do seriously, while wearing that shirt....
LOL - a bizarre sartorial choice - completely at odds with his laid back hookah smoking hazy thoughts persona.
It's interesting that this often comes up.
So what do you consider to be a fair comparison to either of those two games? And you can't use sequels or prequels from the same franchise either.
Serious question by the way because sooner or later someone does that "Apples and Oranges" thing so I'm interested to know what you think.
I'm sure SC will be a spiffy game etc (probably purchase it myself on release), but is it really only me that thinks it's utterly bizarre to be making cringe-worthy talent shows for the game? I know they've got to spend the money on something, and keep the backers fed with something, but really... it looks so forced.
Should we be badgering the devs to be treated to an E: D version of 'The Voice' or the Great Elite Bake-Off?
Should we be badgering the devs to be treated to an E: D version of 'The Voice' or the Great Elite Bake-Off?
Should we be badgering the devs to be treated to an E: D version of 'The Voice' or the Great Elite Bake-Off?
I'm comfortable with Frontier taking their own quiet 'get on with it' approach, the alpha looks good but there is still room to disappoint and we are a long way from the finish line. Nobody has ever marketed a game like RSI before. Its interesting but I'm not sure that its good or bad yet. They still have no product to market and yet they are on marketing overdrive. Assuming the final product cures cancer and world poverty as the SC community claim it will, then I guess every company will produce and market games like that in the future. Invest the fans early and pile on the promotion. Its practically a 'faith' thing. I know people here are really into SC and I'm a backer too and not having a stab, but I maintain my right to be cynical as a consumer, until I can play it its not a game..sorry.
I still think that SC is such a long way off. I had a go with the Oculus Rift support on the hanger module and its rough to say the least, which kind of means they are still diverting resources. The DFM isn't going to be with us until PAX east in a couple of months and there is such a grand vision to build on top of that...
Babies will be conceived tonight and will have learnt to talk and shall probably be ready to play once the game ready.
Nope, it's not just you who thinks that.
In fact, my first thought when I saw that cloyingly cheesy pseudo-talent show was: 'So, you've got, what is it, thirty million bucks off people, and you still want them to do the work for you?'
Frankly, the notion that they want people to do all of the finished modelling and rendering is a bit bizarre too. I mean, I've worked as a designer for over thirty years, I train people on how to do that too, at the largest training company for that sort of thing in Europe. I've trained people at massive companies such as the BBC, British Aerospace, Sky etc, in all of the high end creative programs such as 3DSMax, Cinema 4D, After Effects etc, so I genuinely do know the world-class talent in that arena, and I can tell you now that any designer worth his or her salt should be able to scribble out a design on the back of a beermat and that would be good enough for any 3D artist or renderer who claims to be the best in the world, as those guys on that show are claiming they have working for RSI.
Being a designer is about coming up with good ideas and concepts, not how good you are at modelling and rendering stuff with 3DSMax, Cinema 4D or whatever, and it isn't about poncing around talking about it either. A beautifully-modelled and rendered crap design, is still a crap design, no matter how good the texturing and lighting is. If they really want genuinely good design ideas to be submitted, they should be willing to accept something scribbled on a page out of an exercise book, so long as it is a good idea. You can then give that to someone who does know 3DSMax or whatever, and it will be their job to realise the thing. But you don't do that until the idea has been approved.
Yes it is sort of necessary to be able to draw a little bit to do the job, but it isn't vital to be brilliant at it, conveying the idea is the vital bit. And that's coming from someone who spent four years at art college, who can actually draw. It's nice to be able to draw, but that alone will not make you a good designer.
Last edited:
That's really all the show should have said; that the group withdrew. They did not have to wash the laundry unless they wanted to create the controversy.
Pettiness in the worst way. I am disappointed.