Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4002
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
The Rubicon 1.1 point release saw a considerable large upgrade of in-game art assets with a V3 renovation of all stations, the introduction of completely new wrecks for capita and supercapitall ships which now properly reflect the destructive forces required to tear down these behemoths.
Please read CCP BlueScreen's latest art blog The Art of Rubicon 1.1 which provides not only shiny pictures (click the thumbnails in the blog for high resolution pictures) but also gives a deep insight into the work processes of our beloved art department! CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
10983
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Whooo!
Looks great! Those wrecks are yummy! And permanent b-r5rb wrecks site!! Good move!
(also might want to update the link to http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/art-for-rubicon-1.1/ instead of the b-r5rb link... ) *thumbs up*
/c
|
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4002
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yes, it is a bit unfortunate that the Bloodbath of B-R5RB was one day too soon for the new capitals and supercapital as outlined in the Art blog to be displayed in game.
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
CCP Logibro
C C P C C P Alliance
255
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
So pretty! Can't wait to see more wrecks in space! CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites
@CCP_Logibro |
|
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
528
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
So now that Stations are V3'd, what is left to undergo this process before we get the new lighting system/render that was promised long ago? |
Garr Earthbender
Justified Chaos
196
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
but, but, where's my Rifter wreck? -Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper |
Elena Thiesant
Sun Micro Systems
1248
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
Quote:So now that I have this tool, what to wreck next GǪ?
Battleships! Then battlecruisers, then cruisers, then.... |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4815
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 17:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
This is some amazing stuff guys! . |
Obil Que
Star Explorers
30
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:17:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:The Rubicon 1.1 point release saw a considerable large upgrade of in-game art assets with a V3 renovation of all stations, the introduction of completely new wrecks for capita and supercapitall ships which now properly reflect the destructive forces required to tear down these behemoths. Please read CCP BlueScreen's latest art blog The Art of Rubicon 1.1 which provides not only shiny pictures (click the thumbnails in the blog for high resolution pictures) but also gives a deep insight into the work processes of our beloved art department!
It may be the smallest thing to some but THANK YOU for being able to turn off clouds. It is a *huge* benefit to those of us with weaker graphics cards.
THANK YOU! |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2629
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
"Well now you can now turn them off if they give your computer/graphics cars any trouble."
I have a graphics car? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
444
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
I love these, but I cant help but wonder why some of the ships don't seem to break along weaker natural stress points in the model.
The Providence being a good example, the front hull breaks but there seems to be a natural breaking stress point in the middle.
That, and some of the ships don't seem that badly damaged (rev, naglfar, Ragnarok). Was there intention behind that, or just artist interpretation? |
|
CCP BlueScreen
C C P C C P Alliance
227
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:So now that Stations are V3'd, what is left to undergo this process before we get the new lighting system/render that was promised long ago?
We are definitely getting closer but not quite there yet, there is at least a good number of world/dungeon objects left to V3.
But believe me, we want to get there just as fast as you do, and we just about see the light at the end tunnel now.
|
|
Aurora Fatalis
Blacklight Recon
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
EVE has graphics?
I jest, this is awesome, and I'm looking forward to taking the view in full on my multi-monitor setup, thus avoiding the above image =) |
Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
338
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 18:52:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Yes, it is a bit unfortunate that the Bloodbath of B-R5RB happened one day too soon for the new capitals and supercapital as outlined in the Art blog to be displayed in game. they would have just got one shot by a noobship... poke the game design devs and have them rework salvaging as Marlona Sky suggests
on topic - wrecks look fantastic and I really appreciate all the WIP screenshots, I love learning about the development process (and i suppose asset creation process in this case)
The next thing you should wreck, hmm... T1/T2 ships look straightforward with your nice new tool, so I suggest that CCP Ph00ze extend it to handle any combination of subsystems on a T3 :D Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2431
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:02:00 -
[15] - Quote
the only issue i see is that now if you would decide to update a capital ship model you would have to go to the process again to update its wreck. (and two wrecks next to each other will look identical)
but it certainly does look awesome - good job.
the stations look nice too, however i liked the old amar color scheme a bit more (warm yellow lights/force fields instead of white/gray) - but i am sure you find enough people who don't agree with me here ;) eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
|
CCP BlueScreen
C C P C C P Alliance
227
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:04:00 -
[16] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:"Well now you can now turn them off if they give your computer/graphics cars any trouble."
I have a graphics car?
Dammit |
|
Callic Veratar
579
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:15:00 -
[17] - Quote
I'm looking forward to the tool being integrated directly into eve and building the wrecks dynamically based on where it was shot and how it got blown up. |
Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
269
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:15:00 -
[18] - Quote
While there was a specific need to redo the stealthbombers from their T1 counterparts to fit the actual launchers on the model, why did you pass up on doing the same with the Crucifier, creating a visual difference between the T1 and the T2 hull?
Also, I do get a slight feeling that a lot of the V3 work isn't keeping up with current visuals/processing power.
Even though wrecks were redone, the original hull still is taken from the universe, before magically put back, only damaged. There's no bits and pieces falling off during combat, there's no animation getting into this wrecked state. It's all very "1.0" if you catch my drift. Effect animations on the new deployables still are the same camera-angle independent effects like we have on the warpdisruptor/stasis/sensor boosters/etc. that can look really weird at times. With that, the whole directX11 client is also quite unstable still, with plenty of blackouts (especially when alt-tabbing)
I'm really asking; is all the artwork done now getting it's chance to shine with the current rendering engine? |
Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
529
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:18:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP BlueScreen wrote:Jack bubu wrote:So now that Stations are V3'd, what is left to undergo this process before we get the new lighting system/render that was promised long ago? We are definitely getting closer but not quite there yet, there is at least a good number of world/dungeon objects left to V3. But believe me, we want to get there just as fast as you do, and we just about see the light at the end tunnel now. Thanks for the reply, good to hear that not many objects are left. |
Jessica Danikov
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
265
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
Am I correct in saying that the new wrecks are just 1 wreck model per ship? Not that I'm complaining, they are gorgeous, but when you see 5 identical wreck models next to each other... does break a immersion a bit, and that gets worse when you make them visually distinct like this.
Dynamic wrecks are probably a long way off, but one can dream and these tools seem like at least one step in that direction.
Just can't wait for the sub-capital wrecks (I know, you didn't say that, that's just me reading between the lines...) |
|
Kossaw
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
91
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:So now that I have this tool, what to wreck next GǪ?
Your beautiful new V3 stations please .... WTB : An image in my signature |
Quinn Corvez
Probe Patrol Awakened.
198
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:34:00 -
[22] - Quote
It's a real shame about that Nestor... Damn that's an ugly ship! |
|
CCP BlueScreen
C C P C C P Alliance
229
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:I love these, but I cant help but wonder why some of the ships don't seem to break along weaker natural stress points in the model.
The Providence being a good example, the front hull breaks but there seems to be a natural breaking stress point in the middle.
That, and some of the ships don't seem that badly damaged (rev, naglfar, Ragnarok). Was there intention behind that, or just artist interpretation?
Yes, there was some thinking behind some of those choices Ah but seriously there was.
I don't quite follow you on the Providence, it is true that she has a gap across her main armor plating just about in the middle, but this place also represents just about the absolute thickest part of the ship.
Also to that I would say, what you describe is almost like someone holding a stick at either end, applying force until it breaks at its weakest point. That's not how i interpret the ship damages. The damages and locations of these is based on imagined direct hits, armor/hull breaches, ammunition chamber explosions etc. (I am imagining some pretty hefty ammunition chambers here, after all, we are blowing apart Titans)
As far as the Naglfar, Ragnarok and other ships with lesser damage, yes it was a choice not to have them all break apart completely. Obviously I have seen that people have commented on this, and that some Naglfar pilots/hunters are somewhat disappointed in the amount of damage it has received.
It was not intentional to have some wreck be underwhelming, but rather be a bit more clever and subtle in their destruction. Like the Naglfar, where the top bridge and main gun mounts have been blown to bits, and the before moving parts of the siege module is floating around detached in space. But we will absolutely keep this in mind when we hopefully get around to making more variations on the individual ship wrecks some day |
|
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
402
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
CCP BlueScreen wrote:But we will absolutely keep this in mind when we hopefully get around to making more variations on the individual ship wrecks some day
That is literally what everybody wants. There doesn't need to be 10 to 20 variation of ship wrecks, 3 would work.
It takes a little dimension away when every titan blew up in exactly the same way.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2629
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 19:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
You mention that better wrecks help with immersion. But the new ones have one big immersion breaker: Floating parts. If a part is floating free of the ship then it must have moved there; that is at one time it had some net velocity. But now its just sitting there. What stopped it? Space has no friction.
Also in space very small forces, over time, can move things about great distances. Light pressure, solar wind, gravity gradients. Its totally unbelievable that parts of a wreck would remain flying in formation for any length of time. The pieces of the Jita monument should have dispersed long ago.
If the goal was just a pretty game this would not matter. You succeeded in doing that part. But you specifically stated that improving immersion was a goal. Immersion-wise the wrecks just look... strange. Better would be to have parts dangling at the end of cables or thin strips of metal and other wreckage elements. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
402
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 20:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
You want to laugh at lost immersion, have a noob ship tractor in a capital ship :-). Its funny to watch this piece of junk noob ship drag around a capital behind it with 0 effort :-P
You might want to consider making player made capitals, supercapitals and titan wrecks immune to being tractorbeamed.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Bariolage
Control F9
20
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 20:30:00 -
[27] - Quote
Thanks. I love elaborate and well written summaries. This is a game for people who are obsessed with details. |
|
CCP BlueScreen
C C P C C P Alliance
235
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 20:59:00 -
[28] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:You mention that better wrecks help with immersion. But the new ones have one big immersion breaker: Floating parts. If a part is floating free of the ship then it must have moved there; that is at one time it had some net velocity. But now its just sitting there. What stopped it? Space has no friction.
Also in space very small forces, over time, can move things about great distances. Light pressure, solar wind, gravity gradients. Its totally unbelievable that parts of a wreck would remain flying in formation for any length of time. The pieces of the Jita monument should have dispersed long ago.
If the goal was just a pretty game this would not matter. You succeeded in doing that part. But you specifically stated that improving immersion was a goal. Immersion-wise the wrecks just look... strange. Better would be to have parts dangling at the end of cables or thin strips of metal and other wreckage elements.
Pfff, I mean come on, this is obviously caused by the WCCP also known as "Warp Core Compromised Perimeter".
Its common knowledge that immediately upon compromising the integrity of a pod controlled ship hull, the exposed warp core reacting to the vacuum of space, creates an extremely strong yet temporary "perimeter" or "spherical charge" around itself. This sudden but short lived force stops any debris from continuing its natural travels into deep space. While the initial charge is temporary, a much weaker but constant force will remain and keep the wreck looking seemingly intact for long periods of time
This is fantastic luck for us, since I am not sure how we would handle debris continuously traveling through space.*
Anyways, seriously now You are obviously right, what I meant by immersion was rather immersion into the game than into an astrophysical correctly represented virtual reality. As far as immersion into the game of blowing up massive spaceships in space go, I would hold that the new wrecks is a step in the right direction, i hope you might agree on that.
*Theories and/or astrophysics observations stated as facts contained within this post could/might/probably are flawed and factually incorrect. These should not be considered a reflection of EVE lore or CCP intelligence in general, but rather a reflection of CCP BlueScreens terrible humor. |
|
Tasha Saisima
State War Academy Caldari State
81
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:05:00 -
[29] - Quote
Thanks for the long awaited Dev Blog. Still no mention of the Amarr colors issue so I hope that is not forgotten |
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
967
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 21:09:00 -
[30] - Quote
Are there any plans to make an animation of the ships breaking up? Mashie Saldana Dominique Vasilkovsky
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |