Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
HeXxploiT
Little Red X
72
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 02:34:19 -
[1] - Quote
It seems to me that replacing or updating ship models is really a waste of perfectly good content.
Yes a number of the newer ship models really do look nice but since time and effort went into the old models why throw the baby out with the bathwater? Every pilot including myself misses at least one of the old models. The question has to be asked why throw out the old models to begin with? Why not instead just make a version 2? Then you please both the camp that likes the old model as well as the camp that likes the new model AND now you have twice as much content. Would you throw out a 67 Mustang just because you've now created a 68?
Perhaps there is something in the coding that would make this a more difficult task then it seems on the surface.
Maybe this idea just hadn't occurred to any of the Devs? |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out
6813
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 02:42:38 -
[2] - Quote
It's a matter of future effort.
Which is easier to maintain in the long run? Different distinct models of the same ship? Or one?
Newer models also might be easier to maintain than the older ones due to more optimized coding/artwork.
Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?"
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
460
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 02:56:32 -
[3] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:Maybe this idea just hadn't occurred to any of the Devs? It certainly didn't occur to you to use the search function. |
HeXxploiT
Little Red X
73
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 02:57:06 -
[4] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:HeXxploiT wrote:Maybe this idea just hadn't occurred to any of the Devs? It certainly didn't occur to you to use the search function.
Use it all the time. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
1840
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 03:29:36 -
[5] - Quote
maintaining old systems is not very good for future development.
Imagine if they tried to maintain the orginal release they started with? It would only serve a nostalgic purpose, unfortunately. |
Lapine Davion
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
744
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 04:37:10 -
[6] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:It seems to me that replacing or updating ship models is really a waste of perfectly good content.
Yes a number of the newer ship models really do look nice but since time and effort went into the old models why throw the baby out with the bathwater? Every pilot including myself misses at least one of the old models. The question has to be asked why throw out the old models to begin with? Why not instead just make a version 2? Then you please both the camp that likes the old model as well as the camp that likes the new model AND now you have twice as much content. Would you throw out a 67 Mustang just because you've now created a 68?
Perhaps there is something in the coding that would make this a more difficult task then it seems on the surface.
Maybe this idea just hadn't occurred to any of the Devs?
tl;dr I say I like nice things, but I really don't.
[b]Don't worry about posting with your main! -áPost with your brain!
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."[/b]
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
554
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 05:59:24 -
[7] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:Would you throw out a 67 Mustang just because you've now created a 68?
Bad example here..Car makers actually do this.
Any production lines for parts for the 67 slowly wound down as 68 rolled in. At some point you got the surplus of parts they had for projected repairs and that was it when the lines shut down for good for retooling for later model manufacturing.
Years down the road...want parts best find some good junk yards (today we have the internet, 3rd party and specialty shops for restorations ofc).
End of 67 dealers under the gun to "end of year clearance" that stuff....to make room for the 68's.
68 hit...Ford was pushing the 68.
This how car makers work. Out with the old, in with the new. At some point last years hotness is just picture on a wall at the car makers buildings and a series of cad diagrams on the company file servers.
Also In terms of eve you are aware devs optimize around the models graphics gives them, right? Seem to recall a story of graphics giving up a model whose hardpoint layout that killed the internal test servers as it was an optimization beast they could not tame. So back to graphics it went to redo it iirc.
Take away here is say 2 scorpion models is added code and time to make sure the game runs both of these optimally in the game. And any other model that has been changed. Which is quite a few. This is unneeded code bloat really.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
614
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 06:11:48 -
[8] - Quote
The new planned launcher and a customisation menu would make selecting your ship models and textures possible.
I would like to replace ships with textureless, coloured cylinders on my client. Less lag and fits with the bracket boxes that I see zoomed out most of the time anyway.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
554
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 06:21:35 -
[9] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:The new planned launcher and a customisation menu would make selecting your ship models and textures possible.
I would like to replace ships with textureless, coloured cylinders on my client. Less lag and fits with the bracket boxes that I see zoomed out most of the time anyway.
when in some bad lag fights I half serious half joked I'd be happy with an 8 bit client tha could t make Donkey kong on the OG nintendo consoles look graphically intense lol. |
Elisk Skyforge
Night Raven Task Force Night Raven Alliance
48
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 07:39:04 -
[10] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:It seems to me that replacing or updating ship models is really a waste of perfectly good content.
Yes a number of the newer ship models really do look nice but since time and effort went into the old models why throw the baby out with the bathwater? Every pilot including myself misses at least one of the old models. The question has to be asked why throw out the old models to begin with? Why not instead just make a version 2? Then you please both the camp that likes the old model as well as the camp that likes the new model AND now you have twice as much content. Would you throw out a 67 Mustang just because you've now created a 68?
Perhaps there is something in the coding that would make this a more difficult task then it seems on the surface.
Maybe this idea just hadn't occurred to any of the Devs?
That's like saying you're not cutting your nails and hair at all because its a waste of food and amino acids that your body turned into hair and nail proteins!
We cant have old ship models with 10 polygons its not 2003, they would also look silly flying among ships that look realistic , but if you want old ship models upgraded with latest graphics then means twice the ship models and twice the work conflicting with what you're trying to achieve. |
|
Momiji Sakora
Omni Galactic
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 10:56:20 -
[11] - Quote
I would have loved it if CCP made new revisited models as V2's (Or just make old models under the Ship Skinning).
But all future constructed models of the ship from blueprints are the new mesh, suddenly we're all owning limited volumes of ship, and they're going to be blown up, eventually becoming museum relics.
This is only a good thing from a game world standpoint, it means CCP doesn't need to produce new limited run ships, and the world consistently evolves and remains believable (Rather than suddenly logging in to find the Apoc has gained weight, or all the newbie ships have changed, or my Amarr Shuttle no-longer has the tardis bathroom plunger moving in and out the back engine).
People who don't like the old model and want the new one will then pay their ISK for a new one, or resell their now rare ship to get ahold of the new model.
On the flip side, maintaining these models for new textures etc becomes difficult, and increases the overall size of the client (two separate models and textures for example).
I would still love CCP to consider this, for future updates, especially with the streamed content client in the works.
+1 from me. |
Alexa de'Crux
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
27
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 11:35:09 -
[12] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:Why not instead just make a version 2?
The new models are 'version 2'. As graphics technology changes, the older models will start to show their age; the original models were designed for a different lighting environment, and haven't been properly 'tuned' for the current settings. |
Madeleine Lemmont
Divide et Impera DE
13
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 11:51:13 -
[13] - Quote
I'm really sure, there not only are eye catching reasons for remodeling. They match the new DB style, more individual coloring and customizing features.
Finally it's not reasonable to do artwork multiple times for the same ship type. But I really would like it to have "collectables". |
Momiji Sakora
Omni Galactic
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 12:05:33 -
[14] - Quote
Madeleine Lemmont wrote:I'm really sure, there not only are eye catching reasons for remodeling. They match the new DB style, more individual coloring and customizing features.
Finally it's not reasonable to do artwork multiple times for the same ship type. But I really would like it to have "collectables". *cough* ship skins *cough* |
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
157
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 12:49:27 -
[15] - Quote
I see this more of a rant than a constructive post... |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
554
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 13:13:32 -
[16] - Quote
Momiji Sakora wrote:Madeleine Lemmont wrote:I'm really sure, there not only are eye catching reasons for remodeling. They match the new DB style, more individual coloring and customizing features.
Finally it's not reasonable to do artwork multiple times for the same ship type. But I really would like it to have "collectables". *cough* ship skins *cough*
This would be the method ccp is going with. Going back to my model problem above it solves that. Its a scorpion. Whether vanilla, widow, gurista, victory or ishukone. Skin changes, model stays the same. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
614
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 15:01:30 -
[17] - Quote
Elisk Skyforge wrote:We cant have old ship models with 10 polygons its not 2003, they would also look silly flying among ships that look realistic , but if you want old ship models upgraded with latest graphics then means twice the ship models and twice the work conflicting with what you're trying to achieve.
Unless they change their code base. It is an "asset" and which one you chose to represent something is up to the developers but could be up to the player. I am pretty sure they used to have frigates on D-scan and then have really fast Titans flying around when messing with each other.
This suggestion fits perfectly with the new launcher they are planning.
More options and customisation that doesn't harm the game is a great idea. See, you wouldn't be rendering a version 1 vexor for some and a version 2 vexor for others (although doing that for reds and blues might be fun); you are just having one or the other and you could be downloading and storing one or the other.
The only argument I can see against it is that PVPers would pick all the lowest resolution ones for the highest performance but that is like saying everyone must use the same machines and graphical settings right now.
CSM Ten movement for change.
EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
HeXxploiT
Little Red X
75
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 17:58:28 -
[18] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Elisk Skyforge wrote:We cant have old ship models with 10 polygons its not 2003, they would also look silly flying among ships that look realistic , but if you want old ship models upgraded with latest graphics then means twice the ship models and twice the work conflicting with what you're trying to achieve. Unless they change their code base. It is an "asset" and which one you chose to represent something is up to the developers but could be up to the player. I am pretty sure they used to have frigates on D-scan and then have really fast Titans flying around when messing with each other. This suggestion fits perfectly with the new launcher they are planning. More options and customisation that doesn't harm the game is a great idea. See, you wouldn't be rendering a version 1 vexor for some and a version 2 vexor for others (although doing that for reds and blues might be fun); you are just having one or the other and you could be downloading and storing one or the other. The only argument I can see against it is that PVPers would pick all the lowest resolution ones for the highest performance but that is like saying everyone must use the same machines and graphical settings right now.
I think some of you are picturing the option of having one model or the other. I was actually envisioning having both models in game and on market simultaneously. Either option I think however is superior to the current system. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |