| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jack Cradk
   |
Posted - 2009.08.07 13:39:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Jack Cradk on 07/08/2009 13:42:59
Hi !!
In the game , I think there isn't equilibrium in the structures or ships. I've work on Photoshop and after lot of try , effect , possibility , I prefer much more symmetrical things.
Let's see...
What do you think about this ?
It's not perfect , but my eyes prefer that ^^
Sorry if my English is bad but it's not my natal language =)
Jack
|
Che Biko
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 14:15:00 -
[2]
Why don't you go fly Ammarr ships?
|
SuiJuris
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 14:27:00 -
[3]
Unlike a normal Raven that one actually looks cool, Rather then a conglomeration of 2 ships that crashed together.
---
It's like my mom always said... "I knew I should of drowned that one." |
Harcole
Amarr
Sanguine Unity
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 14:43:00 -
[4]
why should they be symmetrical?
I think it adds to the realism of the game that there are extra bits jutting out here and there to represent additional modules such as sensors and what not.
Good work on the Raven though that thing does need some love, although its the bridge section I don't like about it.
|
Corozan Aspinall
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 14:43:00 -
[5]
I don't have any opinion on the symmetry debate, they are all equally fugly tbh, but your mock up looks cool. Nice work!
|
mchief117
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 15:48:00 -
[6]
i like it
|
Spud Mackenzie
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 16:45:00 -
[7]
I'd love to see some more symmetrical ships. Why are the Amarr the only ones to think of it?
Sure, it doesn't have much impact from an aerodynamic perspective. But its still a visual game and generally symmetrical shapes are more pleasing to the eyes.
Given, we could all be flying something more like a Borg cube or sphere... or like the alien cigar from ST:IV. But even those were still symmetrical shapes.
/signed for better looking designs!
|
Daedalus II
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 17:49:00 -
[8]
It reminds me of the Scimitar from Star Trek Nemesis when it was just about to deploy its weapon 
|
Octoven
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 20:09:00 -
[9]
I like symmetrical ships, one of the reasons I chose amarr over the other races. All the racial boost and such had no bearing on my choice. I would rather fly a ship that looks like professionals had built it then have it look like it took a few too many trips close to a black hole or was constructed from a junk pile.
Look how advanced these ships are, they can travel faster then the speed of light yet they can't even be constructed symmetrically. Not asking for perfect round ship, I don't mind parts sticking out here and there but I want the same on the opposite side of the ship as well.
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 21:22:00 -
[10]
I like the asymetric.
And to the photoshop? Nice doned, really, but I think that more looks like a box with attached wings, trying to fly...
|
|
|
Veebora
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 22:38:00 -
[11]
I would like seeing more symmetrical ships.
Some ships in game really gives me the impression the artist is lazy.
The probe frigate is a complete shame, the guy was working 4:00pm on Friday and left this unfinished job going to production.
|
Ezevector
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 22:39:00 -
[12]
My vote is for good-looking ships. It's possible to make good looking ships that are assymetrical, but it hasn't happened in EVE. And it's because it's really fracking hard.
Look at all the cool looking EVE ships: The Rifter, the Arbitrator, the Prophecy, even the Hulk, they're all symmetrical ships. Visually, the human eye naturally goes for things that are compositionally balanced. Even a lot of the symmetrical ships look awkward just because all of their bulk is toward the bottom, far away from their assumed center of gravity and thrust.
I'm all for doing things creatively, but there's a certain danger to trying to be unique for it's own sake. There are certain conventions, such as symmetrical starships, that exist for a reason; the alternatives don't work very well.
"lolz. Rationalize more, griefer." |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.07 23:03:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Whitehound on 07/08/2009 23:04:36
CCP's designers like to produce nonsense now and then. Some ships are designed so that their form does not follow function. I wonder, the rule here might be to make a design as disgusting as possible, and people will stop thinking about it. Minor asymmetries are acceptable, however.
See here. I believe they have mistakenly swapped the design of the two T2 transporters. I fail to make sense of it, but they claim it is intended. To me this is like they have turned a pick-up truck into an heavy, armoured truck, and a truck into a turbo-charged pick-up.
--
|
Adunh Slavy
Blood Red Dawn
Novus Auctorita
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 00:19:00 -
[14]
I'm not a physicist, but some of these Eve asymmetricals, looking at where the engines are, would spin around in circles. But I suppose, the oil like viscosity of Eve space must be offsetting the uh ... Yeah.
Symmetrical looks more realistic, the odd bulge or antenna/sensor array thinger here and there is enough to give an asymmetrical appearance with out making ships look so off the center of mass. One day, back in some meeting, someone with authority probably said, "ooo let's make asymmetrical ships!" ... When will the devs put in the time travel module so that such choices can be corrected, that's the thing eve really needs, time travel.
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Jack Cradk
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 17:21:00 -
[15]
I actually work in order to give you some other symmetrical ship.
I really think it can boost game's popularity , i don't know if you have watch EVE's vidoes but already we see Amarr ship and the Minimatar frigate/cruiser and they're symmetrical , if the players see the caldari's ship before the creation of their character, i think they donc choose them lol ^^
|
Jack Cradk
|
Posted - 2009.08.08 19:04:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Jack Cradk on 08/08/2009 19:05:06
Some new symmetrical ships
I prefer to...
|
Lukelen
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 00:28:00 -
[17]
Nice images, see THAT is what starships should look like, CCP, wake up and quit losing customers by not giving us more realism, take out the asymmetrical ships and replace with symmetry. At least the game will actually look cleaner. One has to wander, why would an osprey fly around space at nearly 500 times the speed of light and look like a garbage scow?
|
Jack Cradk
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 01:14:00 -
[18]
I don't say that all the ship must be symmetrical , but the majority of the ship
. It's very weird here , the majority of the ship are asymmetrical , it's per aps the CCP's vision of future space but I don't know if all the players think the same.
and i think in a future extension , if the players really want changes , the staff can update Spaceship DB and renew it. it's my point of view but i don't know if the dev listen their players.
Most of you say it's impossible to create symmetrical ship with advenced technology but I don't agree and that don't touch at the realism of the game
|
ShadowGod56
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 03:42:00 -
[19]
Edited by: ShadowGod56 on 09/08/2009 03:43:44
keep that **** out of my eve
the fact that most of the caldari are mostly A symmetrical gives them a more artistic appearance and a more eye catching appearance.
the eve ships are about practicality or how it sould be in real life, the people who deigned the ships were making pieces of art not blue prints for NASA.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 03:58:00 -
[20]
I don't care for symmetry, it's boring.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
|
|
King Rothgar
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 08:58:00 -
[21]
Would be nice to see many ships revised to be made more symmetrical. It's true that the interstellar medium isn't really dense enough for it to make an aerodynamic difference, especially at the really low speeds ships in eve travel. But symmetry does effect balancing and that remains important. Some of the ships in eve would just spin like a top as others have mentioned. It just looks really bad.
-----------------------------------------------------
|
Storm Templar
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 10:10:00 -
[22]
The Scorpion is probably the ugly duckling of the Battleships.
What is wrong with CCP's artists? Some of the EVE's ship is jarringly ugly, especially the Blackbird and the Scorpion mentioned above.
________________________________________________
For the Immortal God-Emperor.....ooops, wrong universe. |
Bibbleibble
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 10:20:00 -
[23]
 Originally by: Danton Marcellus
I don't care for symmetry, it's boring.
This.
Also, you leave the Incursus alone! It's good as it is!
________________________________________________
For changes to Minmatar Battleships click here (Now with added summary!) |
Verlokiraptor
All Around Research Inc
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 11:11:00 -
[24]
Some symmetrical ships look good, some look bad. Same goes for asymmetrical. However, I think basically every ship should have some noticeable asymmetry, even if it's just a texture change on one side.
|
Jack Icegaard
The Omega Project
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 11:34:00 -
[25]
Obviously, what looks good is a matter of taste. Personally i think the Vexor hull is one of the prettier in the game. I don't think symmetry is important but for combat vessels there has to be some consideration to things like structural integrity in the design. You may want to deflect incoming ordnance rather than having a hull full of bling bling and shot-traps. As an example, I find some of the older Caldari designs such as the Scorpion and the Moa to be somewhat pretentious, as aspiring to be modern art installations rather than combat vessels. The Rokh or Abaddon looks more as i perceive a larger military spacecrafts might look like in the future.
|
Vorll Minaaran
|
Posted - 2009.08.09 22:22:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Vorll Minaaran on 09/08/2009 22:22:14
sorry, but leave alone caldari ships as are.
i prefer caldari ships for their asymmetrical shapes.
your symmetric kestrel worst then i could imagine, maybe it will be better, if you mirror its ****pit side.
your Raven so-so, but i like her shape now.
i show your incursus to my gallente brother, he dont like it.
every faction has symetric and asymmetric ships, some has a lot asymmetric (caldari, minmatar) and some has more symmetric (amarr, gallente)
everyone is able to train to fly any of them.
|
4THELULZ
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 01:39:00 -
[27]
Caldari ships sort of grew on me after a while. The Omen is one of my biggest hates actually, I always saw that bit at the front as unnessecary and ugly.
|
mojogore
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 02:08:00 -
[28]
If CCP just fixed the scorp I would be happy, I get dizzy fling that thing around
|
Aranis Nax
Minmatar
Seraphim Blades
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 03:16:00 -
[29]
STAY AWAY FROM THE KESTREL AND INCURSUS! They're AWESOME as they are.
Raven is also fine as it is.
Why does everything have to be symmetrical, perfect symmetry is fugly.
One game where they really nailed it imo was Homeworld 2(for an example: http://homeworld.wikia.com/wiki/Harridan-class_Plasma_Lance_Fighter).
some "light" reading(http://www.uni-regensburg.de/Fakultaeten/phil_Fak_II/Psychologie/Psy_II/beautycheck/english/symmetrie/symmetrie.htm)
|
CaptainFalcon07
|
Posted - 2009.08.10 05:46:00 -
[30]
Yes Symmetrical ships look far better and make more realistic sense!
Some of the asymmetrical ships look really unbalanced, the blackbird looks very un-aerodynamic, sure there's no friction in space perhaps, but there are particles of dust, debris, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |