| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lord Helghast
   |
Posted - 2010.01.20 15:58:00 -
[1]
As was stated in some other threads, i'd like to bring up the effects in EVE as something that needs to be brought to CCP, these could all be kept at strictly client side, and henceforth have 0 impact to the servers.
1. I would like to see an enhancement to the gun and projectile effects, as currently the effect really doesnt feel powerful at all, we're dealing with things up to 1400mm and yet the effect looks much less satisfying as it stands.
2. Explosions, it's time eve did explosions properly, i'm talking explosions based on the size of the ship, with fractured parts that could disappear after a few seconds but atleast a proper explosion with gases venting and you know a proper boom to the ship, with cloud and fire etc. I'm sorry but this has been long needed, eves explosions as they currently are leave a lot to be wanted, even if the floating parts blown apart arent included, a proper sized fireball and lingering smoke would be something.
2a. Wrecks, why is it every ship wreck is just a weird mangle of metal strips, that the icon over the wreck pretty much covers? How about we get wreck types we already know the server tracks the size of the wreck so how about a better graphic to show when you know, a ship carcas or something.
3. Hull damage, oh MY GOD this is probably one of my most hated things in all of eve, ever get to hull damage, and warp out to say that super gay single ripple of smoke from the back left corner of your ship!? Well i propose a dynamic hull damage model, gases leaking from various parts of the ship at 5-15% damage, 15-30$ damage, gas leaks + fires and black smoke, and darkened overlay on top of the ship to show damage to the... Well the HULL, since its supposedly have taken a beaten, i dont see why the hull is sparkly clean with a small smoke stack from it if all the armor is gone and on top of that the hull is at 10%
4. Finally last but not least on these revisions should be the return or addition of engine trails, you know nice little smoke trails from the engines during sub-warp travel, ab's and mwd's with their own trail types (Ab bigger smoke, mwd maybe different color smoke), this doesnt have to be server side it could be all client side, to atleast add to the immersion.
This is my first CSM proposal, so i dont know if i did it right but after reading other threads from eve capsuleers like myself i figured i'd bring it to the CSM's attention of how wanted these graphical changes are wanted.
(Ok, Ok, the explosions and hull damage were my own annoyances that im adding to the proposal but i cant be the only one that wants to see them improved ASAP)
|
Sokratesz
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 16:20:00 -
[2]
100% for bringing back engine trails, and as long as it can be turned off at will, extra eye candy is nice too.
- Sok.
Want to test a supercap on SISI but don't have one? |
Furb Killer
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 16:24:00 -
[3]
1. Yes but start with hybrid turrets, projectiles at least have ACs that look good. Hybrid turrets you often dont even see firing.
2. Yes but dynamic, dont want to see it blowing up exactly the same everytime.
Rest just yes.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 16:28:00 -
[4]
Signed, especially for #4.
Ideally the list should also include a request for the return of the old cyno effect (or some modification thereof) and a general introduction of the long-promised particle effects for everything (engine plumes/trails, stargate effects, NOS/Neut, etc.).
...
|
Avatoin
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 18:29:00 -
[5]
Shield, Missiles, and Hybrid graphics (hmm... once again we see what CCP thinks about Caldari). The hardener effects on armor tanks have this nice and very visible gold shimmer to it, while most of the time I can't even see my Raven's shield hardeners unless I really zoom it and pay attention. Missiles we all agree need something like what the Ragnorak Titan DDD has, nice smoke trails and everything, at the very least get rid of the bright light on cruise and torps and give then a really nice smoke trail effect, and make missile explosions seem a little better, maybe not so big and a little more detailed and hit parts other than just the center of the ship. Also what the OP said about not being able to see Hybrids, this is so true, the neutron blaster effects were so much better before the change. When I saw the next blaster effects in the early builds I thought they weren;t finish but then they made it to the final product and I was very disappointed, lasers look better, projectiles look better.
CCP gives use Caldari pilots some love.
100% supported
While I'm on it return the Cyno jump vortex effects and remove the ECCM and Sensor boosters, its very annoying, especially on bigger ships where they cover the entire screen of the fleet if you're even zoomed in at a moderate distance.
|
Lordess Trader
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 19:18:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Lordess Trader on 20/01/2010 19:21:40
Dropping the shiny missle effect for a nice thick smoke trail would be awesome
And your right Hybrids do need a bit more love graphically than the AC's LOL
Shield impacts should look awesome, but ya adding a shield effect would be nice, kinda like the armor ones but offset it from the ship itself so that its floating around the ship countored the same as the ships, that would look wicked. Shouldn't be too hard, add a invisible layer around the ship using the same design as the hull, but transparent that the mask is applied to for the hardener animation, and for impacts pulse the area where the impact happens a radial impact to the shields transparency
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperium Technologies
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 21:45:00 -
[7]
PLease get a high-res texture for your disproportionaly gigantic torpedo explosion, and make it a cyrcle, where you cannot see corners.
|
Laboratory Technician
|
Posted - 2010.01.20 21:59:00 -
[8]
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 02:06:00 -
[9]
Eye candy is a low priority, but it is fun, and it should be done when it can be. Supported.
|
Bunyip
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 08:22:00 -
[10]
So long as we have the ability to turn this 'eye-candy' off if we're running on a slower computer, I see no reason why it shouldn't be in the game. Supported.
"May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table. |
Bevil Smyth
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 15:33:00 -
[11]
Supported!
Eyecandy is what brought be to EVE in the first place, I cry a little bit inside every time a better looking game comes out (which is all too frequently for my tastes these days). Give us new spangly shinies to look at and also improve the gate FX like what you did before and then took away again before it got to TQ.
Cheers 
============================
2003 and still alive! |
Idami Raptor
Gallente
Section Eight LLC
Omega Vector
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 16:40:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Idami Raptor on 21/01/2010 16:41:13
More shiny is generally a good thing... I don't know from projectiles personally, but Blasters could definitely use from love.
The current explosions seems pretty decent to me (at least on my system, it looks like a big puff of gas with an expanding cloud of metallic-looking dust).
Wrecks...I tend to just gobble up, but I have to admit...It would be kinda neat if my mission rooms looked more like the graveyard POIs when I got done.
And thorax hulls just don't look right without the massive band of engine trails. That was the best part!
As for the hull damage, it'd be better if it was a bit more dynamic, but as for only showing 'one small smoke stack'...it's actually more realistic that way. For example, here's a picture of a real WWII German Tiger II tank that's been killed. See if you can spot the damage: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Tiger_II_punctured_in_front_turret.jpg
Most of the time, when they look all burned and torn up, it's because something (Ammo, fuel) got hit and burned, not from the actual hit itself. What you'd likely get, rather than 'looking beat up', is that only spots where it was hit would be 'damaged'. Either dented or simply a hole through the hull, maybe with something spilling out. If it WERE actual smoke, you'd get some carbonization on the parts of the ship the smoke washed over as it moved, maybe, but that'd be it. You'd get more of that kinda thing with a particulate like smoke rather than a gas, as it'd probably disperse much more slowly.
|
Pasus Nauran
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 20:38:00 -
[13]
1. Supported
2. Supported
2a. Supported (at least have different sized wrecks for different sized ships).
3. Supported though I'd rather see major issues (like the sound engine) fixed than spending dev time on something like this right away, as I'm sure it'd be a hefty revision.
4. Definitely supported!
|
Don Pellegrino
Helljumpers
Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 23:00:00 -
[14]
|
ISHKUR MASTER
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.01.21 23:22:00 -
[15]
SIGNED x 100
Just do it.
|
EdwardNardella
Capital Construction Research
|
Posted - 2010.01.22 16:19:00 -
[16]
Missile trails too!
CCRES is recruiting pilots who want to live in WSpace/Wormholes. Fill out an application here! |
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 11:17:00 -
[17]
I'd love to see engine trails.
Everything else would be gravy.
----
I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it). |
Anya Synn
|
Posted - 2010.01.23 12:36:00 -
[18]
Supported, all of them. Provided that the minimum system requirements can be kept at current by turning off the shiny stuff.
Why were the engine trails removed anyway?
|
Lord FunkyMunky
|
Posted - 2010.01.25 15:24:00 -
[19]
WE SOOO Need to get this brought up to CCP, i know theirs rumors their working on improved effects, but it should be made a high priority.
|
Zahorite
|
Posted - 2010.01.25 16:28:00 -
[20]
You know the only problem I have with all of this is the "smoke trails" that everyone is talking about all over this thread.
I don't think there is any "smoke" in space. Even on engines like what the space shuttle uses, in space what is being burned is a perfect combination of fuels, it doesn't leave any remains behind like smoke, just the molecules created after the interaction of the two fuel parts. Kind of like how hydrogen and oxygen when combined won't leave smoke behind, just the H2O molecules created by the combination. Although on Earth the intense heat could burn other molecules and leave a bit of smoke behind.
Anyway anything that "leaves a smoke trail" isn't supported by me. Same with giant "explosions", they just wouldn't be that big in space unless it was the fuel source exploding, in which case it could be very big depending on that fuel source rather than the ship size. For instance it is completly possible that an interceptor with a MWD would create a bigger boom than a battleship. If the engine doesn't go, which it shouldn't always explode then the explosion would be limited by the oxygen in the ship. In fact most ships would simply vent the atmosphere or fracture apart with very small explosions if any, it all depends on how it was destroyed.
Basically I would rather see things be realistic instead of shiny and graphics intense.
|
FugginNutz
Trolls From Outer Space
|
Posted - 2010.01.25 20:05:00 -
[21]
 Originally by: Zahorite
I totally missed the point
:facepalm:
So..yeah...support the OP.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.01.25 22:21:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Zahorite
You know the only problem I have with all of this is the "smoke trails" that everyone is talking about all over this thread.
I don't think there is any "smoke" in space. Even on engines like what the space shuttle uses, in space what is being burned is a perfect combination of fuels, it doesn't leave any remains behind like smoke, just the molecules created after the interaction of the two fuel parts. Kind of like how hydrogen and oxygen when combined won't leave smoke behind, just the H2O molecules created by the combination. Although on Earth the intense heat could burn other molecules and leave a bit of smoke behind.
Anyway anything that "leaves a smoke trail" isn't supported by me. Same with giant "explosions", they just wouldn't be that big in space unless it was the fuel source exploding, in which case it could be very big depending on that fuel source rather than the ship size. For instance it is completly possible that an interceptor with a MWD would create a bigger boom than a battleship. If the engine doesn't go, which it shouldn't always explode then the explosion would be limited by the oxygen in the ship. In fact most ships would simply vent the atmosphere or fracture apart with very small explosions if any, it all depends on how it was destroyed.
Basically I would rather see things be realistic instead of shiny and graphics intense.
|
Alpha195
|
Posted - 2010.01.26 01:19:00 -
[23]
When anything burns you get C02 and H20, both of which would freeze into crystals in space. So it would be a crystal trail, rather then a smoke trail, but a trail nonetheless
|
Culsotu2
Nomads
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 09:08:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Culsotu2 on 28/01/2010 09:16:20
I have this idea that pop up in my mind from time to time.
Ships that looks old and used the longer you had them.
Lets say you owned a megathron or whatever ship since 2006 and
have used it alot. Then it should look really used.
Black parts around the engines and guns, lights that dont work,
some armor plates bended due to hits, paint missing in some parts, etc.
Maybe supported with some sort of info about owner history
and ship age in shipinfo.
edit: forgot to support and sorry for my post being kinda OT.
|
Storm Templar
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 12:47:00 -
[25]
Moar eye candies please CCP.
________________________________________________
For the Immortal God-Emperor.....ooops, wrong universe. |
Sir Fourhead
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 14:07:00 -
[26]
Please pardon the prissy overtones that will be found throughout this letter, but the reservoir from which CCP draws its lickspittles is primarily the masses of revolting enemies of the people. Let me |
crimson fire
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 14:32:00 -
[27]
This is badly needed! No.1 especially
|
Fengo Marr
Tenacious Tendencies
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 15:20:00 -
[28]
Yes to all that stuff :)
|
Chillshock
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 16:02:00 -
[29]
I support these ideas!
|
WarlockX
Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.28 19:36:00 -
[30]
yes
-----------------------------------------------
Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
Lordess Trader
|
Posted - 2010.01.29 18:09:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Lordess Trader on 29/01/2010 18:24:19
guys dont forget to put that you support the thread several of you guys keep forgetting it.
|
crimson fire
|
Posted - 2010.02.03 12:03:00 -
[32]
yes!
|
Lord Helghast
|
Posted - 2010.02.12 23:41:00 -
[33]
i really pray that they get this done in the next expansion, Hate to compair but STO/BP/Other upcoming/new space games are just making me sad at eve effects... the planets and moons were a nice step, but we really need to go further.
|
Mr Greh
Dead Sun Heavy Mining
|
Posted - 2010.02.12 23:45:00 -
[34]
I would love to see all these changes.
|
Ben Fenix
Caldari Empire
Luminance Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 03:24:00 -
[35]
Not just the turrets need to be enhanced. Even the missile system looks like an epic fail to me. Best example is the drake. Why does this ship have so many missile bays on both sides for when they're not used? It looks so damn silly when a missile is coming right out of nowhere in the middle of the ships belly. Not to mention that this is a "!BATTLE!" Cruiser. In comparison to what the name stands for and what is going on on the screen, when fighting, the drake should be called "Pong Cruiser"
Cause when fighting it looks like the drake is the bar and the missiles are the dot...just silly. That example matches with every other missile based ship in eve. the bigger the ship gets, the sillier it looks.
Lord Helghast said:
1. I would like to see an enhancement to the gun and projectile effects, as currently the effect really doesnt feel powerful at all, we're dealing with things up to 1400mm and yet the effect looks much less satisfying as it stands.
The problem is the size of the turrets. They are everywhere the same. On any ship. Looks silly too. On a frig the number of turrets are realistic but they are totally oversized. on a battleship where there should be hundreds of turrets if we stick to what the name it's standing for. it's almost the same. they are also totally unrealistic oversized (Rokh f.e.) and they are far too few. EPIC Fail in my opinion.
I don't speak of changing the stats. keep'em as they are. just match the size and amount of turrets according to the class of ship and as the author of this thread said: the effects. possible way to get this done: implement a turret/missile-battery system on bigger ships. for when you activate one of your turret/missile-buttons a hole battery of beams, projectiles or missiles is firing. matching the size of the effects according to the ships class would have the nice side effect that finally f.e. a battleship would'nt just look like a battleship, it would fight like a battleship and the player could finally feel like a captain of a battleship.
Please CCP, there is no need in rushing things like walking on stations and dust 514 if there are still bigger issues to solve in EVE as they are right now. eyecandy for the players is necessary too to keep them sticked to the game. if the graphical difference between WOS and the rest of the game (with all the unsolved issues I mentioned above) will be getting the big like we've seen it on the trailers then this won't be good at all. I'm hoping for the best.
By the way: Topic absolutely supported!
__________________________________
Space is massive. Humanity is not. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 08:56:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Maxsim Goratiev on 13/02/2010 08:58:44
Quote:
. In fact most ships would simply vent the atmosphere or fracture apart with very small explosions if any, it all depends on how it was destroyed.
that would be really cool, i whant to see capitals breaking in half upon death, and battleship falling to pieces. IN the epic mission arc you can see several battleships torn to shreds and a minmatar dread broken in half. WE could use those sorts of wrecks.
CUrrently eve is eye-candy while you are in station and orbiting a planet. As soon as someone fires a gun, it starts looking like a dated game with bad effects.
Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes.StevieSG |
Psycho Tripper
Urban Malice
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 11:17:00 -
[37]
Yes to all of it!
|
Serpents smile
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 11:22:00 -
[38]
Mo' eyecandy! 
|
Memorya
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 15:09:00 -
[39]
Full support 
|
Sundlander
Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 17:51:00 -
[40]
Yes, yes to everything. Eyecandy tastes good.
Also the engine trails added a lot to the game. I really hope this will happen soonÖ.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.02.13 17:52:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Zahorite
You know the only problem I have with all of this is the "smoke trails" that everyone is talking about all over this thread.
I don't think there is any "smoke" in space. Even on engines like what the space shuttle uses, in space what is being burned is a perfect combination of fuels, it doesn't leave any remains behind like smoke, just the molecules created after the interaction of the two fuel parts. Kind of like how hydrogen and oxygen when combined won't leave smoke behind, just the H2O molecules created by the combination. Although on Earth the intense heat could burn other molecules and leave a bit of smoke behind.
Anyway anything that "leaves a smoke trail" isn't supported by me. Same with giant "explosions", they just wouldn't be that big in space unless it was the fuel source exploding, in which case it could be very big depending on that fuel source rather than the ship size. For instance it is completly possible that an interceptor with a MWD would create a bigger boom than a battleship. If the engine doesn't go, which it shouldn't always explode then the explosion would be limited by the oxygen in the ship. In fact most ships would simply vent the atmosphere or fracture apart with very small explosions if any, it all depends on how it was destroyed.
Basically I would rather see things be realistic instead of shiny and graphics intense.
Engine trails were always optional, with an on/off switch in the client graphics options. No reason why it can't be so again.
As for realism, here's a sample justification: a reaction engine will always leave a trail of something behind itself, so the visible trails are the exhausts made visible by your ship's computer to aid in situational awareness with respect to ships' heading and speed. Or some variation thereof.
...
|
Birdman Ravo
|
Posted - 2010.02.14 04:59:00 -
[42]
Support for all of it.
|
Grideris
|
Posted - 2010.02.14 09:35:00 -
[43]
I can not iterate just how much more awesome this game would be with all this cool stuff.
Esp the point on having battleships have heaps of guns (but staying the same as they are stat wise). That would just look awesome!
So don't argue it CCP - do it!
|
R4zGr1z
|
Posted - 2010.02.14 18:01:00 -
[44]
|
Morgals
Dark Star Industries
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 19:02:00 -
[45]
Yes! to Engine Trails. this should be in 100%
The others are nice to have as well.
Dark Star Industries
Actions speak louder than words.
Let us show you=> DSI-Recruitment in game channel |
Lordess Trader
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 21:54:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Zahorite
You know the only problem I have with all of this is the "smoke trails" that everyone is talking about all over this thread.
I don't think there is any "smoke" in space. Even on engines like what the space shuttle uses, in space what is being burned is a perfect combination of fuels, it doesn't leave any remains behind like smoke, just the molecules created after the interaction of the two fuel parts. Kind of like how hydrogen and oxygen when combined won't leave smoke behind, just the H2O molecules created by the combination. Although on Earth the intense heat could burn other molecules and leave a bit of smoke behind.
Anyway anything that "leaves a smoke trail" isn't supported by me. Same with giant "explosions", they just wouldn't be that big in space unless it was the fuel source exploding, in which case it could be very big depending on that fuel source rather than the ship size. For instance it is completly possible that an interceptor with a MWD would create a bigger boom than a battleship. If the engine doesn't go, which it shouldn't always explode then the explosion would be limited by the oxygen in the ship. In fact most ships would simply vent the atmosphere or fracture apart with very small explosions if any, it all depends on how it was destroyed.
Basically I would rather see things be realistic instead of shiny and graphics intense.
Engine trails were always optional, with an on/off switch in the client graphics options. No reason why it can't be so again.
As for realism, here's a sample justification: a reaction engine will always leave a trail of something behind itself, so the visible trails are the exhausts made visible by your ship's computer to aid in situational awareness with respect to ships' heading and speed. Or some variation thereof.
Depends on the drive being used, a propolsion ion drive, would vent negative charged ions past the positive grid, leaving the ions as a train as they expel out the back...
As for explosions, if their nuclear based propolsion drives, im almost positive the f*cking impulse/warp drive exploding would make a MASSIVE explosion.
As for the venting of gases, it wasnt said that we needed more fires on the ship, though random placement of the fire and smoke, and maybe gases leaking from the hull in various areas would be nice... even if to each client it looked different atleast i want to see some bad ass effects when im loosing my 200m ISK battleship slowly but surely.
http://eveonline-aghostblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/ricochet.html <---- THIS IS WHAT I THINK SHOULD BE #1 on the list to be done with this graphical revision...
I'm sick of seeing my rails missed yet the client rendered the damn shot as hitting him dead on!
And why does every f*cking gun hit the exact same spot!?!?!
|
Lord Helghast
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 12:48:00 -
[47]
will the csm ever pick this up :D hehe, they really need to make a better way for us to track which assembly hall topics have been picked up for vote etc, maybe this needs to be changed from a forum to an actual CSM solution.
|
Skanthra
|
Posted - 2010.02.25 13:24:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Serpents smile
Mo' eyecandy!
Yes!
|
Shifty Face
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 00:48:00 -
[49]
I've always been irked by the fact that all turret effects hit their mark graphically, even while missing wildly. Better turret effects that actually include a "missed shot" effect would be very nice.
Engine trails would be a nice edition as well, I especially like the idea of different effects for Ab/Mwd. |
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 03:15:00 -
[50]
Supported - railguns and artillery in particular look terrible. Blasters look less bad but still crap. Some of the missile explosion effects are starting to look very dated.
You know, that way the artillery trail tracks a ship after it's fired and follows it around like a laser... this also ties in with the other thread requesting missed and glancing shots be rendered correctly.
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 04:34:00 -
[51]
+1000
-T'amber
www.shipsofeve.com/soe5
|
343guilty1
Gallente
Strategic Insanity
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 04:58:00 -
[52]
Supporting everything EXCEPT the explosions on missiles idea, because as of now they are accurate, don't speak out of your ass about things, because contrary to what you've seen in hollywood videos, there are NO fireballs in space, as it is a vacuum, and therefor no fire can be made. Smaller explosions from the air of the ship yes, but as big fireballs, no -.-
|
Dogfighter
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 16:53:00 -
[53]
+1
|
Kytanos Termek
Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.03.03 20:10:00 -
[54]
Update missles too while you at it
They were the only thing missed by your bloody update :-)
|
Simokon
Smegnet Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 01:14:00 -
[55]
|
Arcturus Raz
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 07:52:00 -
[56]
Wow something everyone is agreeing on...
|
Wu Jiaqiu
Frenemy and Foerend Co.
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 09:23:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Wu Jiaqiu on 04/03/2010 09:22:44
Yes.
|
Chirjo Durruti
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.04 15:04:00 -
[58]
-1 I don't care about eye candy. If you want eye candy, play the new crysis or how it's called. Put more people on fixing bugs, because these are ruining my player experience. Not missing effects.
|
Enzu777
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 20:49:00 -
[59]
|
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.03.09 22:34:00 -
[60]
All kinds of greatness in this thread.
BS turrets are too small. In fact they should be about 3x the size they are now at a minimum.
ALL gun effects suck except lasers...go figure. AC's should either fire a burst of ammo or continuously fire through the cycle time and both projectile systems should have much better firing and hitting effects. Hybrids also have crappy effects. Most guns sound like complete crap(though I like med rails). A large AC should sound more like a 25mm Bushmaster Chaingun instead of a spitwad cannon and a small AC should sound like a burst from a minigun with the cycle noise in between bursts, even if the computer is simulating the sound give me the choice of the sound. Hell in theory you could program the computer to make it sound like you were shooting geese or cows at your enemy so why not Sound...eh...real? Then intensify the effect if you are overheating the system.
Missile effects are ridiculous in that I would love to see smoke trails and explosions that were much smaller and spherical instead of planar.
The hull damage idea is cool though aging as you own your ship is kind of dumb but if it is limited to YOUR client and you can turn it off then I am all for it. At least let me bust out a high pressure washer and a paint brush to keep her looking good and don't kill bandwidth with something unnecessary.
It would be cool to see smoke coming from your engine if you are using an AB or MWD intensify this for overheating as well.
I don't like the change to wrecks since it really adds nothing to the game unless you are directly looking at the wreck but meh.
Sounds good.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |