| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hathor II
   |
Posted - 2010.06.20 21:30:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 21:31:17
can some Game designer tell me why Caldari ships are Ugly ? ONLY cool ship looking is Scorpion now , mostly they are like Handicap ships !
|
Voggles
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:15:00 -
[2]
I like the Widow too..
|
Strazdas Unstoppable
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:16:00 -
[3]
cardari is greedy. they care about money, not art.
|
Barkaial Starfinder
Minmatar
Conflagration.
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:25:00 -
[4]
I like the Heron, Merlin..
Caracal and Grifin maybe
Oh and Scorpion now.
|
fatherted1989
Red Horizon Inc
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:32:00 -
[5]
plenty of decent looking caldari boats.
in no particular order;
kestrel,merlin,condor,caracal,drake,ferox,scorp,rokh,chimera,wyvern.
+T2 variants
|
Leon777Leon
Incidental Damage
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:33:00 -
[6]
mainly because caldari ships are not symmetrical, the new scorp is... as is the merlin, but the blackbird, what is with that? dev's we're on LSD when they designed that ship...
if you ever find yourself in a fair fight, you screwed up somewhere |
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:34:00 -
[7]
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Mithfindel
Aseyakone
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:37:00 -
[8]
In the matter of fact, the Caldari ships are gorgeous. The issue is that after years of spaceships = fighter planes in space thinking, the early art style of EVE Online, which underlines asymmetry does not seem very pleasing. However, after getting used to the ships, they look pretty nice. Except the Bantam, unless you like old-style vacuum cleaners. Luckily, unlike the other ships which theoretically might all have a role, there's no reason to use the Bantam for anything.
|
Hathor II
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:38:00 -
[9]
Agree, some ships are really cool look , but lots of Caldari ships are really Bad Design , do you think Raven is looks good ? what about E-War ships ? Crow ? what about Charon ? ... the Left-side of ships is not same as Right-side ... 99% of other races have nice ships , at least Acceptable , BUT caldari Designer is worst designer i ever seen ! Scorpion was really ugly befor they change it to new look , now Scorp is best Caldari look .... hope CCP do something about this Disaster Design ... at least set Left-Side of ship = Righ Side  
|
Eomar
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:42:00 -
[10]
i think its down to the old school design philosophy that went something like:
lets make ships that are unique, that look different to everything thats normally done, and that clearly identifies each as belonging to a certain race.
the amarrian battering ram approach, the matari rust and ducttape etc.
personally i like the asymetric look, its different to the generic IRSPACESHIP look that is dominant in sci-fi.
particularly when you take into account that having a cool looking spaceship doesnt gain you much from a practical standpoint: solid, maintainable and utilitarian being the preferrable options.
lets face it, they may not be pretty, but theyre clearly caldari and clearly belong to eve online.
i get the feeling that a lot of the original ship designers and artists have been promoted or moved on, or maybe have been told to follow a different philosophy, cos the newer ships seem to be trending into generic spaceship territory.
|
|
|
Hathor II
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 22:57:00 -
[11]
 Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
You mean this  http://i33.tinypic.com/244unlz.jpg
even in worst si-fi movies/games/whatever , spaceships looks acceptable , not Flyting Junk Metall !!  
|
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:14:00 -
[12]
It is not so much that they are ugly, but that they are impossible to fly ships. There is a reason ships are symmetrical along their axis of movement, just by looking at the engine placement of most Caldari ships and w/o being an engineer or doing any math you easily see that those ships should be spinning out of control instead of moving forward. It is called "suspension of disbelief" most people cannot tell why, but instinctively they know there is something wrong with Caldari hulls and thus find them ugly.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:32:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Hathor II
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 23:00:46
Edited by: Hathor II on 20/06/2010 22:59:53
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
You mean this http://i33.tinypic.com/244unlz.jpg
even in worst si-fi movies/games/whatever , spaceships looks acceptable , not Flyting Junk Metall !!
*chough*
Or this
Just because people think spaceship = planes...dosn't mean it's so.
Symmetry = boring.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Messoroz
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:50:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Messoroz on 21/06/2010 00:51:26
<NVM>
|
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 02:39:00 -
[15]
Originally by: AterraX
*chough*
Or this
Almost made a good point there except that space labs and stations are not spaceships. Nice try, thanks for playing
|
DeadNite
Caldari
Inquisition Industries LLC
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 03:02:00 -
[16]
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus
Originally by: AterraX
*chough*
Or this
Almost made a good point there except that space labs and stations are not spaceships. Nice try, thanks for playing
He solidified a perfect point. There is no need for sleek symmetrical aerodynamics in space.
Weakness in attitude becomes weakness of character. -AE |
Aldee
Federated Holdings
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 03:17:00 -
[17]
Is it because they look like fish or bugs or some sort of insects?
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 06:13:00 -
[18]
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
The Lynxpardinus
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 06:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 06:58:06
Originally by: AterraX
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
Almost got it again, good effort but still got it wrong, and now you are actually making my point: Here is the actual craft that transported the astronauts to the Moon. Notice how it is still symmetrical along the axis of movement? (I chose the picture of the toy because the wire used to attach the ship to the base actually follows that axis) Symmetry is important for 2 related things, making it easy to calculate the center of mass and engine placement.
Caldari ships are ugly because they do not work
|
Opertone
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 07:10:00 -
[20]
caldari ships need to be redisigned
Draw concepts and offer them to CCP, concepts to replace existing ships
use drawing board, photoshop or paint + scanner, upload your concepts and inspire CCP
|
|
|
Draknishar
The Exploited.
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 08:58:00 -
[21]
Many make the argument that caldari dont care about looks only that the ships work. well most of them wouldn't. I wouldn't mind ships being a bit asymetrical but come on, some ships are just stupid. :P
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 09:40:00 -
[22]
Originally by: The Lynxpardinus
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 07:07:29
Edited by: The Lynxpardinus on 21/06/2010 06:58:06
Originally by: AterraX
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 06:13:11
Or the best example, the only craft we buildt to transport humans between worlds.
Almost got it again, good effort but still got it wrong, and now you are actually making my point: Here is the actual craft that transported the astronauts to the Moon. Notice how it is still symmetrical along the axis of movement? (I chose the picture of the toy because the wire used to attach the ship to the base actually follows that axis) Symmetry is important for 2 related things, making it easy to calculate the center of mass and engine placement.
Caldari ships are ugly because they do not work
Originally by: DeadNite
He solidified a perfect point. There is no need for sleek symmetrical aerodynamics in space.
What point are you talking about? nobody was saying anything about aerodynamic shapes (which BTW do not need to be symmetrical) until you showed up.
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:07:00 -
[23]
Originally by: AterraX
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
You keep focusing on the 'aerodynamic' bit and ignoring his real point...
While there is indeed no atmosphere in space (beyond trace gases, anyway), inertia still exists, and will royally **** up anything that isn't at least vaguely centered along the axis of movement. It's possible to compensate for something like that with extra thrusters firing at different strengths, but why make your life in space even more difficult?
TL;DR: Aerodynamics don't apply. Inertia does.
|
Derelicht
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:17:00 -
[24]
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:52:00 -
[25]
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 11:53:13
Edited by: AterraX on 21/06/2010 11:52:02
Originally by: Shayna Brellis
Originally by: AterraX
The only reason for the Apollo craft to be shaped like that is because it has to exit and enter our atmosphere.
Again, in space there is no atmosphere...so the only ships in EvE that resemable TRUE spacecrafts (that dosn't land on planets with an atmosphere) are the caldari.
You keep focusing on the 'aerodynamic' bit and ignoring his real point...
While there is indeed no atmosphere in space (beyond trace gases, anyway), inertia still exists, and will royally **** up anything that isn't at least vaguely centered along the axis of movement. It's possible to compensate for something like that with extra thrusters firing at different strengths, but why make your life in space even more difficult?
TL;DR: Aerodynamics don't apply. Inertia does.
Yeah, these have really had issues:
Voyager 1
Voyager 2
And lets not forget about Mir
Spaceship != planes...and you vastly exaggerate the inertia problem...
Again the only ships ingame that resemble anything like real spacecratfs...are the caldari ones.
Originally by: Derelicht
Originally by: AterraX
This is EvE...not hello-kitty, pimp my pixels.
Caldari ships are the only ships looking anything like real spaceships.
I see your ..and raise you
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Vhan Jarrah
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:28:00 -
[26]
Why are you comparing real life spaceships to virtual battleships that can reach warp-speed, mine asteroids and do battle?
I assume real-life spaceships look ugly for the same reason the first cars looked ugly...function took priority over form and the technology for them was basic. As the technology improved and more people could afford them, companies concentrated on aesthetics to compete in the market. It only seems natural that if spaceships were as commonplace and easily made as they are in Eve that the companies who made them would spend some time on aesthetics to get an edge on their competitors.
|
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:42:00 -
[27]
Originally by: AterraX
Yeah, these have really had issues:
Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Neither of which uses much in the way of active propulsion. And what they do have is in a nicely centered position.
Quote:
And lets not forget about Mir
Again, you are comparing apples (station 'anchored' in orbit with minimal attitude-thruster capabilities) to oranges (powered spaceflight).
Quote:
Again the only ships ingame that resemble anything like real spacecratfs...are the caldari ones.
Again, no.
If you want resemblance to current designs...that'd be minmatar, with all those exposed structural elements. If you want the most physically sensible design...well, the closest thing would probably be the Avatar, of all things. Almost radial symmetry, centered propulsion, and the front 'shield' is a feature of several potential designs for real-life interstellar craft as well.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:43:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Vhan Jarrah
Why are you comparing real life spaceships to virtual battleships that can reach warp-speed, mine asteroids and do battle?
I assume real-life spaceships look ugly for the same reason the first cars looked ugly...function took priority over form and the technology for them was basic. As the technology improved and more people could afford them, companies concentrated on aesthetics to compete in the market. It only seems natural that if spaceships were as commonplace and easily made as they are in Eve that the companies who made them would spend some time on aesthetics to get an edge on their competitors.
In cars is has more to do with aerodynamics, than anything else.
Why do you think most cars have the same or similar shape today?
Because of airflow...but in space there is no airflow...hence no need for wasting resources on stuff like "fancy shapes"..resources that could be used on more purdent systems.
You guys think the ISS look "streamlined"?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Shayna Brellis
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:53:00 -
[29]
*sigh*
You keep ignoring the main point. Either you are flat-out incapable of understanding...or a troll. Either way there's no point in arguing any further.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:59:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Shayna Brellis
*sigh*
You keep ignoring the main point. Either you are flat-out incapable of understanding...or a troll. Either way there's no point in arguing any further.
Yeah run away after a lot of Ad Hominem and no arguments to counter
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |