575 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

SpOoKy777, on 27 March 2015 - 05:11 PM, said:

Hi-Res:
http://spooky777.dev...mmand-522979984

nice one Spooks!

So, ya think the Zeus might get featured in one, soonish?

[Mighty Spike]

PGI give Spooky his own Hero mech

[SpOoKy777]

Quote

So, ya think the Zeus might get featured in one, soonish?

Definitely at some point...most likely a FedCom related scene...

But soonisher I have to do a little tribute to...mhhh...something you might enjoy

[NautilusCommand]

SpOoKy777, on 28 March 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

Definitely at some point...most likely a FedCom related scene...

But soonisher I have to do a little tribute to...mhhh...something you might enjoy

Here comes the urbies!

[Bishop Steiner]

SpOoKy777, on 28 March 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

Definitely at some point...most likely a FedCom related scene...

But soonisher I have to do a little tribute to...mhhh...something you might enjoy

Also curious, do all of them have to be MWO Mechs, or could you add a custom design to one of your pieces?

[Burktross]

Holy ****.... this is phenomenal man!

[9erRed]

Greetings all,

So has Sp0oky777 ever been approached by PGI do work on possible 'Poster Artwork'?
- I know that PGI does not have the licence for physical material BattleTech products, but they do have the 'digital' rights, and that could be exactly how this work could be offered.

Do you (sp0oky) ever collaborate with 'Alex from PGI on ideas or concepts? Might be a NDA involved here so I understand.

As always , excellent work with BattleTech 'Mechs and concepts.

9erRed

[SpOoKy777]

I was never approached by PGI directly, though NGNG helped out a lot to spread my work, can't thank them enough...
However, would be really, really cool to hear what the Dev's think of my stuff...

A while back, I sent applications as an freelance artist to both PGI and Catalyst without response...

I would assume Alex has only limited options to let somebody influence his designs from outside the project and generally that is not the way things work in the industry...
And no, I never contacted him...just throwing out one tribute to his work after another...in silent admiration...

Edited by SpOoKy777, 04 April 2015 - 04:36 PM.

[Iqfish]

SpOoKy777, on 04 April 2015 - 04:32 PM, said:

I was never approached by PGI directly, though NGNG helped out a lot to spread my work, can't thank them enough...
However, would be really, really cool to hear what the Dev's think of my stuff...

A while back, I sent applications as an freelance artist to both PGI and Catalyst without response...

I would assume Alex has only limited options to let somebody influence his designs from outside the project and generally that is not the way things work in the industry...
And no, I never contacted him...just throwing out one tribute to his work after another...in silent admiration...

That is a god damn shame. Your artwork beats theirs many times and not even answering to your application... Well. I would try it again, since a lot has changed since the split with IGP.
You should send a message to Tina Benoit too, because she does a lot for the art creating community.

I can only hope they realize how much talent is literally at their door and employ you at some point.

[SpOoKy777]

To a large extent I totally understand that there wasn't a reply and further the complications of hiring freelance artists (from around the world)...even if there is potential...in the end it is business...nobody to blame here, I guess

My two cents about the general situation...
In case of MWO (BT), the amount of people creating quality stuff from this community is unreal...and even more the level of passion involved...
If I could give PGI (Catalyst) an advise, it would be to use these ressources extensively...artworks, videos, machinima, ingame-assets, map design etc. we have (semi-)pro's for everything here...why not involving them even more and making it a bit worth their efforts...it will pay out for everybody, for sure...

The community spotlight is fine and all, but hmm...honestly I'm not a big fan...yet...
Can't really see the signifcance of it...I would rather integrate NGNG in some way with the main forums...to bring everything together...

Edited by SpOoKy777, 06 April 2015 - 12:05 AM.

[BlackPhoenix01]

The fact that they brought NGNG in in the first place is a good sign. That was a significant outside thing for it all and they used it to their advantage. Lets hope they consider doing that some more with the highest quality contributors.

More Artwork!!!!! Nothing makes my day more on the interwebz than seeing a new piece by SpOoky

Edited by BlackPhoenix01, 06 April 2015 - 04:35 AM.

[Mighty Spike]

Iqfish, on 04 April 2015 - 06:59 PM, said:

That is a god damn shame. Your artwork beats theirs many times and not even answering to your application... . Well. I would try it again, since a lot has changed since the split with IGP.
You should send a message to Tina Benoit too, because she does a lot for the art creating community.

I can only hope they realize how much talent is literally at their door and employ you at some point.

EXACTLY IQ

SPOOKY YOU ARE BRILLIANT Dont give up

[Dakkss]

I quite enjoy your artwork Spooky, I have yours and ShimmeringSword's deviantarts bookmarked which I check daily for new stuff. About 90% of your BT work is my desktop wallpaper on rotation. Keep up the badass art!

[SpOoKy777]

Mechwarrior Hardline



http://spooky777.dev...rsuit-527515895

[Tennex]

The atlas one is probably my favorite, doesn't even look 3d

[Bishop Steiner]

SpOoKy777, on 17 April 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

Mechwarrior Hardline



http://spooky777.dev...rsuit-527515895

Oh....mah......gerd. Spook...that's beyond fantabulous brother man. And my new wallpaper.

[Tennex]

Awesome work dude!

Question directly to the artist
This is one of my favorite pieces by you, are the tanks in the convoy actually many times the size of contemporary tanks? They look really good next to the hunchbacks. I notice you havent used those models in any of your other art.

[Nathan Foxbane]

Tennex, on 18 April 2015 - 06:29 PM, said:

Awesome work dude!

Question directly to the artist
This is one of my favorite pieces by you, are the tanks in the convoy actually many times the size of contemporary tanks? They look really good next to the hunchbacks. I notice you havent used those models in any of your other art.

I think those are Challenger X MBTs and an SRM Carrier. Which are Assault Class and Heavy Class tracked vehicles respectively. The Challenger X MBT would be well matched against a fully functional Atlas, weigh as much as a Highlander, mount a Gauss Rifle, LB 10-X AC, LRM 10 +Artemis IV, 2x SSRM 2s, 2x MPL, and a SPL while carrying almost as much weight in Ferro Fibrous armor as a Banshee does. I have a pair of Challenger X minis and their length is about 2/3s the height of an AS7-K (which I also have) and about 4/5s as wide as the Atlas. They dwarf a modern Challenger II MBT. Why the SRM Carrier is in the open I have no idea as they are notorious for the thin armor needed to mount ten SRM 6s on a 60 ton tank. SRM Carriers are somewhat shorter, but a little taller and wider than Challenger Xs.

Edited by Nathan Foxbane, 19 April 2015 - 11:28 AM.

[SpOoKy777]

Quote

Oh....mah......gerd. Spook...that's beyond fantabulous brother man. And my new wallpaper.

Glad you like it...that scene popped up in my mind the second I saw your very first DD pic...was time the Urbie went live...

Quote

Awesome work dude!

Question directly to the artist
This is one of my favorite pieces by you, are the tanks in the convoy actually many times the size of contemporary tanks? They look really good next to the hunchbacks. I notice you havent used those models in any of your other art.

Actually tank size is weird in Battletech...if you compare the tonnages/sizes of BT tanks to contemporary tanks and then back to mechs...nothing makes sense anymore

I wrote this a while ago over at NGNG forums...it was about the "Shreck" PPC Carrier in my "staging area" pic...selfquote:


"[...]in the process I stumbled upon the fact that BT vehicles are way off, regarding the envisioned weight/crew capacity...

Here is some data:


Fluff says (for the featured vehicles):

Scorpion -> 25 tons -> crew: 2

Striker -> 35 tons -> crew: 3

Schrek -> 80 tons -> crew: 6

J-27 (manlift-conversion aside) -> 10 Tons -> crew: 3


Reality says (not exact matches, just for comparison):

M1 Abrams MBT -> ~ 61 tons -> crew: 4

M2 Bradley IFV -> ~ 32 tons -> crew: 3(+6)

HMMWV "Humvee" -> ~ 2,6 tons -> crew: 4-5 (?)

Middleweight Cargo Truck -> ~ 10 Tons


Hard to set this in relation in a realistic way, I assume the BT-designer back in the day where just not so concerned about a realistic scaling and balanced it down from the mech tonnages...
As we learned from the PGI guys, scaling is not only about size, you have to consider mass and density too...

The Shreck would be a giant machine...3 PPC's, the energy supply and 6 crewmember need some room...I basically scaled it similar to a Panzerkampfwagen VIII „Maus“http://en.wikipedia....anzer_VIII_Maus...even with futuristic materials, I think it should be at least as bulky as the "Maus",though way more efficent."


This is in some way also true for the vehicles in the Atlas pic...

Why I haven't used the tanks since then? Good question!
Guess, I just lost them out of sight...

Edited by SpOoKy777, 19 April 2015 - 06:47 PM.

[The Boneshaman]

some things make me question.
why so many crew members in vehicle's like the shreck?
I was a Tanker in the army 1999-2003 we had
1. driver. drives tank
2. gunner. shoots big gun
3 loader. put bug bullet in big gun
4. TC Tank Commander. tells crew what to do
most Russian tanks have only 3 crew minus the loader. most their tanks have an auto loader.
some WW2 tanks had more than 4 adding in a radio operator second gunner like theM3 Lee it had 7 crew and it wasn't as big as the Maus but was tall.
so looking at the PPC carrier I can only see really the need for 3 crew this could make it more compact.
1. driver
2.gunner. really need only 1 gunner all 3 PPCs are on the turret ad only able to face one way so really only 1 gunner is needed it has only 3 PPCs all located in the turret with no other hull weapons. and only energy no need for a loader.
3. TC
optional crew for the 6 men
4. radio operator?
5th and 6th one can only assume a spotter second radio operator?
The tank doesn't need to be really bulky for all this. When made for combat comfort and safety generally take a back seat for combat usefulness.
and in the year 2813 tech could be more compact and lighter than todays tech.
Something the size of a C battery could have more juice than a car battery.