1219 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

And my point is that having a visible representation of some of the most common mechs that have played a large role in the history of Battletech is better than having no representation at all and pretending they don't exist.

Very good point, and I agree. BT tried to do that with the IIC mechs, some with much worse results than others (goodness that PH IIC art was horrible), and many automotive companies in real life have one it.

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

EDIT: Also to me, the Cataphract is what happens when Cappellans try to build a Marauder but can't figure out where the "spare parts" go, so I guess that fits.

LOL

[DirePhoenix]

Cimarb, on 07 October 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

Very good point, and I agree. BT tried to do that with the IIC mechs, some with much worse results than others (goodness that PH IIC art was horrible), and many automotive companies in real life have one it.

They made a repeat mistake with the IIC art: The licensed it from an external source. Again. Although this time the art was created for BattleTech, the art was still licensed, this time from Victor Musical Industries. When Catalyst Game Labs picked up Battletech from FASA, they probably wouldn't have been able to get the licenses for that art from VMI anyway with the weirdness that is Topps owning all Battletech imagery in print media.

(Also I liked the art for the Phoenix Hawk IIC, but the fact that they changed from a 45-ton mech to some freakish 80-ton ballistic monstrosity made me scratch my head)

[Cimarb]

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

[/size]

(Also I liked the art for the Phoenix Hawk IIC, but the fact that they changed from a 45-ton mech to some freakish 80-ton ballistic monstrosity made me scratch my head)

I like the design itself, but the pose plus cartoonish coloring remind me more of a child's transformer or a power ranger than an awe inspiring battle machine. That was pretty consistent with all of that sourcebook, but that PH IIC just really stuck in my head.

[Zordicron]

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

[/size]

They made a repeat mistake with the IIC art: The licensed it from an external source. Again. Although this time the art was created for BattleTech, the art was still licensed, this time from Victor Musical Industries. When Catalyst Game Labs picked up Battletech from FASA, they probably wouldn't have been able to get the licenses for that art from VMI anyway with the weirdness that is Topps owning all Battletech imagery in print media.

(Also I liked the art for the Phoenix Hawk IIC, but the fact that they changed from a 45-ton mech to some freakish 80-ton ballistic monstrosity made me scratch my head)

That has mobile suit Gundam all over it. The knee pads, the thrusters and binders on the shoulders, all it needs is a beam sword.

I hope we never get anything like that in MWO. I

[DirePhoenix]

Also apparently the PHX-IIC got the Project Phoenix treatment way back when too:



From the same artist that gave us the new (legal) Phoenix Hawk:



But who knows what FD may be able to give us, considering how much the sourcebook Centurion:


Differs from his:

[Cimarb]

His concept art is so awesome, lol

[MayGay]

for obvious reasons, the Griffin is one of my favourite 'mechs

[aniviron]

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

But who knows what FD may be able to give us, considering how much the sourcebook Centurion:

Differs from his:

To be fair, if the Cent were as tall as the HBK and had legs as thin as in the concept art, nothing would be wrong with the in-game model at all; it'd be pretty much perfect, actually. (Not going to redact the image, it's awesome enough that everyone gets to see it twice.)

I've gotta be honest, I always thought the BT sourcebook art was pretty bad for the most part. I'm really glad that FD is in charge of the redesigning for MWO; it's a lot closer to how awesome these look in my head than the BT art is, that's for sure.

Edited by aniviron, 07 October 2013 - 05:02 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

aniviron, on 07 October 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

To be fair, if the Cent were as tall as the HBK and had legs as thin as in the concept art, nothing would be wrong with the in-game model at all; it'd be pretty much perfect, actually. (Not going to redact the image, it's awesome enough that everyone gets to see it twice.)

I've gotta be honest, I always thought the BT sourcebook art was pretty bad for the most part. I'm really glad that FD is in charge of the redesigning for MWO; it's a lot closer to how awesome these look in my head than the BT art is, that's for sure.

Total agreement. Also what a lot of people miss is that I think in 90% of cases Alex has kept the flavor and distinctive elements true whenever possible, but seeing "perfect" re-creations of the TRO art is what got us such lovely looking stuff in MechCommander...... Seriously, most official art is kinda lame, and a lot of the newer stuff, like PLOGs, while high quality just doesn't have the FEEL of the Battletech universe to my mind (kinda my knock on Shortpainter too, tbh.. awesome stuff, but doesn't feel clunky/industrial enough for Battletech, IMO).

Also, most of the Closed Beta mechs, like the Atlas and Hunchback are definitively improved and IMO should be the official TRO version going forward. I think the MWO Hunchback is one of the best looking mechs ever done for Battletech, and the K2 Catapult is only a smidge behind.

I think Alex has done, generally a pretty darn good job of capturing and usually improving the designs. There may be small things I prefer to see different, like on the CENTURION, I'd prefer a traditional battlefist, and maybe less of a shark-fin sensor in the head, or for the THUNDERBOLT, the torso lasers I would prefer in a tighter cluster (makes more military sense, for ensuring tight patterns) and nromal hands in place of the pincers.

And yeah, a lot of the "issues" is more the scaling problems the in game models have had, but IMO, there are times where the in-game models have, IMO, come out better looking than Alex's concepts. The original Jagermech's concept arms looked, IMO, horrible. Had they simply kept the "dome" cockpit, I think it would be a PERFECT model. also like the in game Victor and Orion more than the concept art, TBH. (Kinda like how I love Kiriages 3D render of my KGC model a LOT more than my actual concept piece)

So, gotta give credit where due.

[XX Sulla XX]

The truth is 98% of the official art is TERRIBLE. Alex has done a great job designing the mechs. Really no idea why they never could hire any one that could draw

[5th Fedcom Rat]

XX Sulla XX, on 07 October 2013 - 07:54 PM, said:

The truth is 98% of the official art is TERRIBLE. Alex has done a great job designing the mechs. Really no idea why they never could hire any one that could draw

That's your version of the truth. Not mine.

To say they never had any good artists doing Battletech art is absolute and utter bunk.

The older BT art gets unfairly knocked a lot on this forum, but every book ever done (and I own close to a hundred) has a healthy chunk of great art that usually outweighs the bad pieces that people on this forum and reddit like to single out for ridicule. Indeed every BT property ever (from games to the cartoon) has its good and bad looking mechs.

The Centurion posted above, for example, is the one and only piece of Alex art I really dislike. It has stupid looking widely splayed bird legs and the shape departs too radically from the original design for no good reason (which should be tall and slender). Because of this concept art, in the game we ended up with a giant wide shouldered huge armed frankenstein monstrosity of a mech that's closer to assault than medium size, with messed up torso hitboxes that force people to shoot the legs out to destroy it in a timely fashion. Alex is a fantastic BT artist, of that there can be no doubt, one of the best ever in fact, but nothing and no one is perfect.

Besides the messed up Centurion, the Stalker in MWO (see right sidebar in your browser) is absolutely abysmal in its design and animation: it looks like a bunch of chunky 3D printer shapes glued together in layers with little prancing baby feet holding it up. I think most were also disappointed in how the MWO Highlander turned out visually after all the hype. The game modellers really need to start using curved surfaces to capture the proper look of some mechs.

The Raven also had questionable concept art (no beak??) but thankfully the in-game model turned out great. Alex supervised the transition so perhaps he had a change of heart about the design, I'm not sure.

In short, I end up mentally cherry picking from various iterations what version of any particular mech is the "best" official one. MWO in no way visually trumps what came before - it simply builds on the shoulders of the past.

If BT art were truly so TERRIBLE in the past, would this property have EVER become a multi-million dollar franchise that spans decades? Think before you type please.

.

Edited by 5th Fedcom Rat, 07 October 2013 - 09:12 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

5th Fedcom Rat, on 07 October 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

That's your version of the truth. Not mine.

To say they never had any good artists doing Battletech art is absolute and utter bunk.

The older BT art gets unfairly knocked a lot on this forum, but every book ever done (and I own close to a hundred) has a healthy chunk of great art that usually outweighs the bad pieces that people on this forum and reddit like to single out for ridicule. Indeed every BT property ever (from games to the cartoon) has its good and bad looking mechs.

The Centurion posted above, for example, is the one and only piece of Alex art I really dislike. It has stupid looking widely splayed bird legs and the shape departs too radically from the original design for no good reason (which should be tall and slender). Because of this concept art, in the game we ended up with a giant wide shouldered huge armed frankenstein monstrosity of a mech that's closer to assault than medium size, with messed up torso hitboxes that force people to shoot the legs out to destroy it in a timely fashion. Alex is a fantastic BT artist, of that there can be no doubt, one of the best ever in fact, but nothing and no one is perfect.

Besides the messed up Centurion, the Stalker in MWO (see right sidebar in your browser) is absolutely abysmal in its design and animation: it looks like a bunch of chunky 3D printer shapes glued together in layers with little prancing baby feet holding it up. I think most were also disappointed in how the MWO Highlander turned out visually after all the hype. The game modellers really need to start using curved surfaces to capture the proper look of some mechs.

The Raven also had questionable concept art (no beak??) but thankfully the in-game model turned out great. Alex supervised the transition so perhaps he had a change of heart about the design, I'm not sure.

In short, I end up mentally cherry picking from various iterations what version of any particular mech is the "best" official one. MWO in no way visually trumps what came before - it simply builds on the shoulders of the past.

If BT art were truly so TERRIBLE in the past, would this property have EVER become a multi-million dollar franchise that spans decades? Think before you type please.

.

even ugly girls have admirers. doesn't make them any less ugly. Most of the original art is pretty damn bad. And yes I not only have all the books you do, but quite likely all the ones you don't. And I am talking the originals, not the upgrades, etc.

The original 3025 was DECENT with a few really good designs. And some interesting ideas that were not really executed all the way. the Original 3050 Inner Sphere section looked like it was a Jr High School art project. The Clan MEchs were well done though, mostly. The 3055? Looked like an Elementary School project, aside from the VMI stuff. the 3058? Return of Loose... and yet, some of the worst, most nonsensical designs yet seen. Overall art direction was a little higher come the 3060 TRO, and actually pretty good in 3067, but no, by and large, MOST of the original TRO designs were pure garbage.

[GalaxyBluestar]

DirePhoenix, on 07 October 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

i'm a traditionalist so



even this pathetic stencil of 2 mins making is more Marauder in feel than that remake.



that's the only point to calling a battlemech a Marauder because it's like say... a MARAUDER!

this basic appearance can have any amount of completely different detail stacked on it to make it distinctly MWO but it's this shape or it's not a MARAUDER!

btw **** HG!

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 08 October 2013 - 12:44 AM.

[Cimarb]

What GalaxyBluestar said. Btw, I like that stencil - that is remarkably accurate for 6 lines...



This is the Marauder. Do a quick search for images, and you can see tons of variations of it, but the round pod topped with a huge autocannon, bird-like legs and long dangly arms with large weapon pods all combine to make the appearance. You can't move the auto cannon to the side torso and completely scrap the entire look of the body without also completely losing the identity of the Marauder, because that IS what makes it a Marauder.

Edited by Cimarb, 08 October 2013 - 07:45 AM.

[Cimarb]

This is probably my favorite, by shimmering-sword @deviantart

[Country Gravy]

What about this one:

[Mason Grimm]

Ultimately the purists need to decide "Do I want to hold on to my antiquated idea of what the Marauder IS, thus forcing me to sit in my room all day and drool over the 3025 Original TRO but nothing else" OR "Do I want to open my mind up to new visions of the monster that inspired my imagination when I was a kid, thus allowing me to play it in a 'tangible' way".

Adapt and play something that could be great fun or remain stagnant and drooling over things you can never touch. Rest assured, Harmony Gold will hold the rights to those images until their last dying gasp. Why? Because it is something that people want for another franchise, because it is human nature to do so and because, while it may be personal to some, to others it is just business.

[PropagandaWar]

Cimarb, on 02 October 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

What you fail to acknowledge is that people pay $60+ for a console game that takes them, MAYBE, a solid weekends worth of time to finish, then move on to the next. MMOs and MMORPGs (yes, they are different) used to cost money up front PLUS subscription fees. In the six or so years I played WoW, for instance, I put down roughly $100 for the initial game plus expansions, plus around $1,000 in subscription fees. A console game, on the other hand, is $60-$80 and I would be lucky to stay entertained for six hours, let alone six years. There is a world of difference.

Let me ask you this. For your $60 MWO purchase, how many hours of game time did you get from it? Be honest. If you got more than six hours, quit whining like a spoiled baby, because you got well more than your money's worth. If not, then you obviously didn't put much thought into the purchase ahead of time...

MW3 and 4 2+ Years and sometimes still play. Stronghold Still play, MechCommander Still Play. Homeworld would still play. I've put in over a year playing this game every day and spent over a grand and no I don't regret it. I have been frustrated at times but I don't regret it one bit.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cimarb, on 08 October 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

This is probably my favorite, by shimmering-sword @deviantart

is that the mid life Marauder that ate too many cupcakes and Hohos? I like my Marauders to actually look sleek and deadly, not like an NFL lineman with a beer gut.

GalaxyBluestar, on 08 October 2013 - 12:42 AM, said:

i'm a traditionalist so



even this pathetic stencil of 2 mins making is more Marauder in feel than that remake.



that's the only point to calling a battlemech a Marauder because it's like say... a MARAUDER!

this basic appearance can have any amount of completely different detail stacked on it to make it distinctly MWO but it's this shape or it's not a MARAUDER!

btw **** HG!

U r of course correct...... unless you have to be the one to animate a mech with totally non usable knees that can scarcely stand it's so poorly balanced, let alone actually move.

The Glaugg Officers Pod/Marauder was always a design that looked cool until anyone with a smidge of engineering sense actually takes a second look and realizes the dang thing is about as horrible a design as imaginable. For an alien space opera, ok, for armored combat in the 31st Century? I'll take the re-design.

[Deux]

I haven't spent as much as prop butttt I have played since sloes beta and still enjoy playing. Yes I get frustrated to at the pace of the games development, but I still enjoy playing.