239 replies to this topic

[Tannhauser Gate]

Having read many great opinions and comments here, Ive changed my own opinion somewhat.

The current light-revision style of IS emblems seem to be place holders. They look ok (especially in small scale) but they are bland and have no umph compared to the canon emblems. Canon emblems are more like military squadron emblems that pilots here proud to have on their mechs, flags, and uniforms. The new Heavy versions aren’t exactly there yet but definitely in the right direction.

I think ALL the emblems should be re-envisioned in the heavy direction, based on the canon originals, and improved / updated / modernized the same way that PGI improved the mechs themselves over the canon designs.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 09 June 2014 - 08:56 AM.

[Bulletsponge0]

LakeDaemon, on 09 June 2014 - 08:25 AM, said:

Having read many great opinions and comments here, Ive changed my own opinion somewhat.

The current light-revision style of IS emblems seem to be place holders. They look ok (especially in small scale) but they are bland and have no umph compared to the canon emblems. Canon emblems are more like military squadron emblems that pilots here proud to have on their mechs, flags, and uniforms. The new Heavy versions aren’t exactly there yet but definitely in the right direction.

I think ALL the emblems should be re-envisioned in the heavy direction but based on the originals and improved / updated / modernized the same way that PGI improved the mechs themselves based on the canon designs.

Most unit insignia tend to go for a more Spartan design. Simpler is better. The current iteration if the clan logos go the opposite direction, more complex and colorful. I prefer a light rework of the original clan logos from Canon to the stylized things we have now.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Well said but I disagree on your point regarding most unit insignia. As military aviation vet, I can tell you that spartan and simple (in the light logo style) were not the norm. I would like to see original canon insignia but re-envisioned. I think the heavy designs were an attempt at that but came out cartoony in stead of clean. The light designs are functional and clean and Im "ok" with them. If they retired the new heavy one for the light Id be fine with it but I think they could try again and do something remarkable based on canon designs that are less bland.

[Bulletsponge0]

LakeDaemon, on 09 June 2014 - 09:18 AM, said:

Well said but I disagree on your point regarding most unit insignia. As military aviation vet, I can tell you that spartan and simple (in the light logo style) were not the norm. I would like to see original canon insignia but re-envisioned. I think the heavy designs were an attempt at that but came out cartoony in stead of clean. The light designs are functional and clean and Im "ok" with them. If they retired the new heavy one for the light Id be fine with it but I think they could try again and do something remarkable based on canon designs that are less bland.

Aviation insignia are the exception to the rule...but we aren't piloting aerospace fighters...we are piloting big stompy robots 'mechs. think more along the lines you'd see on current tanks and not fighter/bombers...

Edited for spelling...stupid autocorrect....

Edited by Bulletsponge0, 09 June 2014 - 10:28 AM.

[CeeKay Boques]

7ynx, on 04 June 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

Seriously?! all this work when the real work should be on smoothing out UI2.0 and CW. I'd rather see PGI stick to their priorities.

So... what did you want the artists to do? Draw out a CW map for ya? This is art stuff, not code stuff.

(except for the part where you have to code the art into the uh... code.)

My kids love the new ones, to me they are "demilitarizing"... either way I win I guess!

[smokefield]

so - instead of letting pgi work on really important matters, you know...those that actually "are" the game, we are arguing over 4 small images. and when they will delay again some of those important things..well...we had to "rework " those graphics as you wanted, right ?

[Tannhauser Gate]

smokefield, on 09 June 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

so - instead of letting pgi work on really important matters, you know...those that actually "are" the game, we are arguing over 4 small images. and when they will delay again some of those important things..well...we had to "rework " those graphics as you wanted, right ?

I would agree *if* this was somehow PGI's priority but it is not. Russ asked in a recent ngng podcast for a poll and some opinions regarding the recent clan insignia (as long as it was mature and positive). He said they were not complete and were kinda rushed out the door and were in a style that he thought might not be popular.

So, this is not a distraction from PGI's plan but discussion around constructive feedback.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 09 June 2014 - 11:46 AM.

[Lou3b]

LakeDaemon, on 09 June 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

He said they were not complete and were kinda rushed out the door and were in a style that he thought might not be popular.

So they got rushed out and he thought they might not be popular and they still released them, story of my life. How long have the clan packs been advertised now? and the images still got rushed...

Well at least we have some sort of clan love even if it is half hearted haha.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Bulletsponge0, on 09 June 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Aviation insignia are the exception to the rule...but we aren't piloting aerospace fighters...we are piloting big stompy robots 'mechs. think more along the lines you'd see on current tanks and not fighter/bombers...

Edited for spelling...stupid autocorrect....

Thats fine and I can agree with that. My position is that Id rather see canon insignia re-envisioned with some edge rather than smoothed into blandness.

[Ridersofdoom]

logos, logos, I dont care about it if you do not carry in your mech, these are only for the chat or forums, remember MW4 you could carry logos in the skin of any mech, that is important.

[Bulletsponge0]

LakeDaemon, on 09 June 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Thats fine and I can agree with that. My position is that Id rather see canon insignia re-envisioned with some edge rather than smoothed into blandness.

you kind of do have the old logos re-envisioned with some edge right now

[Tannhauser Gate]

Clearly they arent finished. Id rather not pick each one apart. The new logos are in the right direction I think but should be given a few more passes.

[Ryvucz]

Will9761, on 07 June 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

It's a damn shame fellas, your pet Wolf has rabies. I'm afraid you're gonna have to put em' down.

No worries, Wolf will be in our talons soon enough.

[Pale Jackal]

As a random comment: I actually do like the CJF emblem. It's not perfect, but it's not bad either. I'd also say the Wolf emblem is tolerable. The other two definitely need a revamp.

[evil merlin]

Clanners... its going to be fun picking you off... Emblems be damned.

[Bulletsponge0]

Thought we were suppose to have some new art and a poll about them by now

[Haakon Magnusson]

First you need to work the social rewards to the end of phase 4... oh yeah, forgot it's on automatic

[Ryvucz]

Shh, Niko is here, maybe an update for us?

[BLOOD WOLF]

In the NGNG 113 podcast, russ stated that the Logos will be getting their classic look albeit they will have a modern feel.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 10 June 2014 - 11:19 AM.

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

@Russ Bullock

How about in the future you put stuff like this to a vote to avoid getting so harshly flamed over something so trivial as this. Fan polls and community engagement is a wonderful thing and a great tool if you use it properly, CIG knows this and uses it quite nicely. You could learn a few things from them and I hope that you are trying.