223 replies to this topic

[Verdic Mckenna]

I'm poking fun. We both share a passion for the game. I can just picture you with a cup of java looking at the design and going... "WHAT THE HECK IS THIS CRAP!?" and then taking to Photoshop to completely re-design the mech. We're in an isolationist "bubble" where Aff, Neg, Quiaff, Quineg, all exist in our worlds but most people just look at it and go... "Whoa dude, you're out there." Don't tell me you don't get that. I know I have.

To add to this. Look at how much money we spend here. I mean cmon. The average player surely doesn't spend what we spend if not motivated by the love of the universe. I'd picture their building inlaid with gold if that were the case.

Bishop Steiner, on 25 September 2014 - 05:14 AM, said:

what's overcaffeinated? I critiqued the design?

Edited by Verdic Mckenna, 25 September 2014 - 05:30 AM.

[Lord de Seis]

Oh all the friggin things to complain about.... Every mechwarrior has had different artistic representations of battle mechs ffs.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lord de Seis, on 25 September 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

Oh all the friggin things to complain about.... Every mechwarrior has had different artistic representations of battle mechs ffs.

so whats sillier?

My "complaining" or more to point, writing a pretty comprehensive critique, or, your complaining about my complaining? Maybe some decaf?

[Verdic Mckenna]

Excellent example of my joke. We're all involved in our own way. And to others its completely misguided. You have to laugh at it. Its amazing what the human mind tells itself. For example, I really thought my personal story about MW would positively impact someone. You realize that thread was buried in a matter of seconds? Its crazy. People would prefer to complain, than they would to share stories of how this universe has POSITIVELY impacted them. Human nature. Laugh or cry.

Lord de Seis, on 25 September 2014 - 05:30 AM, said:

Oh all the friggin things to complain about.... Every mechwarrior has had different artistic representations of battle mechs ffs.

IN any case. Why are you trying to turn it around on someone? It's silly man. My thoughts, his thoughts, we are all impervious to external perspective most days. It's what makes us human. It takes a ton of reflection and being able to put yourself in someone elses shoes. This thread really brightened my day. The fact you care enough to put it out there - criticism be damned. But when you start snipping at the criticism? You're letting people beat you. People know you, and people like you. It was funny.

Bishop Steiner, on 25 September 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

so whats sillier?

My "complaining" or more to point, writing a pretty comprehensive critique, or, your complaining about my complaining? Maybe some decaf?

Edited by Verdic Mckenna, 25 September 2014 - 05:35 AM.

[boomshekah]

By far the best looking mech in the game. 10 out of 10.

[Lord de Seis]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 September 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

so whats sillier?

My "complaining" or more to point, writing a pretty comprehensive critique, or, your complaining about my complaining? Maybe some decaf?

Name one mechwarrior game that has perfectly recreated the line drawings and pictures you posted.

It looks great in game.

Edited by Lord de Seis, 25 September 2014 - 05:49 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lord de Seis, on 25 September 2014 - 05:48 AM, said:

Name one mechwarrior game that has perfectly recreated the line drawings and pictures you posted.

show me where I asked for a perfect recreation?

[Lord de Seis]

Bishop Steiner, on 25 September 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

show me where I asked for a perfect recreation?

What is the point of your post then?!?! You want the arms and legs resized but admit that the torso placement and shape make for a more balanced mech but went to all the trouble to point how they don't look "how they are supposed too". My point is that every mechwarrior has different representations of what all our favourite mechs look like and what I took from your post (mostly from the negative title) and you even admit to being heavily critical of the design and if you want the Vulture/Mad Dog to look like it was originally drawn you must have been disappointed with every mechwarrior up to now.

[Mawai]

Hi ...

I like the MWO version of the mech.

I also think that some of the adjustments were made for "physics" reasons.

The MWO modelers like to create "realistic" looking mechs that are in the spirit of the original designs.

1) Compare the attachment point of legs to torso. In the original design the shoulders are "back" ... draw a line through the center of mass ... if you assume that the torso is generally a chunk of metal without extra weight in the nose ... the original design would be heavily weighted to the back so that it could either be unstable moving or could tip over. The MWO design fixes this ... the legs attach under the center of mass of the torso.

2) Both arms and legs on the original are spindly. In MWO, they have generally gone with a thicker, stronger look to every mech which gives them a much better feeling of durability. The original design is hard to picture when exposed to lateral forces ... on the other hand the MWO design looks a lot more stable.

3) The biggest issue appears to be that the weapons are not long and slender. Two issues here. First, they are trying to re-use art work for weapon customization ... so folks are stuck with laser shapes that fit on all mechs. Try to picture long lasers sticking out the front of other mechs just to accomodate the Mad Dog. To do this requires custom laser and ppc shapes just for the Mad Dog. That might be worth doing down the road since you could use the same asset for the Catapult-K2 since folks have complained that the laser/ppc there are also too short. However, from a game play perspective, doing this would make the arm hit box much much larger. The weapons are part of the arm and if they extend very far forward they can be used as a shield ... which might be an issue from a hitbox and game play perspective.

4) They could consider bending the legs more ... but that would depend on the animation requirements.

Anyway, it seems pretty good as it is, living up to the spirit of the original designs if not the details ... with some adjustments to fit the MWO "look and feel" and physics requirements.

[RockmachinE]

You as*holes are WAAAY too nitpicky.

I like the model, its decent. You see, a standard thing for artists is to re-interpret something to have it fit with the visual style, technical limitations and nature of the current project. Also an artist should have the liberty to put his own touches on whatever it is he's doing. This is so standard I can't believe I have to mention this at all.

The more I read this forum the more I think 90% of the people here are just a bunch of very very spoiled people who are used to their every whim being catered to. No wonder PGI doesn't listen to most of you f*ckers. There are MANY MANY other things this game needs to fix the last thing is some NON ISSUE some dumbass came up with because a mech doesn't match his whiny idea of it. And the forum is chock full of spoiled d*mbass non-realistic posts like this.

I've not been a supporter of PGI and actually quite critical of them, but I understand why they CAN'T listen to this community, 90% of the post are just whiny f*ckers trying to get their way.

Edited by Louis Brofist, 25 September 2014 - 06:10 AM.

[Lord de Seis]

Louis Brofist, on 25 September 2014 - 06:07 AM, said:

You as*holes are WAAAY too nitpicky.

I like the model, its decent. You see, a standard thing for artists is to re-interpret something to have it fit with the visual style, technical limitations and nature of the current project. Also an artist should have the liberty to put his own touches on whatever it is he's doing. This is so standard I can't believe I have to mention this at all.

The more I read this forum the more I think 90% of the people here are just a bunch of very very spoiled kids-teens-students who are used to their every whim being catered to. No wonder PGI doesn't listen to most of you f*ckers. There are MANY MANY other things this game needs to fix the last thing is some NON ISSUE some dumbass came up with because a mech doesn't match his vision of it.

I've not been a supporter of PGI and actually quite critical of them, but I understand why they CAN'T listen to this community 90% of the post are just whiny ******* trying to get their way.

Amen.

[Ozric]

Lord de Seis, on 25 September 2014 - 06:00 AM, said:

What is the point of your post then?!?! You want the arms and legs resized but admit that the torso placement and shape make for a more balanced mech but went to all the trouble to point how they don't look "how they are supposed too". My point is that every mechwarrior has different representations of what all our favourite mechs look like and what I took from your post (mostly from the negative title) and you even admit to being heavily critical of the design and if you want the Vulture/Mad Dog to look like it was originally drawn you must have been disappointed with every mechwarrior up to now.

What was the point of you even getting involved in this thread at all I wonder? Many people are disappointed with the way the Vulture turned out, just as at least you are quite happy with it. Hardly something worth getting your knickers in a twist over. Unless, of course, you like twisting your knickers...



TL/DR - Stubby Mad Dog arms bad!

[carl kerensky]

Im liking it. Maybe in the future the weapons in the arms can be extended.

[Lord de Seis]

Ozric, on 25 September 2014 - 06:11 AM, said:

What was the point of you even getting involved in this thread at all I wonder? Many people are disappointed with the way the Vulture turned out, just as at least you are quite happy with it. Hardly something worth getting your knickers in a twist over. Unless, of course, you like twisting your knickers...

TL/DR - Stubby Mad Dog arms bad!

Because I think the topic is ridiculous and made that clear with my first post.

The rest is responses, there is more pressing issues to be discussed in the game IMO.

Edited by Lord de Seis, 25 September 2014 - 06:39 AM.

[Bigbacon]

OMG IT DOESNT LOOK THE SAME!!

RAGE!!!

wow......

[MeiSooHaityu]

Wow, this thread went crazy. One persons critique of a design met with such rage. Crazy.

[Demi-Precentor Konev]

I'm all for keeping MW:O as closely in line with BattleTech lore as possible, but the two critical things I value more than that?

1. Alex Iglesias is an artist. He is already under extremely strict constraints to crank out the art for these 'Mechs and keep them relatively similar to previous artwork for the sake of recognition. I think any time we can afford him more room to add his flavor to things, we should.

2. The shape, movement, hitboxes, etc. of the 'Mechs is almost guaranteed to be modified to fit the nature of MW:O gameplay. Otherwise, certain geometrically challenged 'Mechs will suffer simply because the original artists working on the 3025 TRO didn't plan for their work to be sourced for a video game.

[MadLowiss]

I don't understand why on the concept art it had long barrel, and the final model has short barrels... longer barrel would be better IMO...

[Bishop Steiner]

Louis Brofist, on 25 September 2014 - 06:07 AM, said:

You as*holes are WAAAY too nitpicky.

I like the model, its decent. You see, a standard thing for artists is to re-interpret something to have it fit with the visual style, technical limitations and nature of the current project. Also an artist should have the liberty to put his own touches on whatever it is he's doing. This is so standard I can't believe I have to mention this at all.

The more I read this forum the more I think 90% of the people here are just a bunch of very very spoiled people who are used to their every whim being catered to. No wonder PGI doesn't listen to most of you f*ckers. There are MANY MANY other things this game needs to fix the last thing is some NON ISSUE some dumbass came up with because a mech doesn't match his whiny idea of it. And the forum is chock full of spoiled d*mbass non-realistic posts like this.

I've not been a supporter of PGI and actually quite critical of them, but I understand why they CAN'T listen to this community, 90% of the post are just whiny f*ckers trying to get their way.

Lol...who's the bigger a-hole, the person who gives an honest critique, or the person getting butthurt and calling him an a-hole for making it?

ArtyomBrusilov, on 25 September 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

I'm all for keeping MW:O as closely in line with BattleTech lore as possible, but the two critical things I value more than that?

1. Alex Iglesias is an artist. He is already under extremely strict constraints to crank out the art for these 'Mechs and keep them relatively similar to previous artwork for the sake of recognition. I think any time we can afford him more room to add his flavor to things, we should.

Great.

Alex did a good job on it BTW. Unfortunately, the in game model is distinctly different in those very key areas I noted, from Alex's concept art.


Next?

[TELEFORCE]

The only thing the Mad Dog needs are longer laser barrels just like they appeared in the original concept art. Other than that, I'm very happy with the way it looks in MWO.

Russ mentioned in a topic a few days ago that he was going to talk to the art director about making the laser barrel length change, but I haven't seen him say anything else about it. I'm trying to find the post he said it in (it's in General Discussion somewhere a few pages back).