107 replies to this topic

[MauttyKoray]

Creovex, on 11 February 2015 - 05:29 AM, said:

As someone who got the Gargoyle Prime with the fantastic face.... I support the PGI's look over the OPs. These are mechs, not Gundams... let's remember that when trying to tweak design.

The simple point, is that the concept/model between the Panther is amazing and very accurate, meanwhile the model for the Enforcer is very different from the concept with the head being nothing more than the same general shape, and almost entirely different in its design.
The largest complaint is in fact the head. The rest of the mech being off in proportions, while annoying and obvious, could be accepted as the overall design is still the same with the right design elements in their places, if skewed a bit. The head however only keeps the same shape while all the design elements on it have been completely changed. Flat shell shaped forehead vs rounded hexagonal forehead, windows are much larger and shaped completely different while no longer recessed also seeming to continue the flatness of the forehead, the 'ear' area is a straight rectangular cutout vs a rounded partial circle cutout, the 'cheek' area is horribly inflated,

[MauttyKoray]

Tarogato, on 11 February 2015 - 12:10 AM, said:

For all those that don't see the difference, I hope this helps.
On first glance, I could immediately tell that the model didn't match the concept art because the face just had a completely different personality - it wasn't the same character, not the same mech. I couldn't actually tell why, so that's why I drew up the following to compare:

Added to OP on this topic: Link

Thanks Tarogato, you and Axeface are really helpful in showing the issues. I was about to make a response to this specific part of this post myself, and more specifically the underline section cause 'LOLWUT SERIOUSLY?' was my reaction:

627, on 10 February 2015 - 11:06 PM, said:

Ok I just looked at those heads for a couple of minutes... and to be true, imho you are exaggerating.

The left one is a 2D painting, the right a (bad angled) shot from a 3D model. And the only real difference I can spot is that the 3D model has some kind of larger windows.
But the shape of those windows is the same. And that some armor plates are not exactly like in the concept art... I mean c'mon.

The only window that is similar shaped is the front/cent one and even that is still off on its proportion.

You should make a simple GIF to show the quality difference of the Panther concept/model like you did with the Enforcer to really hit home the argument.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 11 February 2015 - 06:27 PM.

[Golden Vulf]

The Gargoyle Prime head is god awful. No one plays the Gargoyle prime, over the other variant with the extra energy hard point in the center torso. Everyone went off on PGI on how it didn't match the art and how almost everyone hated it! It changed nothing.

Gargoyle is lame since it has **** hard points and no endo, they refused to fix the model, and refused to fix the glaring problems making it trash tier.

[MauttyKoray]

OP updated to include further community involvement.

[Tarogato]

MauttyKoray, on 11 February 2015 - 06:21 PM, said:

You should make a simple GIF to show the quality difference of the Panther concept/model like you did with the Enforcer to really hit home the argument.

I would love to do that, because I think you're completely right, but we don't have any in game screenshots of the Panther that match the orientation of the concept art.

While this shot is "close enough", it's just too dark for it to be useful. I lucked out in that the Enforcer screenshot very closely matched the orientation of the concept art, and that's what allowed me to make the fair comparison.

[Tarogato]

By the way, when I made those GIFs, I started to realise, and I think others need to consider this as well - it's quite obvious that the difference between the Enforcer's model and concept art comes down to artistic discretion and not "horrible" or "hasty" "hackjob" work. The differences to me are clearly intentional and I don't think anybody should be deriding the modeler(s) work just because it's different. Expressing a concern for appearance of a model and outright ridiculing the modeler's work (which I've seen people doing) are two different things, the latter of which there is no place for. Give the guys a break, the mech is, with the exception of the chin and a few panes on/surrounding the cockpit, VERY accurate to the artwork and VERY well done and people seem to be ignoring this. =]

Oh, and as for the stubby arm... PGI does this with every single mech, we should be used to it by now.

Edited by Tarogato, 11 February 2015 - 08:02 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Tarogato, on 11 February 2015 - 08:00 PM, said:

By the way, when I made those GIFs, I started to realise, and I think others need to consider this as well - it's quite obvious that the difference between the Enforcer's model and concept art comes down to artistic discretion and not "horrible" or "hasty" "hackjob" work. The differences to me are clearly intentional and I don't think anybody should be deriding the modeler(s) work just because it's different. Expressing a concern for appearance of a model and outright ridiculing the modeler's work (which I've seen people doing) are two different things, the latter of which there is no place for. Give the guys a break, the mech is, with the exception of the chin and a few panes on/surrounding the cockpit, VERY accurate to the artwork and VERY well done and people seem to be ignoring this. =]

Oh, and as for the stubby arm... PGI does this with every single mech, we should be used to it by now.

By different, you mean bad right? While the arm is probably a PGI decision and I have no issue with that...the head/face? Seriously? You can't defend that atrocity of a change.

Like I've said before, I understand that not everything is the same, and I don't mind mostly. BUT THAT FRIGGIN HEAD IS INEXCUSABLE.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 11 February 2015 - 08:10 PM.

[syngyne]

Tarogato, on 11 February 2015 - 12:10 AM, said:

For all those that don't see the difference, I hope this helps.
On first glance, I could immediately tell that the model didn't match the concept art because the face just had a completely different personality - it wasn't the same character, not the same mech. I couldn't actually tell why, so that's why I drew up the following to compare:

I'm wondering if the change was done because the original made for too small a cockpit space when modeled.

[MauttyKoray]

syngyne, on 11 February 2015 - 08:10 PM, said:

I'm wondering if the change was done because the original made for too small a cockpit space when modeled.

Idk, but the original has a great view, if it were too small, making that center bottom square panel there a window (if it wasn't already) could have easily fixed the vertical view. The changes they made don't allow for that much larger of a view/cockpit area really, just a deformed, ugly looking version of it.

[Xetelian]

Does look a bit like a gas mask and I doubt it will change...unless it sells really well and then maybe

[MauttyKoray]

Xetelian, on 11 February 2015 - 09:43 PM, said:

Does look a bit like a gas mask and I doubt it will change...unless it sells really well and then maybe

I was planning on buying it, even without the month bonuses... Now I'm not because the face...

I wouldn't be surprised if others had the same situation.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 11 February 2015 - 09:53 PM.

[Sparks Murphey]

tortuousGoddess, on 10 February 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

I don't like that edit, you fixed the "brow" some but you made the cockpit even LESS hexagonal than the concept art was, which is what was cool about it in the first place. The "brow" in the concept art peeks over the "eyes" of the cockpit a little bit, making it look almost like a helmet, whereas it's flush with the cockpit in the finished product, and the hexagonal shape of the cockpit was altered to a less even polygonal shape that doesn't look as good.

I think you've hit the nail on the head (excuse the pun) here. I've been giving the two versions a good stare down, and while I agree something's a little off with the 3D version, I'm disagreeing with most of the opinions about it being an issue of proportions. While they are different to the concept art, I don't think they are radically so, and I don't think they're the cause of the "offness".

On the other hand, the original BattleTech Enforcer art has a rather distinctive "helmet" shape, which the MWO concept art mimicked with an inset cockpit window, in particular a brow ridge extending forwards of the glass. The 3D version, however, neglects that, barring some minor panelling edges, and effectively blends the glass into the rest of the head. To me, that's the bit that needs tweaking. Not the overall proportions, but the extent to which the cockpit is recessed into the head armour.

[MauttyKoray]

Sparks Murphey, on 11 February 2015 - 10:06 PM, said:

I think you've hit the nail on the head (excuse the pun) here. I've been giving the two versions a good stare down, and while I agree something's a little off with the 3D version, I'm disagreeing with most of the opinions about it being an issue of proportions. While they are different to the concept art, I don't think they are radically so, and I don't think they're the cause of the "offness".

On the other hand, the original BattleTech Enforcer art has a rather distinctive "helmet" shape, which the MWO concept art mimicked with an inset cockpit window, in particular a brow ridge extending forwards of the glass. The 3D version, however, neglects that, barring some minor panelling edges, and effectively blends the glass into the rest of the head. To me, that's the bit that needs tweaking. Not the overall proportions, but the extent to which the cockpit is recessed into the head armour.

Its a combination, and I listed it in this thread: http://mwomercs.com/...nforcer-issues/

Not sure if I listed the head one in this thread too, or if that was just the general overall one that I replied to someone about.

[DoomEngine]

can i haz antenna?

[LordLosh]

I really wonder how hard and how much time it would take to do this. one side of me says they could knock it out in a few hours easy. Other is thinking a full week? I don't know but if its an easy fix they really should do it. On the same note the gargoyle Prime(i) is 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 * worse then the enforcers head issues. I named mine Fugly and dressed him up in pink and purple.

[Nori Silverrage]

The things people complain about...

[Burktross]

Creovex, on 11 February 2015 - 05:32 AM, said:

ALSO... I will take PGI's take over traditional anyday. Look at a Hunchback before PGI and then look at the PGI model. PGI has done a good job of badass redesign on some poorly drawn or modeled mechs....

Amen-- Hunchback is abso-$%&^#&-lutely gorgeous with PGI's redesign.
TRO... not so much...

I like the TRO orion better, though. That head is gorgeous.

[TLBFestus]

HOLY CROPOLLA!! You are right! We must not allow for any interpretation of how these things look even if it's MINUTIA.

[PurpleNinja]

Great, now I'm gonna dream about switching heads in rapid succession.

[Malleus011]

Ozealot, on 12 March 2015 - 08:20 PM, said:

Good that change will never happen since they would also have to change the cockpit interior. But hey, if you do PGI I'm ready to start some threads about some negligible details from other chassis I personally prefer adjusted. Maybe I can score 20 likes too to show you the overwhelming community approval. For each change. Imagine that.

They won't have to mess with the cockpit interior at all if they don't want to. Nobody's asking for that.

If you want other mechs fixed, go start your own thread.