172 replies to this topic

[Crotch RockIt]

A PPC weighs 7 TONS. It is a huge weapon. Three of them amount to 26% of an Awesome's total weight. They should look big on the mech.

And a single PPC is 28% of a Commando's total weight. It should look ridiculously huge and out of proportion on a 25 ton mech, and I'm OK with that.

[Summon3r]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

Yes, dynamic weapons geometry SHOULD be a nice thing. Something that adds immersion and a feeling of ownership to the unique variants you can whip up in the mechlab.

And ye, time and again, PGI gives us Nipple PPCs, Red Ryder BB Gun Autocannons, and little flat Doorbell Lasers. (Missiles..... can't even think of some not so witty thing to label them with atm, sorry).

This is a Giant, Stompy Space Robot Game. Mind you, there is zero logical combat application to said giant stompy robots. We almost certainly all, got into them because they LOOKED FREAKING COOL. Big Robots, BIG GUNS.

Now we aren't having to talk Crazy Gundam Swords and Final Fantasy oversize weapons. But ones that looks proportionate and pleasing, should not be that hard.




These Hardpoints look like an Accountant designed them, not anyone with one ounce of artistic sensibilities.

Example, AWS-8Q as we are getting it:

AWS-8Q that we COULD have gotten


or for comparison sake, how the M1A1 Abrams would look, as designed by PGI


Yes, I know some of the Denizens of Mount TryHard, will dismiss it, as it has no real in game impact on Uberplay. And perhaps that is what this is PGI trying to get the last of us holdouts to cave in and imply embrace Sword and Board Meta LegoMechs. Because only a blind person would drive any of these for their Aesthetics.

It's so dang disappointing to see a patch that is so chock full of apparently great in game fixes and a such, get saddled with such a horrible job of visual customization. Doubly so when it's nothing new, people have been blowing up PGI about this since the VERY FIRST visual customization pass!!!!

Dang it PGI!!!! Hire someone to do some visual QA over this stuff!!! Heck, I'll do it for freaking FREE. But stop shooting yourself in the foot with these ludicrously bad, undersized and generic looking weapon passes. Please? (see, I asked nicely?)

*Edit (just for you Escef)


Happy now?

couldnt have said it better myself... who actually thinks when they are making these mechs that they look good?!?!??

btw that PGI M1A1 about made me fall out of my chair LMFAO

[mark v92]

cant wait for the hollander



and pgi's version...

[reign]

mark v92, on 07 July 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

cant wait for the hollander



and pgi's version...

In all honesty... that gun would soooo get blown off in MWO... it would be a bigger target than the Misery AC turret ... I mean I think it looks good .... But...

[Escef]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 07:58 AM, said:

In this instance, I would say you are man. Not flinging poo, but (so far) no one else is apparently seeing it the way you are.

Ok, let's rewind this a bit. You complained they don't listen, yet you are one fo the folks they hear the loudest and clearest. That sounds a lot like the typical complains I see bandied around here that boil down to, "PGI didn't do what I told them to, so obviously they ignored me!" Obviously, this is not the case, otherwise you would not have the interactions with them that you have.

Secondly, this should hardly be a surprise at this point. Russ has shown repeatedly that whatever he, or his people in charge of QC, give the OK stamp to in regards to revised dynamic weapon appearance has a history of conflicting with the community's sense of aesthetics. Catapult? Centurion? Jagermech? Obviously this is a blind spot for them. It's not that they aren't listening, it's just that they're the people that show up to a date wearing orange pants and a plaid shirt and have absolutely NO IDEA what they did wrong.

[Sarlic]

Escef, on 07 July 2015 - 08:07 AM, said:

Ok, let's rewind this a bit. You complained they don't listen, yet you are one fo the folks they hear the loudest and clearest. That sounds a lot like the typical complains I see bandied around here that boil down to, "PGI didn't do what I told them to, so obviously they ignored me!" Obviously, this is not the case, otherwise you would not have the interactions with them that you have.

Secondly, this should hardly be a surprise at this point. Russ has shown repeatedly that whatever he, or his people in charge of QC, give the OK stamp to in regards to revised dynamic weapon appearance has a history of conflicting with the community's sense of aesthetics. Catapult? Centurion? Jagermech? Obviously this is a blind spot for them. It's not that they aren't listening, it's just that they're the people that show up to a date wearing orange pants and a plaid shirt and have absolutely NO IDEA what they did wrong.

I like the last part. Made me chuckle.

[mark v92]

reign, on 07 July 2015 - 08:06 AM, said:

In all honesty... that gun would soooo get blown off in MWO... it would be a bigger target than the Misery AC turret ... I mean I think it looks good .... But...

its still only a 35 ton light mech. so the size of the mech itself wont be that big.
add some gauss quirks and it will ofset the larger hitbox

[Novakaine]

Come on Bish ya know the deal here over sized phallic shaped weapons are not pc anymore.
Wouldn't want to offend anyone ya know, God forbid.
Ooopty sorry forgot the big G is offensive now.
Apparently nipples are still in vogue.
Just plain sad.

[Dawnstealer]

Escef, on 07 July 2015 - 07:23 AM, said:

Bloody hell, Bishop. You have an easier time bending Russ's ear than most, yet you want to whine about them not listening? Holy s***, man, they listen to YOU more than most of us. You're unhappy with these results? Fine, say so. But you of all people have exactly zero business saying they don't listen.

This. Bishop? Ask Russ to put this in the game:

[Bishop Steiner]

Escef, on 07 July 2015 - 08:07 AM, said:

Ok, let's rewind this a bit. You complained they don't listen, yet you are one fo the folks they hear the loudest and clearest. That sounds a lot like the typical complains I see bandied around here that boil down to, "PGI didn't do what I told them to, so obviously they ignored me!" Obviously, this is not the case, otherwise you would not have the interactions with them that you have.

Secondly, this should hardly be a surprise at this point. Russ has shown repeatedly that whatever he, or his people in charge of QC, give the OK stamp to in regards to revised dynamic weapon appearance has a history of conflicting with the community's sense of aesthetics. Catapult? Centurion? Jagermech? Obviously this is a blind spot for them. It's not that they aren't listening, it's just that they're the people that show up to a date wearing orange pants and a plaid shirt and have absolutely NO IDEA what they did wrong.

Which is why, they need to listen. When this many people have repeatedly told you that your Green Pants are actually purple, it's time to admit you are colorblind, and let your wife/girlfriend dress you, lol. It's is apparent this is a blind spot to the Modelers and at least some of the other Devs, including, apparently, Russ. Mind you, some of it is subjective. So you have to mix that in.

But at this point I think they need someone, Alex, anyone with an eye for the form, to be doing QA and overwatch on these things. Some concessions have to be made (for instance, some mechs might simply not have the required real estate, and I can get where adding more bolt on geometry might be an issue (especially as people will likely want it all affected by their paint, too.

What's the saying, the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have it?

[DAYLEET]

So the AWS has an iconic shape when it uses ppcs? Well lets have that iconic shape with ppcs. But when you switch to lasers then switch the graphic too because i should be able to just tell what weapon you have on, it just make sense to me.

[Bishop Steiner]

Novakaine, on 07 July 2015 - 08:10 AM, said:

Come on Bish ya know the deal here over sized phallic shaped weapons are not pc anymore.
Wouldn't want to offend anyone ya know, God forbid.
Ooopty sorry forgot the big G is offensive now.
Apparently nipples are still in vogue.
Just plain sad.

didn't the Supreme Court just make the big phallus OK for everyone?

[MeiSooHaityu]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 07:48 AM, said:

Russ did say he was looking at restoring those, sometime after this pass. And he also said just a few minutes ago, that he could look into havin gthe "improved" PPCs put on the AWS, etc. So, there is hope, perhaps.

I actually thought the Awesome came out looking ok after the pass.

Still though, I could see why people want the massive barrels for the Iconic Awesome. I want the larger barrels for the K2, so i can sympathize. Glad to hear it should revisited with the K2 later.

[reign]

mark v92, on 07 July 2015 - 08:09 AM, said:

its still only a 35 ton light mech. so the size of the mech itself wont be that big.
add some gauss quirks and it will ofset the larger hitbox

Probably would have to do some serious Hunchback (internal structure) like quirks on it to save it... cause if that gause rifle goes... So does that mech.

[Bishop Steiner]

DAYLEET, on 07 July 2015 - 08:13 AM, said:

So the AWS has an iconic shape when it uses ppcs? Well lets have that iconic shape with ppcs. But when you switch to lasers then switch the graphic too because i should be able to just tell what weapon you have on, it just make sense to me.

no one is saying DON'T have dynamic weapons geometry dude. Are saying do it right.

[Tombstoner]

reign, on 07 July 2015 - 08:06 AM, said:

In all honesty... that gun would soooo get blown off in MWO... it would be a bigger target than the Misery AC turret ... I mean I think it looks good .... But...

Once again this is why the game badly needs armor coefficients by location. you can tweak protection levels for any kind of art work. That arm is its 4x the size of other arms for the same weight class... guess what its gets a an armor level of 4x normal. The awesome is a walking barn door, shoot me here... 2.5x . That is how you balance. you build a gunnery range and model the hit frequencies.

[Foxfire kadrpg]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 July 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

And this is a tank contemporary to the M1A1:


Different profile, none the less effective when used in its given role.

I am not mocking your position, Bishop, but I, for one, like the dynamic geometry.

[Sarlic]

Quote

But at this point I think they need someone, Alex, anyone with an eye for the form, to be doing QA and overwatch on these things.

Good point. But i doubt any new player will have a look at the conceptart and notice that there's something wrong with it.

The only ones who are basically getting shafted is people who paid for the mech before the pass and who know the conceptart from the start and how it looked like in game before the final pass.

[Hit the Deck]

mark v92, on 07 July 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

cant wait for the hollander

Hollander is such a glorious 'Mech. Her sole purpose is just to carry that single *gun*! Too bad that many can carry the gun with ECM and/or JJs unlike it.

I still remember meeting the Hollander for the first time in Mech Commander. If your Commandos and Firestarters get shot by her, it could be the end of their career.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dawnstealer, on 07 July 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

This. Bishop? Ask Russ to put this in the game:

so,......somebody stole the hatchetman's hatchet...and strapped a meat cleaver to his forearm as a consolation prize?

Well, it fits the context of this thread, at least......

Foxfire kadrpg, on 07 July 2015 - 08:15 AM, said:

And this is a tank contemporary to the M1A1:


Different profile, none the less effective when used in its given role.

I am not mocking your position, Bishop, but I, for one, like the dynamic geometry.

Yess. And if the Abrams was packing a 20mm Bushmaster, that weapon size makes sense.

Not so much for a 120mm Rheinmetall. THAT is the point of dynamic weaponry.