33 replies to this topic

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Akaryu, on 26 September 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

lol i suspect assault pilots wont think its as cute.

They will if the Flea's skinned as a FIFA game ball!

[tyrone dunkirk]

Omigir better get really comfy with this 'mech. According to Paul, it's going to be his only friend for a VERY long while
Honestly every flea has looked different, just look at the original ( read: crappy ) TRO art for the flea, and then the MW4 one compared to this one. It looks cool, and it'll more than likely perform well, too.

[Taxtripelsix]

Alex Wolfe, on 26 September 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

The redesigns simply look like modernized Jagermech/Flea to me, recognizable as such at first glance.

I do not ever wish to pilot something like the flea , but I think you did a grea Job, very nice design and it looks like a very smal Mech in the BT/MW universe should look like.

For the Jagermech, come on Guys , ones you figure out how a System should look like of course it looks claose to the system before. A anti aircraft tank with guns will allways look like a anti aircraft tank as long as you got the same Weapon configuration.

A Battle Tank looks like a Battle Tank ....the Basic design does not get to so much development . Look at a Main Battle Tank from 1945 an a brand new Challenger, Abrahams M1, Leopard A6. Yes of course they are better then the old ones but there ist still to Tracks a Turret a Main Gun and some smaler auxillery Guns........

So the Jagermech ist the Evolution of the Rifleman....thats ist.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Taxtripelsix, on 26 September 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

So the Jagermech ist the Evolution of the Rifleman....thats ist.

That's honestly how I've always seen the Jager', personally. That is what it was designed to be. That said, I think there's quite a bit of GOOD artistic license that's been taken for the Jager' in it's transition from TRO to MWO, and I think the MWO Jager' is closer in appearance to a Rifleman than the TRO Jager' was.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 26 September 2012 - 05:31 PM.

[Alex Wolfe]

Taxtripelsix, on 26 September 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

I do not ever wish to pilot something like the flea , but I think you did a grea Job, very nice design and it looks like a very smal Mech in the BT/MW universe should look like.

It's not me doing any job . The redesign is by Alex Iglesias, looking to be at least somewhat inspired by an earlier redesign, by David White (linked on the first page) rather than the TRO form of the mech (which looked like an antennae'd box on legs).

[DirePhoenix]

Prosperity Park, on 26 September 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

I think this might be a hint, but I cannot say anything like that for sure. It certainly does look like the JagerMech was drawn while a picture of the JagerMech and a picture of the Rifleman sat side-by-side on FD's desktop... and the MW:O Flea made me think "OMG LOCU-Oh wait, it's a FLEA! Still, really cool!"

Now all I need is a couple Machineguns and some moxy, and I can go make a name for myself.

Anyways... seeing that the MW:O version of these Mechs have so much Unseen in them, do you think we're going to have bona fide Unseen Mechs in MW:O, or just hybrid replicas like the [awesomely redesigned] JagerMech and Flea?

The Flea is the same tonnage and looks like it will probably have the hardpoints to generally mount the same loadout as the standard Locust (especially if they make one of the variants the "standard" Flea instead of the FLE-15 in the 3050 TRO which is *supposed* to be exclusive to the Wolf's Dragoons for at least another year).

Still, I can't help but look at this MWO Flea and think, "That's a Locust."

So my question is this: Why would they make 'mechs that look like they could easily be stand-ins for the Unseen, but don't have the names of the Unseen? Last I checked, there was no issue with using the names or the stats of those 'mechs, it was just the original art that was in contention (a very loose contention I might add).

Second question: Would anyone have been upset if they had used the art they're using for this Flea and called it the Locust? This is what I meant when I said before on this forum (repeatedly) that PGI can and should make their own art for the Unseen. They are clearly capable of making outstanding versions of the original 'mechs. The Unseen play such a key role in filling out the lineup of 'mechs throughout most of the history of BattleTech. They need to be seen again. They can't be kept swept under the rug like they have been for the past 20 years. The original art is in contention? Too risky to try and use it again? FINE. MAKE NEW ART. BETTER ART. GET THESE MECHS BACK IN THE GAME.

Look, we're getting the Cataphract in the game. Anyone who's seen any prior art for that thing can take one look at it and tell half the parts on the damn thing came straight off a Marauder. There is no issue with the version of the Cataphract we're getting in the game. Here's a simple chop-job I did using MWO art and built my own version of a Marauder out of Cataphract and Catapult parts:



Now there we go: Art for the Marauder that is NOT based on the original Macross art, but based on pre-existing MWO art. If I can come up with this, imagine what the MWO artists can do themselves?

Edited by DirePhoenix, 27 September 2012 - 11:22 PM.

[Scytale]

DirePhoenix, on 27 September 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

The Flea is the same tonnage and looks like it will probably have the hardpoints to generally mount the same loadout as the standard Locust (especially if they make one of the variants the "standard" Flea instead of the FLE-15 in the 3050 TRO which is *supposed* to be exclusive to the Wolf's Dragoons for at least another year).

Still, I can't help but look at this MWO Flea and think, "That's a Locust."

So my question is this: Why would they make 'mechs that look like they could easily be stand-ins for the Unseen, but don't have the names of the Unseen? Last I checked, there was no issue with using the names or the stats of those 'mechs, it was just the original art that was in contention (a very loose contention I might add).

Second question: Would anyone have been upset if they had used the art they're using for this Flea and called it the Locust? This is what I meant when I said before on this forum (repeatedly) that PGI can and should make their own art for the Unseen. They are clearly capable of making outstanding versions of the original 'mechs. The Unseen play such a key role in filling out the lineup of 'mechs throughout most of the history of BattleTech. They need to be seen again. They can't be kept swept under the rug like they have been for the past 20 years. The original art is in contention? Too risky to try and use it again? FINE. MAKE NEW ART. BETTER ART. GET THESE MECHS BACK IN THE GAME.

Look, we're getting the Cataphract in the game. Anyone who's seen any prior art for that thing can take one look at it and tell half the parts on the damn thing came straight off a Marauder. There is no issue with the version of the Cataphract we're getting in the game. Here's a simple chop-job I did using MWO art and built my own version of a Marauder out of Cataphract and Catapult parts:



Now there we go: Art for the Marauder that is NOT based on the original Macross art, but based on pre-existing MWO art. If I can come up with this, imagine what the MWO artists can do themselves?

Well, they obviously can't make the marauder because the example you show seems to be simultaneously part of the Waco Rangers and Liao. How do you explain that, huh??

Just kidding. You make a very good point. I really, really wouldn't mind seeing what they could do with a Warhammer... but that goes without saying =P

[Blackfire1]

Most people don't know the laws of art because... well they simply never asked.

Most states go by the silhouette rule. Where if an untrained eye has trouble telling the art apart then its too close to the origonal.

FB's work is SOOOO out there in terms of mechanics, structure, frameing, accesories and such. Anything he does will never look like the origonal.

If you were you put up FB's work and the original. People would say they look "Simular." Legally SImular =/= the same. Even if all the parts are in the right places and such. An FB marauder would not look like the Macross battle suit. Because of the design is 100% different.


SO yes. They could very well remake the unseen mechs, leave them in roughtly the same shape, but change everything an be 100% fine.

Edited by Blackfire1, 28 September 2012 - 12:39 AM.

[Alex Wolfe]

Blackfire1, on 28 September 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:

Most people don't know the laws of art because... well they simply never asked.

Most states go by the silhouette rule. Where if an untrained eye has trouble telling the art apart then its too close to the origonal.

FB's work is SOOOO out there in terms of mechanics, structure, frameing, accesories and such. Anything he does will never look like the origonal.

If you were you put up FB's work and the original. People would say they look "Simular." Legally SImular =/= the same. Even if all the parts are in the right places and such. An FB marauder would not look like the Macross battle suit. Because of the design is 100% different.

SO yes. They could very well remake the unseen mechs, leave them in roughtly the same shape, but change everything an be 100% fine.

?

Isn't the issue at this point that HG spontaneously bursts into lawyers at mere mention of unseen names, regardless of how said unseen would look?

Out of "total redesigns", I really like shortpainter's take on MAD:

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 28 September 2012 - 12:50 AM.

[Blackfire1]

In the art world that doesn't matter. HG DOES NOT own battletech names to the unseen. They own the us right to the ORIGONAL design's made by the Tatsunoko Production Co. who did all the unseen artwork before HG got the rights.

PGI, Smith & tinker, M$ can make anything with those Battletech names. Because of how Fb builds his stuff. Even if he put things in the same arrangement it would NOT in any way be the origonal art work or design.

I've seen all the work done by these folks. They would all be 100% fine in a court of law.

You technically can just repaint and change the dimensions of parts of the origonal artwork and legally its 100% different. Thats what artistic licence is for. It allows people to change or build on others work and make it there own.

You can't copy right design ideas in term os generic principles. period. They won't let it. Back wards legs, guns on the side, and a cannon on top are not the issue. The problems have been they all used the near exact origonal artwork design.

Perfect example is Apple's patent of a "rectangle design with rounded corners." This goes to the supreme court soon, and no it won't hold. You can't copyright shapes. Only ideas. And technically barely that. Trademark is different however.

HG freaked because the buisness trailer PGI made to get funding used the Warhammer nearly exactingly to the original design.

You don't have to change alot to get away with things.

Edited by Blackfire1, 28 September 2012 - 01:12 AM.

[Alex Wolfe]

Blackfire1, on 28 September 2012 - 01:00 AM, said:

In the art world that doesn't matter. HG DOES NOT own battletech names to the unseen. They own the us right to the ORIGONAL design's made by the Tatsunoko Production Co. who did all the unseen artwork before HG got the rights.

PGI, Smith & tinker, M$ can make anything with those Battletech names. Because of how Fb builds his stuff. Even if he put things in the same arrangement it would NOT in any way be the origonal art work or design.

I've seen all the work done by these folks. They would all be 100% fine in a court of law.

You technically can just repaint and change the dimensions of parts of the origonal artwork and legally its 100% different. Thats what artistic licence is for. It allows people to change or build on others work and make it there own.

You can't copy right design ideas in term os generic principles. period. They won't let it. Back wards legs, guns on the side, and a cannon on top are not the issue. The problems have been they all used the near exact origonal artwork design.

HG freaked because the buisness trailer PGI made to get funding used the Warhammer nearly exactingly to the original design.

You don't have to change alot to get away with things.

Interesting. Although lawyers are expensive - couldn't HG simply bleed PGI out on legal fees, regardless of the jury's decision?

Still, if things are as you say (I wouldn't know, I do languages not law), it gives some hope for unseen some day, if MWO manages to net a big profit (fingers crossed)...

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 28 September 2012 - 01:10 AM.

[DirePhoenix]

Alex Wolfe, on 28 September 2012 - 12:46 AM, said:

?

Isn't the issue at this point that HG spontaneously bursts into lawyers at mere mention of unseen names, regardless of how said unseen would look?

Out of "total redesigns", I really like shortpainter's take on MAD:

I'm of the opinion that HG isn't in the kind of financial shape any more to afford the lawyers they'd need to bring this to court again, especially if we're not even using the same art again.

The Shortpainter Marauder presents some very interesting ideas, but the style looks too much like something that belongs in Hawken for my liking. Legs are a bit too spindly (which is also one of my major issues with the ReSeen Marauder... it's a 75t 'mech, it needs thick, powerful legs, not stick stilts) and all the little doodads hanging off of it make it look like it belongs in an anime cartoon as much as the original art (although to be fair, it's good anime like Ghost in the Shell stuff, not cheesy stuff like Mazinger Z or something)

[Alex Wolfe]

DirePhoenix, on 28 September 2012 - 01:37 AM, said:

I'm of the opinion that HG isn't in the kind of financial shape any more to afford the lawyers they'd need to bring this to court again, especially if we're not even using the same art again.

The Shortpainter Marauder presents some very interesting ideas, but the style looks too much like something that belongs in Hawken for my liking. Legs are a bit too spindly (which is also one of my major issues with the ReSeen Marauder... it's a 75t 'mech, it needs thick, powerful legs, not stick stilts) and all the little doodads hanging off of it make it look like it belongs in an anime cartoon as much as the original art (although to be fair, it's good anime like Ghost in the Shell stuff, not cheesy stuff like Mazinger Z or something)

Well, seeing as the original Marauder is mostly legs (mosty shins, to be precise - which is my biggest gripe with it, besides "halp I haz chronic back pain" posture), I guess the "truth is in the middle" somewhere , I really like FD's redesign with the better proportioned... well, everything.

Still, I dig shortpainter's take on those (especially the Locust and those lesser used unseen like Eggmechs), sure it's a bit plain but could always be fleshed out. And I'm loving the doodads - they make it look like a functional machine to me. FD does them too for each of his redesigns, check the ladderface on his Flea, or those... things... under each of his mechs' "torso", for example!

Still - it's art, everyone likes it or not.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 28 September 2012 - 02:51 AM.

[Scytale]

Quote

Well, seeing as the original Marauder is mostly legs (mosty shins, to be precise - which is my biggest gripe with it, besides "halp I haz chronic back pain" posture

I laughed at this. Pretty much made my morning~

Edited by Scytale, 28 September 2012 - 02:43 PM.