Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Camael]

Girlfriend is a fashion-designer, and I am... uhm, a guy. At some point I had to tell her, really, the stuff You guys chose to wear does look horrible 80% of the time. She was like "I know. It's not about looking good, it's about looking fashionable." Same issue I sense here. Probably for a schooled eye, an artist or graphics designer this progress in style is all awesome and reductionist-mature and what not. To some un-artsy spacecowboy like meself the new eagle looks... uhm... like plastic. Old eagle... it's not so much about the sense of scale, more about the sense of material. It looks like it's a spaceship surface with features. Only high-end tech should be allowed to have organic forms and plastic-looks, as it says super-high-tech-titanium-polymer-xenophobium-alloy molded into shape by designers with too much time to really make it look smooth. Older ships... should look fixed up, older designs should look mainly functional - those are the designs that outlive their respective aeras. An older ship, in a brownish colour... with that surface... suggests yoghurt, not big space-war.

Sorry, but I sincerely dislike the new style and while I am willing to see it in action and change my mind, at first glance, this new style kills half of the greebly feel of the game.

[nomadic_leader]

The new Eagle is great. This is really moving SS art in the right direction.

It addresses one of the main issues with SS' sprites: a lot of time you can't tell what the ships are supposed to look like.  By simplifying the design, as you state, you draw attention to the composition and overall shape, so each ship's "personality" stands out more.

This helps to make the ships stand out more in gameplay, which is very important. Though greebliness can be good for occasional ships or factions, when every ship has them, they blur together.

I recommend the Enforcer get this treatment!

[Megas]

Eagle #1 and #3 have distinct styles.  Eagle #2 looks like either someone could not decide what style to use or it was unfinished, and it shows.  Eagle #1 is the classic Eagle-greeble design, which is sharp and well-defined.  #2 appears to be a transition from #1 to #3, but it is mostly #1 with few smooth areas and a lot of greebles blurred away.  #3 is mostly smooth (and I like it the best).

My only possible complaint about #3 is if the Eagle's weapon mounts remain the same, then those two new holes between the side small turrets and side medium hardpoints look like more mounts to stick weapons in, if there were lighter-than-light weapons in the game.  Bit of a tease if we have areas that look like weapons mounts but are not.

[Dratai]

I think I'd take a little issue with the shapes that the #3 eagle suggests, before anything on the new design. The oval-like shapes feel a little tacked on.
Meaning it still kinda looks greebly.
But removing the greebles is still nice- I think the issue with a lot of ship design is more visible between, say, the old star wars trilogy and the prequel trilogy.
A lot of the initial trilogy's ships had greebles and uneven surfaces and looked far too busy, with cannons for, say, the death star being boxes tacked ontop of an extremely greebly landscape- so they vanished into it.
On the other hand, the clone cruisers, specifically the carriers featured in the prequel trilogy.. are a lot more smooth, and they have contrast colours.
The turrets are generally in even spaces along the surface/top side. With the bridge/shield generator elevated. They're mostly white exceft for the hangar bay door which slides open being highlighted in red.
It's simple, it's just greebly enough to draw attention and it's mostly smooth and you see clearly when the hangar bays open.
So it's a step in the right direction but from your own words tacking on the little half-shapes kind of retains a greeblyness that I, personally, don't think should be there considering most of the ship is so angular/straightened vectors. Two of the forward guns on the newest eagle look a bit tacked on compared to previously- Like they've been glued into place on a model after it's been finished like some kind of afterthought.
On the other hand it's a lot easier to see what the ship is, what it does, what guns point where when mounted- so it's a good progression even if it might not suit everyone's taste. On the upside of this, the ship also now looks like a complete piece where the hull itself is concerned, the middle forward section no longer looks as out of place as it might have.

Other than that I have no complaints- this could be a very good thing especially for a few of the phase ships out there because some of the larger ones I find I have problems seeing the turrets on, for instance.
The apogee could possibly also use some streamlining. For a supposedly high-tech ship it looks somewhat greebly compared to the other ones.

Keep up the good work!

[SCC]

I think greebles should remain on multi-role ships, kinda like it was indicator of focus (the simpler the ship, the more specialised it is). That way they would have some role anyway, and besides, who knows for what purposes where those areas of ship used, or designed to be used - after all, maybe creators of ships thought it would be easier to just repurpose unused space on the ship than to go all the way back to the nearest shipyard to modify (or even buy a new ship!) the ship so as to have ship do something needed now, but unavailable earlier because nobody thought it would be needed. You would say that back when those ships were designed there was Domain of Man - but this sector is (almost) space frontier, isn't it? And on the space frontier one can find themself in a very dangerous situation... Or just find more treasure than the cargo can hold. Anyway, I think it's reasonable to left some areas of the ship unused just so they can be used by captains if they would need so - at least the civilian ships, because in military you are not supposed to mess with your ship anyway. And bigger ships should have more (if only by virtue by having it at all) than small ships (well... Frigates.) simply because bigger ship can have more roles without detriment of main ones (especially if those secondary aren't combat roles). So, greebles without specific purpose are good if they fill a general purpose... What.

On the newest Eagle - why did it change it colours? Go back to that white-ish something, I liked it better. D: On a more serious tone, for some reason that quite white (I don't even try to find it's name, too many colours are "just a little bit off") is somewhat unique and better than that rusty tone.
Also, turret bulbs. What? Couldn't they just make turrets aligned with armour? I mean, it isn't like in space is some kind of universal horizontal plane, right? I know it's because of game's 2D, but it makes them jarringly outstanding - the rest of core ships is sleek and stuff, and suddenly, BULBS. Though I must admit that middle front light mount looks neat with its small cosy hole. And that I'm a bit overacting, design-wise (not in-universe-wise), since light mounts don't jar me as much as left and right medium mounts. Central medium mount looks more like a part of design (though it's a little bulby too. Maybe make it look like it's on top of that triangular armour part?).

[Clockwork Owl]

I try to think what does it do when I do the greebling... That does work, but at a cost of mental burden.

[TheHengeProphet]

Really, turret bulbs make a lot of sense.  A turret in a divot would not have as much an angle for use as a turret on a bulb.  While more obvious, a 180+ degree operational range is better than a 180- degree operational range.  You want to be able to focus as much fire on a location as possible.

I'm... okay with the new colour.  It brings it closer in line with the supposedly mid-line Mule; however, I would have preferred the Mule been brought to the average than the inverse.  I do find, however, the new Eagle looks more like a beefy destroyer than an actual cruiser, now, as it's lack of greeble has almost cost its sense of scale.  I very much understand the need to smoothe out the textures for the purpose of easily "re-branding" ships, I fear it may cost the Starsector universe its "used" feel.  Even the Enterprise D and Voyager, from Star Trek had more greeble than the new Eagle.

Now that I have posited my two cents, I would like to thank David for all of the graphical work he has done thus far, and I greatly appreciate the level of thought he obviously continues to put into this venture!

[Gothars]

I very much understand the need to smoothe out the textures for the purpose of easily "re-branding" ships, I fear it may cost the Starsector universe its "used" feel. 

Just look at the Eagle-d from the blogpost, you get all the greebles when the ship is actually "used".

[TheHengeProphet]

I very much understand the need to smoothe out the textures for the purpose of easily "re-branding" ships, I fear it may cost the Starsector universe its "used" feel. 

Just look at the Eagle-d from the blogpost, you get all the greebles when the ship is actually "used".

I would say that goes past "used" and is in the realm of Distraught.

However, with the new texture, it could be easily be painted blue to look like a Tri-Tach ship.

[angrytigerp]

I think greebles have their place, and while coating the ship art with them is dangerous, so too is stripping away.

Even as I type this, I'm looking out on ships on the waterfront here (US Sailor, for reference), and I have to echo the sense of older designs should = more greebles. I'm aboard a new-school LPD (on my phone so I can't link a picture, just Google "San Antonio-class") and its newness is obvious -- it's a very curvy design, we've got the enclosed mast, everything looks more modernized. Then look at the old LPD style (I wanna say Houston class?) It's cluttered with cranes, boats, an exposed mast covered with electronics, etc. Ditto for upcoming new destroyer class (Zumwalt) vice the current design (Arleigh Burke) -- a similar disparity between sleek, futuristic design with minimum exposure of gear, and a mast coated in antennas and random radomes and antennas sticking out all over.

Obviously, I'm not trying to say necessarily that you should basically design stuff with older = greeble-ier, but it does indicate the older, less advanced designs and technologies that went into constructing it.

Just my deux centimes.

[celestis]

I liked the curvy fragments around med slots on the new Eagle, but the color is wrong and I think you removed too much greeble. I like the 2nd variant much more than 3rd (except round parts, as I've already said).

[Nanao-kun]

I thought the Eagle was smoothed so that it could serve as a base for the ship skins that we would actually be using?

[Megas]

However, with the new texture, it could be easily be painted blue to look like a Tri-Tach ship.

Agreed.  Same with the Heron, too.  Actually, because Heron has no ballistic-only mounts, if Heron was colored blue and its CR deployment raised, it can easily appear as a high-tech or Tri-Tachyon ship.  Eagle, if its medium hardpoints changed to energy, and its flux stats boosted (and special changed to Phase Skimmer), it could be high-tech too, and I prefer to use an energy-spec Eagle over an Aurora.  (Aurora is only good as a missile boat.)

[Madao]

Personally, I like greebles, it's an aesthetic that really speaks to me.

But my own preferences aside I have always loved the aesthetics of Starfarer Starsector and the fact remains that it is still my number one most enjoyed game. I check the page for updates everyday without fail. As far as the art style goes, I agree that sometimes you need to change things around for technical reasons, as you said reducing greebles helps to sharpen and define ship damage and so on.. But there is nothing integrally wrong with the aesthetic itself. It always spoke to me of overuse and disrepair, of grungy post apocalyptic civilisation in recovery. It felt very real to me.

Picasso might have decided that his art style was wrong and could have written a book justifying how by switching to a cleaner modern portrait style he could better define to the viewer what he wanted to express.. But it wouldn't change the fact that it wouldn't be Picasso anymore. People don't love it because it is efficient, they love it for what it is. There is no right and wrong to aesthetics, just what you and others like. You have to choose who you want to appeal to I guess and go from there.

Back to my own preferences I feel the new eagle has gone too far to one side now, a too clean hyundai-esque plastic thing going on.. But the new shading also adds alot more depth the ship and armour.. I like the previous one, but I can settle for this one too. I would love the new one with just a little bit more greebles added back in for good measure 

The most important thing I want to express is that all that aside Alex can do no wrong by me, please just keep doing your thing! I'm anxious too see the latest development one way or another ^^

[Aereto]

There is much to think about the greebles in the ships. The important part is that the greebles have purpose to indicate the ship's technology of the time appropriate to lore and ship designer. Having too-little or too much compared to the ships of the same line/theme can make certain viewers feel off about the design, sticking as the odd one out.

Hegemony ships, as far as I looked into the design, used ships whose core design was built before shielding came into being. That makes importance of redundant systems, ablative armor, and robust parts to survive engagements.

In regards to the Eagle, the second iteration is the preferred, as, lighting/angle wise, the first iteration does happen to make the ship appearing having large, raised components that appear taller, with gaps for good measure. The third iteration makes it an Eagle-class variant, belonging to another ship designer who was tasked in redesigning the hull and systems, but I could not pinpoint if that was for reduced or improved functions in the later portion of the era.