These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: The Dominix, Work In Progress And A New Art Director

First post
Author
Estella Osoka
Perkone
Caldari State
#81 - 2015-06-19 18:56:49 UTC
Do not like the new Thrasher design. Current design is still one of the best looking ships out there.
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
#82 - 2015-06-19 18:58:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Manssell
CCP Jorg wrote:


We knew the Thrasher would be controversial - its a really fresh and different design.



We're glad to see the early sketches, don't get us wrong they are really neat!

But please, please don't get caught up in that terrible corporate mindset that just because something is "fresh and different" that makes it inherently good or something that must be pursued.
Circumstantial Evidence
#83 - 2015-06-19 19:00:32 UTC
The Stiletto WIP goes too far, for my taste. I would like to see more of an evolution of the current design. The flat, straight wings, and the top center piece that the wings flow out from, with its flat shallow angles, suggests Caldari influence to me. Please put some angle back into the wings, and, they should be solar panels. The WIP is flat-shaded, so maybe they were going to be, idk.

I think the Probe WIP looks more substantial than it should. The Probe and variants are light-duty exploration ships. The top solar sail is replaced by a solid, heavy, almost-pyramidal tower structure. Please make this structure thinner. Likewise, the center-forward cockpit extension is short, stubby, and has a thick neck in this WIP. It seems to be borrowed from the Tempest, which is kind of a neat idea, unifying some Minmatar design cues. But these two parts being this tough looking, loses some of the "I need to be careful with this ship" delicacy, of the current Probe.
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#84 - 2015-06-19 19:02:43 UTC
Manssell wrote:
CCP Jorg wrote:


We knew the Thrasher would be controversial - its a really fresh and different design.



We're glad to see the early sketches, don't get us wrong they are really neat!

But please, please don't get caught up in that terrible corporate mindset that just because something is "fresh and different" that makes it inherently good or something that must be pursued.


This goes for everything else CCP is doing, not just ship art. For real.
Cleanse Serce
La Forge.
Toilet Paper.
#85 - 2015-06-19 19:10:38 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
with its flat shallow angles, suggests Caldari influence to me.


I love new design, but i think that he points out something true in some ways.
I've always thought those long straight lines were a Caldari thing.
May be you're planning to animate wings in warp ?
I would suggest to do the other way around, leave the wings open with angles in non-in-warp state, and put them together in a straight line with no angles when it goes in warp !
Faelune
Tous Pour Un
#86 - 2015-06-19 19:10:53 UTC
I don't need to exchange my actual stock of Thrasher against a pile of coal boiler from 19th century branded Thrasher.

Dump that and forget forever
Niobe Song
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2015-06-19 19:13:38 UTC
Old Thrasher has a classic look that should not be changed. That is a pretty cool design though so I propose that instead of the Thrasher you use that model for the Rupture. It would be a perfect change!
Alexis Nightwish
#88 - 2015-06-19 19:28:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexis Nightwish
Thrasher looks like a Caldari ship. Adding solar panels or w/e doesn't change that.

Stiletto doesn't look like an interceptor. Should be much more streamlined. This looks like an exploration ship, closer to the Probe or Zephyr.

The others look good, especially the Cerberus.




EDIT: Oh **** Huskalr is leaving!? Cry

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers

Alstevar Eastern
Caldari State
#89 - 2015-06-19 19:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Alstevar Eastern
The Dominix

Perfect make it so.

The Stilletto

The wings are a bit too large for a Minmatar i think, the rest is good.

The Probe

Good but i don't understand the center up part.

The Thrasher

I dislike the current choice but if you don't change what you have in mind, add a second large propulsion at the back please.

Redesign thumbnail exploration : I and J concepts are interesting.

Redesign WIP : without the top, it's just ugly.

Redesign variation exploration if you don't change your idea :

  • B : ok for the Thrasher
  • D : ok for the Saber
  • F : is interesting
  • A,C,E : bad

Please don't try to match it with the Talwar who look like an Earth tank.

Your effective personal standings need to be higher to see the player's signature.

Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#90 - 2015-06-19 19:36:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
A bit of constructive feedback here.

In this picture have you considered removing the top portion and just using the bottom hull section as the entire ship. It would look more sleek and less bulky whilst still maintaining the aggressive look you are possibly trying to achieve. The top part looks like a mini thrasher stuck on top of a larger ship and doesn't add much to the design.

Also a bit off topic, but is there any chance you can alter the Svipul so that when it is in sharpshooter and defensive mode it also has a small thruster on the bottom. At the moment it looks wrong as that propulsion setup would cause the ship to spin rather than go forward in a straight line.
Kaster
Siege Blades
#91 - 2015-06-19 19:40:34 UTC
I love the redesigns for all the ships you have been doing. they seem more in line with the ships introduced later in the game.

I see a lot of "Iconic" this "loved" that, however from a person that has been flying in EVE since 2004 i can recall a lot of discussion in the game as to the asymmetric look of most of the ships and how many of the ships looked like junk back during those times. IIRC someone in the art department said that most ships were like that because of limitations at the time they were originally made, but that they always wanted to redo all the ships in the game.

Now this is a case of, like another player posted, "neo-phobia" if all the ships looked like the redesigns they show here from day one, and they started to change them into what they look like now you would all be crying bloody murder as well. I am still waiting for the day of the badass Thorax redesign (pls Big smile)
Baljos Arnjak
Dark Praetorian Order
#92 - 2015-06-19 19:46:37 UTC
I like the new Domi!

The concepts for the Minmatar ships though are a different story. I have a soft spot for Minmatar because they are and will always be my first main's main ship type. The Stiletto is too flat and wings too square, the Probe looks exactly like the Reaper, and every one of the Thrasher concepts are just bad. I always liked that the Thrasher looked like a pocket version of the Cyclone, don't change this!
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#93 - 2015-06-19 19:52:15 UTC
Quote:
We knew the Thrasher would be controversial - its a really fresh and different design.


It's not that the proposed redesign is a bad model - I certainly wouldn't suggest putting it in the circular file. But it is not as good the current Thrasher model*. I don't mean that as a knock against the artist or artists who designed it. Keep it for another ship. Either another Minmatar destroyer, if one comes out, or use it as an update for a cruiser instead (Rupture, Scythe, or Bellicose are all options).

*The current Thrasher model could stand some touch ups, but the underlying design is one of the best in the game. It looks dangerous, and it looks minimalist and no-frills without looking jury-rigged. Plus, it's arguably only slightly less iconic than the Rifter.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#94 - 2015-06-19 20:17:16 UTC
I'd vote for Trasher redesign versions D, E and J. Cool

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2015-06-19 20:18:30 UTC
CCP Jorg wrote:
Hello everyone and thanx for your thoughts and input.

We knew the Thrasher would be controversial - its a really fresh and different design.

Keep in mind these are all still WIP and that´s perhaps a key point to take from this dev blog.
We are showing you designs at a pretty early stage and looking for feedback.

Also, we thought giving everyone a little inside into our workflow, seeing early sketches etc would be fun to do.

Perhaps it has been mentioned before and I missed it, but here goes:

What is the art teams thoughts on redesigns and allowing classic hulls to stay in the form of skins? Sure we have paint jobs, but there is an obvious desire for classic looks as well as new. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I admit I don't know much about the workload in maintaining multiple hull versions of the same ship. Especially when you consider we are talking hundreds in the EVE universe.

Your thoughts?
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Goonswarm Federation
#96 - 2015-06-19 21:12:19 UTC
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2015-06-19 21:22:42 UTC
Welcome, CCP Jörg. Cool

People sure do get attached to their favorites, don't they? I like the new Thrasher possibilities, but I fly them only rarely. I'd possibly be quite upset if it was one of my favorites getting such a comprehensive overhaul.

If the server database and client installs could handle it, I think it'd be a worthwhile addition to the EVE universe to have ship versions. So the new Thrasher - it'd be the "Thrasher YC117". Those who like their "Thrasher YC116" versions would still be able to fly them - but wouldn't be able to purchase or manufacture any new ones. Upon announcement of the YC117 version, market PvPers would have additional content opportunities. And after release, owners of the older version would have sandbox opportunities of either flying and losing their vintage ships, or hoarding them as collectors, or holding them as investments for later sale.

Do this for both graphic model changes and stat changes.

Can you imagine the market there'd be right now for non-nerfed Ishtars if they were still around? They wouldn't be OP since they'd be subject to destruction if used during combat, and market conditions would make their value very high for those who could afford to use them. Given enough time, and there'd be only a single Ishtar YC116 left in the whole game...

Possible concerns...
Rampant growth of the shared cache size for the clients.
The market browser could get cluttered, but a simple settings toggle of "Show only current model ships" would eliminate display vintage ships.
While assembled and package ships would be untouched by new ship versions, BPOs and BPCs of such ships would still have to be changed over, in order to prevent the older versions from being constructed.
Solhild
Doomheim
#98 - 2015-06-19 21:27:16 UTC
Domi, fantastic, get on with it.

Stilletto, brilliant - prioritise that!

Probe, much better. Personally prefer more symmetry but that looks relatively balanced asymmetry which is an art form in itself - unlike the awful reaper.

Thrasher concepts, E, I, K are excellent. Suggested design is really great, maybe you should look again at the talwar?

Thrasher variations, B is the winner, probably should use this for the base thrasher model as it look old school. Use EIK variations to develop the Sabre variant, or use the model you've posted??

Love the new direction for Minmatar ships. Can't wait to see what you do with the Rupture.


Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#99 - 2015-06-19 21:38:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Hal Morsh
The dominix still looks like a giant turd. I LOVE IT!!!!!



The only way I will accept the thrasher design is if
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67315/1/06_THRASHER.jpg
becomes the thrasher and
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67315/1/07_THRASHER.jpg
becomes the T2 interdiction launcher because it looks too Caldari to be a base ship for the Minmatar.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?

Sven Viko VIkolander
Allemannsrett
#100 - 2015-06-19 21:46:39 UTC
Hey Art team, I want you folks to know that you have been doing amazing work over the past year, far more productive than any other team it seems. You are the MVPs of the past year, and the game is 100x more beautiful than ever thanks to you! I hope you manage to keep it up for the next year!

On the designs, the dominix is nice but tbh would be hard to make worse than it currently is. The new stilleto and probe concepts are 100% awesome, but the thrasher does feel a little too different. The thrasher is one of the most iconic destroyers, but the new concept art does not seem to preserve the "look" of the thrasher to me. I think there might just be too many "nubs" on all of the thrasher concepts that make it a bit too much of a visual overload.