Maybe I'm just being picky but I have the strange feeling there's to much attention to detail on the overall mass of the ships structural sections, of course at the moment it's hard to tell when there's not a lot of 3d rendering of light and shadow... or perhaps it's simply the dull grey scale colour that robs the ship of it's might and luster
Yes, please clarify. I understand the words, but not the meaning of the post, haha :)
In regards to detail, I like to make sure an asset(in this case a complete cruiser) looks good enough when it fills the screen, even though a player would usually spend more time zoomed out. With a free 3d camera and free 3d navigation it's not as simple to determine what level of detail is enough as in a fixed camera top view game. Since the player can zoom in a lot, I take care that things look ok close up.
Okay if you want me to be more specific then, the texturing, looks to detailed with to much brightly lit areas of what I assume are lights or general markings, giving the illusion that the cruiser is a delicate ship rather than a sturdy ship designed for war, essentially where I'm coming from is the ship looks to fragile and it wouldn't withstand more than a couple of shots to the hull without exploding... Where as a cruiser class ship is designed for war, usually is more robust looking with solid amour plates covering most of the exterior of the ship and very few if not none at all weak spots shown on the outer hull.
A cruiser doesn't have to be designed for war in DSS. It depends on what parts you use. If you think these ships are too fragile looking than consider that this is essentially the first and smallest of the capital ships, aside from the colony ship. In any case, I'd suggest you reserve your judgement until I'm finished with cruiser assets. I'm lokoing forward to your input then. Appreciate the comment!
Very nice work!
Thank you, glad you like it!
Maybe I'm just being picky but I have the strange feeling there's to much attention to detail on the overall mass of the ships structural sections, of course at the moment it's hard to tell when there's not a lot of 3d rendering of light and shadow... or perhaps it's simply the dull grey scale colour that robs the ship of it's might and luster
You might want to clarify, because though it is clear you don't like the grey coloring, the rest of your post is vague.
Thanks :)
Yes, please clarify. I understand the words, but not the meaning of the post, haha :)
In regards to detail, I like to make sure an asset(in this case a complete cruiser) looks good enough when it fills the screen, even though a player would usually spend more time zoomed out. With a free 3d camera and free 3d navigation it's not as simple to determine what level of detail is enough as in a fixed camera top view game. Since the player can zoom in a lot, I take care that things look ok close up.
Okay if you want me to be more specific then, the texturing, looks to detailed with to much brightly lit areas of what I assume are lights or general markings, giving the illusion that the cruiser is a delicate ship rather than a sturdy ship designed for war, essentially where I'm coming from is the ship looks to fragile and it wouldn't withstand more than a couple of shots to the hull without exploding... Where as a cruiser class ship is designed for war, usually is more robust looking with solid amour plates covering most of the exterior of the ship and very few if not none at all weak spots shown on the outer hull.
A cruiser doesn't have to be designed for war in DSS. It depends on what parts you use. If you think these ships are too fragile looking than consider that this is essentially the first and smallest of the capital ships, aside from the colony ship. In any case, I'd suggest you reserve your judgement until I'm finished with cruiser assets. I'm lokoing forward to your input then. Appreciate the comment!