New Graphics/Skins. Thoughts?

from Sins Forums

Hi all, apologies if there is already a post for this topic but i did not see one...

Just posting this to talk about the new graphics and the skins of the new units in Entrenchment, get peoples reactions.

The Good

-Some improved details, e.g. Gauss cannons look pretty cool now especially with their new upgrade.
-Fighter and Bomber squadrons look much better i think, their new style/skins are definitely an improvement i feel.

The Bad

-Starbases look rubbish i reckon, just big inanimate blobs. TEC one looks like some kind of pyramid/dreedle and the Vasari like a big spiky interstellar eggplant. Hope they look different in final release, i think starbases are a great idea but they need to look more alive and animated, and generally just cooler as well. At the moment they are pretty dull.
-The new Advent anti-building torpedo ship looks awful. It looks like a shiny starfish, hope this changes!
-Despite all the alleged graphical improvements in textures etc, Bailknights mod STILL looks absolutely tons better, battles look so much better. I look forward to the final release of entrenchment which can run his mod.
-Perhaps some better lighting dynamics? Like reflections and flashes from muzzle fire on ships hulls or from blast impacts etc? Some more in-depth evidence of ship damage (fires, sparks, leaks etc.) would be awesome as well.

What do you guys think?

4,145 views 14 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
I agree with you about better dynamic lighting would be great but the rest is just so subjective. I've always prefered the default effects over Bailknights because I want the battles to look more realistic, not a huge fire works show. When you look at the scale we are viewing things from Bailknights effects are rediculous in scale.
Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

I'm not sure I comlpetely agree. I like how the developers are going with it. Improvements here and there while not focusing on the graphics too much. I'd much rather see gameplay improvements right now.


I'm also more in agreement with Haree78. I think bailknight did a great job, but that style is not for me. It's really over the top, something you'd see in command and conquer. I'd prefer a more toned down realistic approach.

Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

That, and the Argonev looks awesome :( Heathen.

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

I'd actually prefer something in between BK and Dev graphics. A little more flashy, but not too much.

Probably just me, but I was expecting the starbases to be bigger than they are. Argonev is awesome, though.

Also, best description of the Vasari starbase yet.

 

:fox:

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

big spiky interstellar eggplant   I love it!

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Probably tastes just as crappy, too :P

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top

Hehe! Glad it amused =)

Dont get me wrong, i LOVE the gameplay and am very excited by the direction Entrenchment is going, and starbases are a lot of fun. However i created this thread purely to analyse the aesthetics and visuals, nothing else. In other words, be as shallow and greedy as hell!

Bailknights mod was a bit over the top (lets not even talk about the WLD mod then lol although i did like it) and i agree, i like the realistic toned down aspect as well. But i am also keen on excitement, and i see no reason we cant have blazing ballistics in dark-light space, smashing into structured ships which physically react realistically, blasting small chunks of metal off etc, crazy shiz like that! Sometimes it feels like im just watching dispassionate pixels invisibly collide with indifferent mesh hulls of static cap ships until someone dies/runs away.

Maybe i just had false expectations about the starbases like Kitkun...was hoping they would be a bit more grand, kind of "Thats not a starbase...THATS A SPACE STATION!"

I get the distinct feeling i may be asking too much here =(

Although i did read in another thread that starbases will visually adapt and correspond with the upgrades you buy for it. Now THATS what im talking about =) lets have a little bit of details baby!

Btw eggplants absolutely f*cking reek dont ever smell one. I imagine the taste is pretty bad to.

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

But i am also keen on excitement, and i see no reason we cant have blazing ballistics in dark-light space, smashing into structured ships which physically react realistically, blasting small chunks of metal off etc, crazy shiz like that! Sometimes it feels like im just watching dispassionate pixels invisibly collide with indifferent mesh hulls of static cap ships until someone dies/runs away.
End of quote

Well, most of that boils down to performance. They want it to run well on old machines, and there's a lot of compromising and optimising to make that work and still look good. Hell, fighters don't even have collision detection because of it :P

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top

before i even start, i'm going to appologize because i don't even have the beta.  

in 1.1 they changed the designs of the fighters for the worse i think.  the tec bomber is a b2 stealth bomber and the advent fighter is an sr-71, and i dont remember off the top of my head what the others were turned into.  Are they still that way in the beta or do have even newer original designs, not rip offs of current aircraft?

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Yeah youre quite right. Its true, obviously this game deserves to have greater potential audience by being accessible to all kinds of computers. I must say the game runs very efficiently considering everything that is going on during your average game!

Ive always admired the fighters ability to fly through planets...future technology really is astonishing!

Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top

I like the Argonev Design! Reminds me of the old series Cylon Basestars :cylon:

Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Well, most of that boils down to performance. They want it to run well on old machines, and there's a lot of compromising and optimising to make that work and still look good. Hell, fighters don't even have collision detection because of it
End of quote

I absolutely don't want it to run well on old machines or laptops AT THE COST of holding back high-end machines.

Thats what the graphics options are for, please scale it up properly not everyone has 2GB of RAM and a 8600 GO GPU, it runs great on old hardware well done lets deal with the other end of the spectrum.... Roll out the 20,000 poly models I say! :D

Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top

I dont mind the TEC SB.  It looks very...  TECish.  It could use a little more life (Maybe some drones flying around outside doing maintence/etc), but most of the game needs a little more of that.  The Vasari one is fugly.  It needs a reworking.  The Advent one is ok, but again its mostly lifeless.

I know the scale is very different, but I wish Sins had more life like Company of Heroes.  That game just looks amazing with the detail.  Its not that the models are better, but a tank actually acts like a tank.  Treads move, gunners look around, squadmembers interact with each other when idle and things look real.  I know sins is a space game, but it would still be nice to see shuttles flying between buildings or guns pivoting around, fighters flying actual patrols around their ship...  a lot of little things could be added to add life to the game.

Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top

Yeah thats the kind of thing im getting at, and would like to see. Considering the game seems to have come out of nowhere yet is keen to promote some in-depth lore, it cant hurt to get players more 'involved' in this story by adding some touches of humanity to make it a bit more immersive. The example of CoH by anti-commie is very appropriate, and i dont think it would hurt for the developers to include this kind of perspective...at the very worst, by adding these little touches of life it will feel like you actually have a living EMPIRE under your command. Hardly a bad thing since EMPIRE is in the game title and is fairly fundamental to the games genre.