Why do the TEC look so bad graphically - pixel wise

I imagine it's because they were designed first; the Advent who look sleek and wonderful in both in universe and graphics terms were designed last for instance.
The Kol looks properly detailed while being clunky and worn as it should be, because it too was designed later, replacing an earlier design.

Will they update the others? I hope so. I agree that the Marza in particlar is a horrible monstrosity. I purposefully do not build those ghastly things when playing TEC because they look like something a 5 year old built out of lego blocks.

I like the Sova's naval style.

I absolutely hate the little twigs that stick out of the Akkan, that are suppose to be "weapons" . Its like the work of a second rate modder.

The TEC sent their engineers to Caldari State War Academy  :LOL: and came back with minmatar blueprints.

SINS reminds me very much of FreeSpace 2 -sans campaign.

The marza though looks like they cut the pixels down due to the fact it was bigger and used more pixels than the other ships.
I have just played the mod 7 deadly sins and can confirm it makes the marza look awesome

I'm sorry but I must say - can we stop saying pixels here? I believe the right word is "poly."

But, I agree.

I find the textures to be rather low in resolution for the TEC as well.

- PR-0927

sorry but I am old school when it comes to those terms
whether a model is mad from pixels in 2d or polygons in 3d matters not to me.

Yes I agree, there are some ships in the game that look pretty bad graphically. There was some ship I was up against (and this was only the tutorial) that looked like something that my 6 year old had drawn on the fridgerator) that looked like a tank in outer space, it looked out of place.

Then there is that huge rusty capital ship, with all that rust Im suprised that the enemy doesn't just fly up to it and poke it with a finger to make it implode, I've seen cars on Planet Earth that have more holes and less rust than that capital ship.

To be honest I was expecting some really great graphically represented ships in this title and so far I've not seen them. Granted I've not played much yet.

I would hope that there is a way for the users to mod the ship files themselves if the developers aren't going to do it, so that they can be made to look nice (graphically speaking).

I agree, The Kodiak looks pretty silly, a dodgem car in space it is. However spacecraft are still largely imaginary atm. We don't really know what they will look like if we ever get lightspeed travel.

The rust on the TEC you will have to show me though. Rust in space is an interesting concept.

The Advent and Vasari do look much better. Hoever I do like the look of all the TEC caps excepting the marza. The Kol is probably the most awesome looking cap in the game, I love the detail in the AKKAN... the sun-chamber, the dunov reminds me of the Aliens marine cap ship...Sulaco
Granted they are converted merchantmen, and I can understand the devs need to make them instantly recognisable. However I just cannot seem to like them. More homeworld looking ships would have been better.

The TEC ships I do think look silly are

Cobalt Light frigate - it just looks wrong for some reason
Javelis missle frigate -
percheron carrier
garda - the flack guns just look silly
robotics cruiser
kodiak - A massive bus in space

Graphically though its mainly the Marza that looked out of place

The only ones I'd like to see something different for is the Cobalt, Garda, and Javelis. I prefer the lengthened mesh of the Marza that I'm using.

 

That has nothing to do with "old school." Pixels are what "make up" the resolution of a screen, if you will (very generalized statement, I know), and polygons are the "faces" of the 3D model (in real life or virtual).

- PR-0927

What i miss on most TEC ships is the Bab5 Earthforce'esque turret philosophy.

The Kol reminded my in most parts of the Omega Class Destroyers (awesome thingys) because it just looked like something humans would actualy build.
The Marzas overall design, while being crude and somewhat ugly in terms of polygon usage, is again something humans would build. A giant anti planet Massdriver with a ship slapped onto it.
Up the model details and textures and off you go, awsome ship.


What i realy hate:
Cobalts. They look like some kind of screwed rectal treatment device.

Kodiaks: Turrets, please?




I mean human ships without turrets look kinda unmhuman to me.

<-- want gun barrels on turrets lobbing old school kinetic death.

PR-0927 really.... its a figure of speech sheez
pixels and 2D graphics are from old games and describe how complicated a model was.
Polys describe how complex a 3D model is.... newer but stull graphics related.

pixels are from older school games, remember 2d games like rampage?
remember a game called loadrunner with a stick figure made up of 10 or so pixels.....
there are parallels in the more modern 3d poly models..... most people who remember the 2d stuff
interchange the terms.

Like you would call a 12 O'clock in front of you, even though digital watches do not have a hand to tell this anymore.

Makes sense, however I'm not sure you could call a 2D image a "model."

And while I understand you're sticking in the past by using the word "pixel" instead of "poly," it doesn't make it correct.

I'm just pretty picky, and I felt that this thread was proliferated by noobs who wanted to keep saying pixel.

- PR-0927

PR-0927 no problem.
Most noobs though, would have no clue what a pixel was... its too old school for them.
As for model, again they would more likely be called sprites for 2D.
Why don't I just agree that your correct and stop using the old terminology.

Next time you fill up your car, please don't say you want some Gas though......

Who the hell cares? Stop being a nitpicking schmuck.

Yeah, after playing the tutorials I played Vasari, and the stuck with Advent for ages because the ships looked the best. I still haven't actually played a proper game with TEC because the ships look rather naff.

As for the pixels vs polys - I didn't really understand what the opening poster meant by 'pixel-wise' at first, and also what context he meant pixellated in. I was fully expecting this thread to consist of "duh, turn your screen resolution settings up" or similar. The two words do mean different things after all.

I never looked close enough at the ships to pay too much attention to the details, but now that I look at some of my in-game screenshots shows how much worse the tec ships look, but I'm not one to care much.

I think the TEC so busy getting ready for war, they didn't bother with rounder looking ships

OR, the TEC just was "soft" and "easy" (intro video) - part of that being the first to be designed (ingame). But if you look at the trailer (which is beta), they really have improved ALOT.

Now for the 12 o'clock question:

Would you call a missle a rocket... I mean same tech, right?
(nope)

Would you call a tank a armoured car? They both spurted out of similar ideas?
(nope)

Why call a 3d model pixels (though that term can be correct - everything still has to be rendered out)
(You don't, most/all 2d sprites had their origions in 3D models.

Similarly, why nitpick out over it?
(You don't because CDO (the way it SUPPOSED to be spelt) doesn't affect everyone... right?)