I think the AR needs yellow stripes.

+1

"weapon appears extremely flat on the upper shroud section" This!

Marsters1337, when you will upload this week's ViDoc?

+2

as a suggestion, why not just use both PRs. the original could be the brute variant, and the new one could be the normal PR. anybody else thinks so? no... i'll just leave.

Hopefully this weekend. With semester at a close my time is limited, plus I have some other IRL stuff going on that is cutting into the free time I have. The DMR and AR vids are coming though, I just can't give you a good timeframe as of when.

Then your participation in this thread is completely pointless, is it not?

Anyway, the AR looks awesome. I just hope it works well in-game.

Uh. Not likely. We removed the old PR because it looked bad. Why would we put a poor looking model back in?



It should be noted that Lag didn't care much for the over the top normal for the hex pattern either, the one that's actually in game right now is a lot less intensive. Our Plasma Pistol has it in the normal too, I toned it down to that level.



I'm so confused where this "flat" claim is coming from. I'm interested in fixing it, but I really don't see what anyone is talking about. Here are some pictures for comparison, please feel free to point out where you feel the model is "flat". Old model is in gray and also the blue over the top of the new:





As you can see it's very similar in roundness on the top, so I'm kind of stumped as to what everyone is going on about.

Just a first person comparison for you guys:





for the sake of the debate

This is what is wrong with the new AR.

It's the same model....kind of....but the thing that makes the bottom one look so "flat" or unappealing compared to the top one is the skin on the bottom AR. not that hard to notice, especially after that side by side 3d model comparison. IMO I think the bitmap for the new AR needs to be changed a tad, but over all, it's not a huge concern. the AR is fine.

Not a very good comparison. Considering the two are running at completely different resolutions.

I don't plan on messing with the model. But I'm welcome to the idea of editing the texture a bit. I might look in to editing the "rubber" texture.

not much I can do given one is ingame and one is 720p youtube. However the resolution is not what we're comparing, correct?

I like the top one better but the stock is better on the bottom one.

i didn't mean the OLD OLD OLD one from the T&R release, i meant the one with the section missing from the top. i just thought a nice red glow there would make it look great. that, and the really nice worn look that dano added so nicely.

Look terrible in first person.

Yeah pretty much. Nobody was a fan of the design once it was in game.

Agreed, while it's cool to have the UNSC logo, it looks very distracting.

I think part of the issue with the design may be in the animation origins, just comparing the two from the screens posted earlier. I think one other thing is that I feel like the ammo counter should be more distinguishable from the rest of the cowling on the top there, maybe raised up a bit, or something? I dunno.

That being said, the model is impressive, but something still bugs me a little about the FP...

Edit: I think it might also be the background of the video... do you think you could pop a screenshot of it in a level without a grey background? Just for comparisons?

Edit2: And one other idea, it may also be because of the color difference between the cowling around the ammo counter which is the darker color, and lighter color of the area in front of the counter. Just throwing some ideas out there.
Edited by Bobblehob on May 4, 2013 at 02:38 AM

The origins are exactly the same as when I made them 1-2 years ago, the only real things that changed are FOV and the model.

this kind of stuff looks pretty in slowmo

I'm not digging the AR display so much, it looks too... out of place

Honestly, I think there's more to this gun than the out of place black block.. Thing.. At the back. For one, i think the saturation of the counter on the AR is wayy too out of place, and the gun just feels like it's a bit short in general. I feel like the weapon should protrude farther out of the FOV just to emphasize the fact that it's an AR, not a Sub machine gun. As for the Unsc emblem and the failed attempt at a screw hole for that block, I feel like these things can be solved as well. Perhaps, turn down the brightness on the emblem/screw to make it look as metallic as the rest of the gun, or overlay it with the same camo that's on the front (In retrospect, why does the gun need camo if we're in variable environments anyways? You know, that's an argument for another day.)
Err, anyways, I feel like the most unforgivable sin here regarding the out of place emblem is that it contradicts the curvature on the rest of the gun. I wish the curvature on this gun would resemble more of the Halo 4 model in the sense that it's consistent and it looks sleak without resembling black modelling clay that's been slightly dampened. I say make the entire gun a darker metallic grey like the halo 1 model, overlay the camo over it, desaturate the counter to a teal/cobalt and 86 the over-luminosity, and 86 the black thing on the back or make it resemble that of a mesh/matte texture to make it less of an eyesore and clothify the logo over it to make it match.
Something like this


Or, you could just yell F*** it into the night and go with something unique

The "out of plcae black block" is the cheek rest.

Only if it looks better that way, but its modern counterpart is short anyways

I really have to be honest with you guys. Although I appreciate everyone voicing their opinion, I have zero intentions of changing the model at all. This includes the display and cheek rest. Get used to it, or model your own. I don't honestly care. The team likes it, so we're keeping it.

The UNSC logo is staying exactly where it is, so don't look too much in to that either, it's extremely unlikely that it's going anywhere else.

And lastly, I do plan on changing the "rubber" texture soon. It's certainly something that is also bugging me.

So I'm not going to tell you to stop posting about it, but certainly don't expect me to change my view, and the team's view of the weapon on a whim just because some people don't like it.

Since the F2000 has optics mounted where the ammo counter would be on the MA5, it doesn't need a higher cheek rest. Since the MA5 features pop-up iron sights on top of the cowling that houses the ammo counter, though, it makes sense that it has a relatively high cheek rest.

I actually like the design of the rifle. Look tougher than the original one, maybe the UNSC logo could be toned down a bit so it isn't as bright. But that would be my only complaint, and I could probably do that myself once the map is released if it bugged me that badly

I agree. I am looking in to revising the intensity of the logo, and that entire part actually.

Well, considering that CMT is being stubborn on the AR issue, which I can understand, I'll drop that. Is there any real updates on TSC:E? Ingame pix?

Stubborn is hardly what I would call it. But we can't go changing every little detail about every little thing because no matter what we do, no one will ever be completely happy with it. So sometimes we just have to put our foot down and say something is finished once we're happy with it. I've certainly taken some suggestions, but I can't take them all.

As for TSC:E, I wouldn't expect any ingame pictures any time soon. We are working very hard to get everything looking the best we can, but we're still a little ways from the polishing stage. As soon as we have something ready to show, we'll be more than happy to show it.

Yes we will be :)

We await a video or image.

-{NP}Thr0s
Edited by NP_Mapping_Team on May 11, 2013 at 09:43 AM

I have yet another question;

Will we be seeing other spartans as our allies in these maps like we did in SPV1?

No.