| written by Frig on Mar 23, 2008 19:11 |
   | |  | | ![]() We will need a Stardrifter ship model eventually. Actually, it sounds like you have enough experience in all the areas we might need. Most textures will probably be created or at least applied through procedural means, so no problems there.
The only object that I can guarantee will be hard-modeled is the Stardrifter, which will most likely be hexagonal this time around.
Some ideas for its design have been posted in this topic:
http://www.anywherebb.com/postline/posts.php?t=3913
This sketch seems to be the most popular model idea so far (I'm fairly sure that the hole on top will house the cupola dome):
Anyway, feel free to post any prototype or idea models if you wish.
So in other words... Welcome to Anywhere! | |  | |  |
|
  | |  | | ![]() It's difficult to say what kinds of objects will need to be modelled at this point, but most will likely be procedurally generated. I can think of some types of things that would probably work best as pre-built models though, the most notable being the stardrifter. Things like ruins will probably make use of procedural generation, though there will probably be some specialized detail objects to model in that category as well.
By the way, your models are looking nice. : ) | |  | |  |
|
 | |  | | ![]() An area where meshes won't likely be procedural is the fauna. It was mentioned the idea of having interchangeable heads, upper and lower torsos, so that their combinations produce different animals; each sub-part would have its own animation. (Best we can do short of writing Spore.)
All this is in a very initial stage, and there is nothing settled about things to be modeled yet. | |  | |  |
|
| written by Frig on Mar 25, 2008 02:19 |
| | | | ![]()  | Frig said: | | and Arne's concept looked pretty cool. |
I agree. However, we will probably want to ask permission before we use it. If we decide to use it. | | | | |
|
| written by Skeritxp on Mar 25, 2008 06:35 |
 | |  | | Nice! I don't know which one I like more, the hexagonal one is more Noctis-y, but the cilindrical stardrifter looks great, too!
(And if round shaped vehicles work for UFOs.... ) | |  | |  |
|
| written by Megagun on Mar 25, 2008 14:32 |
 | |  | | ![]() Bah. And I thought that that hexagonal Stardrifter was the obvious best choice for the new Stardrifter.. The panoramic windowness of that cylindrical Stardrifter is extremely awesome...
| Hello!  said: | | Frig said: | | and Arne's concept looked pretty cool. |
I agree. However, we will probably want to ask permission before we use it. If we decide to use it. |
I don't think that, if we end up using it, getting permission would be trouble at all. Not that we should not ask though 
Also: mind if I merge this thread later on with the 'concept art' thread? | |  | |  |
|
| | | | ![]() At first, I almost mistook them for real world models. Gets my stamp of approval. Good stuff!   | | | | |
|
| written by Buuks on Mar 25, 2008 19:10 |
| | | | ![]() I like the cilinder one, it is almost one big window.  | | | | |
|
| written by Frig on Mar 26, 2008 04:40 |
 | |  | | | Megagun said: | | Also: mind if I merge this thread later on with the 'concept art' thread? |
not at all, that would be better. Ill post anything else i happen to make in there in the future.
| Stargazer said: | | At first, I almost mistook them for real world models. Gets my stamp of approval. Good stuff! |
thanks i tried using GI in yafray so i could get some cool internal shots of the thing using the circular lighting i put in there, but that would have taken way too long to render  . came out better than i had expected though with the lighting setup i had. | |  | |  |
|
| written by Ponder s on Mar 26, 2008 12:41 |
 | |  | | ![]() I wondered what renderer you were using. That looks really good, keep it up!
*reminds self to get yafray* | |  | |  |
|
| 
