Weapon design and you: how to avoid sci-fi samery

[JackalStomper]

Using Halo 1, or any game from then or earlier, is a poor example to compare to newer generation games. Most of the time the lack of greeble is from hardware constraints rather than artistic design. When games from older times have the bonus of coming with the concept art illustrations you can see that they are usually just as noisy and complicated as they are in current games today.

I feel I should remind you the design of most of those weapons were carried over from Unreal Championship 2. the rocket launcher, flak, and shock rifle were up-resed.

seriously. go look at some screenshots. they're nearly identical.

Never played the UC games. Just Unreal, UT2K4, and UT3.

That wasn't quite my point though, it was more providing an argument as to why they can get away with crazy weapon designs.

[rossmum]

Either way, it is a good example of how clean lines and well-planned detail are demonstrably superior to the 'blocks and greeble' school of design.

[Pooky]

best sci-fi weapon:

[Warsaw]

No u.



That's the best sci-fi gun. It's so...I don't know...down to earth. I love the OSI.

--------------------------------

Even Halo 4's stuff is far cleaner than what you often see, but the point is that they are gravitating in a direction that's been beaten to death. And no, Gears of War doesn't fall under the same category as Unreal Tournament because if you read the lore, they actually are trying to be dead serious with it. Go read Halo's fiction, then read GoW's, and tell me which one comes off as more believable when you picture the equipment in your head. It's not the chainsaw that's the problem, it's the ridiculous crap hanging off of everything and everyone. Yes, GoW's aesthetic design works, but it doesn't work with their attitude toward the franchise. I can't look at what they call a tank, the Boltok, and the armour worn by COGS and suspend my disbelief. I consider it nothing more than a game, not a world to lose myself in.

And why the fuck does a gun that shoots rounds as big as the Lancer NOT have a stock?

Rule-of-Cool should always be used sparingly to avoid cheese-factor, unless your game is deliberately way over the top like Unreal Tournament. I suspect GoW started off that way, but then they tried to take it seriously in GoW 2 and GoW 3.

@Higuy: there's this right here. Anything with a watermark is not up for grabs, and even then if anybody wants to do something with any item, ask first. Most of it is for a personal project and none of it is complete or final, only doing something of higher-quality when I feel like I'm done iterating.

@ICEE: Barrel on the bolt-action I.R. Mk. IV is messed up because of the scanner. There would normally be a rough texture on it, but I don't show that in line-drawings. Imperial stuff is supposed to generally be clean. The sighting system is based on a UV laser that reacts with a coating on the goggles of Imperial troops to form a front and rear aperture that need to be lined up; this makes it hard for the enemy to effectively use captured munitions. I'm not about to add detail for the sake of detail; a Brown Bess musket is rather boring looking if you take the colours away as well. I will agree that a front-sight projector should be added, though. I already have that idea prototyped on a different gun that, in-universe, would be the successor to that weapon.

[TVTyrant]

Take the Halo AR or Halo 2 BR out of context, and you know exactly where they're from. It's pretty simple.

But I would no where any variation of the two are from. Instantly. Because they are so ingrained in my mind. Especially the BR. My opinion is that, no matter what they change about it, as long as it has that shape I can tell what it is instantly. Its like an AK. It might not always look exactly the same, but you can always take a basic look at one and say "That's an AK".

[Warsaw]

Except when that AK turns out to be an AEK...

[TVTyrant]

Except when that AK turns out to be an AEK...

[rossmum]

But I would no where any variation of the two are from. Instantly. Because they are so ingrained in my mind. Especially the BR. My opinion is that, no matter what they change about it, as long as it has that shape I can tell what it is instantly. Its like an AK. It might not always look exactly the same, but you can always take a basic look at one and say "That's an AK".

But they haven't really retained the shape all that well, and more and more sci-fi genre stuff is getting hard over bullpups with carry handles. The AK example is a bit dodgy too, since even the AK-12 is very similar to a classic AK-47 in shape, and on AK-based weapons like the Groza, the entire receiver is unmodified.

[TVTyrant]

But they haven't really retained the shape all that well, and more and more sci-fi genre stuff is getting hard over bullpups with carry handles. The AK example is a bit dodgy too, since even the AK-12 is very similar to a classic AK-47 in shape, and on AK-based weapons like the Groza, the entire receiver is unmodified.

Thats because they're copying Halo lol. And yeah, but thats the closest it gets. I mean, for the most part there are no other military firearms that have seen as many variations as the AK-47. The AKM, the Type-56, the PSL/Dragunov/Romak, The AK-74, the AK-74M, the 100 series, the 200, the newest version, the AN. The PKM. Fuck have the Russians gotten some mileage out of that fucker.

[rossmum]

The Dragunov isn't an AK in any sense of the word. The PSL is, so I'll give you that. The AN-94 isn't even a gun, let alone an AK. It's a strange alien artefact designed via mind-control. I doubt even Nikonov knows how that fucker works, and he designed it.

PKM isn't an AK in the strictest sense, but it is based off the action I believe so I'll give you that one too.

Lots of things that look like AKs aren't actually AKs at all. See: basically every 9x39 assault rifle, the vz.58, the SVD, the AN-94, the AEK...