Tesla generator

[Theyain]

You know what? Fine, be arrogant and don't listen to anything I have been saying. You want to go with a design that is far from believable and far more complicated? Sure, why not. It's not like gamers haven't made fun of games for less. I mean, negative view points must be good, right?

Theyain, I would be happy if you could take the discussion into PM's. You do this great model no justice if this thread isn't available for a variety of feedback. ;)

You want this thread to be open to a variety of public feedback but I can't provide public feedback on that topic? That seems a little hypocritical Viech.

I honestly don't think it's that great. The old Tesla model from trem was better, if lower in polygons. This is far too simple. It has no style, does not match the look of the any of the other models or concepts, and looks far from being able to fit in the size of the old Tesla's bbox.

[velociostrich]

Firstly, @Theyain, please don't triple post; it clutters up the forum. If you want to reply to multiple people at once, hit "Reply With Quote" and copy and paste the quoted text as you go.

This is far too simple. It has no style, does not match the look of the any of the other models or concepts...

This is what you call a concept. Moreover, it's a concept realized in 3d, which is not as readily mutable an artform as, say, a piece of paper (unless you're sculpting, which webshinra clearly isn't doing). I do agree that it is currently a bit bland, but I think the intention was to get the basic shape down, and it certainly accomplishes that.

... [it] looks far from being able to fit in the size of the old Tesla's bbox.

I think it would be foolish to assume that the bounding boxes for buildables should remain exactly the same. Also, for sake of visual coherency, I think a move to something other than simple axially aligned bounding boxes is in order some time in the future.

As for the science behind the Tesla. I was going to point out some of the flaws in what both of you, @webshinra and @Theyain, were saying, but in the end it really doesn't even matter.

Consider the Gravity Gun from the Half Life 2 franchise: for every one player who got their trousers in a bunch over how it could possibly have worked, there were another 99 players mad with glee over the sheer amount of fun it was to use, who probably could've cared less about how something like it could work. No, they were far too busy tearing zombies in half with giant, rusty saw blades flung with such force as if by magic.

Remember that we're making a game whose objective is to be fun. Some percentage of that fun is achieved through cool effects, and, for most players, almost nil from thinking about the science behind the weapons. Therefore, I think the best course of action would not be to model the tesla (or equivalent) until after we've decided what we'd like to use for an effect of it firing. Of course, testing effects in-game is a very tedious process, so playing with effects in Blender is a much better route. Once we have a solid concept for the firing effect (that everyone can agree on), then we can work on getting the same effect working in-game and modeling something to fit.

To that end, @webshinra, are you interested in playing with creating a cool effect (without regard to how it works)? Otherwise, I suppose you could continue working on the concept you have here, but understand that your time may be ill spent if it doesn't match whatever effect is finally decided upon.

[webshinra]

Ok, after a longggg moment of silence on the forum (and a sporadic presence on IRC), I will try to make a point on the situation.

during the lasts month I have spent more time thinking of a way to construct the design around a meaning (instead of adding a meaning after), my conclusion was that I should think of the tesla not as a static object, but as a fold-able war machine.
the movement was the task I should use to shape my mind.

so, after some hours, I finally get a preliminary animation, that give (I think) a good base concept.

the question is, should I pursue in that way (adding more details, correcting glitch, approach a turret-like fixation, reduce polycount etc.) or not?

phpBB [video]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yIR1U_wamA[/video]

[velociostrich]

Hey there, sorry I did not reply to you sooner. I received your PM; I've just been too busy with school to reply.

Anyway, I love the concept of a buildable that actually appears to construct itself. This is something that has been discussed in the past but never really at length. There is, however, the beginning of a feature proposal for such on the wiki.

Please feel free to continue to develop your idea, and if it's good enough maybe it can even end up in game. Do keep in mind, however, that I cannot promise you that we will not for some reason decide to change direction in the future and, as a result, your model end up not being used, though I think this is unlikely. I also cannot promise you that someone else might not in the future create a model that we find to be superior to yours (for whatever reason) and your model gets replaced. I just want you to understand that now rather than later so that there's no hard feelings.

Also, if you do intend on developing this idea further with the intention of getting it in the game, please read our Exporting Models guide. I do not expect you to read the entire thing now; it's designed to serve more as a reference so that you can tackle exporting in stages, but I absolutely expect you to read the "Overview" and "What is MD5?" sections so that you understand potential pitfalls sooner rather than later. That will make both our jobs a lot easier, as there'll be a lot less technical headaches to deal with later on down the line.

Anyway, on to critiquing what you've got:

• Your render makes it a little hard to see what's going on! If you could provide a wireframe render with just ambient occlusion (or even just a solid color) as a material, that would make it easier for me to provide feedback on your animation. A sorta-wireframe effect at render-time can be achieved in Blender using the "Edge" post-processing effect under the Renderer settings tab. Also, either set the materials to shadeless or give them some amount of emissive light so that they're not too dark in places. Disabling shadows would also make sense.

• I like that the base expands some amount horizontally before the top then opening and the tesla part itself extending; I think that basic concept is good. I also like the rotation that you have going on with the top portion, although I think that perhaps (for time reasons) the rotation should occur at the same time that the tesla is extending.

• I feel like the base appears a little too rickety or weak. It seems like the tesla would be light enough that a tyrant or dragoon could easily send it flying (especially considering its high center of gravity) which does not go well with the idea that, once erected, it is rooted firmly to the floor. Perhaps if it appeared more solid—either by thickening those base plates or by removing the window at the base—this problem would be resolved.

• Similarly, I think the small dish antennae that pops up seems a little weak, as well, and should perhaps be entirely removed. At this rate, perhaps the vertical parts of the tesla could be thickened to appear stronger, and perhaps telescope out instead of being one solid section. When I say "telescope out", I mean multiple sections extend vertically, like a radio antennae or a crane boom or a spyglass. In going with a futuristic theme, if you go that route, try experimenting with odd-shaped cross-sections: e.g., instead of circular cross sections, try making them trapezoidal.

• I like the environment-mapped sorta-spherical thing in the center: I think that does well enough to sell the idea of the origin of the arc that the tesla produces.

Overall, good work! Keep it up.