Ugly Gauss Deluxe Skin, please change this something more better looking one.

[Marcell22]

[Kaggelos]

There is no image attached, or at least I don't see one.

Here's one;

 

 

(Now, artist's opinion incoming)

Overall his new deluxe skin is really good looking.

My only issue is for the thighs to be shortened and calves to be elongated a bit ( or at least the armour protruding at the front of his thighs), it seems to be a bit unbalanced in terms of proportions, in my opinion at least.

[Birdframe_Prime]

Great Gauss Deluxe skin, DE, please do your best to realise it as accurately as possible.

[(PSN)robotwars7]

ah yes, the classic "I'm the only person on a planet of several BILLION people who can define what is and isn't ugly". whatever would we do without your insight? _/s

personally, I think it's mid-tier, not hideous but not making me reach for my wallet either. the concept arts rarely do the finished article any justice: once the skin is shown in game, that's the make-or-break moment for me. if it looks better in game, and I can think of a good color scheme for it, I might get it, otherwise I'll stick to the Agito Skin, which I really like.

[ReddyDisco]

12 hours ago, Kaggelos said:

There is no image attached, or at least I don't see one.

Here's one;

 

 

(Now, artist's opinion incoming)

Overall his new deluxe skin is really good looking.

My only issue is for the thighs to be shortened and calves to be elongated a bit ( or at least the armour protruding at the front of his thighs), it seems to be a bit unbalanced in terms of proportions, in my opinion at least.

I love it! 

[(PSN)Hopper_Orouk]

I think i'm being a bit selfish when i say that I expected a new take?

Like Current Gauss has that boxy, racecar type of design, I was expecting a very sleek, slim design.

If current Gauss is the Nascar, then i expected the deluxe to be the Lamborghini.

This one doesn't feel very different (except the olive head) 

It is a new take, but it's still boxy and it's still robotic.

[(XBOX)Lord ChibiVR]

https://youtube.com/shorts/Vxnl5NpH4fk?feature=share

 

 

Nah I think he's pretty cool. I prefer it over baruuk or wisp deluxe.

[--END--Rikutatis]

I really like this deluxe, it's pretty cool. But I also loved baruuk's as well. Only one  I disliked and thought was weak was wisp. 

[Felsagger]

Yes, true, the Deluxe skin looks bad because of the low polygonal design. The engine is old and it doesn't help. 

I think that it is an issue of the 3D engine and how the design got interpreted on the low poly model. In conceptual drawing looks good but the final product is distasteful to say the least. 

I said it long time ago and I'll say it now. The 3D engine of this game sucks deep ass when we talk about detailing. The low polygons on the models throws away neat concepts because the level of detail is way too low. 

[(PSN)Hopper_Orouk]

it's alright, it made me love Gauss again after not playing him much since 2020...

I like the concept, based on a scifi futuristic depiction of hermes, i like the wings on his helmet and feet when going Redline, His helmet is still too small 

I don't like the design, i pictured something slimmer and polished, Something akin to Nova atomica, but that's Nova's second skin so i'll wait for future second deluxes, overall, my main goal is to buy every single Gauss skin that gets released (except the sentient one)

 

[(PSN)Unstar]

IMO this deluxe skin is quite sweet.

[Felsagger]

6 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

IMO this deluxe skin is quite sweet.

The design, yes. 

How it looks in the game, no. 

It looks ugly. 

[(PSN)Unstar]

1 minute ago, Felsagger said:

8 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

IMO this deluxe skin is quite sweet.

The design, yes. 

How it looks in the game, no. 

It looks ugly. 

Personally I actually like the way it looks in-game significantly more than the design shown earlier in the thread.

[Felsagger]

6 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

Personally I actually like the way it looks in-game significantly more than the design shown earlier in the thread.

ROFL, if you like low poly models, why not. 

Lots of geometric features  and proportions are lost in the translation. 

 

 

[(PSN)Unstar]

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

ROFL, if you like low poly models, why not. 

I remember when the Nintendo 64's graphics were considered breath-taking, so I imagine I'm probably not the harshest critic.  Texturing and modeling have evolved past the point where I generally notice any technical differences between something on the Switch and something on the PS5; for me it's far more often about style.

 

5 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

Lots of geometric features  and proportions are lost in the translation. 

I agree that it's different, but personally I like the proportions of the in-game one better.  It's got this thick body with these spindly jagged extremities, and I just dig it.

[Felsagger]

4 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

I remember when the Nintendo 64's graphics were considered breath-taking, so I imagine I'm probably not the harshest critic.  Texturing and modeling have evolved past the point where I generally notice any technical differences between something on the Switch and something on the PS5; for me it's far more often about style.

 

You concluded any rational conversation there. 

If you can't distinguish the differences then for you a NINTENDO NES game and a PS4 game has zero difference in your mind. 

4 minutes ago, (PSN)Unstar said:

I agree that it's different, but personally I like the proportions of the in-game one better.  It's got this thick body with these spindly jagged extremities, and I just dig it.

That's fair. I can't debate personal preferences. As a design, it's not bad. However the representation of the design in the 3D engine is NOT the best one. There is something missing in translation between Zbrush and the 3D engine. That is the level of details or LODS. 

[(PSN)Unstar]

2 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

f you can't distinguish the differences then for you a NINTENDO NES game and a PS4 game has zero difference in your mind. 

Nah I can distinguish between NES and PS4 pretty easily, as long as it's not a trick question where it's an NES game that's been re-released as an Arcade Classic on PS4.

[Felsagger]

There is a substantial difference between a Switch and PS5 hardware. Yes DE wants to make the game look almost identical in all platforms. That IS a big mistake. 

 

 

[(PSN)Joylesstuna]

Kinda disappointed how non mechanical it ended up being in game. Not horrible but not terribly accurate to concept design.

[Felsagger]

7 hours ago, (PSN)Joylesstuna said:

Kinda disappointed how non mechanical it ended up being in game. Not horrible but not terribly accurate to concept design.

Precisely. The translation and interpretation from the conceptual drawings leaves a lot to be desired. One reason is the low polygon counts and the strict budget of polygons imposed on those models. Unreal Engine 5.2 throws away that constraint. However since DE wants to include the Switch they will have restrictions for every frame they design. 

I don't even want to mention how many polygons has Alloy in Burning Shores. Don't even make me get there. :P

The engine and the graphics on this game each year resembles more and IOS portable phone game. This is why the format is so tight with graphical progressions and character detailing. 

[(PSN)AyinDygra]

As another person who grew up playing games (started on the Atari2600, Colecovision, Commodor64), graphics don't really matter much to me. I'll never understand the modern PC mindset of always needing to push the envelope of what's possible on home computers, requiring players to upgrade their PC to the newest $2000 gaming rig every year to keep up. (I use my PCs until the cost of repairing a key component becomes unreasonable compared to simply buying a new computer... my current gaming laptop is from 2020, and already struggles to keep up with running a game, and browsing the web/streaming twitch stuff at the same time.)

I prefer consoles for my gaming, though I game on PC as well. I always appreciate when a game company maintains reasonable expectations of their player's hardware. Warframe has tried very hard to keep its requirements low, partially because it's cross platform, and I, for one, like that.

All that being said, I haven't noticed a problematic level of detail on warframes... they seem far more detailed for a fast paced, action oriented game than is necessary, given you only really see your frame in detail while you're in the orbiter. Gauss doesn't seem out of the ordinary, compared to other frames. I like the concept of the deluxe more than the base frame design. If I liked the frame, I'd consider getting it. (I don't seriously consider a frame existing in the game until it has a Prime, unless I really like how it plays, and Gauss isn't there for me.)

My biggest issues with Warframe designs is the insistence on asymmetrical designs. It feels off and wrong to my brain. It's part of the desired style of the game, and I know they won't go changing it for me, and it adds a little special design flavor that is uniquely Warframe, when you see cybernetic warrior pictures on the internet. As a result, I find few skins to be visually appealing as something I'd personally "like" or design myself (as an artist). There are few exceptions, such as Frost Harka... though I dislike playing as Frost in the current state of the game.

[CephalonOlphus]

18 hours ago, Felsagger said:

Yes, true, the Deluxe skin looks bad because of the low polygonal design. The engine is old and it doesn't help. 

I think that it is an issue of the 3D engine and how the design got interpreted on the low poly model. In conceptual drawing looks good but the final product is distasteful to say the least. 

I said it long time ago and I'll say it now. The 3D engine of this game sucks deep ass when we talk about detailing. The low polygons on the models throws away neat concepts because the level of detail is way too low. 

I honestly don't think you understand what "low polygons" means. It is a very detailed skin, even considering the limitations of the engine, probably the MOST detailed skin in game so far, with a very clean texture. It feels like you have no anti aliasing or low texture resolution or something to have this opinion.

If you can provide a screenshot of what specifically you mean it'd help clear up what you mean.

[trst]

As usual it's another case of the proportions between the concept art and in-game model being way off. But besides that I think it's a neat looking skin, not enough to make me want to play Gauss but far from what I'd personally consider to be the worst.

Though the legs resembling running prosthetics and hollow arms are giving me Kenshi vibes with their similarities to that game's prosthetics.

 

7 minutes ago, Olphus said:

I honestly don't think you understand what "low polygons" means. It is a very detailed skin, even considering the limitations of the engine, probably the MOST detailed skin in game so far, with a very clean texture. It feels like you have no anti aliasing or low texture resolution or something to have this opinion.

If you can provide a screenshot of what specifically you mean it'd help clear up what you mean.

Careful, if you engage with them you'll just cause a multipage rant where they start comparing this over ten year old self-published game to AAA titles that haven't even released yet.

[CephalonOlphus]

7 minutes ago, trst said:

Careful, if you engage with them you'll just cause a multipage rant where they start comparing this over ten year old self-published game to AAA titles that haven't even released yet.

Yeah i know, but for science I need to know how they formed the opinion. It's not the first time it's happened for me.

[Bahl-175]

The Gauss deluxe skin was very beautifully made and proper credit should go to the artist who designed it and modeler who made it come to life. 👏

It is one of my most favorite to date so far. I am most impressed.

4 hours ago, Felsagger said:

Precisely. The translation and interpretation from the conceptual drawings leaves a lot to be desired. One reason is the low polygon counts and the strict budget of polygons imposed on those models. Unreal Engine 5.2 throws away that constraint. However since DE wants to include the Switch they will have restrictions for every frame they design. 

I don't even want to mention how many polygons has Alloy in Burning Shores. Don't even make me get there. :P

The engine and the graphics on this game each year resembles more and IOS portable phone game. This is why the format is so tight with graphical progressions and character detailing. 

Sorry, but I’m afraid you have a very limited and misguided understanding of 3D modeling, game design, and game data size. 

You seem to think that low polygon counts are a bad thing and that they result in poor quality models. This is not true at all. Polygon count is only one of the factors that affect the visual fidelity and performance of a game model. Other factors include vertex count, texture resolution, shading, lighting, normal maps, and other effects. A skilled game artist can create stunning models with very low polygon counts by using these techniques effectively. In fact, low-poly models are often preferred for games because they are easier to animate, optimize, and render.

Next you seem to assume that Unreal Engine 5.2 “throws away” the constraint of polygon count and allows for unlimited detail. This is also not true. Unreal Engine 5.2 introduces a new technology called Nanite, which is a virtualized geometry system that enables artists to create and import high-resolution models without worrying about polygon budgets or level-of-detail3. However, this does not mean that polygon count is irrelevant or that Nanite can handle any amount of polygons. Nanite still has limitations and requirements, such as using only static meshes, having no overlapping geometry, and having a minimum triangle size of 0.3 pixels. Nanite also does not eliminate the need for optimization and performance testing, especially for multiplayer games or games that target multiple platforms.

To further emphasize on this, you seem to blame the Switch for holding back the game design and quality. This is also not true. The Switch is a powerful and versatile console that can run many games with impressive graphics and gameplay. The Switch is not the reason why DE has to impose polygon budgets or other constraints on their models. The reason is that they want to create a game that is consistent, balanced, and enjoyable for all players, regardless of their platform or device. They also want to create a game that is scalable, adaptable, and future-proof for new technologies and updates.

So anyways I must again point out that your comments in many posts in this thread show a lack of knowledge and respect for the game development process and the game developers themselves. You should not judge a game by its polygon count or its platform compatibility. You should also not make false or uninformed claims about game engines or game models. Instead, you should appreciate the artistry, creativity, and technical skill that goes into making a game. A game's success does not correlate with the depth and quality of it's graphics. If you want to learn more about 3D modeling, game design, or game data size, I suggest you do some actual research before commenting again.

Or ever again really.

You may now prepare your response as the victim with one word responses and bolded statements that highlight random things to appear like actual supporting arguments or important facts.