UFOPEDIA

[A M D G]

Greetings to all!

First of all I wish to tell that you good fellows - to make such class game, true continuation of a series.

 Yesterday I climbed on UFOPEDIA and I was occurred with one idea. Why instead of models of the weapon to not put the beautiful pictures drawn in a photoshop? If UFOPEDIA was three-dimensional then it would be clear, but time of a picture do not move, on mine it will be much better to make here so:

http://forum.nival.com/rus//attachment.php?attachmentid=15897&d=1152287213

http://forum.nival.com/rus//attachment.php?attachmentid=15889&d=1152283676

If it was pleasant to you, I can make pictures to all small arms.

PS Sorry for bad English - I'am Russian.

[BTAxis]

Actually, the models can be rotated in the UFOpedia. So they're not really still pictures. And even if they were, it would be less costly to just display the models, because making images of all the weapons would just be extra work.

[Bandobras]

Some of the models look bad in the ufopedia (a slight rotation is needed, usually), but there is already a but report filled for that.

Models are better than pictures, because when the models change, the pictures would have to be changed too or players would be confused. Moreover we have no conflict of visual styles. But you are very welcome to contribute in one of the many other ways...

[Bandobras]

Or perhaps the models in Ufopedia should slowly rotate, slightly and randomly changing direction? And when player clicks on them they should stop and when dragged they should rotate in the direction indicated? Eye candy is sweet.

[BTAxis]

The dragging thing is in already. I can't imagine making the models rotate is hard to implement at all, though I'd prefer them to rotate along one axis only.

[A M D G]

Thanks big for answers.

But at me the weapon does not rotate, at me rotates only cartrige chambers. Besides before you to me it have told, I did not guess such opportunity. Can be somehow mark this function?

And still. I think that UFO: AI should be extremely simple both in UFOPEDIA and in other places. So was and in X-com. IMHO rotating models - superfluous complication for game. Let alone that that very few people uses it.


PS About that is superfluous trouble - I with pleasure shall make pictures to all weapon and is absolutely free-of-charge!
PPS And with pleasure.

[Northen_Wolf]

 And still. I think that UFO: AI should be extremely simple both in UFOPEDIA and in other places. So was and in X-com. IMHO rotating models - superfluous complication for game.

What is so complicated in roting models? I just don't get it how can roating (turning) models make ufopedia difficult? they are just nice to look at...

Let alone that that very few people uses it.

i am not sure about that, they are not ment to "use them" they are ment to ufopedia to look cooler (mho) ...  And wouln't it be cool if u could see the alien b**ts and other stuff...

[A M D G]

I do not speak that it difficult for perception. I spoke about simplicity. Which always is perceived easy and clearly.

I do not try to impose the opinion and to force to change UFOPEDIA but if to it will listen, I shall be glad.

But tell to me, what picture is better? In fact they do not differ with anything besides that on one drawn model, and on another a real picture. Simply on perception.

[BTAxis]

If you could properly rotate the model (which you can in the next release), I'd say the model is better.

[Northen_Wolf]

I do not speak that it difficult for perception. I spoke about simplicity. Which always is perceived easy and clearly.

What is there so hard in roating pictures??? (models) Can anyone explain me whats so "hard to understand" when weapon slowly spins?.... What makes that difficult? its simple, if its spins enough slowly not in hyperspeed or something...

[A M D G]

Easy, easy. I at all had it in view of. Here you spoke me that will long make new pictures but then will make how many rotating models? Such trouble with scripts, when UFOPEDIA so continually... have bugs. (sorry I can't formulate in English)

 I do not object to them, but I do not see them. And I know that is possible excellently (as in Rome: TW, in the same X-com: Apocalypse, HoMM 3 and other) to make not animated UFOPEDIA and not who will not dare to tell that it unmodernly.


PS I hope you understand me?   :oops:

[Bandobras]

PS I hope you understand me?   :oops:

I can't say that but I will respond, nevertheless. I think we all agree that the fact the current models can be rotated by dragging (I didn't know about it, either) will be easier to guess if they spin slowly along a diagonal axis. I also think they will look better (some of them look flat right now) and more impressive.

I know that the slow spinning and rotation by dragging is easy to code, as opposed to displaying pictures, keeping and updating a table of pictures corresponding to models, updating the table, updating the pictures, etc. Therefore, if I was a developer I would reject your kind offer on the basis of simplicity alone. I also reiterate your any other help is very welcome --- just visit the Contribute page on the Wiki.

[BTAxis]

if they spin slowly along a diagonal axis.

Hmm, I'd say vertical. Keep in mind that the models can't be rotated 360 degrees on the horizontal axis, if you reach top or bottom view you can't go any farther. Try it out in the UFOpedia. (it's kind of broken in the old tech beta, though).

[Bandobras]

Whatever.

[A M D G]

Ok, good. But if I shall create beautiful models in 3Ds MAX (higher quality than now) they can be inserted in UFOPEDIA? Q2 In game certainly cannot prosses these models, but in UFOPEDIA it is possible to make as a series of pictures.

PS Excuse I can't correctly formulate a phrase, again.