Light Armor Feedback (Again!)

Rooster128

I know the pose is a bit wonky (right leg goes where?)

Some texturing artifacts.

Maybe a bit too much grunge on the bronze/gold.

What's good, what's bad? Beat me up! (but go easy!)

Brian "Panda" Choi

I think you need to reference existing armor suits (or fabricated for Movies, like the Pacific Rim rift suits) to see where exactly wear and tear builds up. Same goes for the gun.

My overall impression is that this was just run through dDo and called done, without a large amount time spent on refining and redefining placement of details.

Regarding your design (and I'm doing this unless you have an existing concept you're working from), could be a lot better.

Armored infantry conceptually is difficult to make memorable and well designed. I'm even still somewhat confused as to why even Titanfall's soldiers seem well designed when they look like a lot of concept art I've seen from other artists.

I want to see a story, and right now, I'm getting nothing besides really generic, perhaps Command and Conquer, Space Marine.

The silhouette of this soldier doesn't say anything specific to me. It's generic. I don't see this as light soldier, and the only way I could perceive that is if it was compared to another character that was designated a heavy or a medium armored soldier.

An explanation as to why silhouettte in character design is important: http://characterdesignnotes.blogspot.com/2011/03/use-of-silhouettes-in-concept-design.html

Rooster128

Right- this helps a bit.

I think I see what you mean by the unique silhouette/proportions- a unique silhouette is important, I most certainly agree. But I was aiming for a suit that would fit a standard proportion/virtuvian male, without any wonky proportions. What I'm seeing at that site you linked is either characters widely out out proportion (how does that first character even stand up straight?) or standard proportions, such as I'm using. What I can visualize in a different way, I am. The look is a minimalized space marine look but with more angular hard edges.

So I suppose I do agree- armored infantry is difficult to make memorable and at the same time be well designed. I thought I was doing a nice balance here, but I agree it could be a lot better. I just don't think overloading a design with a bunch of unneeded greeble is the answer, as I believe a lot of artists think.

I agree with the texture refining. It wasn't thrown into ddo, it was Substance Painter using substance effects- but I could do much more in the way of manual tweaking.

PS: I love the Pac Rim suits, suits that ergonomical and streamlined are so hard to make look correct though- especially while appearing unique. I'd show you my recent attempt at a Pac-rim ish suit, but it's horrid and not worth showing.

Brian "Panda" Choi

I think, with realistic human proportions, your concerns about silhouette bleed into INTERNAL value separated elements. So you avoid the greeble that protrudes, and focus on how the interior silhouette reads. Same critiques apply to this guy in that way, internal silhouette could use more work to look more interesting.

Titanfall achieved this half and half: Scarves around the neck, an obvious protrusion that was the jetpack, and helmets that had internal elements like visor lights that made them look interesting and distinct.

That flamethrower does have this nice arcade flamethrower game prop look to it.

Rooster128

Thanks mate. I'll have to look into this unique silhouette more- from what I'm gathering, the unique shape of a proportional armor is probably best achieved by breaking up the contouring plating in different ways.

The feedback is appreciated!