Remington ACR / Magpul Masada
Well for over a year now I have been following the development of this rifle and its many stages and companies that it has been through lol. I still like the original name of the Masada. Magpul didn't have the man power to produce rifles on such big scale such as Remington and Bushmaster. Anyways past gun talk and back to 3D talk lol. As you can tell I am really into guns but anywho. Plus I plan on picking up the civilian version of this gun when they release it. If i can drop almost 3g on it lol.
Here are some screens. Also the gun is going to have the Advanced Armament Corp. suppressor on it. I have not decided on what kind of optics I am going to include on it. Mostly likely I'm going to do an Aimoint Comp M3 on it.
:poly124:
I've included the Highpoly, low with tri count, and lowpoly with the normal map and base diffuse on it in the viewport with a direct x shader. I am going to do multiple textures for this gun.
Here are some screens. Also the gun is going to have the Advanced Armament Corp. suppressor on it. I have not decided on what kind of optics I am going to include on it. Mostly likely I'm going to do an Aimoint Comp M3 on it.
:poly124:
I've included the Highpoly, low with tri count, and lowpoly with the normal map and base diffuse on it in the viewport with a direct x shader. I am going to do multiple textures for this gun.
Replies
good work anyway, it looks very clean
But on that note, for a self-professed ACR fan it really doesn't look like you've nailed the Flat Dark Earth color.
Yours is a little too saturated, a little too shiny. And what's with the mottling of the color? The plastic tends to look more consistently toned than that. And if you really want to get fancy there should be some very slight material differentiation between the metal and the plastic bits, though the ACR doesn't seem to have the color inconsistencies like the SCAR does in that department.
All that said nice work. So, are you picking one up for the low low price of $2.5k ?
-Edit- I actually want to pick up the $3k one tbh lol. But I can't afford it. I wish they would make the Massoud. The 7.62 one they were making a while back.
-Another Edit- I am going to do a whole A-TACS camo on the gun. Everything will be in it. Here is a picture of the new A-TACS camo design for those who don't know.
Also added more geo to the suppressor.
Also 5-7k tris is about average now for a fps view weapon. Don't waste polys but don't be overly zealous about having it really low poly.
Rang3r1- Its 1024x1024. I recieved some specs on how the guns were done in CoDmw2 and I am trying to do my own version with the specs. Which were 3-4k tris and 1000x1000 texture sheet.
Well, I've been modeling guns for years, and seen a lot of gun models, and usually in that polygon range there's a lot more detail and smoothness. It's probably those rails that are eating up your polygon count.
I don't know what it is, but that 1024 map seems awfully pixelated, right in fps view too. Either you made things a little too small on the UV, or what, but I don't know.
As for the low, I would make the bottom rail one solid piece, and then normal map the rails in, there it would not be as noticeable, you can also do that for the rail on the right side, that should save quite a bit of tris. I just don't see where all 4000 tris are coming from, even with the rails. The ACR that you are doing there is quite boxy, so you don't need very complex geo...
You high poly looks great though, I just see it as a shame to not have an equally nice low, I think an extra 1000 tris wont hurt performance, but I understand you would like to stay within a set limit.
Krazy, can you post a wireframe of the low poly?
I_R_Hopo - I just built my computer a year ago so I doubt that is the issue.
GarageBay9 - I will post one a new one up with the new clean up I have done. I have been pretty busy this weekend so I didn't get much done.
In my opninion, you'd be better off either setting for a more realistical polycount, say 6000, or face the fact that you'd make better use of polies if you were to normalmap the rails. Even if you were to just normalmap the left and right rail, which you hardly ever see contributing to the profile (I think) you'd free up around 400 polies.
These could then be used to smooth out the suppresor, grip, and bevel the stock some. There's some smaller issues too (the front of the ironsights could do with a bit of optimization, you could do with a couple of insets on the main body etc, but the largest issue is the poly-nomming of the rails.
Comment about the dirtying up would be the same as usual wear and tear texturing, the devil is in the details. Right now the grime is almost uniformly coated which seems odd. Really nice dirt in the grip, though.) I'd like to see some of the broader areas of the upper generally cleaner.
Also if you're trying to suggest a gun that is seeing a lot of field use, keep in mind fouling. Any gun after a lot of shooting is going to collect more soot around the muzzle, but a suppressed weapon is a special case. Since it's all about retarding gases escaping the muzzle, the action gets waaaay more dirty than normal. Not that there's much you can do to suggest that, other than say some more junk caked around the charging hand--
hey wait a minute, where is your ambi-charging handle? Not on the version you chose to depict, or what?
Noisy texture in the last image is due to compression, as you can see it's also on the metal.
Well Like I said before have YOU seen a polymer gun upclose and held it before? I'm not talking about pictures I'm asking if you have seen it up close. Even if you have held or seen a Glock up close you would understand what I am talking about. But I went ahead and uploaded this image for you since you don't seem to understand what I am talking about. Also like I said before if your criticize people's work tell them what they are doing right not always negative and saying what is wrong with it. I know you like to point out flaws a lot but also telling people what they are doing right is a good thing.
Now please tell me you don't see the bumpiness in the reciever? If you can't well I'm sorry then I don't know what to tell you.
I've seen polymer close up, and your texture is way too big and way too substantial compared to the real thing. The texture is barely noticeable, even close up, but on your model, it's obviously textured from far away in a small image.
if you have a problem with negative criticism, maybe you shouldn't post your work here. Saying 'looks good' isn't really helpful to anyone.
I know its hard making these things and to some people you can never do enough almost. In the end we're doing this mostly for ourselves because we love and enjoy doing it, I think we need to remember that and not try to suck out all the fun from it while being respectful and courteous to others
Nice work so far by the way
@EricV Yea I knew what he was saying, I did agree but I guess the way It was just coming off idk. I tried to scale it down too but because of my UV it shows very bulky bumpiness I guess lol.