same reason things in your imagination are better than reality
concept art exists to inspire people, it's not subject to the same constraints as the final product
One's a made up idea on paper that would be a cool "what if"
The other has to be modeled, textures, rigged and scripted to work ingame.
You can draw and design as many sonic speed futuristic cars as you want, actually having the time, skills and resources to make it a reality is different.
I fricking LOVE these loading screens and artworks that merge the cocnept art with the shitty ass models. The living example devs tried to make their vision a reality, and often it would explain or show how stuff from the model you wouldn't get due lower polycount or ress was.
Generally drawings can look way better than they look like in game to countless reasons from model inflexibility to lighting engine
The same somewhat applies to scenery where concept art is better used as guide for feeling of location rather than it's actual design Mostly skill issue tho
There's probably a reason for this. In the west game development is compartmentalised. That is each person does a specific job, high poly modeller, low poly, baking, textures, animation etc all different jobs. In Japan the expectation is you do all of it and it's all the same job. This is probably less efficient but you get a more direct translation
I always assumed it was designed for the Robotic Synths.
as in the ones which are basically just fancy robots and thus more naturally armoured than the human synths and treated as hyper disposably by the institute
armour isn't meant to protect a human and just meant to keep the robots functioning for a few seconds longer in a fight
even if we go by that logic it serves frick all as protection, we see on the wireframe gen 1s how packed the torso is with machinery, the light armor protects absoulutly nothing of value to keep it running, at least the medium armor coves some important bits and the heavy actually looks like it protects the user so its not a total disaster
I think there are several ideas with this. >Institute is super high technology so their armor contrasts everything you might see in the Wasteland, it's white, clean and pristine to contrast the usual aesthetics >Institute armor is designed for Synths who might have different weak points from regular human beings
The execution isn't the best.
Fallout 3 is more missing the point and exagerating the themes in some places.
Fallout 4 is a flanderization of the setting and themes. A shame because gameplay-wise it is pretty cool.
>ugly disposable armor made for ugly disposable synth soldiers
thats actually really simple, a real curveball is how they called pic related an assault rifle
>we wanted a big gun that looked like it fit in the hands of power armour >ok what about the mini guns they've carried since FO1 and you give the player in the opening? >ok we just have one (1) gun animation for super mutants so we needed something with a side loading magazine that isn't a pipe gun
That would be fine if it actually worked like a machine gun (like it does in the show)
And not a semi-automatic brick that's effectively a shitter version of NV's service rifle
I think the reason this exists and has such a shitty design is because Bethesda wanted the armour to be compartmentalised so it didn't conflict with other armour. As in if you wear mismatched sets it wouldn't clip. That's why its so constrained to each limb, head, body, legs etc. You basically have a dead zone between each armour piece. This is why it looks SHIT
idealogically i frick with the institute but that armor looks so fricking moronic i couldnt do it
I don't think they ever understood what they were designing.
This one is a little better but they completely fricked it in-game.
Frick cancer. If that based polack didnt die Bethesdas art directio in 4 wouldn't have been such a travesty
Can someone explain the very common trend in vidya where the concept art is usually leagues better than what ends up in the game?
same reason things in your imagination are better than reality
concept art exists to inspire people, it's not subject to the same constraints as the final product
Because fine details take forever to model, but seconds to paint
One's a made up idea on paper that would be a cool "what if"
The other has to be modeled, textures, rigged and scripted to work ingame.
You can draw and design as many sonic speed futuristic cars as you want, actually having the time, skills and resources to make it a reality is different.
This. I'm learning unreal engine 5 and it's been a little eye opening as to how games are made. I'm currently teaching myself rigging.
The draw-er is more skilled than the modeler
Incompetency crisis.
I fricking LOVE these loading screens and artworks that merge the cocnept art with the shitty ass models. The living example devs tried to make their vision a reality, and often it would explain or show how stuff from the model you wouldn't get due lower polycount or ress was.
you mean competency crisis
Generally drawings can look way better than they look like in game to countless reasons from model inflexibility to lighting engine
The same somewhat applies to scenery where concept art is better used as guide for feeling of location rather than it's actual design
Mostly skill issue tho
I've noticed nips is more faithful to the concept, like some of the stuff in souls games are almost 1:1
There's probably a reason for this. In the west game development is compartmentalised. That is each person does a specific job, high poly modeller, low poly, baking, textures, animation etc all different jobs. In Japan the expectation is you do all of it and it's all the same job. This is probably less efficient but you get a more direct translation
I always assumed it was designed for the Robotic Synths.
as in the ones which are basically just fancy robots and thus more naturally armoured than the human synths and treated as hyper disposably by the institute
armour isn't meant to protect a human and just meant to keep the robots functioning for a few seconds longer in a fight
even if we go by that logic it serves frick all as protection, we see on the wireframe gen 1s how packed the torso is with machinery, the light armor protects absoulutly nothing of value to keep it running, at least the medium armor coves some important bits and the heavy actually looks like it protects the user so its not a total disaster
Because Bethesda has shit writers and designers
insane that people want 3 and New Vegas ported into this dogshit game.
I think there are several ideas with this.
>Institute is super high technology so their armor contrasts everything you might see in the Wasteland, it's white, clean and pristine to contrast the usual aesthetics
>Institute armor is designed for Synths who might have different weak points from regular human beings
The execution isn't the best.
I never played Fallout 3 or 4 btw.
Fallout 3 is more missing the point and exagerating the themes in some places.
Fallout 4 is a flanderization of the setting and themes. A shame because gameplay-wise it is pretty cool.
>ugly disposable armor made for ugly disposable synth soldiers
thats actually really simple, a real curveball is how they called pic related an assault rifle
>we wanted a big gun that looked like it fit in the hands of power armour
>ok what about the mini guns they've carried since FO1 and you give the player in the opening?
>ok we just have one (1) gun animation for super mutants so we needed something with a side loading magazine that isn't a pipe gun
I think this looks dope though. It's like one of those water jacketed guns from WW1
That would be fine if it actually worked like a machine gun (like it does in the show)
And not a semi-automatic brick that's effectively a shitter version of NV's service rifle
>yep, that's a cool armor right there
What was the design team smoking when they made this shit
I think the reason this exists and has such a shitty design is because Bethesda wanted the armour to be compartmentalised so it didn't conflict with other armour. As in if you wear mismatched sets it wouldn't clip. That's why its so constrained to each limb, head, body, legs etc. You basically have a dead zone between each armour piece. This is why it looks SHIT
Because they’re shit
>That leftmost armor configuration
Why not go with the breastplate first? Imagine going into battle with just ankle and wrist armor?