When we are saying that the X4‘s ship is ugly, what are we talking about?

[Warnoise]

...

Lies, damned lies, and statistics - you can coin statistics all you like but that does not make your opinion anymore valid than anyone elses. It is you that has lost the debate, you have yet to actually make a point that is on-topic - statistics do not define right and wrong, they just are. Statistics are too often abused and misused, especially in cases of matters of subjective opinion such as this.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

[ReverieSwimming]

My main problem with the Paranid capital ships is that their textures and models seem to be oddly low-rez compared to the other races. It makes them look almost unfinished in comparison. This is even more apparent when you are performing EVA and you compare the engines with the hull, for example. The engines are super detailed and hold up well to closer examination, while the hull textures look like something from 2005. It's jarring

[Nafensoriel]

...

Lies, damned lies, and statistics - you can coin statistics all you like but that does not make your opinion anymore valid than anyone elses. It is you that has lost the debate, you have yet to actually make a point that is on-topic - statistics do not define right and wrong, they just are. Statistics are too often abused and misused, especially in cases of matters of subjective opinion such as this.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

Steamstats says at least 100-200k sales. "Hundreds of posts" reflects less than a percent. All the reviews on steam combined do not equal five percent. Even statistically all the "complaints" about the art dont even add up to a rounding error yet.

My only beef with egosofts art choices is id prefer the more ceramic look and less metal. Ceramic makes a bit more sense as a material shell for a space ship(and I like the aesthetic)

[Falcrack]

...

Lies, damned lies, and statistics - you can coin statistics all you like but that does not make your opinion anymore valid than anyone elses. It is you that has lost the debate, you have yet to actually make a point that is on-topic - statistics do not define right and wrong, they just are. Statistics are too often abused and misused, especially in cases of matters of subjective opinion such as this.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

Well, those who feel passionately about a dislike for the ship designs will naturally be more vocal than those who are fine with it but don't want to take the time to debate the matter. So whether you like X4 ship designs or not, it remains, in the end, a matter of opinion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

My main problem with the Paranid capital ships is that their textures and models seem to be oddly low-rez compared to the other races. It makes them look almost unfinished in comparison. This is even more apparent when you are performing EVA and you compare the engines with the hull, for example. The engines are super detailed and hold up well to closer examination, while the hull textures look like something from 2005. It's jarring

In at least 1.60 and prior there are some modelling abberations with some ships... the Paranid L/XL ships in general do seem to more visibly exhibit such issues (possibly due to their smooth curves). My guess is there are either some modelling or model conversion issues rather than texture issues. While I have noted some issues with specific parts of the models, I would not say there is anything majorly wrong with the texture mapping (the mapping does seem to be comparable to other capital craft). Perhaps your perception is more down to the lack of surface details than anything else? What paint schemes do you use on them?

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

...

Lies, damned lies, and statistics - you can coin statistics all you like but that does not make your opinion anymore valid than anyone elses. It is you that has lost the debate, you have yet to actually make a point that is on-topic - statistics do not define right and wrong, they just are. Statistics are too often abused and misused, especially in cases of matters of subjective opinion such as this.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

You keep claiming majority but you lack any meat to back up your assertions. A majority in a given sample poll is not actually indicative of anything unless the sample is sufficiently large - in forums in general, such samples rarely pass that criteria (in fact they almost never do).

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

My only beef with egosofts art choices is id prefer the more ceramic look and less metal. Ceramic makes a bit more sense as a material shell for a space ship(and I like the aesthetic)

That is where the paint jobs come in to play - if you don't like the more reflective options, personally I do in the main, then there are alternatives. The Aldrin paint job for example.

[Geonis]

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

Argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."

The only thing you have denoted is the opinion exists, and for a X amount of people. But no matter how many people you find that share the opinion, doesn't at any point turn an opinion into a fact.

[Warnoise]

Lies, damned lies, and statistics - you can coin statistics all you like but that does not make your opinion anymore valid than anyone elses. It is you that has lost the debate, you have yet to actually make a point that is on-topic - statistics do not define right and wrong, they just are. Statistics are too often abused and misused, especially in cases of matters of subjective opinion such as this.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

You keep claiming majority but you lack any meat to back up your assertions. A majority in a given sample poll is not actually indicative of anything unless the sample is sufficiently large - in forums in general, such samples rarely pass that criteria (in fact they almost never do).

"A majority in a given sample poll is not actually indicative of anything unless the sample is sufficiently large"

What? then by your logic if less than 30% of the population votes for some political parties then it won't be accounted for because "sample is not sufficiently large" ?

And who decides whether a sample is sufficiently large or not? certainly not you. If the sample is big enough to allow to calculate a median and standard deviation then it is indicative until proven wrong by another data (bigger sample or whatever).

Come back when you can prove me wrong because this is really getting nowhere.

If you think like that then there's no point in debating with you. I remind you again, this is not my opinion vs your opinion, the current case is your opinion (which is based on your feelings and your personal observation) vs a fact (dozens of threads with hundreds of posts in total criticizing the design) and since you seem to have forgotten about what the fact is, the fact is that the majority of the Egosoft community didn't like the X4 ship designs in general. Companies and artists use such statistics to analyse their shortcomings and improve their products. Thanks to that, Egosoft has acknowledged the negative response of the community and will improve their design for future ships.

Argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "argument to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition must be true because many or most people believe it, often concisely encapsulated as: "If many believe so, it is so."

The only thing you have denoted is the opinion exists, and for a X amount of people. But no matter how many people you find that share the opinion, doesn't at any point turn an opinion into a fact.

It is nice to attempt to sound smart by using latin and stuff, but unfortunately the content of your statement ruined your attempt.

If you think a little bit more, what i denoted is the fact that "The majority of players are negative towards the design of X foundation ships" with proof. Unless you prove that wrong, it stays as a fact which is based on an existing evidence (hundreds of posts etc...). For example say "The durian smells bad" which is an opinion, some don't think the same, which is also an opinion, but the fact that the majority of people think the durian smells bad is a fact, that is regardless of me or you liking the smell of durian or not.

So next time, instead of googling the next latin term to use, you should perhaps google the difference between fact and opinion.

[Falcrack]

It is nice to attempt to sound smart by using latin and stuff, but unfortunately the content of your statement ruined your attempt.

If you think a little bit more, what i denoted is the fact that "The majority of players are negative towards the design of X foundation ships" with proof. Unless you prove that wrong, it stays as a fact which is based on an existing evidence (hundreds of posts etc...). For example say "The durian smells bad" which is an opinion, some don't think the same, which is also an opinion, but the fact that the majority of people think the durian smells bad is a fact, that is regardless of me or you liking the smell of durian or not.

So next time, instead of googling the next latin term to use, you should perhaps google the difference between fact and opinion.

When you say the majority of players think X4 ship designs are ugly, you haven't proved a single thing. You offer no statistics. Just anecdotal observations from a number of vocal forum members. You are the one in need of learning the difference between fact and opinion. That's my opinion

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

What? then by your logic if less than 30% of the population votes for some political parties then it won't be accounted for because "sample is not sufficiently large" ?

Not even close to being relevant to the matter at hand, since voting systems in general have rules set for data interpretation.

And who decides whether a sample is sufficiently large or not? certainly not you. If the sample is big enough to allow to calculate a median and standard deviation then it is indicative until proven wrong by another data (bigger sample or whatever).

You do not understand statistics that much is abundently clear. I respectfully suggest that you quit this line of argument while you are behind.

The matter of "what the majority think" is not something that is relevant to the topic at hand anyway.

[Geonis]

It is nice to attempt to sound smart by using latin and stuff, but unfortunately the content of your statement ruined your attempt.

If you think a little bit more, what i denoted is the fact that "The majority of players are negative towards the design of X foundation ships" with proof. Unless you prove that wrong, it stays as a fact which is based on an existing evidence (hundreds of posts etc...). For example say "The durian smells bad" which is an opinion, some don't think the same, which is also an opinion, but the fact that the majority of people think the durian smells bad is a fact, that is regardless of me or you liking the smell of durian or not.

So next time, instead of googling the next latin term to use, you should perhaps google the difference between fact and opinion.

The general guideline for gauging unsatisfied customers is the 1 to 26 idea. For each one complaining, there are, in theory, 26 not speaking but feeling the same.

Taking 500 multiply by 27 is 13,500. Is 13,500 a majority? No. By estimations, this is 13.5% to 6.75% of steam only owners.

Your claim is "The majority of players are negative towards the design of X foundation ships". I see no evidence of that even if we take at face value these hundred of posts do exist without having the google them. This is not even accounting for data outliers such as complainers no being players at all. I am assuming your complaints are from legitimate players, every single one.

So no, I haven't googled these posts, because your value is to low to support your claims of majority even if true.

[Terre]

Warnings are being issued.

Please return to the topic of the aesthetics or not, of the X4 craft.

[X-Tie]

Guys let's just be real for a second... If ships from X3 and expansions had been updated with newer graphics, better textures and more detail, they would look A LOT better than the capital ships currently in the game. Most fighters actually look decent in my opinion, but except from one or two of the L freighters / miners, the rest of the capital ships are very disappointing.

That being said, what I find MORE disappointing is the lack of ship diversity

[plynak]

Guys let's just be real for a second... If ships from X3 and expansions had been updated with newer graphics, better textures and more detail, they would look A LOT better than the capital ships currently in the game. Most fighters actually look decent in my opinion, but except from one or two of the L freighters / miners, the rest of the capital ships are very disappointing.

That being said, what I find MORE disappointing is the lack of ship diversity

This! It really buffles me how could they release this travesty and call it finished ship models.
Hell even X2 ships look better (I really miss Boron ships with moving parts). Not to mention that ship models were one of the few things they got right in Rebirth. With the exception of Teladi "mushrooms".

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

Guys let's just be real for a second... If ships from X3 and expansions had been updated with newer graphics, better textures and more detail, they would look A LOT better than the capital ships currently in the game. Most fighters actually look decent in my opinion, but except from one or two of the L freighters / miners, the rest of the capital ships are very disappointing.

If we are getting real, then you need to consider the simple fact that reworking models as you suggest is not as straightforward as you seem to be implying - especially given the move to modular ship designs. Different rendering engines can require different approaches to model design and X4 is not even using the same rendering API as X3 - X4 is Vulkan/OpenGL based X3/X2 were DirectX based.

The models from X3 were perhaps good (a highly subjective matter) but were not necessarily appropriate for the X-Rebirth/X4 engine. Consider the move from X2 to X3 as a prime example where models were completely redesigned from the ground up due to overall design changes. Arguably, due to changes in game mechanics with X4 what you are suggesting would have been anything but the right approach to take.

That being said, what I find MORE disappointing is the lack of ship diversity

Ship diversity in X4 is not that far off the diversity we had with X2 which, given the level of changes in overall game mechanics in X4, is probably the fairest benchmark for measuring what should be considered a reasonable level of expectation with respect to ship diversity.

X3:TC and X3:AP built on X3:R, X3:R evolved from X2. While X4 essentially evolved from the clean slate that was X-Rebirth things have sufficiently changed that the X-Rebirth models on the whole would not be fit for purpose - with some specific exceptions perhaps (e.g. the Xenon ships and the Kha'ak ships - which seem to have been deliberately excluded from being affected by the modular ship design approach as well as being seemingly deliberately excluded from the pilotable ship list).

[GCU Grey Area]

If ships from X3 and expansions had been updated with newer graphics, better textures and more detail, they would look A LOT better than the capital ships currently in the game. Most fighters actually look decent in my opinion, but except from one or two of the L freighters / miners, the rest of the capital ships are very disappointing.

Ugh! No, was not a fan of X3 ship design. Really glad they didn't do that. Played X3 (etc) because the game mechanics were better than X2, but really did not think much of some of the ship designs. Borons in particular were (in my entirely subjective opinion) atrocious compared to X2 counterparts - e.g. they turned spiky mutant fish Hydra (my favourite X2 M6) into a bloated whale. Still flew one but tried very hard to avoid ever looking at it from the outside. Think my favourite game in the series from a ship design perspective has to be XR - some truly beautiful ships in that game (very fond memories of the Lepton). Do however like many of the ships in X4 (would rate it 2nd overall for ship design after XR). In particular think they did a grand job with many of the freighters & mining ships. Very fond of the design aesthetic for Teladi ships in X4 too - weapon placement may be a little odd for some of them, but that just gives them distinctive character.

[Nafensoriel]

Guys let's just be real for a second... If ships from X3 and expansions had been updated with newer graphics, better textures and more detail, they would look A LOT better than the capital ships currently in the game. Most fighters actually look decent in my opinion, but except from one or two of the L freighters / miners, the rest of the capital ships are very disappointing.

That being said, what I find MORE disappointing is the lack of ship diversity

Really? I think people just have nostalgia syndrome.
https://www.egosoft.com/games/x4/screen ... en_048.png

X3TC.net is being annoying.http://eng.x3tc.net/screenshot/ship.php?MzkwMTM0Nw

Do my eyes deceive me or is this pretty much an open and shut case when actual data is applied? "upgrading" X3 ships to x4 ships would be a stunningly major undertaking.
I suggest anyone who thinks it's not to load up 3ds/maya and go to town. Tell us how long it takes you.

[mr.WHO]

Discoverer/Callisto/Quasar are one of the best X4 models.

[ReverieSwimming]

This! It really buffles me how could they release this travesty and call it finished ship models.
Hell even X2 ships look better (I really miss Boron ships with moving parts). Not to mention that ship models were one of the few things they got right in Rebirth. With the exception of Teladi "mushrooms".

I absolutely loved the Terran aesthetic in Rebirth. Seeing as how X4 has somewhat followed the Rebirth aesthetic for the Argon and Teladi ships (Argon keep the tuning fork design, Teladi keep the mushroom), I really hope that if and when the Terrans come back, they have designs reminiscent of the Sucellus/Onil/Lepton.

Also, a weird thing about the Teladi mushrooms in X4 vs Rebirth, is that the mushrooms made much more practical sense in Rebirth. The Phoenix Marauder mounted 6 Plasma/LRs on the mushroom cap, all facing foward, which was a terrifying amount of single-target damage for a ship its size and speed. In X4, however, the majority of the Phoenix's firepower is mounted aft of the mushroom cap (on the "stem") meaning the damn thing blocks your firing angles and makes it impossible to focus fire from your turrets.

The design of X4's Phoenix utterly negates the entire purpose of the mushroom design of the X:Rebirth Phoenix. It's like they forgot why they used the shape in the first place