New Props
-
Yea, update 1.07
Don't get too excited though, until you see what they are.
-
Just read the patch notes...curious as to what the bug was when it comes to "editing foul pole positions"...and I'm not thrilled about more UFO's, being honest...more garbage nobody asked for while ignoring the things people actually want. Intrigued by the new stands thing though.
-
The new stands are like the old ones, just new colors. Plaza and upper deck, WAY DIFFERENT.
-
Sorry brother I know you're probably trying to do stuff with em right now lol, do they look more modern? I have so many questions lmao
-
Link to Reddit post I just posted some pics for ya
-
They're not awful looking. The plaza level and upper decks though..those look like they'd pair well with the "modern" field level seats, or even contemporary
-
I must respectfully disagree with the assertion that they are "not awful looking." Perhaps if they had been designed properly, they would look OK. But, when the field level props are so poorly designed that when snapped together the straight field level props stop short by a scaled distance of about 30 feet from where the curved field level props lie, then that's the epitome of "awful." In fact, I would go so far as to call it deliberate malfeasance on the part of the designer.
Something this obvious did not simply go unnoticed. No one creating 3D objects are this blind to the end result, or else they deliberately don't care about the quality of their work.
Moreover, when the bug is immediately brought to the attention of SDS through submitted trouble tickets, and a few weeks later the next update promises to fix the bugs in these props, and this glaring bug is not addressed at all, then one is left quite angry.
But, it's worse. I don't know if anyone has noticed yet, but the original release of the field level prop that slots behind home plate actually fit pretty nicely around the backstop wall and in between the dugouts. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't bad either.
Well, the designers did alter one thing for the field level props, they increased the distance that the field level prop #1 (that goes behind home plate) must be placed from the backstop wall! In short, they made it so that you had to increase the gap between the front of this prop and the wall!
Now, if as a designer you wish to line your field level props up tight, so that they look realistic, then this forces the rest of the field level props that radiate out from the one behind home plate to lie even further away from the infield and outfield walls.
Now, when I submitted my trouble ticket I followed up in the email they sent asking me to provide any additional feedback via reply to that email. I decided to add that they could keep the field level props "as is," provided they would give us something we designers have been steadily asking for now for three years -- a small stand prop of actual seats that would be about five rows deep and five seats across (straight) and a second one that was curved with five seats at front, five rows deep, with seven seats in the rear row.
I also repeated that if they put these seats on a tightly aligned concrete concourse base, and then made those concourse bases bare (sans seats) to go with the seat props, then we could use the seat props and concourse props to create really sharp dugout level seating to fill in such gaps between the field level props and the walls. I also advised that giving us straight and inclined railing sections, would let us take all this to create dugout level entrance ways, aisleways, and professional looking seating to ring around the infield walls.
Now, I have it on professionally reliable feedback that what I just described can be easily rendered completely by one designer in one work day using the sort of 3D object developer tools used today.
So, not only did we not get these new field level props fixed, we did not even get the easy to render small props that would have allowed us the option to make the result appear good anyway.
That's nothing if not awful. In fact, I call it malfeasance, pure unadulterated malfeasance by a company who thinks it's cool to poke a stick in the eyes of their paying customers.
-
@PriorFir4383355 I'm not even joking when I say this, but I wouldn't be surprised if we get all that stuff you mentioned before the main number 1 request we all have. Bullpens off the field!
-
@JoeSelser said in New Props:
@PriorFir4383355 I'm not even joking when I say this, but I wouldn't be surprised if we get all that stuff you mentioned before the main number 1 request we all have. Bullpens off the field!
I was closely inspecting the seating templates...and I've got a theory that they actually designed the seats for a tapered style field and not a jewel box...which is why they don't fit correctly. Also tells me they designed the seats and props first, and the field second
-
@JoeSelser I think we get none of it. I also endorse the template with the bullpens off the field of play, as well as the option to isolate and move the wall hinge points on the baseline walls from the foul poles to a point near the far reach of the dugouts.
However, I'm really trying to give SDS a low cost (quick) option to do something that would make a lot of customers happy. And, they are refusing to do it.
I think the reason for this stubbornness is SDS doesn't really want customers to design stadiums that rival their own work.
-
A admin locked this topic on
