Old Carrier vs New Carrier

[Gurluash]

I'm not sure that's a Carrier (at least not a standard one). Aside from its slightly hemiellipsoid (half a 3D ellipse) top half, it doesn't have much in common with the old Carrier. Plus, the front section looks to be a cockpit of some sort (it's a different color from the main body).




Though if you think about it, 'space camo' would be flat black with no additional details.


Overall, it seems that there is a considerable amount of difference between the old and new air units; right down to a geometric level. Therefore, in order to incorporate the old Carrier model, the entire Protoss air force would need to be redesigned if uniformity is to be maintained. That sounds somewhat unfeasible to me without impacting SC2's schedule.

It looks like one, note the "wing" on top of it.
If the old carrier was redesigned it would look like that.

[Nicol Bolas]

One thing I just noticed (and you guys can tell me if this seems right) is that the old units seem to be more "rounded" with more curvy bodies and appendages. Its not that they arent sleek, just (edit: more) rounded. Now, they seem much more angular with the rounded shuttle being replaced by the rather sharp fins of the phase prism, the sleek bluntness of the scout replaced with a large-winged phoenix complete with tail and wing spikes and the angular voidray (a spiky arrowhead)

This of course is part of the problem. This is clearly a deliberate change from SC1 to SC2. Blizzard wants the Protoss air units to look like that. The old Carrier simply does not fit that aesthetic, so it was replaced with a model that does fit the aesthetic.

[Norfindel]

This of course is part of the problem. This is clearly a deliberate change from SC1 to SC2. Blizzard wants the Protoss air units to look like that. The old Carrier simply does not fit that aesthetic, so it was replaced with a model that does fit the aesthetic.

Except that the new model sucks. It could fill that aesthetic without sucking so badly. I like the Disruptor. Looks flimsy, but cool. Looks almost organic. It's a complex, art-like design.

The Carrier looks like a cheap, simple design, made with a few metal loops, neon tubes, and some randomly-looking spikes and antennae. It's like seeing a flying ellipse. It's a simple, geometric design. So, it really doesn't fills the aesthetic at all.

Sorry about the guy that designed it. I still hope it was a placeholder.

As said before, if one of the strongest reasons to bring the Carrier back, was it was an iconic unit, and if a lot of the community doesn't like the current design, it's obvious it must be improved, right?

[Nicol Bolas]

The Carrier looks like a cheap, simple design, made with a few metal loops, neon tubes, and some randomly-looking spikes and antennae. It's like seeing a flying ellipse. It's a simple, geometric design. So, it really doesn't fills the aesthetic at all.

A "flying ellipse"? ... How do you figure?

I don't see anything particularly "cheap" or "simple" about the design. It does fit the general aesthetic of the Protoss fliers: Yellow/Silver and Blue, with lots of curves that come to sharp points.

As said before, if one of the strongest reasons to bring the Carrier back, was it was an iconic unit, and if a lot of the community doesn't like the current design, it's obvious it must be improved, right?

What constitutes "improved?" Going back to the flying banana isn't going to happen. The absolute most you might get is a re-model to look more like the concept art. The model/textures will certainly be touched up, but the general design of it isn't going away.

So it will certainly be improved. But it's not going back to the drawing board.

[GnaReffotsirk]

I think the new carrier will do just fine if they enlarge the shell just a little bit.

[ManjiSanji]

Frankly, I think both models, both old and new, are nothing special.
I think people prefer the old one because they've gotten so used to it, and most people agree that the new model is lackluster at best.

The old Carrier at least sort of implied power with its construction and size. The new one looks frail, like you might break it if you click on it too hard. The difference between this and the Void Ray is the Void Ray's design implies that it's hiding something deadly, and it is.

What I'd like to see for a new Carrier model is something similar to the recent Battlestar Galactica Cylon Base Stars; not necessarily the shape, but the size, the daunting design, and the fact that the Raiders are visible within the hull. That's a frightening thing to notice when you're coming upon an enemy carrier; seeing just all the firepower it has hidden away. Its shape, form and storage of Interceptors all need to say, "I'm here to fuck you up," not, "Hey, not so hard!"

[Norfindel]

A "flying ellipse"? ... How do you figure?

I don't see anything particularly "cheap" or "simple" about the design. It does fit the general aesthetic of the Protoss fliers: Yellow/Silver and Blue, with lots of curves that come to sharp points.

Are you sure we are speaking about the same model?

It looks like a triangle from the top, like an ellipse from the sides, has that ugly things pointing back, and the random antennae, and that crescent-shaped stuff on the top. It's damn ugly. It's a model made for a unit that didn't last long.

What constitutes "improved?" Going back to the flying banana isn't going to happen. The absolute most you might get is a re-model to look more like the concept art. The model/textures will certainly be touched up, but the general design of it isn't going away.

So it will certainly be improved. But it's not going back to the drawing board.

The concept art looks better. At least doesn't looks completely empty and geometrical like the yellow Tempest.

Still, not the best option IMHO. The best would be to get the original design and improve it. I'm not going to say what's to improve it, because i'm not a designer, which is what it's required to improve a design.

[Nicol Bolas]

It looks like a triangle from the top, like an ellipse from the sides, has that ugly things pointing back, and the random antennae, and that crescent-shaped stuff on the top.

I can break down any model that way. The Phoenix is a triangle. The old Carrier is a flying cylinder. The Mothership is a circle.

Yes, if you ignore all of the gross details of a model, you can break anything down to a simple shape. That doesn't mean it is a bad design.

[KneeofJustice]

Hmm, seeing the interceptors would indeed be cool. Especially if they flew out.

I wonder what it would look like if they turned the two "U" shaped appendages on the sides around so that the bottom of the "U" was towards the front of the carrier. It might hark back to the original carrier a bit more.

Those little ribs sticking off the sides of the carrier provided a lot of bulk for it. If you take them out, it looks thin and wimpy.





My image editing software is primitive at best. I tried to do some cutting and pasting but it looked horrendous. Maybe someone with better software can give it a try? I think it might do some good if they reversed those "U's" and brought them away from the body a little bit.



I also dont like how the hull has been divided into four instead of 3 (makes it look like a cleft-lip, imo) and that the really sweet engines of the first one have been replaced with some little knobby things. At the very least, keep the engines because they looked great.

[ManjiSanji]

That could definitely make it look more menacing, Knee =D