Ohh, old-school style CoH pom-poms. Now all we need is high-school style ones as well.

Though more seriously, body part specific auras gives a huge potential for variety. Just have to ask, do we get to choose if they are on constantly or only on during combat?

Also that blending of shiny spandex as base with what looks like more matte details (some look like rust) gives a wonderful contrast.

JWBullfrog wrote:

[img]https://cityoftitans.com/sites/default/files/2019-02-27.png[/img]

We have another one-shot this week, once again courtesy of Jamie 'GeeksGoneBad' Cunningham. He's provided us with a quick snapshot showing off some of the new features undergoing testing, such as auras for specific parts of the body, and a new template for spandex boots. Thanks again to Jamie, and all of the team working on the Avatar Builder.

Love it! So shiny!

My only thing is....dude's clearly a eunic :p we gotta have something to avoid the extremely empty look.

JWBullfrog wrote:

We have another one-shot this week, once again courtesy of Jamie 'GeeksGoneBad' Cunningham. He's provided us with a quick snapshot showing off some of the new features undergoing testing, such as auras for specific parts of the body, and a new template for spandex boots. Thanks again to Jamie, and all of the team working on the Avatar Builder.

As always thanks for another peek at this. :)

Good to hear we'll have body area specific auras. You mention there will be "combat-only" auras - will we have the option to actively set ANY aura to be either "combat only" or not or is that characteristic going to be hardwired into any given aura? Also what about "travel power auras"?

One more question that I doubt you can/want to answer but I'll ask it again anyway: Since you mentioned new boots there was talk from the Devs a while back of having boots and gloves that could be "size adjusted" so that they could be any length we wanted. For example you could adjust the boots so that they would be anything ranging from ankle boots, knee-high to thigh-high. Is that still in the works for CoT?

JWBullfrog wrote:

Lothic wrote:

JWBullfrog wrote:

We have another one-shot this week, once again courtesy of Jamie 'GeeksGoneBad' Cunningham. He's provided us with a quick snapshot showing off some of the new features undergoing testing, such as auras for specific parts of the body, and a new template for spandex boots. Thanks again to Jamie, and all of the team working on the Avatar Builder.

As always thanks for another peek at this. :)

Good to hear we'll have body area specific auras. You mention there will be "combat-only" auras - will we have the option to actively set ANY aura to be either "combat only" or not or is that characteristic going to be hardwired into any given aura? Also what about "travel power auras"?

One more question that I doubt you can/want to answer but I'll ask it again anyway: Since you mentioned new boots there was talk from the Devs a while back of having boots and gloves that could be "size adjusted" so that they could be any length we wanted. For example you could adjust the boots so that they would be anything ranging from ankle boots, knee-high to thigh-high. Is that still in the works for CoT?

Lets answer as much as I can for now:

The plan is for auras to be selectable. On, Off, Combat only, that sort of idea. We're still working on that, so more information to follow. Travel path auras is something we (sort of) have already. I'm referring to the aura 'trails' as a character moves. Again, it's something in the works so, more on that in the future.

I don't have a clear answer on the boots right now.

Thanks for the responses.

It would be great if you could figure out a way to allow every aura to be "player selectable" (i.e. On, Off, Combat only) because in CoH there were some auras that were hardwired to be only one way or the other and some of those "hardwirings" were annoying.

As far as the adjustable length glove/boot thing goes it was something that some Dev was talking about a few years ago. I was just wondering if that was just somebody's drug-induced hallucination or if that was something you guys were still seriously considering. The advantage of course is that instead of having to come up with like a dozen differently-sized boots or gloves you could just provide a "generic" version that could be slider-adjusted to any length the player desires.

blacke4dawn wrote:

Ohh, old-school style CoH pom-poms. Now all we need is high-school style ones as well.

Pretty sure the "high school style ones" have been listed in the [url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/prop-request-thread-20]Prop Request thread[/url] for a long time now.

desviper wrote:

My only thing is....dude's clearly a eunic :p we gotta have something to avoid the extremely empty look.

I don't think this example looks -that- bad. Besides trust me they are never going to make our guys look like we've stuffed a rolled-up tube sock into our jock straps no matter how much we beg. ;)

Maybe you can just assume this is what [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varys]Lord Varys[/url] would look like as a superhero...

desviper wrote:

No i was literally thinking "is this some test tube baby that they intentionally ditched some parts on"

Perhaps what's making this "situation" more noticeable is the relatively wide "thigh gap" this guy is sporting. You don't normally see guys with thigh gaps that wide/overt. You might regularly see a woman that looks like that but on a guy I think it just adds to the "illusion" that there's nothing between the legs anatomically speaking.

Perhaps if they just made sure the male body model can't have such a wide thigh gap it would look a bit less off-putting.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

desviper wrote:

No i was literally thinking "is this some test tube baby that they intentionally ditched some parts on"

Where the heck do your eyes go when you examine a character that this is a problem? I seriously don't get it. I don't get why anybody cares, because I don't get why anybody is staring and going 'is there something under there'. Get your minds out of the gutter :P

People want their characters to look as good as possible in this (or any) game. For some people that level of "detail" matters. If having a Barbie/Ken doll level of detail is all you care about that's fine. Just accept (for once) you are not in a 100% majority on that.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

Personally, I think that visible packages should only be a thing if girl characters have a cameltoe slider. As far as I'm concerned, they're the same level and belong in the same class of game, ie Not Ours Please. I'm likely to be ignored, but that's how I see it.

No actually I agree with you at least on the point that whatever level of detail the male body model gets in a game the female body model should also get the same equivalent level of detail. It would be totally unfair if males got a package slider without females also getting a camel toe slider.

As far as your childish notions of thinking "anatomical correctness" equates to an implied "lower" class game goes you can keep that silliness to yourself, thanks. ;)

Shadow Elusive wrote:

desviper wrote:

No i was literally thinking "is this some test tube baby that they intentionally ditched some parts on"

Where the heck do your eyes go when you examine a character that this is a problem? I seriously don't get it. I don't get why anybody cares, because I don't get why anybody is staring and going 'is there something under there'. Get your minds out of the gutter :P

Personally, I think that visible packages should only be a thing if girl characters have a cameltoe slider. As far as I'm concerned, they're the same level and belong in the same class of game, ie Not Ours Please. I'm likely to be ignored, but that's how I see it.

I think what happened is that there's a lot going on in this costume, but the lower chest down to the feet is mostly empty. A belt might've stopped me from looking for more features and being distracted :p

desviper wrote:

I think what happened is that there's a lot going on in this costume, but the lower chest down to the feet is mostly empty. A belt might've stopped me from looking for more features and being distracted :p

Yeah a belt or -something- might have helped. I still think the relatively wide female-esque thigh-gap isn't helping this fellow out much either in this regard.

[img]https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/15/jul/coh6.jpg[/img]

Comparing to the Old City, I'd say there's a nod to what's going on, not pornographic, but not startling.

My interpretation is to via the UI, e.g. select fiery left eye, right arm, upper left thigh, and both pinky toes :p

Otherwise maybe an aura that's extremely different from the body, e.g. a giant bird aura over a regular human.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

Can't see that part of the picture very well Desviper. That said I could be convinced easily enough there is a middle ground where the nod to anatomy does not draw much attention. Having a slider on the other hand...I prefer not to think about it. Really does bother me.

Yeah I'm not asking for a slider, just an adjustment. A slider definitely points the wrong direction.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

desviper wrote:

Shadow Elusive wrote:

Where the heck do your eyes go when you examine a character that this is a problem? I seriously don't get it. I don't get why anybody cares, because I don't get why anybody is staring and going 'is there something under there'. Get your minds out of the gutter :P

Personally, I think that visible packages should only be a thing if girl characters have a cameltoe slider. As far as I'm concerned, they're the same level and belong in the same class of game, ie Not Ours Please. I'm likely to be ignored, but that's how I see it.

I think what happened is that there's a lot going on in this costume, but the lower chest down to the feet is mostly empty. A belt might've stopped me from looking for more features and being distracted :p

Fair enough. What it comes down to is, I'm flat out grossed out by requests for a package slider, or even a set bulge. Doubtless this is my more conservative upbringing talking, but when I compare it to a cameltoe slider, I mean I find the suggestion of either borderline pornographic. It's become clear this is not a majority opinion, but if we do get one, it will bother me VERY deeply.

Shadow Elusive wrote:

desviper wrote:

Yeah I'm not asking for a slider, just an adjustment. A slider definitely points the wrong direction.

There was a time when sliders were being debated a lot...I suspect I knee jerked with one when you really discussed the other. I apologize.

Just to be clear you were the one who specifically brought up package/camel toe sliders here... again. If you don't like the subject so much perhaps you shouldn't talk about it. *shrugs*

desviper wrote:

Shadow Elusive wrote:

There was a time when sliders were being debated a lot...I suspect I knee jerked with one when you really discussed the other. I apologize.

No, I getcha. [color=red]Sliders[/color] of that nature are definitely...icky. I'm just suggesting a slight adjustment to the mesh/skeleton. [color=red]Unless it's an android[/color] ;p

Ah but then how would a player be able to adapt between having a human and an android type character? If only there was some kind of GUI control that would allow a player to make "slight adjustments to the mesh/skeleton" in that region of the body model... ;)

Too bad this is all about borderline pornography instead of a nod to simple anatomical correctness.

He looks like one of those fat Superman artwork to me. Where the idea isn't to make them look like a superhero at all, but some out of shape figure in tights.

Do they do that on purpose or just can't use the sliders? :p

Brand X wrote:

He looks like one of those fat Superman artwork to me. Where the idea isn't to make them look like a superhero at all, but some out of shape figure in tights.

Do they do that on purpose or just can't use the sliders? :p

Personally, I think there are 2 issues that attribute to this:

The legs are set too far apart creating s noticeable “gap” in the thighs making standing appear unnatural.

The second is the lat muscles near the armpit curve inward above the rib cage. It makes the characters left side (your right), look bowled out around the rib cage instead of the “V” shape a fitter person carries in their frame.

On some positive notes, I do love the aura and the textures at the hands and feet :)

Did someone say Conan Exiles?

Tranquil Flower wrote:

I'm firmly in the 'definitely no slider but a binary androgynous yes/no choice for both models and a bit less ken if you don't pick yes' camp myself, for what it's worth.

You guys understand the Devs could always strictly limit a slider in this body region to only go between whatever two points you guys might actually be comfortable with via your "binary toggle compromise" right?

You see that's been the real problem here: When anyone (ironically like Shadow Elusive) reminds us about the possibility of "crotch region sliders" for this game everyone apparently always assumes that has to mean that guys would [b]automatically[/b] get to look like they have huge, bowling ball sized bulges in their pants. Listen to me people: NO SANE PERSON WANTS TO SEE THAT AS AN OPTION FOR THIS GAME, PERIOD.

Now that we're clear here if you'd actually be willing to accept something like what you're calling a "binary androgynous yes/no" toggle switch for this that presumably would be VERY SUBTLE in its effects then consider the idea of going one baby step further and allowing for a SLIDER that would ONLY traverse the small distance between what you're envisioning in your head would be the "endpoints" for your toggle switch. Have you got that idea now? Good, because that's EXACTLY what people like me have been advocating in favor of for YEARS. I don't want to see silly gigantic bulges in people's speedos - I just want to be able to make the VERY SUBTLE changes you also seem to be good with. Hopefully others will read this post and finally understand what's being talked about here.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with "pornography" as some have absentmindedly claimed this is all about. This is just about being able to make anatomically reasonable adjustments on our characters based purely on character concepts.

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with "pornography" as some have absentmindedly claimed this is all about. This is just about being able to make anatomically reasonably adjustments on our characters based purely on character concepts.

Yeah, like the cool new character I just came up with at some point during this thread. I call him Rod Stone, no reason, he has a lot of lady friends, no reason, and I'm gonna need to know the theoretical upper limits of the proposed dong slider. No reason.

If a slider/toggle like this actually happens as envisioned by Tranquil Flower and myself you'd be sadly disappointed by whatever the "upper limit" would be. *shrugs*

The very fact that you called it a "dong" slider proves you are simply trolling here. Second Life awaits people like you who apparently want an "actual" dong slider.

Tranquil Flower wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Tranquil Flower wrote:

I'm firmly in the 'definitely no slider but a binary androgynous yes/no choice for both models and a bit less ken if you don't pick yes' camp myself, for what it's worth.

You guys understand the Devs could always strictly limit a slider in this body region to only go between whatever two points you guys might actually be comfortable with via your "binary toggle compromise" right?

You see that's the real problem here: When anyone (ironically like Shadow Elusive) reminds us about the possibility of "crotch region sliders" for this game everyone apparently always assumes that has to mean that guys would [b]automatically[/b] get to look like they have huge, bowling ball sized bulges in their pants. Listen to me people: NO SANE PERSON WANTS TO SEE THAT AS AN OPTION FOR THIS GAME, PERIOD.

Now that we're clear here if you'd actually be willing to accept something like what you're calling a "binary androgynous yes/no" toggle switch for this that presumably would be VERY SUBTLE in its effects then consider the idea of going one baby step further and allowing for a SLIDER that would ONLY traverse the small distance between what you're envisioning in your head would be the "endpoints" for your toggle switch. Have you got that idea now? Good, because that's EXACTLY what people like me have been advocating in favor of for YEARS. I don't want to see silly gigantic bulges in people's speedos - I just want to be able to make the VERY SUBTLE changes you also seem to be good with. Hopefully others will read this post and finally understand what's being talked about here.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with "pornography" as some have absentmindedly claimed this is all about. This is just about being able to make anatomically reasonably adjustments on our characters based purely on character concepts.

You guys? There's just one of me, although I've just made another post referencing your history of campaigning for anatomical correctness, so I guess I have to take that one on the chin.

As far as your stance of 'if there can be options, make them a sliding scale' I admire the purity of your standpoint, and think that in a vacuum your views on design for the game are right, but the inherent pitfalls of making some design decisions just aren't worth it, in my opinion. Yes, in this case it's more because of a flaw in how anatomy is related to sexuality in the zeitgeist, and yes if the game was being built just for you, me and a handful of other customers I'd be totally in agreement, but when you get to the point of implementing features just to make a point, because you have to neuter their impact until it's arbitrarily small to avoid huge hazards, from a practical standpoint it's just not worth doing.

Equally, if you had ten settings on the slider that are all exactly the same, you're still now 'the game that has a cock slider', and that brings consequences.

And thus liberty dies. Let's all have fun with our Ken and Barbie dolls.

P.S. BTW you just contradicted yourself about being able to "tolerate" a toggle for this. C'est la vie...

I am not responsible for this talk on sliders!

desviper wrote:

I am not responsible for this talk on sliders!

I didn't actually start it either, ironically enough.

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with "pornography" as some have absentmindedly claimed this is all about. This is just about being able to make anatomically reasonably adjustments on our characters based purely on character concepts.

Yeah, like the cool new character I just came up with at some point during this thread. I call him Rod Stone, no reason, he has a lot of lady friends, no reason, and I'm gonna need to know the theoretical upper limits of the proposed dong slider. No reason.

If a slider/toggle like this actually happens as envisioned by Tranquil Flower and myself you'd be sadly disappointed by whatever the "upper limit" would be. *shrugs*

The very fact that you called it a "dong" slider proves you are simply trolling here. Second Life awaits people like you who apparently want an "actual" dong slider.

Oh come on Lothic. I was just saying what everyone else was talking around. I want to know if I can make a character who needs a schlong-thong for his ding dong. This is very important information to flesh out the Rod Stone mythos.

People like you what cause unrest...

At least I'm providing a good laugh for you while you're obviously taking this issue to a hyperbolic absurdity.

No, hyperbolic absurdity would be asking if we could have a bulge big enough that it would need it's own collision detection. I'm not asking for that. At launch.

Dude if you want me to be able to shoot your oversized dick off in PvP that's your problem, not mine. ;)

I guess I'll have to resign myself this is going to be one of those issues like the legalization of pot - everyone hates the idea until everyone likes it instead.

Lothic wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

Louis Garou wrote:

Lothic wrote:

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with "pornography" as some have absentmindedly claimed this is all about. This is just about being able to make anatomically reasonably adjustments on our characters based purely on character concepts.

Yeah, like the cool new character I just came up with at some point during this thread. I call him Rod Stone, no reason, he has a lot of lady friends, no reason, and I'm gonna need to know the theoretical upper limits of the proposed dong slider. No reason.

If a slider/toggle like this actually happens as envisioned by Tranquil Flower and myself you'd be sadly disappointed by whatever the "upper limit" would be. *shrugs*

The very fact that you called it a "dong" slider proves you are simply trolling here. Second Life awaits people like you who apparently want an "actual" dong slider.

Oh come on Lothic. I was just saying what everyone else was talking around. I want to know if I can make a character who needs a schlong-thong for his ding dong. This is very important information to flesh out the Rod Stone mythos.

People like you what cause unrest...

At least I'm providing a good laugh for you while you're obviously taking this issue to a hyperbolic absurdity.

No, hyperbolic absurdity would be asking if we could have a bulge big enough that it would need it's own collision detection. I'm not asking for that. At launch.

Dude if you want me to be able to shoot your oversized dick off in PvP that's your problem, not mine. ;)

I'm pretty sure that's actually sexual assault, and Rod Stone would never allow that. He's the most upright, rigidly moral, penetratingly wholesome of heroes. He [i]throbs[/i] with virtue.

[u][b]By order of desviper, quotes have been trimmed. Rod Stone, you'll be happy to know, has not.[/b][/u]

Lothic wrote:

I demand to see pics of this character on this forum in 2034, you know, the year this game finally launches. ;)

Maybe think [i]real[/i] hard before soliciting pictures from a man named Rod Stone.

Tranquil Flower wrote:

Lothic wrote:

P.S. BTW you just contradicted yourself about being able to "tolerate" a toggle for this. C'est la vie...

I'm not seeing where 'tolerate' gets quotation marks from (in your post, mine are now perfectly legitimate). I'm hugely enthusiastic about the idea of an [b]androgynous y/n[/b] toggle because it allows players control over secondary sexual characteristics while being rather hard to attack, fixate upon and generally get steamed up about by those who obsess about secondary sexual characteristics on general principle.

The concept that wishing to identify as an indeterminate gender is OK, maybe actually a human right, is just starting to get a tiny bit of traction in mainstream culture. That might just be enough to allow the kind of options I'm suggesting in a game that intends to have niche appeal, slightly leaking into mainstream, and has a very forward thinking outlook. The focus could be kept on gender equality choices not secondary sexual characteristics.

Again, I appreciate your 'I will give up my anatomical correctness when they pry it from my cold dead.....' passion, but I don't think CoT is a fabulous candidate for martyrdom, and I don't think that's the aspiration of those that are shaping it, nor should it be.

I must genuinely admit I don't understand why your [b]androgynous y/n[/b] toggle would not suffer from all the "negative downsides" that a slider would suffer? TBH, it's throwing for a loop that anyone could be 'pro' one of those things and 'anti' the other. I guess when it comes to this discussion anything can and will be possible.

Tranquil Flower wrote:

Lothic wrote:

P.S. BTW you just contradicted yourself about being able to "tolerate" a toggle for this. C'est la vie...

I'm not seeing where 'tolerate' gets quotation marks from (in your post, mine are now perfectly legitimate). I'm hugely enthusiastic about the idea of an [b]androgynous y/n[/b] toggle because it allows players control over secondary sexual characteristics while being rather hard to attack, fixate upon and generally get steamed up about by those who obsess about secondary sexual characteristics on general principle.

The concept that wishing to identify as an indeterminate gender is OK, maybe actually a human right, is just starting to get a tiny bit of traction in mainstream culture. That might just be enough to allow the kind of options I'm suggesting in a game that intends to have niche appeal, slightly leaking into mainstream, and has a very forward thinking outlook. The focus could be kept on gender equality choices not secondary sexual characteristics.

Again, I appreciate your 'I will give up my anatomical correctness when they pry it from my cold dead.....' passion, but I don't think CoT is a fabulous candidate for martyrdom, and I don't think that's the aspiration of those that are shaping it, nor should it be.

Piqued my interest

Louis Garou wrote:

Maybe think [i]real[/i] hard before soliciting pictures from a man named Rod Stone.

Nice. For what it's worth you've come up with a way to be rhetorically against me that I actually find entertaining. It's better than the "game will go to hell and you're an evil person for wanting it" gambit. :)

P.S. I've cut this down for desviper's sake as well.

Lothic wrote:

If a slider/toggle like this actually happens as envisioned by Tranquil Flower and myself you'd be sadly disappointed by whatever the "upper limit" would be. *shrugs*

Hey, the toggle was my idea!

Tranquil Flower wrote:

A) CoT actively promotes androgynous characters

Gotta point out that CoT has made it a point to show that most* costume pieces will be agendered, at least at launch.

Louis Garou wrote:

Tranquil Flower wrote:

With this kind of stuff the spread of the shot is far more damaging than the penetration of the projectile.

You're baiting me, aren't you?

I was suspecting that myself. :)

For what it's worth I do like that Molten's boots appear to have at least four colors associated with them. Will many/most items be allowed to have as many "colorable regions" depending on the textures I'd guess?

warcabbit wrote:

Watch the chargen video, Lothic. One. Two. Three. Four. Everywhere.

That's nice, just asking. I seem to remember years ago it was just going to be three colors per item. Either I misremembered it or you improved it since then. No worries.

warcabbit wrote:

We've worked HARD on this stuff.

And it's appreciated. One day I suppose we'll get to "work hard" at playing with it as well. :)

warcabbit wrote:

He's also wearing matching gloves, by the way, they're just obscured by the fire. Look closely!

Yep... *looking at gloves* cool.

warcabbit wrote:

I loved how Geeks used the multiple colors to give the impression of slowly cooling lava. Brilliant concept on something that's normally just flaming spandex.
Oh... didn't you notice? That rock skin you saw in the chargen video? That's... right there... on the costume parts, too. Geeks choose it carefully.
You can match ANYTHING.
Want ice cuffs? Done. Scale mail? Felt? All there. Working.
In this case - Geeks turned a pattern into _art_.

I'm sure it'll be much easier to appreciate once we can "tinker" around with it ourselves. While I'm sure everything you're saying here is great it's a lot like one person telling another person about a book they've read. Frankly it'll be more enjoyable to me when I can read it for myself.

warcabbit wrote:

Working like a madman to make it possible.

It might be a bit "lowbrow" to say something like I'm willing to throw a bunch of money at MWM if you guys will just hurry up and let me do that but, yes, that is what I'm saying here. ;)

Atama wrote:

1) That background is so confusing, I keep thinking all the characters being shown have wings.

Yeah this point was actually mentioned a week or two ago. I think a Dev said they were aware of it and would give us some kind of "plain background" option.

Atama wrote:

2) Will I ever make it out of the costume designer?! It might trap me forever.

All told I spent many hundreds of hours in the CoH costume creator tinkering with things and it's looking like the CoT costume creator will be multiple times more detailed so I fully expect I'll waste a non-trivial fraction of my life with it assuming this game lasts at least as long as CoH did. ;)

Can we have a Hold animation where the target is cheerleading for the duration of the hold?

Lothic wrote:

All told I spent many hundreds of hours in the CoH costume creator tinkering with things and it's looking like the CoT costume creator will be multiple times more detailed so I fully expect I'll waste a non-trivial fraction of my life with it assuming this game lasts at least as long as CoH did. ;)

I was also involved in the Costume Creation thread on the forums, which meant I spent a significant number of hours working on costumes for others, or duplicating particularly exciting creations of other posters. In many ways, it became a game of 'how well do you know the costume creator?' and exploring what was available.

A challenge I tackled, after losing a CC to 'Backdoor Betty', was "Can I make a genuinely adolescent-looking female character?" followed by, "Can I make one that doesn't look trashy?" I hope I was successful, but it Did take a lot of time in the CC.

Be Well!
Fireheart

desviper wrote:

Can we have a Hold animation where the target is cheerleading for the duration of the hold?

Doing that is just an alternative form of [b]Dance Gun[/b] ...

[youtube]PGF0MYORADE[/youtube]

Well late adolescent is pretty indistinguishable from adult, esp in 2004 graphics