Graphics is good but unit design is super bad

[AVATON]

What distinguishes good game of the genre is cool features that you feel satisfied when you play with. It could be totally different 3 factions in SC and C&C Generals with interesing unit abilities, siege warfare in AOE, cool tanks and FX in COH.

This game has nothing of it. It is super sterile. Units look similar, their attacks look similar, rockets bullets and tank shots look the same. I see no unit what I feel as "yeah it's cool I wanna build it". Nothing hooks me here. Factions look the same in design despite unique buildings and units.

Devs should do very serious work to make each unit really unique. Otherwise I'll prefer SC, AOE and COH to this game because that games hook by their cool features. Tempest Rising is just an RTS without features.

It's my opinion about this game as a player who likes competitive RTS. That is the cause why I'll not buy it.

[kostaskladianos]

''Unit design is super bad'' For real my friend?

[Water]

I agree, everything looks so bland.

[Sebastian]

You have to clearly distinguish between craftsmanship and art design here. From a craftsmanship perspective, the game is very well-made. Models, materials, effects, lighting—everything looks cohesive and polished.

However, the art design is not particularly good. This is mainly about the readability of the units. They lack strong silhouettes, and their size, color schemes, and animations are too similar. Armored vehicles are not well-designed, but I find the infantry units particularly problematic. In such a fast-paced game, readability is crucial, and with the infantry, it’s simply not there.

The art design is not going to change. The art passes have all been completed. What you see here is exactly what you’ll get in version 1.0.

[AVATON]

Originally posted by Sebastian:

You have to clearly distinguish between craftsmanship and art design here. From a craftsmanship perspective, the game is very well-made. Models, materials, effects, lighting—everything looks cohesive and polished.

However, the art design is not particularly good. This is mainly about the readability of the units. They lack strong silhouettes, and their size, color schemes, and animations are too similar. Armored vehicles are not well-designed, but I find the infantry units particularly problematic. In such a fast-paced game, readability is crucial, and with the infantry, it’s simply not there.

The art design is not going to change. The art passes have all been completed. What you see here is exactly what you’ll get in version 1.0.

Yes, that is exactly I want to say. No readability, no fun in units. I too think this won't be changed, too little time remained before the release.

[Scorch]

Originally posted by Sebastian:

You have to clearly distinguish between craftsmanship and art design here. From a craftsmanship perspective, the game is very well-made. Models, materials, effects, lighting—everything looks cohesive and polished.

However, the art design is not particularly good. This is mainly about the readability of the units. They lack strong silhouettes, and their size, color schemes, and animations are too similar. Armored vehicles are not well-designed, but I find the infantry units particularly problematic. In such a fast-paced game, readability is crucial, and with the infantry, it’s simply not there.

The art design is not going to change. The art passes have all been completed. What you see here is exactly what you’ll get in version 1.0.

That was my first thought. GDF infantry units are especially bad in this regard thanks to their stupid drones, which obscures view even more. Also, sometimes it's hard to tell the purpose of a unit just from the visual standpoint. Like, both factions starting gunships or GDF mobile AA and stealth tank have this problem. But in other cases devs tried too hard and produce such lame abomination, as Dynasty hamster ball.

[huyiuhyiu]

units model are good, but in maximum unzoom the game looks very bad. for be competitiv we need max unzoom mean this game is NO if they dont change this. CoH >>>>>

[Eric]

Lol aoe also as plenty of units that are copy paste, archers? All looks the same and shot the same, your argument is dull

[Blitzwing]

Originally posted by Eric:

Lol aoe also as plenty of units that are copy paste, archers? All looks the same and shot the same, your argument is dull

The OP has a good point, each unit type should have an
own feature to be clear an own thing, like own shape, size and colour.

Take for example soldiers in Starcraft, marine is small metallic, Ghost is tall and white with long weapon , reaper does hover over the ground, Marauder is big bulky and black, Medic is white, Firebat is red. You instantly recognize each soldier. Here in the tempest rising all units have same size and colour.

[Eric]

I can agree on that but their attack don't looks similar at all, also it's not true for every infantry, for example specialists are easily recognezable

[AVATON]

Originally posted by Eric:

Lol aoe also as plenty of units that are copy paste, archers? All looks the same and shot the same, your argument is dull

In aoe 4 you have bowmen, arbalesters and musketeers that are easy distinguishable and each has unique role. Yes there are faction specific variations look like copypaste + stat but the base units are easy distinguishable as it should be in a good game.

[Melinda Safitri]

Originally posted by Eric:

Lol aoe also as plenty of units that are copy paste, archers? All looks the same and shot the same, your argument is dull

Yeah lol broo i have aoe4 units design looks ugly.. hes argument so funny

[SpookyPancakes]

Originally posted by Sebastian:

You have to clearly distinguish between craftsmanship and art design here. From a craftsmanship perspective, the game is very well-made. Models, materials, effects, lighting—everything looks cohesive and polished.

However, the art design is not particularly good. This is mainly about the readability of the units. They lack strong silhouettes, and their size, color schemes, and animations are too similar. Armored vehicles are not well-designed, but I find the infantry units particularly problematic. In such a fast-paced game, readability is crucial, and with the infantry, it’s simply not there.

The art design is not going to change. The art passes have all been completed. What you see here is exactly what you’ll get in version 1.0.

Agree 1000%

[Spartan dropkick]

Same complaints with every new RTS games I swear. People can get used to it.
Infantry could use more readability.

[kampfer91]

Art is subjective and i say damn these unit look good and not goofy like those of Blizzard origin or at least inspired by it .

[puRe]

I think the GDF is perfectly fine, since they represent your basic modern day military faction with some slight futuristic tech here and there, that is somewhat grounded in reality. The Hunter tank even looks like a run of the mill mbt that you find on current battlefields.
Vehicles, including aircraft units, have a similar design language with sharp edges, so even if you don't know what a vehicle does, you know that it belongs to the GDF just from looking at it.

The TD on the other hand is a mixed bag and unit designs are all over the place.
Some look like past / present tech, while others are highly futuristic, achieved from tinkering with the Tempest.
Most show rounded edges to differentiate them from the GDF, while a few are sharp and clash with the overall design language.
Besides that the TD has some units that just look boring, at least in my opinion.

Maybe that's what they're supposed to look like, and the TD has different tech from different periodes, but it just feels incoherent to me and I'd definitely prefer a specific rounded and highly futuristic tech fueled by Tempest design language to make them more unique and distinguishable. They're called Tempest Dynasty after all.