Moderator: Cartographers
Mishalex wrote:in my opinion, the 10.1 version without shadow fits better than this... but if everybody feels good about this version, let's go with it...
betiko wrote:i think it looks very good. when is this going to beta?????????
iAmCaffeine wrote:betiko wrote:i think it looks very good. when is this going to beta?????????
Seriously?
betiko wrote:iAmCaffeine wrote:betiko wrote:i think it looks very good. when is this going to beta?????????
Seriously?
Have you seen what 70% of the maps look like? Are you saying those graphics don t meet the site s standards?
iAmCaffeine wrote:betiko wrote:iAmCaffeine wrote:betiko wrote:i think it looks very good. when is this going to beta?????????
Seriously?
Have you seen what 70% of the maps look like? Are you saying those graphics don t meet the site s standards?
It has potential but it has a fair way to go graphically..
What I would say is that some quenched maps are terrible compared to others. I don't know how they got through the foundry, but I suppose it depends on who the mapmaker is.
iAmCaffeine wrote:Time they're made? Presumably you're inferring that newer maps are produced to a higher standard, graphically?
I actually like them. While the hand drawn aspect may not fit perfectly with the rigid style of the map, what I do like most is that, like rj said, they are unobtrusive, and blend in nicely with the map. Basically they don't stand out, and draw your attention straight to them. This allows the great work you did on the overall map to shine through. So while you may not like the exact look of these I think they are more along the lines of how they should look. In my personal opinion.pamoa wrote:sorry rj but they are awful
Donelladan wrote:Maybe we could have a map with rj montains everywhere and compare. I may prefer the one from rj too for the map.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users