Martian invader

[Kyrbi0]

Solid work as always. Gooshy brain matter. Love the teleport anims.

 

[PurrsandMlems]

EEK! EEK!

 

[ZM5]

Mars needs cheerleaders!

 

[MasterHaosis]

THATS GREAT! I like this model very much! Nice death anim with head exploding like balloon and purple effects. I like stand anim where he steps on that butterfly. This is also unique model that benefits the model section and did not exist here so far.
5/5+ like!
@Archian please put this also in contest entry.

 

[tulee]

The head exploding, as well as the blink effect like it is teleporting away (in a science fiction kind of way), are fantastic! Great model.

 

[ShadowMidas]

Great!

 

[stein123]

This is just brilliant, so much character, my favorite entry

 

[Sloane Ranger]

Love this. Would love a whole alien invasion race.

 

[Hotel]

This is awesome. Love the brain twitching!

 

[Villagerino]

This guys is very thematic, amazing work with textures, love the Birth, Stand and Death especially, nothing superfluous and everything to the point, great job!

 

[Wind Rose]

Oh my god, that's hilarious, I love the model, it brings back great memories.

 

[DarknessFalls003]

add "alien" tag please

 

[RanchBurner]

Inspired by "Mars Attacks"?

 

[Archian]

Added to contest entries!

 

[A]mun]

Super useful with Ufo.

Splendid animations!

 

[Kacpa2]

Very characterful, love the animations they're hilarious especially stomping the butterfly xD

 

[All_Time_Pro]

LEGENDARY

 

[stan0033]

some of the geoset animations lack 0 alpha for start/end of 'decay alternate'

Review accepted by Footman16

 

[tillinghast]

some of the geoset animations lack 0 alpha for start/end of 'decay alternate'

because it doesn't matter, it's covered by the material visibility, i have sat there and waited for 88 seconds for decays and model did not become visible for me
geoset animation visibility is binary, visible or not, so material visibility have to be used for gutz or in this case the "beaming up" thing, model still gets removed from the game after the animation is over
it's the same exact thing as default blizzard models

 

[stan0033]

because it doesn't matter, it's covered by the material visibility, i have sat there and waited for 88 seconds for decays and model did not become visible for me
geoset animation visibility is binary, visible or not, so material visibility have to be used for gutz or in this case the "beaming up" thing, model still gets removed from the game after the animation is over
it's the same exact thing as default blizzard models

My review is about data correctness not if it works in another way or not.
Technically it works because the material visibility masks it, but the geoset animations are is still incomplete. Geoset animations should define their own intended visibility instead of relying on another visibility component to hide them.

 

[tillinghast]

My review is about data correctness not if it works in another way or not.

what another way? it's visible when it should be and invisible when it shouldn't, it works

Technically it works because the material visibility masks it

there's not "technically" about it, it works

but the geoset animations are is still incomplete.

because they don't need to be complete if the model works as intended

Geoset animations should define their own intended visibility instead of relying on another visibility component to hide them.

they did define it and it's 1 because of material visibility
there is no point in putting 0 at the last frame of geoset animation visibility because next animation immediately overwrites it, or in this case it gets deleted from the game

 

[stan0033]

We're discussing two different things. You're arguing that the model works correctly in-game, and I don't disagree with that. My review is based on the site's standards for model data. Whoever wrote sanity test is setting a standard how models should behave. The Sanity Test reports six geoset animations that do not disappear during Decay Alternate, so I mentioned it in my review.

Whether you decide to fix it is entirely your choice. I simply pointed out what the site's validation considers an issue.

 

[tillinghast]

We're discussing two different things. You're arguing that the model works correctly in-game, and I don't disagree with that. My review is based on the site's standards for model data. Whoever wrote sanity test is setting a standard how models should behave. The Sanity Test reports six geoset animations that do not disappear during Decay Alternate, so I mentioned it in my review.

it's not even proper sanity test, it's this new "/validate-model" thing that makes wild assumptions
if it has replaceable id 2 (used for portrait background) - then it's a hero, demands a dissipate animation
same bundle here, for a missile it demands a collision shape (can't even select missiles in normal game)
on some models it somehow decides that the model in question is a building and demands a boxy collision shape
why are you blindly adhering to that thing? it does have some points (it did point out that i forgot about rally point attachments for my sepulchers, they're even missing in the screenshot), but it's not a be all end all or whatever, nor is the regular sanity checker

 

[stan0033]

Wether the sanity check is flawed or not is a different topic of discussion and doesnt invalidate my review. I'm not blindly followig the sanity checks, i see inconsistencies in it that you mentioned without you telling me, I choose what to ignore, but this here I did not ignore. As I said follow the review or don't it's your choice. If you want a second opnion there are other reviewers.

 

[General Frank]

[...] If you want a second opnion there are other reviewers.

I think the model is totally fine for approval. It follows every test in sanity check (which both versions are kinda flawed and don't know what is 'fully' correct) and it works well in-game.
I test all things in-game as every model reviewer should. That should be your testing barometer and not jut sanity checker.

The only real problem I have with this model is that the body move too quickly downward during the regular Decay Flesh animation. But that's a quick fix.

 

[Kyrbi0]

It should probably be discussed (elsewhere) how much we should depend/rely on the various "sanity checkers" for reviews (I.e. can a model be approved if it has any "failures"), because tillinghast & stan are both correct here, in different ways.

 

[deepstrasz]

My review is about data correctness not if it works in another way or not.
Technically it works because the material visibility masks it, but the geoset animations are is still incomplete. Geoset animations should define their own intended visibility instead of relying on another visibility component to hide them.

What's this, the onset of new AI minded bureaucrats?

 

[tillinghast]

It should probably be discussed (elsewhere) how much we should depend/rely on the various "sanity checkers" for reviews (I.e. can a model be approved if it has any "failures"), because tillinghast & stan are both correct here, in different ways.

What's this, the onset of new AI minded bureaucrats?

look it's two people that reply to every thread because they're pillars of community
they're pillars of community because they reply to every thread
what would we do without them?