Subject:
|
Re: How was the BrickFest moonbase?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 23:01:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
950 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Keith Goldman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Tony Hafner wrote:
| |
The only comment I’ve seen about the moonbase at BrickFest this year was on
Keith’s MOCPage:
“...but the ccc system works pretty well for a large display...certainly
better than the moonbase system that looked like a jumbled mess.”
|
Let me explain that comment before things get too heated. The modules
couldn’t be connected because the tables were not of the same uniform height.
This seems like a small thing, but some of them weren’t lined up very well.
There was no monorail, space train, or those car-tracks that were present at
PDX. I’m not complaining about the quality or coolness of the individual
modules, there were some great new modules like the “Hall of Justice”, and
Daniel Rubin’s Inquisitor module, and there were plenty of old favorites. I
just thought the lack of ‘neighborhooding’ and the lack of an extra hallway
segment here and there made it look jumbled and crowded. All I have to
compare this layout to was the PDX layout, and I thought that one was much
more pleasing to the eye. As systems go, I think the ccc works better for
large displays. My comments were not intended to disparage the work of those
people (don’t know exactly who it was) who were responsible for the layout.
I’m sure they did the best they could, with the resources they had. Since I
wasn’t there to help, one could make the argument that I have no place to
complain. My comment wasn’t a complaint so much as an observation, with a
side-order of smack. Above everything else, the public really loved it, and
thats probably the most important thing.
-Keith
|
Like Keith said, the moonbase layout suffered from visual disaray. It didn’t
help that they couldn’t be linked because of the table height disparity. Also,
there was over 80 large baseplates worth of modules. This made for issues of
clutter, because plenty of modules didn’t match eachother. Also, the moonbase
was on a big group of tables in the middle of the room, this caused some modules
to get buried on the inside. While the moonbase is an awesome concept, once it
starts getting very large, I think it can be tough to make it look good. By
contrast, the CCC display was a bunch of medieval buildings that all had similar
visual style, were much smaller (for the most part) than a moonbase module, and
had lots of green space between them. Also, a large CCC building was about one
small baseplate, and no more than a foot tall, while there were 2x2 moonbase
modules as tall as 4 feet (blacktron module) this meant that there were several
different visually dominant modules which dwarfed most of the others. In the
future, I think the moonbase might benefit from the same sort of display as
trains, a long skinny layout, so nothing can be more than a couple of feet into
the center. Still, it was cool that so many people got involved in the layout,
and the space room was awesome (if hot and stuffy).
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: How was the BrickFest moonbase?
|
| (...) I'll take the credit/blame for the space room. We had a limited space that had to allow for the public day (I was thinkin upwards of 800 would be through and it was twice that). I had wished we could have had a more open design... but in the (...) (20 years ago, 20-Aug-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: How was the BrickFest moonbase?
|
| (...) Let me explain that comment before things get too heated. The modules couldn't be connected because the tables were not of the same uniform height. This seems like a small thing, but some of them weren't lined up very well. There was no (...) (20 years ago, 19-Aug-04, to lugnet.space)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
