Olympia 6 Discussion and Render Thread (previously Olympia 6 Preview Thread)

1246711

Comments

  • SickleYieldSickleYield Posts: 7,318
    edited December 1969

    Khory said:
    Edgar Rice Burroughs and Tolkien were contemporaries, weren’t they?

    Not so much. Princess of mars was printed in 1912 and the Hobbit was first printed in 1937. The lord of the ring books were not published till 54-57.

    Good to know!

  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 4,492
    edited December 1969

    I get a strong impression that Olympia is a good deal shorter than V6 and Gia. Possibly Josie as well. Not necessarily petite, but nowhere near supermodel tall. Maybe around the same height as V5?

  • mark128mark128 Posts: 1,019
    edited December 1969

    jakiblue said:
    Will Olympia have her own UV set, or is she based off Gen2 female?

    The default skin for Olympia has Olympia UVs. The other Olympia characters seem to use V5 or the Gen2 female UVs, but they still claim to require Olympia. I have not check them all.

  • Coon RaCoon Ra Posts: 200
    edited December 1969

    Can't get what's the point in the multiple and still growing number of "custom" UV sets for G2F. Kind of idiocy to have just a couple skins of new UV set for the new FBM lifetime.
    The Olympia add-on is beautiful, no doubt. But "This beautiful character was hand-sculpted on the Genesis 2 Female base in order to provide the most lifelike, and realistic curves possible" makes me think the previous add-ons - V6, Josie and Gia with the additional G2F body and head morphs - was not THAT perfect and lifelike. After Olympia description I feel that Genesis 1 was insensibly relegated to the junk and rubbish state while previous G2F add-ons set as non-perfect. Kind of befor Olympia I spent my money for nothing. Uncomfortable feeling.

  • KeryaKerya Posts: 9,486
    edited December 1969

    Coon Ra said:

    ... But "This beautiful character was hand-sculpted on the Genesis 2 Female base in order to provide the most lifelike, and realistic curves possible" makes me think the previous add-ons - V6, Josie and Gia with the additional G2F body and head morphs - was not THAT perfect and lifelike. After Olympia description I feel that Genesis 1 was insensibly relegated to the junk and rubbish state while previous G2F add-ons set as non-perfect. Kind of befor Olympia I spent my money for nothing. Uncomfortable feeling.

    Don't feel bad - it's about "lifelike and realistic curves".
    The most curvaceous for G2F is Girl6, which is pretty, but not very realistic, right? ;)
    Josie isn't about curves - she's a teen
    Gia is about muscles
    V6 is about realistic, but not predominantly about curvy
    Feeling better now?

  • Mr BowenMr Bowen Posts: 334
    edited December 1969

    Here are some Frazetta gals, some censored, that share some attributes with Olympia.

    Olympia_Frazetta_Comparison.jpg
    1000 x 1500 - 1M
  • Coon RaCoon Ra Posts: 200
    edited December 2013

    Kerya said:

    Feeling better now?

    No. I hate marketing texts. It is always like you read unholy bible.
    Post edited by Coon Ra on
  • Cliff BowmanCliff Bowman Posts: 1,677
    edited December 1969

    Coon Ra said:
    Kerya said:

    Feeling better now?

    No. I hate marketing texts. It is always like you read unholy bible.

    I tend to get my loathe on for washing powder commercials. OK - so NOW your washing powder will get me clothes clean? But you've been telling me that for umpteen different formulations, each of which was supposedly whiter than white AND kept the colours!

    Grrr. Also, for several years in a row Windows from Micro$oft was supposedly always faster than the previous generation, and I used to cynically think "yeah - but only because we're running it on newer, faster computers!".

    But I digress. I think that each new washing powder/Operating System/3D Figure/character almost certainly DOES possess some of the qualities that are claimed of for it, but they are of such an incremental fashion - so small in nature - that they don't really detract from the quality of the previous one at all. The older washing powered DID get my clothes clean enough, the newer one just does 0.001% better. Windows IS faster, because the PC I run it on has more memory and CPU cores but my old PC hasn't stopped working - and Genesis2 stuff is all slightly better than Genesis 1 stuff, from a certain point of view, but Genesis 1 stuff is still brilliant - and it's the model that "broke the mold", so to me it has an almost nostalgic emotional appeal.

    Um.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

  • Coon RaCoon Ra Posts: 200
    edited December 1969

    They might use HD morphs technology on Genesis 1 and rerig it a bit to have the jaw bone instead of tambourine dances around G2. Looking back to Gen4 it was sucked dry by all the poser/ds community in the potential meaning. The G1 was dropped barely expanded to a third of its possibilities.

  • Carola OCarola O Posts: 2,781
    edited December 1969

    Just want to see if I undrestood it correct... it says about the Pose set Lady and the Lion Poses that...


    For a limited time, owners and purchasers of both Olympia 6 Pro Bundle and DAZ Big Cat 2 will receive these poses for free! If you qualify, just add this product to your cart and the discount will be applied automatically at checkout. Offer expires Dec. 31st 2013.

    Have I understood it correctly that if I buy the Pro Bundle for Olympia I will get that pose set for free since I already have bought the Big Cat 2 when it came out? Not that I can buy Onlympia at this time, but wanted to make sure I just had understood it right :)

  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 5,101
    edited December 1969

    Carola O said:
    Just want to see if I undrestood it correct... it says about the Pose set Lady and the Lion Poses that...


    For a limited time, owners and purchasers of both Olympia 6 Pro Bundle and DAZ Big Cat 2 will receive these poses for free! If you qualify, just add this product to your cart and the discount will be applied automatically at checkout. Offer expires Dec. 31st 2013.

    Have I understood it correctly that if I buy the Pro Bundle for Olympia I will get that pose set for free since I already have bought the Big Cat 2 when it came out? Not that I can buy Onlympia at this time, but wanted to make sure I just had understood it right :)

    There's only one way to find out, and as I have both ...

  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 5,101
    edited December 2013

    SimonJM said:

    There's only one way to find out, and as I have both ...

    ... and the answer seems to be ... "not yet" ;)

    It doesn't say "and has to be in the cart at the same time as one/both of the qualifying items" so I dunno, maybe it is down to me having the BC2 bundle and not 'just' BC2?

    Post edited by SimonJM on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 50,910
    edited December 1969

    I've sent in a query on the Lady and Lion offer.

  • dkgoosedkgoose Posts: 1,351
    edited December 1969

    there wasn't a big cat bundle, was there?

  • RCDescheneRCDeschene Posts: 2,777
    edited December 1969

    dkgoose said:
    there wasn't a big cat bundle, was there?

    Nope, No big Pro Bundle treatment that the DAZ Horse 2 got.
  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 5,101
    edited December 1969

    dkgoose said:
    there wasn't a big cat bundle, was there?

    You're right, I even 'whinged a little' about that ... I tell you, my memor ... er, where's my slippers? ;)
  • KeryaKerya Posts: 9,486
    edited December 1969

    SimonJM said:
    dkgoose said:
    there wasn't a big cat bundle, was there?

    You're right, I even 'whinged a little' about that ... I tell you, my memor ... er, where's my slippers? ;)

    ... in the fridge.

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited December 2013

    Khory said:
    It is a sad day if fantasy clothes started to be defined by loincloth skimpwear -_-

    Started too? Has it not been defined exactly that for over 50 years? Think that the less is more fantasy wear is due to the Mars covers of the 70's? Try looking back to the early 40's and what Jane sometimes wore. http://www.suspense-movies.com/stars/tarzan-jane/jane4.html has a "safe for work but just barely" image as an example. The whole elves covered neck to ankle is a far more recent turn of events than the fabric saving looks of the past.

    edit: That image is actually from 1932 not the early 40's.

    I meant that in 21st century we finally started to define 'fantasy' as something (slightly) more than boobs and buttocks in chainmail bikini, maybe swinging a sword in a temple. We finally developed 'fantasy' into something better than a woman clinging to warrior's knee, and seeing here that fantasy - such broad, diverse and wide genre - is still defined by this long-outdated baseline of a woman in skimpy clothes, is a bit sad. Like this whole development - people experimenting with settings and characters and formulas, - was entirely for nothing. It is a bit like 'what is music' is still defined only by 'it is 9th century church chorals' and there was no Mozart, no Beatles, no Queen as I'm not seeing much, if at all, fantasy books in stores where women dress like that being written today.

    Especially sad if boobs and buttocks in an neon equivalent of chainmail bikini, are also considered to be SF.
    I know it is just bad timing and bad coincidence that Olympia didn't receive anything else, but it still saddens me that none of the clothes makers thought of anything better than that when 'fantasy woman' came to mind.

    Well, you don’t go around seeing those kinds of articles on a regular everyday woman, now, do you? ;)
    I didn't mean everyday clothes but when word 'fantasy' is spoken, chainmail skimpwear is the latest thing that comes into my mind, honestly. I thought - and hoped - on something along Ranger outfit lines: fantasy, but practical one, with chainmail that at least attempts to protect vital organs. And I thought as a woman closer to 'plus' side, Olympia won't be presented just as a girl in skimpy clothes, because people on 'plus' side tend not to wear such revealing outfits. But from all 5 clothes releases today only a dress doesn't bare her midriff.

    Post edited by Kattey on
  • maraichmaraich Posts: 364
    edited December 1969

    And on a completely different whine... Come on, guys! One stinking snowball for the Pro Bundle? Something that expensive should score folks 2-3 snowballs as a little extra incentive.

    During this whole promotion I thought it would be nice if any item that cost over $15 should garner a second snowball. Like when I buy games at Big Fish. If I buy the standard game I get one chit toward a free game. If I buy a "Collector's Edition" I get three.

  • RiggswolfeRiggswolfe Posts: 784
    edited December 1969

    Khory said:
    Edgar Rice Burroughs and Tolkien were contemporaries, weren’t they?

    Not so much. Princess of mars was printed in 1912 and the Hobbit was first printed in 1937. The lord of the ring books were not published till 54-57.

    ERB was, I believe, a contemporary with HP Lovecraft. No, wait, I'm thinking of Robert Howard (Conan) and not ERB (Tarzan).

    On topic: I'm on the fence about Olympia. She looks good but part of me is like "Another full figure that will likely barely be supported after release?"

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 50,910
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    Khory said:
    It is a sad day if fantasy clothes started to be defined by loincloth skimpwear -_-

    Started too? Has it not been defined exactly that for over 50 years? Think that the less is more fantasy wear is due to the Mars covers of the 70's? Try looking back to the early 40's and what Jane sometimes wore. http://www.suspense-movies.com/stars/tarzan-jane/jane4.html has a "safe for work but just barely" image as an example. The whole elves covered neck to ankle is a far more recent turn of events than the fabric saving looks of the past.

    edit: That image is actually from 1932 not the early 40's.

    I meant that in 21st century we finally started to define 'fantasy' as something (slightly) more than boobs and buttocks in chainmail bikini, maybe swinging a sword in a temple. We finally developed 'fantasy' into something better than a woman clinging to warrior's knee, and seeing here that fantasy - such broad, diverse and wide genre - is still defined by this long-outdated baseline of a woman in skimpy clothes, is a bit sad. Like this whole development - people experimenting with settings and characters and formulas, - was entirely for nothing. It is a bit like 'what is music' is still defined only by 'it is 9th century church chorals' and there was no Mozart, no Beatles, no Queen as I'm not seeing much, if at all, fantasy books in stores where women dress like that being written today.

    Especially sad if boobs and buttocks in an neon equivalent of chainmail bikini, are also considered to be SF.
    I know it is just bad timing and bad coincidence that Olympia didn't receive anything else, but it still saddens me that none of the clothes makers thought of anything better than that when 'fantasy woman' came to mind.

    Well, you don’t go around seeing those kinds of articles on a regular everyday woman, now, do you? ;)


    I didn't mean everyday clothes but when word 'fantasy' is spoken, chainmail skimpwear is the latest thing that comes into my mind, honestly. I thought - and hoped - on something along Ranger outfit lines: fantasy, but practical one, with chainmail that at least attempts to protect vital organs. And I thought as a woman closer to 'plus' side, Olympia won't be presented just as a girl in skimpy clothes, because people on 'plus' side tend not to wear such revealing outfits. But from all 5 clothes releases today only a dress doesn't bare her midriff.

    Saying that outfits like most of those in the Olympia bundle are fantasy isn't the same as saying that fantasy is that kind of outfit.

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited December 1969

    Saying that outfits like most of those in the Olympia bundle are fantasy isn't the same as saying that fantasy is that kind of outfit.

    It isn't, but I've got an impression that when 'fantasy woman' is mentioned this is what people think woman of fantasy should look like today because of the image induced by early last-century literature.
  • ZelrothZelroth Posts: 890
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    Saying that outfits like most of those in the Olympia bundle are fantasy isn't the same as saying that fantasy is that kind of outfit.

    It isn't, but I've got an impression that when 'fantasy woman' is mentioned this is what people think woman of fantasy should look like today because of the image induced by early last-century literature.

    I must say I am a bit disappointed in this pro bundle. Not the variety of content - 4 outfits, 3 characters, 3 hairs, and 3 poses, - but the fact that out of the 4 outfits, I am most likely only going to use 1. I like fantasy outfits, but if I can't imagine most of my female characters in an outfit I am not as likely to want to buy it. (an I have a good number of fantasy/D&D females - 6 currently active). So fantasy skimp wear is not often in high demand for me. Out of those 6, I do have 1 lady who does dress scantily, but hers is a very unique situation.
    '
    With the hairs, I haven't looked at them all that well, but I think that MAYBE the same figure could wear all three hair styles as showing different aspects of her mood, or for different occasions. If the colors coincide enough, that would be very nice. I keep looking for hairs that I believe would do that, - one style for when at work, one for when out having fun, one for when out causing trouble?

    I haven't looked at the poses. I use poses, but usually only as a starting point. The characters? Look nice.

  • maraichmaraich Posts: 364
    edited December 1969

    Can someone please tell me what hair is shown in the main promo for the Prehistoric Princess outfit? Does it already exist and I'm oblivious, or is it something that will be coming out?

  • BarubaryBarubary Posts: 1,137
    edited December 2013

    Kattey said:
    Saying that outfits like most of those in the Olympia bundle are fantasy isn't the same as saying that fantasy is that kind of outfit.

    It isn't, but I've got an impression that when 'fantasy woman' is mentioned this is what people think woman of fantasy should look like today because of the image induced by early last-century literature.

    I would say that there is no way a woman in fantasy 'should look like'. They dress according to whatever world they are from. People in the last century weren't 'wrong', nor are they today, it's just a question of style.

    Also, looking at the bigger fantasy franchises of the last years, 'The Lord of the Rings', 'Harry Potter', 'Twilight', '(World of) Warcraft', 'Game of Thrones' and whatever, I would say that 'mainstream' fantasy has been about as clean and 'unpulpy' as one could possibly wish for. Maybe the tendency in art and 3D art to evoke the more pulpy styles of days long past is a bit of a counter-reaction :D Or it's just placing itself on borderline erotica, just like always :D

    As for Olympia's release...I would say that her pro bundle overall looks so-so. The hair looks all out bad. I don't really like the outfits, Jungle Girl might work for, well, jungle girl characters, but it looks to me as if the loincloth might have been rigged to the legs in which case it is pretty much unusable. Not sure about this. There's a Bobby25 outfit that has morphs, which is a really big step forward so that's something. I am usually not a big fan of Silver / Countess characters, at least not of their DS materials (I tend to like the morphs), but this time around they have by far the best-looking characters for Olympia, which isn't saying much, and they also come with SSS materials for DS. The promo shots don't really convince me and they don't seem to take any advantage of Olympia's 'fuller' shape, but again, it's a step in the right direction.

    The stuff I'm most interested in, as usual, is not in the bundle and, as usual, is made by SickleYield, although the included outfit also doesn't look too great. Least not in the promos. The braces by mattymanx look nice, too.

    Post edited by Barubary on
  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 29,848
    edited December 2013

    I've sent in a query on the Lady and Lion offer.

    DAZ is looking into the issue and will add the pose set to the accounts of anyone who missed out.

    Post edited by Chohole on
  • Mr Gneiss GuyMr Gneiss Guy Posts: 462
    edited December 1969

    Khory said:
    Edgar Rice Burroughs and Tolkien were contemporaries, weren’t they?

    Not so much. Princess of mars was printed in 1912 and the Hobbit was first printed in 1937. The lord of the ring books were not published till 54-57.

    Good to know!

    Tolkien did a lot before the publication of the Hobbit. There are drafts of The Silmarillion that date back to World War I. He also did a lot of scholarly writing and translations in the 20s and 30s. He was building his world and building his languages long before he ever thought of Bilbo Baggins. So calling him a contemporary would not be out of line.

  • maraichmaraich Posts: 364
    edited December 1969

    Barubary said:
    I don't really like the outfits, Jungle Girl might work for, well, jungle girl characters, but it looks to me as if the loincloth might have been rigged to the legs in which case it is pretty much unusable. Not sure about this. There's a Bobby25 outfit that has morphs, which is a really big step forward so that's something.

    I would very much like to know if the Jungle Girl outfit is rigged in this manner. That very thing is what has kept me from buying any of Bobby25's items since I discovered that 'feature". It would also be nice to know if the Prehistoric Princess gets away from that. If both items still have the loincloth stuck to the thighs then I'll know to steer clear of the Pro Bundle.

  • DZ_jaredDZ_jared Posts: 1,316
    edited December 1969

    The Lady and the Lion Poses offer is a shopping cart rule, so you have to have the Pro Bundle in your shopping cart, and you have to own the Big Cat 2 already.

    There was an issue with the rule earlier today, and some people who qualified for the offer didn't receive it. If you qualified for Lady and the Lion Poses but didn't receive them we will be adding them to your account. If you payed for them, but should have received them for free we'll be adding a credit to your account.

  • islandgurl31islandgurl31 Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    I just tried adding the poses to the cart and it does not have the discount :-(. I do have the Big Cats 2.

Sign In or Register to comment.