Home | Wiki | Discord | Dev Stream | YouTube | Archived Forums | Contact

Minimalist or Minimal Effort? - A Design Challenge


#41

Yeah but the way people use these 4 fixtures per side is way better than me.


#42

Your unfriendly Tailgator:

Nachtblick Euler



#43

You say that when you haven’t even tried


#44

I’ve tried a couple times they all look bad.


#45

Adenine Cadence


#46

We are now less than 24 hours away from submission deadline!

I have received PM’ed entries from:
@Mikonp7
@Xepy
@Centurion_23
@Dorifto_Dorito
@Kogure
@DeadBuckInc
@EddyBT
@undercoverhardwarema
@yurimacs
@B1ill4Har8din1
@Lava_Cake
@titleguy1

I have yet to receive submissions from:
@CC9020
@Osiru_Industries
@Sir_Night282nd
@phale


#47

Was tempting to join but I didn’t.


#48

2014 Blandico Simplis

The rugged sedan nobody wanted to admit they wanted!

He is Tall

He is Stylish

and
He is Strong

Buy it


#49

Trity Javelin

The all new Javelin power by the new powerful I dont really care -engine



#50

you still have like 10 hours if you’re tempted


#51

Well 7 hours now. But I guess i’ll try.


#52

#BringBackFarox


#53

Submissions are now closed!

Thank you guys for entering, it will probably take forever for me to actually get results out but we’ll see where life takes it. :slight_smile:

If I were to give an estimate, maybe a week? Maybe 2? Idk


#54

So uhhhhhhhhh

bodies are very very very borked right now. I’ll hold a poll on whether or not y’all want the challenge to continue.

  • Proceed forth with the glitched bodies!
  • Fuck this challenge, burn it to the ground!
  • Allow resubmissions for another week! I have hopes!

0 voters

Update:

A patch is supposed to be rolled out tonight for the glitched bodies. You can still vote but it’s probably not gonna contribute much unless the body glitch isn’t fixed


#55

Good I can then take pictures of the New Car Wagon for NYIAS.


#56

Update:

Bodies are fixed and working in the beta version. Challenge continues!

I am halfway through judging surprisingly. Expect stuff soon?


#57

Results: Part 1

Get your design tier list and angry salty keyboards out, because here’s part 1 of y’alls abominations.


Fixture 2.2R Limited - @B1ill4Har8din1


Originality (5/10)

Not particularly innovative, but not offensive either. It looks like what you’d expect from most generic Automation vehicles

Design Consistency (6/10)

Front and rear look like two different cars, with the rounder headlights at the front and the more aggressive sharp ones on the rear. Lower fascia carries out consistently and rather nicely though.

Era Accuracy (9/10)

With LEDs, light choice and edgier styling, the vehicle fits the 2014 aesthetic with not much else to say.

Theme Accuracy (6/10)

It’s decently aggressive with not much else to say in that department. The front and its respective grille give it a bit more of a menacing look, but the top-of-the-line aesthetic falls short in some places. The use of plastic materials on the side cheapens the car a bit.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

It’s pretty nice how some fixtures follow the lines of the car, an example being the side vent or the taillights and its plate holder. The lower parts of the bumper and the front fascia are actually pretty well done and overall a nice touch. However, the door handles are pretty freaking tiny and out-of-place, with keyholes on the rear doors, while mirror proportions feel really off.

Total: (38/50)

Summary: Not awfully flawed, not awfully perfect either.


Hark Gina - @Centurion_23

Originality (7/10)

Like the Fixture 2.2R, the Gina doesn’t break too many bounds with the 4 fixture rule, while fixture choice and morphing doesn’t really stand out. Body choice makes it stand out a bit more, but overall it’s inoffensive but accurate at the most

Design Consistency (8/10)

Front and rear are unified. Sharp edges carry around the car Everything feels like it belongs on the vehicle.

Era Accuracy (8/10)

With its edgy styling complemented by modern touches around the vehicle, the Gina fits into its intended era well with not much else to say.

Theme Accuracy (9/10)

Headlight design and other trim pieces capture the top-line vibe quite well. The car looks modern given its aggressive styling too. Nothing super innovative, but well done regardless.

Attention to Detail (8/10)

Attention to detail is present throughout the car, with changes to material types, giving it a more high-end look. Front and rear fascias incorporate meaningful trim pieces, while details are evident on the top sides of the vehicle.

Total: (40/50)

Summary: Looks how I’d expect it to look, but well-executed.


DBI FS1 - @DeadBuckInc

Originality (7/10)

Elements which are seen less on other vehicles are used. The lower end of the front fascia braves not using a single fixture, but instead, utilizing a layered segment. The vehicle, although a bit messy in era accuracy, is unique in its own way.

Design Consistency (4/10)

Nothing really matches well on this car. Each side i look at feels like a different vehicle, with round fixtures mixed with square ones and other issues here and there. It does however, carry an aggressive theme throughout despite these flaws.

Era Accuracy (4/10)

Besides somewhat-relevant LEDs on the front, the rest is a calamity of fixtures used from various eras, making it feel like a car from '07 mixed in with other ages of time. Headlights are quite round for the intended era as well.

Theme Accuracy (2/10)

Although aggressive, the vehicle does not hit its intended area as accurately as it could. Furthermore, perhaps it’s a bit too aggressive. The excessively-wide wheels and fenders strays away from the compact sedan status quo and leans more towards one of a sports saloon.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

Elements are aligned well, with relative care seen in terms of fixture placement. The taillights are pretty small, while the front fenders are a bit wide however, and the doorhandles are placed in awkward locations.

Total: (23/50)

Summary: Too outdated for the era, too inconsistent in design.


Sol 1 - @Kogure

Originality (8/10)

The Sol 1 differentiates itself from the competition with a well-thought-out and distinct front fascia (even though it reminisces a Lexus by a tad bit). Fixture choices are creative, and somewhat innovative.

Design Consistency (7/10)

Front carries to rear relatively nicely. The taillights do throw it off a bit from the front, but besides that, it’s quite a unified design.

Era Accuracy (9/10)

The car hits the 2014 mark very well! Sharp angles mixed in with elegant styling, black pillars, wheel choice, everything on the vehicle feels accurate to the given era with not much compromise besides the off-putting round mirrors on an edgy car.

Theme Accuracy (10/10)

This car hits the mark dead-on. It looks like a higher-end compact with its material choices and panoramic sunroof. Furthermore, it looks aggressive at all angles with not much complains. Well done.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

The Sol 1 shows attention to detail on every corner. Given its constraints, the front is laid out tastefully while fixtures flow nicely with each other.

Total: (43/50)

Summary: Issa Lexus. A nice-looking knockoff though.


Generica Exliscor LX - @Lava_Cake

Originality (5/10)

The Generica lives up to its brand name, by looking like something one could put together in 10 minutes. It’s not offensive, but very similar to anything else at the same time.

Design Consistency (6/10)

The front and rear vaguely feel like two different cars. Another point can probably be given for the fact that both headlight and taillight are tiny.

Era Accuracy (6/10)

The Exliscor loosely fits into the given era, with tastefully-chosen light fixtures and vaguely aggressive styling on the rear.

Theme Accuracy (6/10)

The Exliscor isn’t the most aggressive, with only the rear and side bits fitting said theme. It does however, look somewhat higher-end, saving it from a 5.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

Attention to detail is on-par with the Fixture 2.2R, with a tasteful side vent which follows the vehicle’s lines. Headlights and taillights are far too small, while each fascia doesn’t seem like much work was put into it.

Total: (29/50)

Summary: Generic, as name suggests.


Zimpli Cti - @Xepy

Originality (9/10)

The Cti is a distinct vehicle all-around. Even with the limits, it looks effectively unique and rather pretty at the same time.

Design Consistency (10/10)

The vehicle feels unified from each side, in fact, very very unified. Everything on the vehicle coexists with harmony, benefiting the design as a whole with nothing feeling off-putting at all.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Not too modern, not too outdated, the Cti scarily hits the mark right-on.

Theme Accuracy (10/10)

The Cti feels sharp, modern, and premium all at the same time. Gloss-black pillars, black accents and chrome on fixtures make the Cti feel premium. Wheel choice and size contributes well too.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

Attention to detail is well-observed in the vehicle, from fixtures that flow with the car’s lines, to tasteful material choices and proportions. Well, except for the doorhandles. Those are too small.

Total: (48/50)

Summary: Sharp and modern with a subtle, tasteful take on aggression.


Bradford Kasama - @yurimacs

Originality (6/10)

The Kasama’s design is unique and creative, but probably not for the greater good… The usage of grile fixtures for windows is a distinct take, but execution isn’t great. The design feels more uncanny and unnerving than it is impressive.

Design Consistency (3/10)

The front and rear don’t match. The windows clash with each other instead of feeling unified. Every side of the vehicle raises nothing but questions.

Era Accuracy (6/10)

It’s vaguely accurate… I guess? Roof fixtures date the car due to the rounder blobbier shape

Theme Accuracy (2/10)

The Kasama doesn’t really look like a top-trim vehicle, neither does it look as aggressive more than anything. The LEDs maintain a vague amount of modernity, but the strange matte colour and other little gripes really detract from the vehicle.

Attention to Detail (4/10)

Some fixtures flow nicely, while others feel very disproportionate such as the bottom front fascia. I get that the windows are trying to be something different but come on, at least give it a B-pillar?

Total: (21/50)

Summary: A promising premise, with rather poor execution.


Nohda Assent Sedan - @Dorifto_Dorito

Originality (8/10)

As expected, a good amount of vehicles with the same body would end up looking similar to this one. However, it does well to stray a bit away with its unique fixture choices seen on both fascias.

Design Consistency (10/10)

Front carries to rear in a way that feels unified and benefits the car. Not much to say here

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Like the Cti, the Assent feels modern enough without going too overkill. Nothing on it comes off as outdated either.

Theme Accuracy (8/10)

The aggressive mark is definitely hit on this vehicle. Perhaps it doesn’t look as top-of-the-line as you’d expect due to material choices and lack of trim detail.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

Fixture limitations are taken advantage of very well. Parts flow well with the body, with interesting touches such as the little trim piece on the side. Tasteful use of the light fixtures complementing the rest of the vehicle help a ton too. More dynamic material choice may push the score up a bit higher.

Total: (45/50)

Summary: It’s a great look. A few material tweaks and it would be among the unstoppable.


Oxford Ripley - @F12OM

Originality (5/10)

The Ripley looks like something I could think of making in less than 5 minutes of my time, with not much innovation in fixture placement.

Design Consistency (5/10)

Round fixtures clash with sharper fixtures, while the front and rear feel like two different vehicles.

Era Accuracy (9/10)

Fixture usage keeps the vehicle vaguely accurate to its era, although mirror choice outdates it by a bit. It isn’t the most striking, but it fits decently well.

Theme Accuracy (6/10)

While vaguely aggressive, the Ripley doesn’t feel too much near the top-line with only wheels and LEDs supporting it.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

Attention to detail is by no means left in vain, but definitely could use more. Fixtures are placed uncreatively and are scaled awkwardly with the body. Also, holy hell that blue is eye-searing.

Total: (31/50)

Summary: It’s what you expect to get with only 4 fixtures-per-side. Nothing too surprising.


Olympus Gemini - @undercoverhardwarema

I forgot to take pics of this car, but since the provided pics are sufficient enough, I’ll just use those.

image
image

Originality (5/10)

It’s… unique? I guess? Definitely not in a good sense

Design Consistency (6/10)

Round fixtures clash with sharper fixtures, while the front and rear feel like two different vehicles.

Era Accuracy (5/10)

The way the wheels are painted outdates the car by quite a bit. Fixture choice is era-accurate but not much else could be said about it.

Theme Accuracy (1/10)

Blobs, blobs, BLOBS. Not very aggressive, not very top-line looking, in fact, not even that compact considering the vehicle’s been extended to lengths, it’s hard to say the Gemini is very accurate to the theme at all. At least it’s vaguely era-accurate?

Attention to Detail (3/10)

The Gemini shows quite a lack of detail. Parts on the fascia are dragged out in strange ways to the point where they’re straight out of a shabby modern art museum. The solid colour doesn’t help much, while some fixtures are just placed in strange locations, notably the side vent. Exhaust is far too large while the taillight is also overwhelmingly large.

Total: (20/50)

Summary: Hit and miss.


Design - @titleguy1

Originality (10/10)

Many entries with this body have looked the same, with similar headlight styling all across the board. The “Design” strays a bit further away from that. The rear is a new take on the body and in fact, rather well thought-out. In fact, the entire vehicle is well thought-out. Fixtures are used in ways which they usually aren’t intended to be used in, making for a very impressive car overall regardless of its similarity to other entries.

Design Consistency (10/10)

Front and rear match very well, giving the “Design” a unified look which benefits the vehicle in a rather impressive manner.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Not too futuristic, not too outdated. The vehicle looks like something you’d see in its time with not much else to say.

Theme Accuracy (9/10)

Aggressive without being offensive, upscale-looking thanks to some material choice, the Design looks appropriate for its era, with my only nitpicks being the plastic trim material and the lack of a sunroof.

Attention to Detail (10/10)

No complaints here. Attention to detail is well and present. Each fixture flows well with each other, with an impressively well-fitting bottom fascia on the rear. Headlight style keeps the Design accurate to its theme. Material choice is taken advantage of everywhere, and the wheels match the overall aura the vehicle gives off. Impressive.

Total: (49/50)

Summary: Strays away from the status quo established by other entries, and does it well.


Mage EV I - @CC9020

Originality (7/10)

An electric car? That’s a new one. Besides the fact that it looks oddly similar to a Model 3, it is well thought-out on both front and rear.

Design Consistency (10/10)

Design carries well from front to rear, edgy styling throughout. Not much to complain about here.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

The EV I is modern on all ends. Not much to complain about here. LEDs are present all around, with a very tasteful taillight manipulated to fit the challenge era.

Theme Accuracy (9/10)

Sleek, modern, aggressive, luxurious, the EV I checks all boxes. Graphite colour with the subtle gunmetal wheels makes the vehicle look quite impressive. Like the Design, it could have used a sunroof.

Attention to Detail (8/10)

Material choice, fixture placement, etc. etc. , the EV I does well with nicely-flowing fixtures and little touches that make it stand out from all the rest. However, some fixtures feel like afterthoughts such as the rear plate holder. Side trim piece is also a tad crude.

Total: (44/50)

Summary: Model 3 or EV I? The black-on-black was a nice touch.


Trity Javelin - @LS-Vehicles

Originality (10/10)

The Javelin takes a unique approach to its design, doing well in achieving its rather distinct look. Fixture usage is innovative and well thought-out, using parts in creative methods I would not have thought about.

Design Consistency (7/10)

Rounder and larger rear fixtures clash with the edgier front, but besides that, the vehicle is pretty tame in consistency with not many more comments to make.

Era Accuracy (9/10)

Like others, the Javelin fits into its intended era well, with the help of LEDs, aggressive styling and material choice. Orange between those halos though? Maybe a strange choice.

Theme Accuracy (9/10)

The Javelin does well to align with the modernity of 2014, creating a fitting and realistic(ish) looking compact sedan. Further attention to detail on material choices in certain areas may have made it look more top-line.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

The limited fixture count is well-used on the front fascia. In fact, in a creative way too. The rear carries that same attention to detail throughout, with a very tastefully-layered lower end. Once again, more care can be put into material choice, and the fixture count could have been taken advantage of more on the sides.

Total: (44/50)

Summary: A creative take on the fixture count, with a somewhat effective design.


Adenine Cadence - @phale

Originality (10/10)

The Cadence is a breath of original design wherever you look, from its premium LED styles with intuitive material choice on front and rear, as well as its unique and tasteful use of side fixtures.

Design Consistency (10/10)

The front and rear carry a consistent motif throughout. The sides do as well, with the sharp flicks of the fascias finding relevance within the door handles.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

LEDs, sharp styling, wheel choice, material choice, etc. etc. etc., it’s all spot-on to the challenge era, and in a way which makes it feel immersive to the year it was built in too.

Theme Accuracy (10/10)

Aggression: Check. Top-line details: Check. The Cadence shows that 2010s-era sharpness on each of its angles, with material choice, wheel choice and fixture decisions helping it look like a true premium vehicle.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

Material choices on all ends are spot-on to what I expected in terms of attention to detail. The mixture of black and chrome is tasteful, and greatly benefits the aesthetic the vehicle is going for. Material modifications on the headlights and taillights help the Cadence achieve this goal too. My only gripes? The door handles are just too small, while the sides and roof could have exploited the fixture limit a bit better, perhaps with the addition of indicators or a sunroof. Besides that, solid design.

Total: (49/50)

Summary: Wavy, sleek, I love every bit of this car. Definitely a contender as a winner


And that’s it for part 1 of judging. I have roughly 6 more cars to process and this stupid challenge is finally gonna be over. Stay tuned.


#58

Not going to lie, this was a fun challenge. Creative one, too. Hats off to yangx2 cause this was surprisingly enjoyable.


#59

Results: Part 2

Finally.


Moteur Devoir Paon L - @Sir_Night282nd

Originality (7/10)

A bit of thought was placed into the front fascia. Although not executed entirely well, it’s unique. The rear however, looks rather generic.

Design Consistency (7/10)

The front carries to the rear somewhat well, with a bit of disconnect with round and sharp fixtures. Some fixtures on the car feel disproportionate, the mirrors being the prime example

Era Accuracy (8/10)

The vehicle feels era-accurate thanks to fixture choice… well… most of its fixtures. The mirrors date the car significantly, keeping the design from getting a top score

Theme Accuracy (8/10)

The Devoir is accurate to the challenge’s theme, providing a top-line look with its tastefully-chosen door handles and chrome wheels. The lack of a sunroof and pillar choice keep it from getting a higher score.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

Attention to detail is the Moteur’s weak point. The mirrors are oversized, while the handles are smaller than expected, albeit being placed correctly. Fixtures on the front fascia don’t feel unified while manipulation of material choice is almost absent.

Total: (36/50)

Summary: If only it wasn’t for those mirrors.


Blandico Simplis - @Tea_Pawt

Originality (6/10)

The Simplis lives up to its name, by showing itself as a rather braindead design. Simple square fixtures are lumped with whatever else might have vaguely worked with the car. The offroad-esque look is a bit unique though. I can give it that.

Design Consistency (9/10)

Although it may be a simple design, the front and rear carry the design language well, with my only nitpick being the round mirrors on the jagged body.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Fixture choice is tasteful on the Simplis, will LEDs utilized to modernize the design.

Theme Accuracy (7/10)

The design is modern, but feels more mid-spec than premium. In fact, it might even look like a pseudo-offroader. Small wheels, black plastic trim and the lack of a sunroof contribute to these factors.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

Material manipulation is almost absent, and the roof racks are placed far too narrow. A slight amount of care was placed in the lower rear fascia, but not much else comes out from attention to detail besides that.

Total: (38/50)

Summary: o f f r o a d


Nachtblick Euler - @Mikonp7

Originality (8/10)

The Euler looks a bit more original than the typical entry, with a more truck-like look. The distinct body choice, although maybe not too compact, helps the Euler look different.

Design Consistency (9/10)

Although it may be a simple design, the front and rear carry the design language well, with my only nitpick being the round mirrors on the jagged body.

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Even with the round headlights, the Euler’s design carries from front to rear, side to side very very well. Surprising.

Theme Accuracy (10/10)

The Euler aided by its fixture choice, is appropriate for its era, showing no flaws in this section.

Attention to Detail 8/10)

A decent amount of attention-to-detail has been used in the Euler, thanks to its manipulation of materials and other accessories such as a small hood bulge and a sunroof cover.

Total: (43/50)

Summary: Masculine, elegant, but a bit too big.


Farox Fucking Furry - @On3CherryShake

Originality (8/10)

Colour choice and a well thought-out front and rear fascia make the (fucking furries) stand out quite a bit. The sports sedan look fits well, despite not being relevant to this challenge.

Design Consistency (10/10)

Front carries to rear, that’s all. In fact, with almost the exact same fixtures…

Era Accuracy (10/10)

The (WHY THE NAMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE) is accurate to its era thanks to its tasteful fixture choice and edgy styling.

Theme Accuracy (8/10)

This is one of the vehicles where plastic trim is acceptable, because a unified theme with said material is carried around the vehicle in an effective manner. The (i still refuse to type out the car’s name) is a sporty take on the top-line trim, and does so effectively without going too overboard. There is however, room for a sunroof and maybe even a lip spoiler.

Attention to Detail (7/10)

Attention to detail is well-presented in the (STILL NOT SAYING IT), with its effective use of material manipulation, and unified flowing fixtures. Door handles are too small, but more importantly, where’s the gas cap?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?

Total: (43/50)

Summary: OHWOO. THERE I SAID IT. HAPPY??


A race car I guess - @EddyBT

Originality (7/10)

Extra points for looking like a racecar. I guess…

All seriousness though, holy shit this is made with only 4 fixtures a side? Gosh, how do people still make awful designs in this game?

Design Consistency (10/10)

FRONT REAR YOU GET THE POINT

Era Accuracy (10/10)

Sharp, modern, nothing feels off despite some more underlying problems.

Theme Accuracy (5/10)

Perhaps the race car styling went a bit overboard? I can’t really see it being more top-line and premium, rather than being an overly-aggressive sports sedan instead.

Attention to Detail (9/10)

Despite major flaws in theme accuracy, attention to detail is well-present for the typical reasons. The fixture limit is taken advantage of, with no limit let off easily. More material manipulation may have helped however.

Total: (43/50)

Summary: hsdgadahdgsdhga i’m forgetting things


MEM Type 3 - @Ezdmn

Originality (1/10)

It’s a BMW.

Design Consistency (8/10)

It’s a BMW with lower fascias from 2010.

Era Accuracy (8/10)

It’s a BMW with taillights from a 2000s BMW.

Theme Accuracy (8/10)

It’s a BMW.

Attention to Detail (6/10)

It’s a pretty shabby looking BMW.

Total: (31/50)

Summary: I’m too tired for this shit.


And with all that concluded we almost have a winner! (In fact a two-way tie).

Between @titleguy1’s design and @phale’s. Tight…

So I decided to weigh the scores accordingly and…

Out comes @phale as the winner! You have successfully made a pretty car with 4 fixtures!


A lot of y’all have been deriving lessons to be learned from this challenge, that I didn’t even intend to communicate when making it. I made this challenge off a fun little thought of “how pretty can you make a 4-fixture wonder?”. Despite this, y’all have taken this challenge as a bit of a learning experience for yourself, such as:

  • “You don’t need a thousand fixtures to make a good looking car”

…and I can’t agree more. You can spend 5 hours on a design and get outclassed by one that only takes 30 minutes. It’s all down to how you plan, and how efficiently you do things.

I guess this obligates me to list out my design manifesto right? Oh well…


  • Know how to do things efficiently. Certain tasks can be completed way faster and return equal results.

  • Plan your design out. It helps a lot to visualize what you want to do before going in.

  • Don’t be afraid to start over. It happens.

  • Criticism is always helpful, but you don’t always have to follow every single quip.

  • Enjoy what you work on. It’s a game for god’s sake.

  • And the one big (maybe unintended) takeaway from this challenge, only use what you need to use.

Thank you guys for entering! This was draining but kind of worth it!

And the rankings, just in case if y’all were curious.

I just realized the rankings haven’t been updated. You know what fuck it not much has changed.


#60

Yangx2 gives the duck up: the challenge.

Thanks for the host, this was an interesting concept and fun to build for!