Why do we want weird looking markers?

[-=Squid=-]

The thing is, were talking about paintball guns, not cars.

[Z-man]

The thing is, were talking about paintball guns, not cars.

What are you saying? That design only applies to cars? Design applies to everything we make. The computer screen you are staring at, the mouse you are clicking, someone designed it to look that way and it's what we recognize as a mouse and screen.

Do you really think that somehow the same principals don't apply to paintball?

[Chris42050]

I think you guys are making good points except that I dont think people will be using dm4's in 20 years. They will have better guns and different rules by then. People are buying new guns all the time. It wont matter what our perception of the gun will be. Just what our perception is today. And my perception is its kinda ugly.

[Konigballer]

I think the DM4 is very fugly looking, but my real hangup on its lines are at the front of the body were it blends into the barrel. I just think it looks like some lame Dr. Seuss gun.

[Z-man]

well Chris, the design or look of the marker has little to do with the mechanics of it. You can mill an angel to look like a VM-68 or an intimidator and it functions the same. Of course we will all be using something newer and (hopefully) improved, but that will likely have little effect on the (aesthetic) design of the markers.

[Chris42050]

Ha ha ha. Dr. Suess gun. Thats perfect.

[coolcatpete]

I think you guys are making good points except that I dont think people will be using dm4's in 20 years. They will have better guns and different rules by then. People are buying new guns all the time. It wont matter what our perception of the gun will be. Just what our perception is today. And my perception is its kinda ugly.

Sure but what about 10 years hasn't the classic mag make it over that.
Pete

[tyrion2323]

I think that there is more though. The guys responsible for the design and appearance of the equipment (industrial designers) are charged with the job of making what think this is a beautiful or successful look that will enhance sales.

There IS good design and bad design. What separates them is how "classic" a look is and that can only be seen after many years. Cars are a good example. Some cars have that timeless beauty about them that will remain no matter how old they get (like the Shelby Cobra or the 57 Chevy). Some cars are ugly when they are made and still look ugly 30 years down the road. Show me a marker that still looks good 10 years later and Ill show you good design.

IMO the Nike Shoe is NOT good design. The phrase "what looks new and hip today, looks old and tired tomorrow" applies to that Sure it looks "new" now but what are you buying for? a new look or a good look?

I must also add:

63 Corvette Stingray w/ split rear window
75 Corvette Stingray
50th Anniversary Corvette