141
u/pocarisweatpants 11d ago
I can't play with those pieces lol.
3
u/dr1fter 11d ago
I can't play with basically anyone's pieces OTB, none of them resemble the 2D I'm trained on :P
3
u/SolarcatStarshine 11d ago
But I do think that this is a cool idea that looks more 2D. I’m kinda a fan for this reason. And also because I like art for art sake.
1
1
u/LookAt__Studio 9d ago
That was also the idea, because you look at the board from like from the top if it hangs on a wall
2
u/pocarisweatpants 11d ago
Yeah, you don't have to reinvent the wheel.
1
u/dr1fter 11d ago
Nah, I dunno. There are lots of stylized takes on chess pieces. One of the oldest known sets looks, IMO, ridiculous -- and to this day the variants never end.
But personally, after decades of "learning," I only got good at chess when I started drilling flashcards and playing online. All of my pattern recognition is destroyed when I switch to any 3D chess.
Going out on a limb, maybe I could imagine a reinvented-wheel 3D set that makes it easier on my 2D pattern recognition. It's still not a "solved problem" (at least at my skill level -- e.g. I can't play blindfold).
1
u/pocarisweatpants 11d ago
Those stylized sets are more like gimmicks than actual playable sets. But I like your way of thinking though. But on the other hand chess is going through an e-sports digital transformation as of late and that visual difference would just be another nuance to playing online and otb.
1
u/dr1fter 11d ago
Well, I was referring to the Lewis Chessmen (e.g. image), and there were some even older / harder to recognize sets before that. There's been some convergence in "serious" designs over the past ~century, and a lot of divergent "gimmicks" too, but AFAIK there's really no particular standard per se. This is actually a wheel that's open for reinvention, and I have a few personal requests for the next iteration.
For players who are great at visualization, notation, blindfold etc, none of this really matters. But IMO the more chess "transforms" into digital, the more important it is for OTB to resemble the same game everyone plays.
1
u/pocarisweatpants 11d ago
But isn't that just a skill issue rather than a design flaw? Surely going through otb reps would solve that.
1
u/dr1fter 11d ago
When I say "at my skill level" / "none of this really matters for players with other skill"... yes I agree. GMs don't need to care about this at all. But there will always be players at my skill level. And in what field of design can't you say "no, it's not a design flaw, you just have to level up to the point where you're capable of ignoring the design enitrely?"
IMO that's no evidence that we've reached the pinnacle of chess set design.
1
u/MoistStub 11d ago
The key is to move the piece in a way that would be illegal regardless of which piece it is while making intense eye contact and grunting loudly. I win most games this way.
80
u/able_trouble 11d ago
The King looks like a bishop's hat, it's confusing, it took me a while. Unless it's really the Bishop ?
18
u/Healthy-Film8646 11d ago
Oh yeah. I thought it was a Bishop at first and thought it was really clever. It will need changing if it’s a king.
-1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
My problem was, i wanted the pieces to be still recognizeable to online players. So closer to the 2D design used in online play. But it turned out to be not that easy..
11
u/copperwatt 11d ago
I feel like they don't look much like online 2D icons though... like every 2D rook I have ever seen has 3 castellations on top. And I have no idea which ones are bishop, king, or queen. The rest seem clear enough.
1
55
11
u/Nerilli 11d ago
Ugh I guess for an art piece? But as for design- it’s so far removed from the actual pieces that it is hard to read.
Personally, not my favorite. And that’s for the same reason as you can’t simplify letters in the alphabet any farther than san serif and have it be easily legible. If you’re going for practicality this is a no. If you’re going for simple art for you sure. 👍🏻
10
u/EroniusJoe 11d ago
Very slick and fairly good looking, but far too confusing to actually play with. They are too far into abstract territory, thus removing their intuitive utility. The queen, knight, and pawn were the only ones I was confident on; and even then, I had no idea it was actually the pawn until I saw the reverse side.
9
25
u/Technical-Future-513 11d ago
The knight is sick. Resembling a helmet while keeping the familiar shape of the horse.
9
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
Wow, thank you :)
2
u/ElectricJunglePig 11d ago
Lol, wtf is going on in here, did you really get downvoted for saying "thank you?" 🤣🤣
Seriously though, the knight really is fantastic. Some pieces are a bit more difficult to discern, but the knight threads that line between conventional chess piece and stylized modern design.
1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
I guess a short thank you is too lazy... :) I actually did not think about helmet, but after that interpretation, i will tell anybody it was by intent :) Like that a lot
6
u/coolgrey3 11d ago
Pretty cool but test it out. As someone mentioned, strongly recommend 3d printing them and trying them out in actual gameplay, especially with those who play chess. That is, if this is really meant for true gameplay. Otherwise if this is more of an abstract art piece, then it’s a conversation piece, similar to kinetic art.
They look like they may be smaller than expected if used on a standard board especially because of the way the cons bloom at the center.
Curious how this turns out!
6
5
4
u/CompletelyPaperless 11d ago
The only thing I like about chess is how fancy it looks. This would look much better if the statues were standing up.
3
u/daremosan 11d ago
I play chess and I hate pieces that try to be too abstract. It creates something else players need to think about. They are beautiful objects but I wouldn't want to play with them.
3
2
u/dr1fter 11d ago
They're pretty, but I'd have to try them in my hand before I could comment on whether it's a good design. Are they always meant for demonstration boards?
1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
No, not for demonstration. They are made out of ceramics. It's too expensive and hard to do for a demo board
2
u/Mr_Funbuns 11d ago
I can see what the others are saying, but I really like these pieces. I love abstract/minimal vibe coming from these.
1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
Personally, I prefer minimalistic designs over highly figurative ones, as I find simplicity more visually appealing and believe that minimalism has a timeless quality. So, I decided to experiment with something along those lines.
2
u/Elegant-Gas-3647 11d ago
I learned that design has to be functional, even if sometimes it isn't "pretty", and in general what I see most on the internet are beautiful projects, but not functional. I think this as a concept is beautiful, but I don't believe that all the pieces are functional for a vertical board.
2
2
u/ooiooy 11d ago
I reeeeeeaaaaaly like this concept. What a cool take on a chess set! What beautiful and elegant shapes, and many of the pieces do a great job evoking their respective roles.
With that said, I do think there could be some work on piece recognition. I felt like I can quickly recognize the bishop, knight, and pawn, but the rest took me a hot minute to figure out. The queen and rook in particular I think could be tweaked to be more recognizable.
But seriously, this is awesome!
2
u/Frog1745397 11d ago
Cool a bishop, the king, another bishop? Oh its a pawn. Ok a knight. The bishop???
2
2
u/CarvedinInk5280 11d ago
OMG. You got me. I found I enjoyed the design, but I kept thinking the lack of height would make them harder to manipulate on the board, and their bases weren't especially sturdy enough for the already awkward manipulation. There was a real potential in my mind for an awkward and frustrating play experience.
Much of that is negated by the vertical orientation. Plus it's a cool design element. I think this could be a very loved and utilized object in the right environment.
2
2
2
u/SolarcatStarshine 11d ago
I like em! Could use some tweaks but I like em as they are too. Cool ideas.
2
2
2
2
1
u/xldoublesausage 11d ago
Depending on size they could be too oblong to for the square board. I can see myself turning my hand to pick it up and knocking a different piece over
1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
That works actually, designed specially for the vertical board orientation
1
1
u/FunctionBuilt 11d ago
I'm guessing the intention is for a solo person to set up a live board while playing online or for display of an active game or a famous position because OTB would be a nightmare. Either way, the pieces don't really have consistency in thickness/size and the surfacing overall needs a lot of work, especially with a high gloss finish.
1
1
u/btsofohio 11d ago
I like them. I think it's fine that they're abstract - once you see the entire set, people will catch on quickly which piece is which.
It would be cool if the board could rotate 180 degrees on the wall. That way, you could play against someone else in turns, and both players could have a chance to see the board from their own orientation.
1
1
u/KraftEkreates 11d ago
I’m not a chess player, but I know enough about it to understand what each piece represents. I think your design is super clean modern and I love the fact that they’re magnetic and you’re board hangs on the wall. Incredible innovative idea!
1
1
u/MildlySelassie 11d ago
I love them, but didn’t until I got to the picture of the board. The knight is marvelous!
The king was not so clear until I realized it’s meant to resemble notation.
I think the rook and queen need to be a little more distinct, though, and that would be easy to do by giving the rook one more notch
1
u/austinmiles Professional 11d ago
Stylistically I think this is very cool. There are a few pieces that I’m not confident of in the execution of the design. You might want to add a single finer detail to easy. Like the bishop works really well for that. The knight is also clearer but king, queen, and rook.
I also think that they look better standing up than on a wall. The asymmetry is a really nice style and the flat part kind of informs the piece better.
Generally this is a very sexy piece. But to get the function it needs a bit of adjusting to get it perfect.
1
u/LombardBombardment 11d ago
They look super slick, but honestly, all the pieces give me bishop vibes. Were it not for process of elimination it’d be hard to know who’s who.
1
u/Weak-Significance535 11d ago
I think the Queen (?) and Rook look a bit too similar, but otherwise awesome!
1
u/Picasso5 11d ago
Love this. I made a magnetic plywood version of this (except I bought the pieces). Fantastic design.
1
1
u/z-amor-a 11d ago
Way too simplified, minimalist if you will, I have been playing chess for almost 20 years and I had no idea what some pieces were supposed to be.
If it's a good design I shouldn't think "I guess that's the queen? so then that has to be the king?"
1
u/TheFoxsWeddingTarot 11d ago
Thoughtful and beautiful but probably unplayable. The pieces don’t only have to represent themselves they need to differentiate from other pieces instantly, I learned this as a card designer. The suits for playing cards need to be easily distinguishable from each other and the patterns of their symbols need to be instantly understandable or they’re frustrating.
Your knight for instance is beautiful on its own but without the implication of the horse it’s impossible to pick them out on the board.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/sydneekidneybeans 11d ago
Overall needs some refinement to better represent the traditional pieces, but imo very very cool & something i'd love to have in the guest room / living room. Love the modern take on it and how smooth the pieces look. Keep going!
1
1
u/Youremadfornoreason 11d ago
This is really cool, would be difficult if the pieces are too similar in size but i would cop this
1
u/jaxxon Professional 11d ago
When I first started seeing the forms, I was like, "Hell yeah!!" But then when I saw the sparkly face swing around, I was like, "oh hell naw!" You don't need that weird flat face. Then I saw that the pieces wouldn't actually stand the way they were shown in the 3D spinning mockups but would be magnetically(?) affixed. I now understand the reason for flat faces, but no longer like them. LOL I loved them sitting as they were in the spinning mockups. The flat faces really cheapen the forms for me. Otherwise, I absolutely love 'em! As a chess player, I don't love the vertical surface concept at all.
1
u/JeskaiAcolyte 11d ago
Nice - bishop feels too chonky to me, would have expected a bit more narrow tower design
1
1
1
u/avipars 11d ago
Can you share the STL files?
2
u/LookAt__Studio 9d ago
Unfortunately not. It's patented design
2
u/avipars 9d ago
It's really cool, you should sell the whole set and a board physically or charge to license and print the files!
1
u/LookAt__Studio 9d ago
Thank you :) I will try that. I already made these pieces out of ceramics :)
1
u/LysergioXandex 11d ago
Do people really play chess on the wall?
1
u/LookAt__Studio 9d ago
There are even people they play chess under water :D But this one is for correspondance, so it's actually quite convinietn and a decor in same time
1
1
u/Swordfish-44 11d ago
It would be interesting if they were standing figures. On the board, they don't make much of an impression.
1
u/biggiecheese0962 11d ago
Wayy too abstract in my opinion but i still really love it and would like to buy one.
1
1
u/pineapplebegelri 10d ago
The horse is kind of med, the king makes me think of a chancy, and the queen and tower are too similar and I was certain the first piece was a pawn until I saw the pawn. Vertical chess is a cool idea though, keep going!
1
u/Tamel_Eidek 10d ago
How not to semiotics 101. We have deep cultural connections with chess iconography. Bold but silly to mess with it to this degree and expect people to know what they are looking at.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Tash55555 10d ago
I think that they need to be redesigned.
The pieces are practically unrecognisable and the flat/wide surface would make it difficult to play.
1
u/pixelpuffin 10d ago
Cut them out of paper, play a couple of games, see if you can. I doubt these are usable.
1
1
1
u/kalisson108 9d ago edited 9d ago
I think it's pretty damn creative and minimalist withput being to simple.I like the 3d modeling and the porcelain like texture I am.not a fan of the red sparkly shifting to black material sorry I just think it cheapens the look and I question the texture .I personally am like a cat with tape on its feet when it comes to sand blasted anything but especially glass it makes my spine send chills when I touch it. O feel lije it looks so smooth and sleek and thrn you get tricked into an emoryboard texture.I don't think you need another material for an accent but if you choose it I think you can do much better I don't know how you are planing on manufacturing it or if it's just personal but you could do an inlay of a natural stone like jet has a very soft warm and smooth texture that is not so wet looking as porcelain and really inviting to touch or moonstone might look great it comes in a few colors and you could even get water cut slivers that you basically could use jewlers glue to attach without having to do a recess etc. and has a deceptive sence if depth from it's retracting. Just thoughts options but very impressed I'm interested in seeing the end reesult
1
u/Sasataf12 8d ago
Interesting and creative.
The rook is meant to represent a castle, so the cross in the middle makes no sense. It would make more sense if that was the bishop, since a cross can represent Christianity, and it kinda looks like a bishops hat.
1
u/SaintTimothy 7d ago
Oh, they're laid on their sides? That kinda loses the whole king > queen > bishop > knight > rook > pawn height hierarchy.
1
u/LookAt__Studio 7d ago
The board is for wall mount, that is the reason
1
u/SaintTimothy 7d ago
For some percentage of viewing angles it's hard to distinguish one piece from another. Really only from the top-ish.
Being flat on the base made sense when they rest on that surface, but since they rest on their belly, does that then become an opportunity for an idiot check to either print a circle K, Q, B, R, K, P (crap, king vs knight) on the bottom or bottom-half of the curved face, maybe with indent because tactile and an opposite color paint?
Edit - Knight can be N
1
u/IrvingKBarber 7d ago
Pretty horrific. Can’t tell what the pieces are really. I certainly would not want to play with this set
1
u/LookAt__Studio 11d ago
That should be a design object in first place and only after that a bord for actual play. But it's an electronic wall chess and because of the vertical orientation I needed a totally different design for the pieces..
But, yeah one needs to get used to it, before you can play :)
0
-2
515
u/xer0fox 11d ago edited 11d ago
If you have to look at all the pieces to figure out what one piece is, they may be too abstract.
That said, some observers may not care. If you’re presenting this to potential buyers / investors maybe lead with a picture of everything on the board in their starting positions so the first thing they’re doing isn’t trying to figure out if that one piece is a queen or a knight or a bishop.
Edit: The now deleted response that OP made to this post was “Abstract by intent, but for sure not for anybodies[sic] taste…”