I need some criticizing!

[Bloodblade]

I'm new here,but nevermind that!

I want to know what you think of the tree in this screenshot:


I was going for a sort of...cartoony look,so I didn't add detail,but I plan on cell-shading it,should I?


Does the contrast flow smoothly?

[Phlox]

what website did you use to host the image?? i suggest imageshack.org or photo bucket and also your image is a jpeg wich is a bad file type because it gets very blurry use png or bmp.

[Bloodblade]

I used imageshack,AND saved it as PNG!

what else must I do?

[pkmays]

I think you linked to the thumbnail, not the actual image. Make sure you copy the correct URL.

[Bloodblade]

would that be where it says "Hotlink":


or where it say "show friends"?:http://img528.imageshack.us/my.php?image=graveyard0qs2.png

or...thumbnail for furums?:

[AdamAtomic]

it's the one that doesn't have ".th" in the filename.

[Bloodblade]

thanks!     now...look at the one that ARE clearly seen,are my trees cartoony looking?   Is the contrast good?

[tocky]

You can use the 'preview' button to check what you're posting, if you've got to.

Picking colours:
Generally, It's best not to pick the most obvious colours for everything. Pick colours that look good next to each another. Try not to use full green, blue, red, yellow, or anything like that, because they're pretty painful to look at. Look other people's pictures, other games, and photos, and try to figure out why they've used the colours they've used. In game graphics, the backgrounds should be kind of dull, so that characters and stuff stand out.

Tiles:
The trick with tiles is to make them look like they're not tiles. Your grass edges are too obviously square, and your trees and flowers are too clearly all the same trees and flowers. Your grass is just a flat pattern, so doesn't look like grass. Nothing really looks natural, because it's all kind of samey and straight.

Tsugomo's tutorial is the best one available for your basic tiley info.

[Bloodblade]

The point of this scene is to be Bright,cheery,and somewhat cartoonish,not detailed,realistic,and dull..as the player ventures deeper,it gets darker,and much more detailed,so the maps appear somewhat loomy... please criticize on how cheerful,cartoony,and bright it is!

[HughSpectrum]

I'm not an expert on choosing colors and hue shifts and such, but you could probably go for pastel-ish colors instead of MS Paint colors.

[tocky]

I wouldn't encourage you to do detailed, realistic, dull stuff. All those criticisms are valid, whether it's bright and cartoony or not. I'll see if I can put together an edit to show you what I mean.

edit:

I planned to include a new grass tile as well, but I haven't made one before, and what I came up with wasn't especially helpful. 'Use duller colours' doesn't necessarily mean 'make it dark and grey', it means 'pick colours that aren't so hard to look at'.

[Bloodblade]

There is a tile size restriction of 32x32 (or something like that) also a "walkabout" size limit of 32x32 (that would be the pumpkin)

The log had water brushing against it,not a shadow (it has animation in-game)

But I do see what you mean by using darker colors and such,but your remake isn't so cheery! (my original has animation,and sound,making for an overal cheery scene!)

I'm not worried about my map anyway,I just need to know if the trees look good,and blend in!

but thanks,anyway! =)

[Cure]

You should be worried about the map.  Take criticism, don't ignore it.  Your colors are way too saturated, and there is absolutely no hue shifting.  Cartoony/cheery or not, you could do with more detail, right now there is next to none.  The trees have a strange triangular shape to their trunk, way too fat at the bottom  And atop that is a ball of green, without an interesting shape or regard given to branches, which you should at least allude to.  More depth on the foliage would also be nice.

[HughSpectrum]

But I do see what you mean by using darker colors and such,but your remake isn't so cheery!

I did this by choosing other colors in the 256 palette (I did not alter the palette in any way).

I'm not claiming this to be the best way to reduce saturation or make a cheery scene, but I just want to show that it can be done without using MS Paint-like colors.  I do want to note that the colors I chose are actually much brighter, yet much easier to look at.

I probably should have changed that rock thing, since it stands out now (I didn't think of it.)  Oh well.  Just use lighter greys since they have absolutely no saturation whatsoever.

Don't just use these tiles and call it done, though, Bloodblade.  Actually make an effort to improve them as well as making better color choices.

EDIT: Edited some of my post.

[Feron]

i feel like my retinas are about to commit suicide...

i suggest reading tsugumos tutorial...

[tocky]

The trees don't look so good. They're blobby and very clearly mirrored. They don't look much like trees. They do blend in, but only in that they look about as good as everything else.

A lot of this stuff is pretty hard to read, like the bridge, which, considering its zigzagginess and the size of the trees, doesn't read like a log. It's all clear enough that you could play the game without any trouble, but if you want people to think that the graphics look nice, which I'm assuming is why you're asking for criticisms on a pixel art forum, you'll have to do better.

The colours and the patterns (both on the grass tile and the pumpkin) are the most glaringly wrong stuff, and if you redid everything else perfectly, it'd still hurt to look at those.

Look at, say, Kenneth Fejer's stuff, or Jericho's, for instances of what i'm trying to get at. Bright graphics shouldn't need to be painful.

[robalan]

I'll agree with the Kenneth Fejer recommendation; he has about the cheeriest mockups I've seen.  He also has a style that is similar to what you seem to be aiming for.  Simple flat-shaded graphics, bright colors, cheery atmosphere, etc.  However, he does not use colors that are uncomfortable to look at.  Nor do his forms look like paper cut-outs pasted onto tiles.  He creates volume and form with a very clean, simple style.  Good luck with your game, and I hope to see some improvement soon!

[Bloodblade]

my trees and contrast suck,so I asked for some criticizing,and thanks for what I DID get on the trees and contrast flow,I will make the colors less intense on your eyes,and try to add some variety to my trees,but lack of detail is purposeful!

The game goes from extremely low detail,to exetrmemly high detail,as the player progresses.

And sorry,the maptile size is 20x20 (to those who cared)

I also plan on enhancing the log (it's ugly,and I can't stand it)

But remember,please... I'm far from an expert (though when I have tried (hard enough) I have made some pretty good stuff)
so don't expect my next update to be astonishing!

[Jad]

Do not worry, my friend, we do not expect a complete artist metamorphosis over the course of a few edits.

We do, though, expect that you try to listen to what we say and put it into use.

I am definately not saying that you do not do that right now, though, I'm just clarifying :]

Looking forward to the next update. I really like the happy-simplistic kind of look in games like this and will gladly try and help you achieve it.

[baccaman21]

Jad is absolutley right bloodblade 100%.

Reading between the lines and based on how you've described your restrictions - "20x20 tiles (to those who cared)", " 32x32's (or sumthing like that)" makes me think that you've not got a realistic handle of what it is you're attempting to do. Coupled with the fact that what I'm looking at is what i'd refer to as "Naive" art... (sky is blue, grass is green, tree trunks are brown, rock is grey, &t &t) and the fact you've said yourself you're no expert... now some of us around here are quite adept at pushing pixels and equally adept at criticizing and commenting on each others work... this is how we roll... this is how we learn... this is how we grow as artists... or should I say, this is how we SHOULD grow as artists.

Learning to take criticism and apply it accordingly is part of that learning curve and shows true proffesionalism when one can take it without feeling the need to react negatively. It's a bitter pill that one must learn to enjoy if one wants to improve.

You've taken steps already on this path of artistic enlightenment by criticising your own work... your trees don't suck... it could be a stylistic choice... don't be too hard on yourself... but if they don't measure up to your expectations of what's in you mindseye then do it again, until it's right, and study other peoples work to get inspiration... I know its corny but its so true that learning comes from mistakes...

But enough of that... on to the piece in question.

I for one am a little perturbed by the notion that the game goes from extremely low detail to extremely high... speaking with my producer hat on I'd have to ask you, if this is your example of extremely low detail then please illustrate extremely high, then one can make an assessment of the range of difference between the two extremes and perhaps, in context, be able to C&C a little more accurately.

If I were you I'd start like this, rather than trying to tackle too much at once... just focus on a couple of elements at first, say the rock and tree... and do a few iterations of them using this lo detail through to high detail idea.

I'll look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[Bloodblade]

thanks,but I AM going bit-by-bit!

I started asking about the trees,but you guys wen't on about my entire MAP!

And when I finished the high-detail parts,I shall show them!

[baccaman21]

lol... fairdoos... may I suggest you refrain from any more updates until you do have an example of said transitions? It may help 'us lot*' get a better handle on what you're attempting to achieve...

*we can be quite tenacious can't we?

[Jad]

thanks,but I AM going bit-by-bit!

I started asking about the trees,but you guys wen't on about my entire MAP!

And when I finished the high-detail parts,I shall show them!

You will never be able to tell us what we should and shouldn't criticize. Sorry.

If we criticize things you haven't asked for critique on, that means something. In this case it mostly means that most people here cannot give good critique on the trees and detail because they think that the piece as a whole, colors, idea, etc., needs to improve before it is necessary to address detail work.

Like this, if I don't like the burning colors (which is true, I don't.), why would I criticize the tree? If I made a nice-looking tree with those saturated colors, would I be happy with the end result? No.

Which is why I, if I would give critique, simply wouldn't be able to disregard the colors.

So please, please, listen to what we have to say. If you disagree completely, then so be it. You're the master of your own art, and you may make it as you wish.

If we seem like tenacious bastards to you, it's only because we want to see you improve.

And of course you may go bit-by-bit, but get the fundamental bits down first of all, ok? Color, general shapes, etc.

Oh well, enough ranting. You know that I have only love and man-hugs for you, so don't pout :]

[Blackbeltdude]

I agree with what's been said here...

But even if you want this to be really simple, there's still a basic look things should have.

Trees can be amazing looking in games, especially with simple designs. Just look at The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap. Those trees are quite simple, but very stylized and show a lot of depth. That's partly because those trees in the game demonstrate some pixel basics if I recall. Most notably Anti-alising (I hope I spelled it right), and selective outlining. Those alone will help with the shape to give some illusion of depth. Another part is shading. And I know you said you want it simple, but these aren't too stylistic. Just showing an indication of bark would be helpful. The leaves are another matter. You've got a chunk of green on a chunk of brown, which doesn't really make a tree. It's more like a cylinder with some balls on top. (If you look at Mario 64's trees, you'll get a great idea of something simple, stylish, and attractive).

While I think the other things could be improved, water, grass, rocks, log, flowers... I think the trees are the most important. (Though, the grass could be even more important). But grass is a pain in the butt to do. I've found several grass tiles that tile together help... it's possible you could get away with flat green, and a few patches of different grass tiles. Same for the water. That's the only way I can think of keeping it simple, and attractive.

Really, I think what would really help is posting the character that walks around this place.

[philjones]

Simple and effective.  And I think it's happy.  The trees may be a bit more complex than you're going for.  They're also at an utterly foolish angle, now that I look at it.  Mario 64-like trees, as Blackbeltdude mentioned, would be an excellent approach.

[edit]


Just Googled "mario 64 trees".
[/edit]