Pixelation
Critique => 2D & 3D => Topic started by: Souly on January 09, 2009, 09:40:56 am
-
Well I don't really wanna post this in the other thread since this is a discussion about the 3D aspect to the game.
You can view the youtube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gBEXMLTPt4).
Think about the world actually being flat, Like a boxed in room with 4 walls.
The top of the wall is above ground, everything else in the wall is underground.
SO it's giant open box, when you hit the edge of the world it will do a sort of paper mario rotation, the camera and player will flip around to the other side.
This was an idea I had to make use of the 3D more. :]
I'm using Google's Sketch Up to do the modeling.
The black outlines are a part of the program and wont be in game.
(http://i44.tinypic.com/2wd5y5v.png)
(http://i44.tinypic.com/1zd6w4l.png)
It's blurry because this is not a screen shot of in game this is just what I have made in the editor so it looks like in-game kind of.
This showcases the lanes.
The player moves in the largest lane, anything on that lane has collision.
The two back lines are for background shapes and objects.
2D grass will be placed on the front line and the second line.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/eq12jm.png)
-
Allrigthy, simple question: Why?
As it is, the 3D might very well decrease your world integrity by introducing elements that make it feel less real. Your world can have it's own rules and they can be really whacky, but to make it solid, it shouldn't contradict itself. In paper mario for example, the flatness is embraced, thus making the integrity higher. You shouldn't be thinking of an excuse to use 3D, but rather make it an important part of your game world system.
-
Well first off, I repeat this not an in game screenshot.
And not how the game will actually look, it's just the best that I can do.
A square world is the reason for 3D?
Allows for easy rotation of the entire playing field?
With 3D I am able to make whatever angles I want, where ever I want without having to do extensive tile making and tile placing.
And make the world as large as I want all within just 1 simple 3D model.
All of the objects are not going to be on the edge of the world as shown in the screen shot, it will all be pushed back to where the mockup image is.
I dunno scenery has always been what I fail at.
And with this I'm able to make tons of original levels, I really just have to work on my texturing.
The roof will be cut into randomly to give it less of a square look.
But overall I guess the reason for 3D is just to be different.
(http://i43.tinypic.com/9i6x6d.png)
(http://i41.tinypic.com/1zz6ypy.png)
-
You're following in on a trend, that is not exactly 3D.
I think level layout is not enough of a reason to introduce 3D, it seems like you could simply have 4 separate worlds for your game, why make it sides of a cube?
If you look at the games that have followed in on this trend of 2d as part of a plane in a 3D world, there is always a very clear game mechanic that is crucial to the game...
http://digitaltools.node3000.com/blog/fez_created_with_trixels_technology_astounding_new_gaming_experience.php
Fez is what everyone thinks of in terms of indy games that employ this type of gameworld, you just have a strange map idea that undermines the in-game reality...people will just think of you as the guy who tried to copy Fez/Paper Mario and didnt really do anything with the concept.
-
Nothing anyone says will really detour me from doing 3D, sorry guys I've gotten a lot of good feedback.
There's going to be the odd person who doesn't like the format. :/
I honestly think I'll get more done in a 3D space terrain wise then I ever will if I tried to tile this.
The point in the 2D is once again so the entire single world is loaded once via one large 3D model.
Saves a hell of a lot of hassle I'm finding, and I'm enjoying working on the levels it's a new challenge.
Though I'm still pondering how the trees will be processed..
The camera angle could be parallel fixed camera meaning it would look just like a pixel world.
Which would be exactly like paper mario or Fez.
(http://i39.tinypic.com/jv64cl.png)
Or it can be more in perspective so the objects move depending on where you are.
Not so much like this one it's too far right the camera would just be up a bit to show some ground and follow the character.
(http://i44.tinypic.com/2qnp10i.png)
-
it's not that we're trying to discourage you, it's that, like any other major design element, it should probably be there for good reason. Personally paper mario just ended up annoying me with it's 3d thing because it was barely used, so when it did show up it was like someone jumping and and screaming "hey guys, remember our gimmick!??!?"
The same thing will happen to you I think if it only even shows up when you turn a corner.
that fez thing is pretty awesome, yet constrained - it might be hard to design for but still neat.
if freedom in level design is all you're looking for, why not make it art-based? 3d isn't the only way to get rid of tiles and it's far from the best looking.
I would urge free and common movement between depths if you're going to have depths, otherwise it's sort "why bother."
-
it's not that we're trying to discourage you, it's that, like any other major design element, it should probably be there for good reason.
But to me it seems that most of the artistic choices made for this project so far have not been made for clear reasons. Souly seems to be drawing things and putting them in the engine until a game appears. Perhaps this sort of design sometimes leads to happy accidents, sure. Not often though.
-
The trick with Fez was that you could rotate the 3D whenever you wanted using it to get to platforms that were impossible to get to in the first place.
That was more less the whole thing about Fez, or at least what I've seen.
The thing is I don't know is how I'd add depth in a flat world game with shooting.
The only way it'd be possible is if I made the pixels 3D like this.
(http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h115/cdterney/forsouly.jpg)
But then why even bother making it pixel art.
It's due to the genre of game that it is that is restricting any real use out of the 3D.
I like it, I'm enjoying doing it, and if it works out great if not live and learn. :/
Anyways...
(http://i43.tinypic.com/o07y9s.jpg)
(http://i40.tinypic.com/wvqvll.jpg)
I don't think the engine actually uses any shading, it also doesn't make sense why there would be sunlight in a cave I just did it for the sake of seeing what it'd look like.
(http://i42.tinypic.com/24xmont.jpg)
It's all looking green, but I've been concentrating more on the 3D it's self then the textures, that's always easy to change.
-
Dammit dammit dammit.
Always with the constant changing.
I was really liking the 3D, but we've ran into a few snags with the 3D engine.
1. Translucent textures (the tubes)
2. Cylinders use too many polys...
To make a long story short 3D was just a waste of time. :/
Guess I'll have to tile everything after all and stay true to the 2D.
Kind of puts my hopes into the ground I thought I had something fun.
I was getting good feedback on it, oh well...
I may do more levels and scenes just for the hell of it since it was a fun experience.
But the game will no longer be 3D.
-
I was really liking the 3D, but we've ran into a few snags with the 3D engine.
1. Translucent textures (the tubes)
2. Cylinders use too many polys...
Oh, I saw that coming a mile away actually, but i assumed that you must be using an overpowered engine. Would have mentioned.
-
I was really liking the 3D, but we've ran into a few snags with the 3D engine.
1. Translucent textures (the tubes)
2. Cylinders use too many polys...
The game is for pc, right? Then I don't see any problem with these two points. Don't get me wrong, I just can't imagine that someone who is able to write a proper engine can't add an alpha-map to his texture-class.
-
Naw he said it that the transparency was possible, just not the way I had done it.
Would have required probably just making the textures in photoshop.
-
If you're using 3D anyway, make use of the depth. Not in terms of movement, but in terms of scener. If you're going to place the camera at a non ortographic angle, display shapes in the caves. If you're going to use the perspective of the camera and not render it as an ortographic one,use multiple image planes and add splits of the cave going into the depth. Unreachable, but logically apparant.
Also, you keep showing new stuff, and haven't gone back to adjust a single thing. If this is a showcase, make it good. If it isn't, show that you listen to critique. I know I sound blunt there :P no offense intended but it's my most direct way of putting it, and I do mean it that you should take more time to stand still at what you are doing before making more progress. The more you do, the more you redo. That's a rule of thumb in any project ;) - My main critique for now: integrate your elements of choice logically into the design.