Excuse the roughness, but the circle (sun?) actually makes a really solid focal point with the clouds bending around it and the city's contours ramping up into it.



EDIT: And the problem with the first version is that the base of the city is much wider and less concentrated. Instead of having a focal point it had a sort of focal large-rectangular-shape, and especially with the curves of the city and the blue stuff going in opposite directions, pulling your eye to each end, it's a little visually awkward.

Instead of the ambient occlusion, why not try actual shadows which would add both depth and shape?

Seconding this. 99% of the time mixing pixel art with gradients/in-engine lighting makes it look even flatter than it would normally, and unfortunately this is one of those cases.

EDIT: To clarify, pixel art is all about creating illusions of depth and forms and all that. When you introduce something that does a similar job in a different way it breaks the illusion and the implied lighting turns back into colored dots on a flat surface.

I think the contrast is a bit over the top, but it could still work if the tiles didn't have patterns all over them which makes it all look quite messy.

This too, there's a big problem with visual priority. You need a way to differentiate foreground and background objects, whether it's through value, contrast. level of detail, etc. Aside from the dark, simple tiles and the uniquely colored people everything runs together a bit.

My first creation Bleu from Breath of Fire

for perler bead art

Read the OP, guys.

But anyway, this section is for critique of original art, so this is probably more of a General Discussion thread if you're just showing something like this off.

Could you tell me how you found my grass? I don't think I ever posted it outside of a private Facebook group.



http://i.imgur.com/NAwQl.png <- for convenience.

EDIT: And I don't mean this as an accusation or anything, I'm really just curious. As long as you don't try to take copyright on the grass. And maybe give credit from now on.

EDIT 2: Also, yes, I know it doesn't tile terribly well but I think this is an older version after comparing what's on my computer right now.

I've been doing a bit of experimenting, maybe this'll give a better sense of what I mean.

That hypothetical dithering page again, now less hypothetical.

Instead of each article being a gospel kind of thing from one author, there would be a very solid division between the technical side and the personal side, and no one perspective taking priority. They don't even have to be credited, either.

As far this-

I think it's good that people have to search the forums for these sorts of explanations or get them first-hand again by someone because that's a process that clues them in as to how these ideas came to exist in the first place and how best to filter them.

-that could actually be part of it. If there could be one place to look for relevant quality threads, that would be endlessly useful.

Basically, the point of it all is two things-

-Making what's essentially a pixel art encyclopedia that can be easily referenced. That's pretty much the entire reason wikis exist, and lord knows how many times I've checked game wikis to find out names and little bits of lore. It takes the searching out of research and gives you one simple, hopefully comprehensive resource.

-And it's a way to consolidate tutorials, forum threads, discussion, and whatever else from everywhere on the internet. That way you get what you normally would from just looking around, but in the same place, and with even more information to complement it.

So it wouldn't only be an independent source, it would also be a hub for anything that could be useful to anyone reading it.

EDIT: That's actually a distinction I want to make- I'm thinking of it more as an encyclopedia for referencing when you need it rather than a textbook that you'd use as an exclusive learning tool.