Bought the latest Superplay earlier today, and I casually flip through the pages until I get to the part that is the only reason to why I'm buying this magazine, a part where they put articles about indie games and such. I find an article about Mockup Frenzy #3, covers a bit more than half a page (with images) and I thought I'd post it here, translated, if anyone cares. Mostly because it seems to be wrong in alot of cases (feel free to correct me in case I've just missed something). It might seem a bit oddly phrased, but that's just because I'm translating it from Swedish, and I don't want to rephrase it too much in case I fuck it up more.

"Way of the pixel

Demakes is the new black, that's for certain. Way of the Pixels demake competition is actually pretty old and was started in autumn 2007, but in conjunction with The Independent Gaming Sources more recent competition with the same theme, we dig out the images from the archive. Mostly just because almost all of them are completely awesome and awakens a strong need to play games we haven't played, or ever can.

Way of the Pixel is a site for artists, where they only produce screenshots, and not the games themselves as they do at TIG. It's unique to feel that you absolutely have to find a copy of the game you see, but with your shoes tied is forced to realize that it has never existed in this form.

The rules for Way of the Pixels competition was much more pixel- and effect-based than many others. The entries were allowed only 2-bits color, tiles of sizes 8x8, 8x16 or 16x8 and so on. Therefor the goal was to create a screenshot of a port of a modern game to Game Boy-format.

The result is this gallery of coolness."

Most of the parts that matter are as word for word as they can be. The words "screenshots" and "awesome" are used as is.

While it feels nice that they (as one of two big console magazines in Sweden, this one being the lesser one) are writing something about what's going on in art communities like Pixelation, it also feels kind of wrong that they seem to care so little about getting their facts straight, and don't even bother supplying a link, something they normally do. They refer to Pixelation as Way of the Pixel.

The page also includes the mockups from the following artists:
Schu, KhrisMUC, .TakaM, Arachne, CroM, Quicksilva, Doppleganger, D.W., vpk, KAT and MaDsk8tard.

A "fix" for this was suggested during alpha stages of FF3, a suggestion to put in several modes of zooming instead of just using billinear scaling (or whatever it's called they're using now), the response was "Why would anyone want that?".

I like the style of river city ransom, so I made it in that vein a long while back.  It is a similar style, but a different character - could I get sued for using a style?  If so, it can be easily changed.

It's not as much about getting sued as passing someone elses work off as your own. And considering the face is just a shaded version of the River City Ransom chars (Try putting one over the other, the resemblence is anything but coincidence) I'd say you're using more than a "style".

The face looks a bit skewed, like her right eye is further away from the nose than her left eye, and awkwardly huge

Quote from: Colonel Mustard on September 03, 2007, 08:58:56 pm

Human movements are rarely like pendulums, frame 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 2 -> repeat, but rather like a cycle: 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 -> repeat

If you try swinging something, you'll notice that you don't move the exact same way but backwards right after you've moved, spend some time in front of the mirror, or perhaps watch some clips from movies where they swing swords alot(300 or something, you'll probably find something), it might help out

I'm not sure that really help colonel... I think what you're trying to say is that he needs to follow through on this motion...

I deliberate over your analogy about pendulums because I actually disagree - a lot of movement is about arcs and pendular motion, particularly when it comes to walk/run cycles... Have a look at my post from yonks ago here to see what I mean...

You are correct though With respect to this animation being that the character moves into the extreme pose and back again using the same frames - which clearly identifies this piece as being naive in it's execution.

The follow through is exactly what I mean, and on the pendulum matter I think we both mean the same thing, I'm just having trouble explaining mine (Not a native english speaker), pendulum might not have been the best explanation, but what I meant was that a pendulum would go from stage 1 to stage 2 followed by stage 3 and then going back to the exact same stage as before (stage 2), rather than your walk cycle example in that topic, where you use four frames rather than reusing frame 2 for second and fourth frame. So what I meant by pendulum was the actual frames used and when, rather than the actual movement of limbs/objects.

Love the post though, and I hope it's saved in that useful-things-topic I saw around here somewhere