Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ashbad
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 23

41
Pixel Art / Re: Scavengers in Sillhoutte - WIP
« on: January 30, 2013, 10:21:34 pm »
Is there any huge significance to that red-and-orange sign on the left?  If not, I'd really suggest either removing it or making it much more subtle by making it purple-hued like the rest of the scene -- I find it to be a huge distraction in its current form.  The first thing my eyes are drawn to when I see the piece now is the sign, and my eyes keep on making their way back to it.  If you're going to make a part of the scene stand out by creating significant color contrast, I'd think it'd be primarily with the two scavengers.  I was also a bigger fan of the earlier, dark blue color edit, but I guess that's just personal taste and has less to do with the composition.

I think you did a good job on this -- it looks very nice  :)

42
Pixel Art / Re: Pixel Face :D
« on: January 30, 2013, 12:39:08 pm »
anyways here is the image id be grateful if any one can tweak it abit and give me some critique just tbh i did use distort effect after i finnished the image :D

You kind of just made it impossible for anyone to do a pixel-level edit...  :-X  Do you have a non-distorted version saved somewhere as well?

Other general critique is that the face/hair don't have any form, and the face is likely far too wide.  The face itself doesn't agree with the implied tilt of the head (which is implied by the hair's parting position and flow.)  Hard to read, too, but that's possibly just the distort effect at work (I'd highly recommend against using such effects -- pixel art is intended to be clean, and dirty effects completely ruin that.)

43
Pixel Art / Re: GAME MOCKUP - Color pallete issues
« on: January 29, 2013, 06:03:53 pm »
I like this very much, but I find the layers of trees and foliage in the background to be visually distracting, though this is probably more subjective.  Example of less layers:


44
General Discussion / Re: s%#t pixel artists say
« on: January 24, 2013, 03:04:15 am »
"Try putting it against a middle grey to help with contrast"

"What's pillow shading?"

"I tried cel shading it"

"i did an edit: "

"I did a quick edit: "  :P

"I did a 5 minute edit; didn't finish it, but this should help:"
Usually when I say that, I actually take 2 hours and do everything within my skill set

45
General Discussion / Re: Flashback HD & The terrible truth of remakes
« on: January 23, 2013, 01:17:58 pm »
The Sonic 4 screencaps make me sad.  Green Hill Zone was always the ugliest Sonic zone, but they went and made it so the background doesn't even seem relevant to the foreground scenery at all.  The worst part is the large forest-ey tree layer in the background -- it looks flat and rushed.  Wouldn't stop me from getting the game, but it doesn't have much of the old Sonic feel left anymore.

46
Pixel Art / Re: New to pixel art/art and need help to understand banding
« on: January 22, 2013, 11:49:00 pm »
I probably didn't catch them all, but I was getting nervous that someone else was doing it at the same time -> my work would be wasted.

Not quite, even if they did find the same bands and fixed them; you'd still get practice with spotting them, and more importantly, removing them effectively.

EDIT: Oops, thought you were OP  :-[

With that it mind, I think it's good to note that banding is something you should take care of very last when you're working; any changes you make could result in more bands, so the later you fix them, the less work you have to do.

47
General Discussion / Re: Game Developement
« on: January 20, 2013, 05:26:40 pm »
Is that a common combination by now? That's a nice thing to hear, LÖVE has my full support. Very nice team, good project :) And another thing: when you say Lua is a simple language, I hope you don't underestimate it. Lua is one of the fastest scripting languages around, offering almost the same speed in code execution as lower level languages in some fields. It's easy to learn, yes, but very powerful. Just like Python :-*

Definitely, of course :) It's powerful and the fact it can be so seamlessly integrated with C makes it even more so.  By "simple" I was going for more of a "simple to learn the basics with", as opposed to C which is more of the opposite.  Probably a bad choice of wording :(

As for the popularity of LOVE, a year ago I hadn't heard of it much, but nowadays many of the people I see on gamedev/tech forums are using it en masse.  Personally I haven't done much more than play around with it for a little bit, but I'm really glad to see that more people are flocking towards it and have a better opportunity to learn while making cool games.

48
General Discussion / Re: Big boobed characters in video games
« on: January 20, 2013, 05:04:53 pm »
Nope. Since you picked those out specifically, do you think they are particularly sexist?

Compared to his other works, lol.

I picked those out because they had less explicit breasts and phalluses drawn all over them compared to the rest :lol:

I don't think that having a few sprites of women like that is at all sexist (again, women with abnormally inflated breasts do exists within the masses of normal human beings), but the fact that essentially every single woman on his blog is drawn like that is a lot more questionable.  In addition, most of the males are drawn with the previously discussed "power fantasy" of big muscles and such.

That being said, that blog link was actually a pretty good example to throw into here, now that I've thought about it.

49
General Discussion / Re: Game Developement
« on: January 20, 2013, 04:52:48 pm »
At first I didn't want to ask about the differences of Java and Javascript since I was worried we were derailing the topic, but I guess it has to do with game development..! Why are these two separate, and what use is learning javascript (other than it being beginner friendly?)

First of all, I'd like to point out that Java is probably just as beginner friendly as Javascript; hence why it's usually taught to first-year college Comp. Sci. students and AP Comp. Sci. students as a base language.

Javascript is generally used as a scripting language with web pages, but its use goes beyond just that.  It's a fun but powerful language and it's straightforward enough to learn basic programming concepts from; it's probably not my top recommendation for such purposes, however.  Here's an explanation of why they have similar names:

Quote
... The change of name from LiveScript to JavaScript roughly coincided with Netscape adding support for Java technology in its Netscape Navigator web browser. The final choice of name caused confusion, giving the impression that the language was a spin-off of the Java programming language, and the choice has been characterized by many as a marketing ploy by Netscape to give JavaScript the cachet of what was then the hot new web programming language.[11][12] It has also been claimed that the language's name is the result of a co-marketing deal between Netscape and Sun, in exchange for Netscape bundling Sun's Java runtime with its then-dominant browser.

Java is an even more versatile language; it's a purely Object Oriented language, with a syntax very similar to that of C/C++.  It's a (JIT) compiled language -- which for now you can just take to mean "faster execution".  Javascript is (generally) interpreted, and is therefore generally slower.  One of Java's design purposes was to give software developers efficiency and control similar to that of C/C++, but with better cross-platform support (a single Java executable conceivably will run on any device that has a Java VM; A C/C++ program has to be compiled for each type of device/Operating System in order to run on them.)

With more sugarcoat: Java is focused more around general-purpose programming; Javascript can be used similarly, but its main focus is around Webpage scripting.  Java is generally faster than Javascript.  Java and Javascript have different language syntax (similar to how English and Chinese have different language syntax.)

With that in mind, Java is often seen as a more viable platform for developing games on than Javascript.  Not that there aren't games written in JS, of course, there are just far less.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think the Code Academy is a great place to learn some of the basics of programming.  Another great option is to try learning a language like Python; it's a powerful language, but it's also great for beginners as well.  It even has an SDL wrapper, and even better for beginners, Pygame ( http://www.pygame.org/news.html ), which is perfectly fine for generally 2D game development.

Lua + LOVE is another common one, and I personally support the idea of learning Lua since it's an interesting and simple language that's good for beginners as well.

I'd say that while Java isn't hard to learn, I think it's a bad place to start when you have Lua/Python/others.  Especially since even the most basic programs require a lot of surrounding code that takes a while to understand.

Mastery of Java would probably lead one into C/C++/Obj-C, which are definitely a bit harder to get a good grasp of.  They provide some of the fastest code execution speeds at the cost of a steep learning curve.  Definitely not the place to start, but somewhere you should try to get to.

Assembly goes past that in difficulty; it hasn't been an essential in a game programmer's toolkit for over a decade, but learning and getting profficient at an assembly language for one architecture or more is an incredible skill to have (and it looks quite good on a resume!)  If nothing else it teaches you to become a much more wary C/C++/Obj-C programmer, and a better programmer in general.

50
General Discussion / Re: Big boobed characters in video games
« on: January 20, 2013, 04:15:58 pm »
How sexist would you say the oeuvre of prominent pixel craftsman Paul Robertson (nsfw) is? :D








I assume this was a rhetorical question?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 23