Thank you! The terrain is tile based and is generated via random number ranges to determine what tiles become what land type. The first thing I make is the oceans in order to know what tiles are land and which are not. Then I create biomes which have different source amounts and size ranges. There's multiple forest biomes, mountain biomes, etc that get created around the map. Some biomes are able to render on top of each other, like forests and rocks, via a more complex shader. The only other part that isn't biome based are the rivers. They always source at mountains and try to snake their way to the nearest edge or ocean shore. Rivers have a shader which allows them to overlap other biome textures. I never have extra landscape game objects that get created on top of the base tiles. Everything uses a single game object tile with shaders that allow for texture overlapping.

These are fantastic critiques thank you!

Not everything needs pixel-level assets, the landscape has a lovely painterly look as-is. I can only see two defects :
- the base of your mountains seem to have the remainder of a darker outline, you may want the even the colors and possibly "feather" those edges (alpha < 100%) to blend them more.
- beaches are very visibly textured using a wave pattern aligned horizontally, instead of following the curves of the coast. It's very wrong for vertical coasts, and even on mostly horizontal costs, it's not so good that it doesn't follow the coastline. If your engine generates the beaches (you don't draw the individual tiles) then you should at least use a solid sand color instead of the texture.

You're right I've been meaning to feather the edges of the texture in the mountains so there isn't that dark outline. Unfortunately I can't have a soft edge on the mountains specifically because in order for the sprite shader to cast a shadow in Unity, it must use a cutoff alpha which means only alpha that is 0% or 100%. I may be able to figure out a way to cheat by using a multi-pass shader and have a semi transparent texture render over the bottom of the mountain to blend it in better. What I'll do first is feather the edges in the diffuse part of the textures so there is no black showing through from the background.

I never thought of that fact about the sand. It would be rippling in the direction that the water is coming in from the ocean. What I can do is make an omni directional sand texture to fix that.

I have a few suggestions for improving the "crispness" of th mountains. Firstly, what file format are you using for the images, and what import setting are you using for whatever game engine you're using? The images look compressed and blurry, which is contrasting with the sharp edges and making them look like paper cutouts or stickers. Assuming this isn't the look you're aiming for, you might want to either save your mountain sprites in a non-compressed format, or (especially if the map can be zoomed in and out of) increase the size of the image.

Also watch out for the line around the edge of the image. That might be caused by settings in your game engine, or you may need to continue the images further outside the line where the alpha cut-off is, so that the image compression at the edges doesn't "bleed over" into the visible part of the image.

You might also want to try removing some of the mossy texture and bumpiness and focusing on making the 3d shape more readable, like with your sand dunes.

I am currently using 64x64 Targas for my images. 32 bit when with alpha and 24 bit for when without alpha. For the mountains I am importing them uncompressed so that they look as crisp as possible. There is no zooming in and out so it is kept at the same distance from the camera. What I can do is import them without any sort of filtering. Below is a side by side comparison with filtered textures(left) and non-filtered textures(right). Which one do you think looks better? I'm starting to warm up to the idea of using non-filtered now that you mention ways of improving the crispness.

Continuing the image past the alpha cutoff is something Ill definitely fix next. As far as the mossy texture, Im meaning those to be trees that are scattered across the mountains. Those are the only parts I painted myself, the rest was done in 3d. I tried making the tree parts in 3d but it ended up being tedious and not looking as good as I wanted so I settled on painting them. I suppose they may need more work or maybe less trees on them like you say. Ill see what I can do to make the rocky parts of the mountains have more deliberate shapes to improve the readability.

Here is an example of one of the textures. This asset is strictly a bitmap texture I made that is thrown on to a plane in the 3d environment. For some of these textures I make and render them in 3d then scale them down in Photoshop and paint over them a bit. In the end, they are 2d textures when put into the game.

I tried fixing the rest of the critiques that were in this thread. Ive changed the color of the lake and river to try and be a bit more realistic. I also changed how the rivers generate. Instead of wildly swerving around the landscape, they generally travel in the direction of the closest ocean coastline. I think this makes them more topographically realistic.

A new addition to the landscape are waterfalls which occur where rivers start at mountains. Previously there was no connection between rivers and their source mountains.

These are solid weapons. I think the wraps seem off because they dont feel like they are wrapping around the weapon. If you were to have the wraps pop out around the silhouette of the weapon handle it should feel more like what its meant to be. Right now it looks more decorative.

I also think the weapons could have more shine on their metal parts. And if you wanted to go further you could add a subtle wood grain to the handles.