AuthorTopic: Pixelator: Round 2 RESULTS  (Read 108362 times)

Offline flaber

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Captain.
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #60 on: February 11, 2007, 09:49:26 am
Quote from: pkmays
So essentially, the size restriction is 32x100, not 32x15. If, for example, I don't like 32x15 boxes and would rather go with 32x16, it's legally within the restrictions? There's also nothing stopping me from abusing as many 32x96 boxes (so they line up cleanly) to fill in as much area with pixels as possible, and then use smaller tiles to fill in the gaps?
essentially... yes.. the bounding box is 32x100.
But your diamond shape must still be the diamond shape i provided.. 32x15. So every base/bottom of each tile (using bottom as standard, because the top can vary due to trees, rocks, etc) must be the diamond of 32x15.
ex: heres an image that my hopefully answer your a question...

on the left is your question regarding tile heights, and tileing. on the right is how is the same as yours, but rather, how it should be set up.
Note that the bottom of each tile is what makes the diamond shape of 1) the tile itself, and 2) the diamond shape of the whole map.
Every tile used needs to lineup with the bottom diamond.(light pink).
...hopefully.. maby just hopefully that answered what you were trying to get at. i wasnt entirely sure.

Quote from: flaber
Answer1: About the 40 tile maximum, it refers to how many unique/original tiles you are allowed. You are allowed to use them repeatedly as much as you want. ex: you could make 1 unique grass tile and reuse it over and over to make a grassy land. This includes any flips / mirrors/ rotations / etc. Any alteration, or any change in a tile counts towards your 40 tile original tile limit.
Quote from: pkamys
So, flips, mirrors, and rotations DON'T count towards unique tile count, correct? We're assuming the map is running on some sort of engine that allows for such transformations?

Wugh. Also, if we're going to be using transparency, does one of the 16 colors from the palette get dropped to act as a transparant color, or do we get 16 colors + transparency?
that was poor wording on my part. I meant to leave a gap between talking about flips /mirrors/rotations and my example...
That was meant to go with the last sentence. any alterations or changes counts towards your tile count. flips mirrors and rotations are alterations of a tile.
that was just my poor paragraphing. sorry.

the transparency colour would be #17. do not worry about setting aside a colour from the pallete for transparency. You are allowed 1 extra colour to set it as the transparency.
---
Quote from: helm
Sadly I feel there's an issue of tile priority. In a real engine, some tiles would have a transparency palette slot and would very easily be placed on lots of different 'backgrounds' for smart tile usage. I think some priority rules should be posted.
what exactly do you mean with priority rules? also.. any of the judges, if you feel a rule needs clarification, correction, or a new rule feel free to go ahead and make the correction.

---
Quote from: buloght
As I understand it, the trunk is one tile unless it goes higher than 100, then it becomes two. If it goes outside of its bounding box with a branch you go into a different tile. If the branch is still below 100 height it counts as the ground tile of that new bounding box? Oh oy I hope I understand, otherwise I have to start over
yes, this is correct.
That branch tile can be all transparent except for the branch, because it is higher than the ground, but you may also add anything else to the tile too because it is a new tile, therefore you could add ground to it.

Offline Feron

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1123
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • Carpe Diem
    • View Profile
    • Pixelheart

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #61 on: February 11, 2007, 11:57:26 am
The palette would be a lot better if it had 100% black in it, looks like im gonna have to ditch one of the highlight colors :D

Question:  Are we gonna be judged on how "alien" it looks.  Obviously it can't look like earth - but an alien forest would'nt really differ that much from an earth forest - apart from plants and creatures (which arent allowed).
« Last Edit: February 11, 2007, 02:06:24 pm by Feron »

Offline Lawrence

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #62 on: February 12, 2007, 07:45:19 am
flaber, I'm still fundamentally confused about this 32x15 vs 32x100 business. If we're only allowed to have 40 unique 32x15 tiles then how can your tree example count as only 1 tile? Could you post a tileset for the tree example?

Offline Xion

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1551
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • FourbitFriday

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #63 on: February 12, 2007, 08:26:55 am
The base of the tile is 32*15. So you can have like, an iso rectangle, 9*5 grid made of 45 32*15 tiles. But those tiles are also able to extend into 3d vertical space without using up other tiles because, technically, the verticality of the tile doesn't affect any horizontal plane. So if you take an cube and divide it with vertical lines into 32*15 squares, then each vertical section would be a tile.

I hope I got it right.
I hope it made sense.


I'm really looking forward to the results of this round. It'll be even better than the 1st for sure! :D

Offline flaber

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Captain.
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #64 on: February 13, 2007, 06:19:39 am
Lawrence:
Here, is an example i created in hopes of it helping to make better sense of my words.


Firstly, about the 32x15, and 32x100 and such.
On the right side of the image I have dimensions shown.

Now, lets explain these alittle more.
The small iso tile that i have labelled 16x16 is the base standard tile. Since isometrics is rotated at 45 degrees to the viewer, so is its axis'. Therefore, X=16 and Y=16 (width x length). X and Y are no longer straight across and up/down because they are rotated with the tile to form this perspective. This is the flat part, what is parallel to the ground

The next tile I have is labelled 16x16x77
I already explained the first 2 numbers (16x16), so now ill talk about why i have 77.
77 refers to the height of the tile. This is the depth / z axis. Since isometrics is a 3d perspective, we now have 3 different measurments. The Z axis is perpendicular to the ground, adding height and depth.
But why is 77 the max for Z? this is because of the bounding boxs.

On the opposite side (after the equals) I have 2 square boxes. the first is labeled 32x100, and the second is 32x15.
The first rectangle is the bounding box for the whole 3d tile, 16x16x77. If you were to draw a box around that, it would measure to be 32x100. As I mentioned in an earlier reply, the max bounding box is 32x100. therefore, when you change it back to 3d, you have 23extra pixels on from the top and bottom diamond shapes. 100-23 = 77 is the max for Z, because then the whole tile fits within the bounding box.

The second small box, is the bounding box, 32x15 for the small iso tile.

Dont worry yourself too much about the bounding boxes. Those are just there for some people for an added visual, and for when i sometimes refer to the bounding box, or 32x15 for the tile(that being the same as 16x16iso).
---
about the tree.
Originally, I had planned that only what could fit into the tile/bounding box would be in that tile, no overflow onto other tiles.
However, as i went to make you an example of what I wanted with this tree (tree from Super Mario RPG)
I found it to be quite difficult and hard to determine which leaves and branches go to each tile.
So, Ill make a rule correction.. Since I found out myself the difficulty and impracticality of my older idea.
For trees, or small bushes the leaves and branches are allowed to extend out over the 8 surrounding tiles, like i have shown. This will now only count as one tile, because the base of the tree is on 1 tile, and the rest of the leaves overhang onto the nearest tiles.
Is that better?

Offline buloght

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 68
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2 (Rules Fixed)

Reply #65 on: February 13, 2007, 07:50:16 am
That helps a lot, thanks flaber.

.Takam, hehe, jalonso is secretly making my entry for me, which means you are up for a challenge, goodluck!



.... grrr I just gave it away now I have to do it myself.

Offline Lawrence

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 200
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2 (Rules Fixed)

Reply #66 on: February 15, 2007, 05:35:21 am
I understand now, thanks flaber. I was confused by the use of the word "tile" to describe what is essentially a "block", but I've only ever done non-tiled iso before so now I know :p I just have one extra, general question regarding the last rule change about trees; wouldn't it be possible to bend the definition of what constitutes a tree, bush, leaf or branch? especially when you bear in mind the theme of this round, one could claim something unrecognizable to be a futuristic tree or alien-tree, and then go and use it as part of a building structure or something.

Offline flaber

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Captain.
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2 (Rules Fixed)

Reply #67 on: February 15, 2007, 06:38:02 am
I know that the plants and such that could be created using that last rule will be very different and interesting. Im hopeing they will be interesting, instead of just some poplar and palm trees.
So about bending that rule, I do realize there could be some iffy things.. but that goes with the futuristic/alien theme.
My best suggestion is to use your own judgement. If your unsure or iffy about if it will be allowed feel free to PM me regarding it. Its better to double check about something you know consciously that you may be bending the rule, instead of assuming.
So I understand that there will be some interesting things, but if you feel unsure then PM a judge.

Offline GOODNIGHTdestroyer

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 276
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Unf Unf.
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2 (Rules Fixed)

Reply #68 on: February 15, 2007, 04:14:38 pm
I thought the two weeks were reset?
And I am finally seeing that you were the one worth eating.

Offline pixelaro

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Pixelator: Round 2

Reply #69 on: February 15, 2007, 06:08:08 pm
Btw, the two weeks are now ON. Up to Feb 24.
:::....