AuthorTopic: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:  (Read 21348 times)

Offline Anything!

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

on: May 22, 2008, 09:43:54 pm
Closer to heart than intended? ;w;

Am I the only person who completely dislikes Pkmn graphics? D: I love Pokémon, honestly, and I believe I always will-- things you grow up with kinda stays, doesn't it?

But damn-- One of the things I /wish/ could go to the next level are the graphics. Despite the fact that they're all pretty, some simple mistakes make me iffy. ("Why the hell is her overworld sprite changing the way she holds her bag from left and right? WTF cheap mirroring. D<")

... Not to say that I'm better. In fact, I'm worse. ;w; But I'll excuse myself and say that GameFreak/Nintendo is a company, and I'm only one person.



Rip it apart-- It's a Pkmn center after all! :D

Offline Joseph

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Shut up and pixel.
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #1 on: May 22, 2008, 10:36:29 pm
nice work.  the roof confuses me though...where's the light source?  and how is the roof shaped?  I can tell it's straight in the front of that dome, and that that's a dome, but I can't tell about the lighter part the dome sits on.  also, the overhang above the door is confusing me too.  looks like there's a light in the front of the building and somewhere above it...maybe?  the slopes on the roof are dark though.

Offline Anything!

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #2 on: May 22, 2008, 11:26:49 pm


Uh, yeah. From above the building /and/ from the front. D:

Let's see... uh..


Kinda like that?

The reason parts on the top of the roof are darker is because I wanted to show that the lighter area is at a higher... plane? Yeah, that's it. So the lighter area is at a higher plane.

The slopes of the roof /aren't/ supposed to be dark? Damm~

Offline Joseph

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Shut up and pixel.
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #3 on: May 23, 2008, 04:21:39 am
the slopes on the roof pointing away from the light are supposed to be dark, not the ones pointing towards it.  they'd actually be lighter than the top plane on the roof.
I get that the lighter part is a plane now, that's kind of what I figured before, but I don't understand the shape of it.  it looks like the roof goes (starting in the back, at the bottom)
up a 45 angle slope, flat plane, up a small 90 angle, flat small plane, and then hits the dome.  but if you go from the front, you go up a 45 angle slope, and hit the top plane?  that doesn't make much sense unless the top plane was pointing towards the front of the building at a downwards angle, having the back end higher.  the back would actually be the height of the small 90 angle, and then gradually slope downwards.

maybe this will explain it a bit better.

ugh...took me forever on that roof!  it really is confusing!

Offline Anything!

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #4 on: May 23, 2008, 05:16:03 am
Waitwaitwait--

This be what you mean?



Edit: It actually /was/ meant to be a downward slope, but if it really doesn't read well, then I suppose I can't do that.  :'(
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 05:19:03 am by Anything! »

Offline tehwexxl0rz

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Swing the bat.
    • View Profile
    • Pixel Art Portfolio

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #5 on: May 23, 2008, 07:40:13 am


Ehh...?

Offline smiker

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 158
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • http://youtube.com/watch?v=cbaRMjlLWng
    • View Profile
    • Smiker's Portal (WIP)

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #6 on: May 23, 2008, 09:23:44 am

Edit: It actually /was/ meant to be a downward slope, but if it really doesn't read well, then I suppose I can't do that.  :'(

you can never say that!

you are here to learn, and you have to force yourself to make such things, leaving apart terms as 'i cant do that', saying instead i have to be able to do that :D
just an advise, the better you do all things is when you have to do them.
ps: simply look for some references ;)

Offline Anything!

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 78
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #7 on: May 23, 2008, 11:25:38 am


D:?

You know, level roof to not... so... leveled?  :'(

Offline Joseph

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Shut up and pixel.
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #8 on: May 23, 2008, 08:02:53 pm
nah, the slope shading is a good idea, it's what I thought to do, but flip it around...  if the lighting is in front of the bulidling, and the slope is high in back, low in front, it's pointing towards the light, so it'll be brighter, almost as bright as the front slope of the roof, with the pokeball on it.

the behind shading looks good, but maybe stick with the same style?  instead of switching to gradient just for that, seems like it'd better to go with a small gradient of your colors or figure some kind of texture, not sure what though.

I like the second one the best, it looks level and it pulll up away from the slopes.  :y:

going from your second edit:
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 08:15:44 pm by Joseph »

Offline VisMaior

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Such a Pkmn geek, WTF. D:

Reply #9 on: May 23, 2008, 08:20:59 pm
I think the cause of the problem is that the viewpoint of the slope, as well as the position of the light makes the actual first image the correct one.
It just does not leave enough tools to show the slope. Maybe if you would change the lightsource position, that could help.

Here is my edit:



Also, do notice that Im a complete beginner, so take everything I say/pixel with a grain of salt. Especially what I pixel.