AuthorTopic: Official Off-Topic Thread  (Read 1014018 times)

Offline tocky

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 503
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • doublepostokrates
    • View Profile
    • my blog

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #790 on: May 27, 2009, 11:35:33 pm
i just spent ages puzzling out this cheap way to do it:



you can count the diagonals on the display and then work backwards to pinpoint the cell

Offline Indigo

  • Administrator
  • 0011
  • *
  • Posts: 946
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Artist, Indie Game Dev
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/849.htm
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • View Profile
    • Portfolio

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #791 on: May 28, 2009, 12:54:26 am
really confused what you're talking about, tocky.  Can you explain?

Offline tocky

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 503
  • Karma: +0/-1
  • doublepostokrates
    • View Profile
    • my blog

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #792 on: May 28, 2009, 01:13:26 am
um, maybe.

in isometric your original x and y coordinates are skewed and don't follow the x and y dimensions of the display. any given x-gridline (on the grid data structure) takes up several different y values on the screen (and vice versa for y-lines and x values). but the diagonals (on the data structure) map to constant x and y positions (on the display). so you can measure the distance in diagonals between any given point and the origin (on the display), and that'll tell you which cell you're addressing.

for each diagonal in one direction, the sum of the x and y adresses (on the data structure) for all cells on that line is constant. in the other direction, the difference between x and y is constant. so if you have both of those values, you've found the cell - but these are the same values you get from counting the x- and y-distance from the origin on the isometric display.

in the example, the cell you're after is one diagonal east and three diagonals south of the origin. so you find the cell in the target area where x-y=1 and x+y = 3, and that's your guy.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 01:52:22 am by tocky »

Offline surt

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 570
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Meat by-product
    • not_surt
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/2254.htm
    • View Profile
    • Uninhabitant

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #793 on: May 28, 2009, 04:53:52 am
Some simple matrix transformation strikes me as the most elegant solution (axonometrically general to boot).

Using a 2x2 matrix derived from your world-to-screen x and y vectors:
xxxy
yxyy
Multiply the matrix by your world coords to get screen coords.
Multiply the inverse of the matrix by your screen coords to get world coords.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 05:24:26 am by surt »

Offline Indigo

  • Administrator
  • 0011
  • *
  • Posts: 946
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Artist, Indie Game Dev
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/849.htm
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • View Profile
    • Portfolio

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #794 on: May 28, 2009, 06:02:01 pm
that IS a good way to go about it.  I didn't think about that at all.  Although my current solution works - this seems much more versitile.  Gah.  I may rewrite my function now.  Thanks surt

Offline junkboy

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 270
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • jnkboy
    • jnkboy
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #795 on: May 29, 2009, 09:35:21 am
Some information (only in 日本語) about the creation of the new KOF sprites, along with galleries and stuff. 100% DOT action!
http://kofaniv.snkplaymore.co.jp/info/15th_anniv/2d_dot/index.php

So far my favorite bit about the new game (aside from the sexy banding on the characters) is the somewhat disturbing backgrounds, especially the one with the french pig women.

Offline ptoing

  • 0101
  • ****
  • Posts: 3063
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • variegated quadrangle arranger
    • the_ptoing
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/2191.htm
    • View Profile
    • Perpetually inactive website

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #796 on: May 29, 2009, 10:30:10 am
100% DOT action!

Edited from cartoonshaded 3D models. Fair enough tho, the sprites are huge and lots of frames.

EDIT: Just looked at the example animation. I have to say I have mixed feelings. Because stuff is made from 3D models the consistency is extremely high, but there is not much flair. Even for really fast attacks they do not use any blurring or stretching, which is some cases looks a bit robotic.

Also it is very formulaic and they added buffershades for the main body but when dropshadows which are of course all from the 3D source overlap they did not apply the buffershades, which looks a bit odd too, but probbaly wont be all that noticable in motion.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2009, 10:51:04 am by ptoing »
There are no ugly colours, only ugly combinations of colours.

Offline junkboy

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 270
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • jnkboy
    • jnkboy
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #797 on: May 29, 2009, 11:50:28 am
Yeah, the lack of buffer shades in the "self shadows" is a bit strange, but I'm sure the style will be copied by pixelers of all ages for the foreseeable future. It'd be nice to read a translation of the page, especially since the jump from 2d to 3d to 2d is a bit fuzzy picture wise.

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #798 on: May 29, 2009, 01:33:26 pm
BANDING HELL

Offline Panda

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1008
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • 威風堂々
    • View Profile

Re: Official Off-Topic Thread

Reply #799 on: May 29, 2009, 05:43:11 pm
Uhmm let's see...

It takes them 3 days to make the rough sprite.
Then they make a 3d model + animations, based on it so they can trace the frames later on.
And after that, it takes them a week to make a finished frame.

A whole character (with all the frames and stuff) takes them roughly 6 months and a half.