MIX-IT-UP Comp Entry - Gunstar

[Steve Elliott]

Please make this a commercial product after the compo. After buying POLYMANIACS I would be happy to be your customer again.

Good idea.  However I did notice you only accept Paypal Stevie, is it a hassle to set-up Pay by Card?  I ask because I've let my Paypal Account die and only use Pay by Card for online software these days.

[STEVIE G]

With the deadline fast approaching I've got the gameplay as far as I can take it.  Plan to add loads of other ideas post comp.

A few new enemies in, the Turret (mounted on plinths with dual barrels) the Destroyer (fires lasers and missiles), the Manufacturer (launches all manner of ships), the Bloomer (spits mines at you) and Asteroids (can be broken apart and used as cover ).

I've got music and effects in which seem to fit quite nice.  Managed to get a pack of loopable spaceship sounds for $1 - enough decent ones for my purposes   

The landscapes become more corrupted as the waves progress (see below).

Added very subtle/see through outlines to all the flying objects to make them stand out from the background a little.

I also got a bit carried away with particles - the ducks even drop a crap now and again which can splash the water below.  Amused me 

The main part left to do is the menu's but I'll keep it simple with just PLAY, OPTIONS, HOW TO PLAY and TOP GUNS and maybe difficulty options.

One final teaser (the last level)



Caption Comp ....

[STEVIE G]

Please make this a commercial product after the compo. After buying POLYMANIACS I would be happy to be your customer again.

Good idea.  However I did notice you only accept Paypal Stevie, is it a hassle to set-up Pay by Card?  I ask because I've let my Paypal Account die and only use Pay by Card for online software these days.

I think I'll do a hidden URL for the comp and try to punt it for a few quid once the final game is done.  Doubt I'll retire but worth a shot.  There are card options to will look into.

[Steve Elliott]

Fun fact for those who don't know, Stevie calling this a 2D Zarch/Virus.  He also wrote a 3D Zarch/Virus game called Z-Virus in Blitz3D.   

[RemiD]

the gameplay looks fast and fun, i like that, and also lot of particles, very nice.

i have noticed what you did with the fake shadows (projected only on the terrain layer)

is it pure 2d ? (2d space and images) or 3d ? (3d space and meshes/textures)

if it is pure 2d, i have no idea how to reproduce that...

[STEVIE G]

Fun fact for those who don't know, Stevie calling this a 2D Zarch/Virus.  He also wrote a 3D Zarch/Virus game called Z-Virus in Blitz3D.   

That was the first thing I did in Blitz in 2002!!     I think this is better but the proof is in the pudding.

the gameplay looks fast and fun, i like that, and also lot of particles, very nice.

i have noticed what you did with the fake shadows (projected only on the terrain layer)

is it pure 2d ? (2d space and images) or 3d ? (3d space and meshes/textures)

if it is pure 2d, i have no idea how to reproduce that...

This is 2d in 3d.  All the graphics were built as models from primitives, vertex coloured, fake lit and stored in textures (32 rotations for most ships).  This makes shadows pretty easy as I just create a shadow version of each using the same model, coloring it just off white and moving the vertices based on heights, then store the shadow version in another texture. 

There was not a chance I'd be creating all the pixel art by hand 


The beauty of using 2d in 3d is that you can set the render depth using the z coord so the GFX card takes care of z ordering and no need for manual depth sorting. 

[Derron]

You promised some poop - so tell, which of the pixels it it!


Looks good - I just wonder in which compo you will experient with a different visual style/look (unknown terrain you know? ). Don't want to say that it does not look stunning (see begin of the paragraph) - just want to motivate you to improve/try things out. Think that vertex-color approach could be used for different visual styles too - did you try (next to polymaniacs)?


bye
Ron

[STEVIE G]

You promised some poop - so tell, which of the pixels it it!


Looks good - I just wonder in which compo you will experient with a different visual style/look (unknown terrain you know? ). Don't want to say that it does not look stunning (see begin of the paragraph) - just want to motivate you to improve/try things out. Think that vertex-color approach could be used for different visual styles too - did you try (next to polymaniacs)?


bye
Ron

Sounds like you're suggesting that I'm taking the easy route with the low res design or that I don't know anything else now?  I can assure you that while the assets are low res I've spent around half the comp time designing and rendering them - it was a lot of work.  I'd like to think it is my style now but it has evolved/improved since Van Tourisimo (which was entirely 2d).  2d in 3d is still relatively new to me and a dig from the infamous Derron isn't going to put me off I'm afraid.  It's a Retro Shooter.

That said, I'm more than capable of try different styles and if future comps give me that opportunity then that's what I'll do.

No poop in that picture, see below - the small green pixels ...

[Derron]

Just wanted to nag you to try a different "style" the next time. I am sure the resulting game would still look fantastic ...
I am just talking about the looks ... Not of the code you write for the gameplay or how many days you spent for asset creation (these is the big part in all of our games I think).

Maybe the next compo will require you to adopt your skills to something as your currently favoured look is then not feasible. I am also not keen to do so but hey, I created a pixel game while I prefer vectors or renderings these days.

So please do not get me wrong. Do what you like as the results are most probably stunning nontheless. Just want to make you leave your comfort zone of known lands ;-)

Of course this should not affect this compo game here. People will enjoy the frenzyness regardless of the visual approach.


Edit: Would you mind posting some WIP-shots of the 3d-models in their natural habitat (the 3DCC tool) ?


PS: What happens if a duck crosses the flight curve of a space ship? Who wins?


Bye
Ron

[STEVIE G]

Just wanted to nag you to try a different "style" the next time. I am sure the resulting game would still look fantastic ...
I am just talking about the looks ... Not of the code you write for the gameplay or how many days you spent for asset creation (these is the big part in all of our games I think).

Maybe the next compo will require you to adopt your skills to something as your currently favoured look is then not feasible. I am also not keen to do so but hey, I created a pixel game while I prefer vectors or renderings these days.

So please do not get me wrong. Do what you like as the results are most probably stunning nontheless. Just want to make you leave your comfort zone of known lands ;-)

Of course this should not affect this compo game here. People will enjoy the frenzyness regardless of the visual approach.


Edit: Would you mind posting some WIP-shots of the 3d-models in their natural habitat (the 3DCC tool) ?


PS: What happens if a duck crosses the flight curve of a space ship? Who wins?


Bye
Ron

The duck always loses no matter what it hits or what hit's it (see video)

All models are created in code, not using a modeller but here are a few screenshots of the models in all their low poly glory (scaled x 5), the final shot is the scale used in game.  The final render also is from overhead but with extrusion on the z-axis based on the vertex height.  I find that this skewed view looks best in low res. 

The Gunstar


The Destroyer


The Bloomer

[RemiD]

@StevieG >> your graphics style is unique and uniform, this is a good thing imo, nowadays many games seem to be made of stuff from the unity assets store or unreal assets store...

[Derron]

Why "in code" rather than using some polygon-modeller? Especially leaving out "wysiwyg" would be a problem for me (not imaginative but "productiveness-wise").
Do the tools not offer the features/functionality you need?


@ shots
Thanks .. of course I prefer the unscaled result at the end - these "magnified" once remind me too much to the attempts of 3D games in the early 90s (low poly, untextured - jaggy lines)
Pixel-game-size is forgiving.

bye
Ron

[STEVIE G]

Why "in code" rather than using some polygon-modeller? Especially leaving out "wysiwyg" would be a problem for me (not imaginative but "productiveness-wise").
Do the tools not offer the features/functionality you need?


@ shots
Thanks .. of course I prefer the unscaled result at the end - these "magnified" once remind me too much to the attempts of 3D games in the early 90s (low poly, untextured - jaggy lines)
Pixel-game-size is forgiving.

bye
Ron

To be honest I've never used a modeller.  I don't really have the time to start learning these things.  I've gotten so used to manipulating primitives in code and created loads of functions for culling/combining/lighting and what not that this will be quicker.  When you also consider the jiggery-pokery that goes on to get the final render and shadows etc... this pipeline would be much less painful imo. 

[iWasAdam]

Got to say Stevie, I'm really looking forward to this

I'm super interested in the mechanisms you are explaining for how you did it all.
As a quick test I knocked this up:
- about 10 mins work

What I found interesting is my vertex and poly count is about a quarter smaller than yours.
I do have a highly optimised lowpoly editor though 

[Derron]

The rendering could still be done in your engine - you just need to load the 3d vertex data (.obj, .x, ...) and then render it out.

Of course you could also fiddle out how it all works in your 3DCC and write a script doing all this (rendering shadow layers, camera rotation, ...) but this is a hassle not everyone likes. But once you did it, it becomes just a matter of executing a script to get a new spritesheet of your current model.
Maybe your workflow is more streamlined - as centric to your visual style - but if you want a more generic approach with especially more detailled objects the use of a modeller will speed up things at the end.

And even if you still favor the "coding approach" - where do you design the prototype / basic shape idea? only in your mind? 


@ Adam
I see six objects mirrored on the x-axis:
- create the right sided 6 cubes (the one behind the cockpit I would keep a qube)
- mirror it
- delete center vertices
Thanks to mirror modifier you can more easily adjust form and shape - and do not have to do all steps twice for the wings. Another mirror modifier and you can create these mother ships etc.

Stuff would become nasty if it all must be a single mesh object.



Seems we all have our favour approaches to things




bye
Ron