Knights of Grumthorr

[Matty]

I will consider your approach.

Re the base figure - it's not diablo nor any existing game but rather my own 3d models I rendered out in 2007 which I still have thousands of frames of animation gathering dust on my hard drive, so I thought I'd use them.  However I have drawn over them and discarded 70% of the frames per model.

[Matty]

Thanks for the tips...it looks better now.

As per Derron - modified the margins/padding on the text boxes....and as per iWasAdam - I've updated all the sprites to have a slightly different shading effect which is what you seem to have done.

You can see the screenshots of it now here:

And also a comparison of the 'before' and 'after' sprites for a handful of them I'll show you:

Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:


New Screenshots:

[Derron]

Is this taken from your actual spritesheet? Asking as the wings are cut on top... some even are... looking like a rectangular area was deleted "in the middle" (of the top wing area)


Gradient improved it already - yet I assume there could be done more, just am not sure what now.


Why didn't you try to use your 3d models - and polish them (texture painting + low poly --- can still result in OK/good renders)


bye
Ron

[Matty]

Thanks Derron - edit I might have to fix the large demon monster...may not have accounted for his extra size when altering the image (I wrote a few programs in blitz3d to shade the images - apply texture to sphere with planar mapping, light the sphere, render then combine with original image as an overlay...)

Unfortunately I am unable to use the 3d models anymore.....the software they all were for (unusual formats) was SoftImage XSI which while expensive only ever worked on WinXP....and I don't have a working winXP machine anymore.....

So...all I have now is thousands of rendered images....that are low quality however I can draw over the top of them....

Here's a video by the way of the game in action... slow frame rate due to fraps video capture....

[blinkok]

and I don't have a working winXP machine anymore.....

Have you tried running it in compatibility mode?

[Matty]

It's more complex than merely compatiblity mode....they no longer operate their servers which means I can't activate the software anymore....so $800AUD software unusable.  Still....i've got other means...

[Matty]

I've still got to make this 'user friendly' but there is a custom scripted map editor which I'd built and am trying to make easier to use for the user.....

This is what I've got so far....

It's what I make the maps in myself.

The tricky part for users is that although the triggers are 'click together' they do so using a type of 'programming language' - a very simple one.

You basically click to start creating a trigger, then scroll up or down with the mousewheel to change the currently selected option.

Eg the first option is "if bring" or "if kill" - which after clicking brings up a next condition which is "more than, less than, exactly" followed by a "this many:" value, a creature type, and a location on the map (area) - all created by clicking/scrolling the mousewheel and clicking on the map....

Some of the options do not always go together- but the system is smart enough to remove them from the trigger when it gets populated at the top of the list.

For example if you create an 'immediate defeat' trigger then the secondary part of the trigger is not used.

Once the triggers and map are created it saves it as a text file in a tmp folder on the computer which can then be edited further if you wish by hand manually...and then copied into the 'customcampaigns.txt' file.

All of this is documented heavily in the text files in the game's media/txt file area.

You might find it interesting.....as programmers.

[Derron]

at 480p (this is what youtube offers as max for me) I cannot read any of the text - except the big ones in the overlay


WarCraft III had a popular and "powerful" map editor. Maybe think about the ability for custom sprite set overrides - so people could add their own units, buildings, ...



bye
Ron

[Matty]

Yes..currently that too is already possible.

Every thing in the game is driven by text files in the media/txt folder.

Including sprites - everything.

So - it would be possible to create an entirely different game just by replacing all the contents of the media/ folders (media/gui, media/environment, media/audio, media/units, media/txt)

Each of the files contains self documentation in the header of the file.

Eg: attached

[iWasAdam]

Remember when you offered your code 'free' when no one wanted to pay for it and then no one wanted to look at it...

Well. No one will ever want to edit a text file. therefore your editor (if it's used by the public) must be exact, graphical, and above all simple and obvious.

OK. pics critique suggestions:

1. your fire is horrible cubes!
2. your wall looks.... go figure
3. you have a map showing the view area which doesn't scale when you change the scale - sloppy
4. you have 3 completely different viewpoints with the graphics:
 - your figures are isometric
 - your wall is - well f*cked really
 - your house is tiny and another view angle.
You MUST use the same for everything or it just looks wrong. if it is your figures, they are isometric (taken from a 45/60 degree angle - it makes sense then to use isometric as you base design grid. see previous posts about scales and making it 'look' right




1. your -'wall' is huge looks alien to all the other graphics - it crap admit it!
2. tour racks are also crap - are they flying?
3. your trees are bonsai I take it
your characters are the key - base everything from them. they will dictate the size and scale of things. You got a basic map grid of about the right size - just your scalings for everything else if not brilliant

fog of war: virtually not used these days - unless it is for parts you haven't visited - once visited they don't fade back to black

There is lots going on - LOTS - TOO MUCH GOING ON. Think one battle small amount of characters. quality vs quantity

Your color palette is grey. everything has the same flat tone. reds are dull, greens are dull, it's like someone turned off all the lights and contrast. the result is just a muddy look. when there are lots of things interacting - all you get is a sea of mud and a wall of disjointed sound - grey...

Here's some pics for you to think over:

[iWasAdam]

ok, downloaded extracted - what a lot of files.... 

here is a correctly rescaled version of your graphics with light and shadow applied so you can see what I mean. The light direction is shown as is the basic shadow construct:



There's a lot that can and wont be said. It shows what a little love can do with your own graphics.

As I said. think small and done brilliantly rather that here's loads of not very well done stuff

[Derron]

a "real" shadow is hard to implement ... which is why often lighting is done from "top" or a "near" angle... to avoid these lengthy shadows - which would else most probably raise issues (overlapping, crossing...).

Also the camera POV IWasAdam has shown is hiding too much stuff "behind".

There must be a reason for the old 2d games to have these kind of "top view" /.


But ... it seems as if they do not use something like "isometric" (like in IWasAdam's image) but more a "dimetric" one (the rectangles are less "high" between top and bottom Y).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axonometric_projection


Coming back to WarCraft 2 - they exaggerate proportions of characters for a reason: so an arm can still be identified as arm - it is easier to animate then (more to move - not just 1-2 pixels). Also it is easier to allow for team colours (you know I mentioned them multiple times now).
Always think of exaggeration - even for buildings. It makes stuff easier to identify.

Think of a bakery-building. It needs a BIG brezel somewhere and you identify it in one blink of your eyes. A Tower with some cannons on top is easier to identify than a tower which has some windows in which 2-3 pixels of cannons are visible.. Maybe even just have a "platform" with a movable fat cannon on top.

Trees --- just check out your trees ... and the warcraft trees. They look "less muddy" (remember what IWasAdam wrote about colour palettes?). In your screenshots I saw you already placed a palette next to your dragon/demon unit ... just improve that already used approach!



bye
Ron

[iWasAdam]

interesting points.
I am not sure using warcraft 1 with it's mix of style is helping matty - more likely reinforce him.

warcraft 2 tried to be follow a more unified look,

orcs and humans tried to ditch the isometric for a more top down approach before 3d edged in.

But as Derron says the characters are defined. there are not too many on any screen at a time

Command and Conquer is also another good thing to look at:


the two main things to take from here is scale and color.

But both the examples have one general things in common:
you have a weak 'you'. That needs to be built up in some way (collect resources) then go an beat up a more powerful foe.
You select your 'men' they go and do your bidding.

Looking at the videos there are also issues with the basic game mechanics. I watched figures go through walls, etc. these are all fundamental issues - they should have been solved before even thinking on piling stuff on top of them.

[iWasAdam]

oh yep - as for shadows.
I was using them to show where the light is coming from, but it also shows how to scale shadows and generally how they can be created.

if you were going to use them my personal recommendation would be to
draw the base map
then draw the shadows
finally draw everything on top of the shadows - figures, walls etc

[Derron]

I am not sure using warcraft 1 with it's mix of style is helping matty - more likely reinforce him.

this should have been a WC2 screenshot - if I wasn't absolutely wrong.


this is WC1:


bye
Ron