PicassoCT wrote:You know smoth, im actually all for this art-worked-out stuff. Im doing it myself.
But after years of deving- i can not stop to notice - that they get stuff done.
Fast. They find out day one, that a idea dosent work.
it is called PLACEHOLDER ART not meant to be used for the actual art style.
PicassoCT wrote:Proof:
Knorkes brickgame.
Conflict Terra.
List continues
Proof of what? That you can use placeholder art?
knorkes game I am not touching.
CT has has many redos as they became better at art but it was never a project they wanted to polish. I even sat down and showed them a few ways to tweak things but that didn't stick.
PicassoCT wrote:Result: Style beats Artwork. And its a faster production method. And if one thing is necessary with a game, it has to get playable fast.
No, it is again, place holders. That isn't STYLE artwork is STYLE. That is placeholder or "the best I can do."
PicassoCT wrote:Thats why JKs metall shadder was so pure awesome. And would have been even more awesome with some randomized, symetric, mechanic and glowy teamcolour stripes.
What metal shader? Also the second bit? what? you sound like you want procedural which is an entirely DIFFERENT thing.
PicassoCT wrote:All those naked models would be instantanously textured, ingame and "good enough" if there devs throw the dice for some time.
Good enough until players go "ugh this looks like crap" don't get started on the art vs gameplay, people expect both. Even the old games as shitty as they looked were they best they could do at the time. You are talking about doing a radical style that the rest of spring will not properly match.
PicassoCT wrote:Lord Muffes SpaceShipGame... ready for testing.
The high standards we set, scare people off, when player start demanding the same.
Also they really look good. Blocky or not.
Which one are you talking about now? Sorry but I have no idea which one.
PicassoCT wrote:
Something not everyone can create out of the box. Texturing is difficult - needing PS:CS i presume.
Needs high phail resistance to learn.
Ass out of U and me etc.. Nope I didn't use photoshop at all. I just mapped it to the atlas bar uses for CORE. So yeah, if playing in wings3d for about 6 hours total to both model, optimize AND uv that is advanced by all means I am a master. However, the Core atlas used by bar is not that advanced a texture.
PicassoCT wrote:
Easily learned. Still will take some time to yield great results, but accessbarrier lowered.
And very obviously lacking effort. Keep making excuses I think it is unacceptable.
if he is doing a cubestyle doing a simple atlas is easy enough.
want to tell me how this model looks great due to texturing?
also texturing in this style is EASY, the biggest difficulty of doing the gundam models was all the conflicting reference materials that I had to work with in trying to shape out the canonical images.
"but your new art took you soo long!" Not really, it took all of
6 hours of me playing in photoshop to get this far:
added a few greebles, which didn't take that long:
which I could then take and make all of these tanks with.
So the upfront effort payed off.
don't even say "well smoth, you have that shader" really? because I have said many times that it is public domain and have been willing to to share, even to help implement it for others. Photoshop is too expensive? oh please, you can get CC for like 19 a month and use it professionally! CC is way more advanced than the old cs3e I was using. A side note, I have yet to see a working DDS exporter for CC but you don't HAVE to use DDS despite what this community blindly follows as far a dogma. Anything with clean lines will look like crap if you use DDS compression.
BUT back to the point at hand. "Style" aside, I think his model could be more interesting as far as shapes and all of that. He could mix it up while still staying mostly to square design.
.
