So, if you do it for the goal of getting a more uniform look, I must say that looking at the screenshot, the buildings don't look more uniform than what we have now imagined in textureless gray*.
* minus the obviously unfinished buildings like the chemlab
Sure its not uniform yet. These are the beginning models we'd like to tweak and develop until they are good. Until now the first guy who comes up with a model has it set in the game. What we are trying to do is something different:
We develop a set of core buildings from concept to model to finished. A group of people iterate over these concepts, models and textures and when we think we are finished we make a proposal to add them to the game..
While we are in this process, I find it strange to hear: "No! You are not allowed to think about that again", "Hey, at the current stage the stuff you do looks no better what we have now (just stop, you can't do it)". If you remember, this was the reason we wanted to work in private first. For the sake of openness everyone can see our humble start and the development.
This is an experiment that some people are obviously willing to put time into. It doesn't take anything away. All the buildings that are in the game are still there and if we are lucky later there will be more. If in the end the stuff we do is really crap or not worth putting in the game because its not much better, we can just dump it.
And just to make this clear before I elaborate: I am not running this project. Don't misunderstand my critique on the methods of your (concepting) work as a veto or anything like that. You are getting a lot of positive feedback currently, even though you say it is just a humble start. So, please don't take it personal if some feedback questions your methodology.
Reading my posts in this thread again, I can see how they might come along a bit rude to you. My concern from the beginning was that content we already have will be remade completely instead of adapting it (new texture, change size, change geometry like the thickness of beams) to fit a common style - and secretly - that it might be the end of that. When writing the posts, I thought I had already stated that concern somewhere else, now I can't find it.
There is a long road from a rendering like in the screenshots and a textured and animated model for real time rendering.
Perhaps you can understand my position better when I tell you that I was the one who created most of the first models (f.e. wind generator, tools workshop) in collaboration with the artists back then. So I walked down that road already, and I remember how much work it was to first get the (seemingly done) model into something fit for real time rendering, create a good UV map and texture it.
So, to get back to the point I was trying to make:
Apart from wanting to spare you the work to redo it, I feel as if my (and others) work was discarded without even considering that those models are generally regarded as nicely done by the community and without considering that those models could be used for the iterative improvement and the finding of a common style.
Your wind generator(s) look very similar to the current one, so what I asked you in that post was why not include any of the current buildings (without texture) for finding a common style? I imagine that making the models in the game fit together better doesn't mean that all the current models need to be ditched, or does it?
> It doesn't take anything away. All the buildings that are in the game are still there and if we are lucky later there will be more. If in the end the stuff we do is really crap or not worth putting in the game because its not much better, we can just dump it.
I trust it will not be crap, of course it will not be crap man, you guys are good! But the implication is that not your work will be dumped, but the previous work when you are done. It doesn't have to be like this: dump the current one or dump your redesign. Some models can be based on, can be improvements of the current models. You guys are deciding that issue now in this process. And this is the point where I am trying to convince you to (partly) base your work on what we already have.
It would probably be good if prioritization were leaning towards missing models (like the inventors lab), so we don't end up with three models for the wind generator (we already have two!) and none for the less popular buildings. But I guess the wind generator is just more fun to do :-)
> Apart from wanting to spare you the work to redo it
Getting in the way of people that want to do free work? Are you mad? ;)
Seriously though, the art team might not realize how much power they have. In my opinion right now OC's biggest weakness is that it is just ugly[*] - I still can't bring myself to play it for more than a few minutes before firing up the IDE to work on something to improve the graphics. We absolutely need some quality work done on general graphics design, and there are only few people who can do that kind of thing. I sure as hell can't, but any effort going into that direction has my full support.
[*] Usual disclaimer: No offense to anyone, obviously. I attribute it to 3D models making screen composition issues way harder. Just throwing together some graphics just isn't going to cut it anymore. Except for that green tentacle monster I encountered in the woods. What the hell is that supposed to be.
Maybe my standards aren't as high as yours or my taste is different, but I wouldn't second that :o
>I mainly dislike the realism approach of the textures.
And for me that also applies to the landscape textures. /o\
> before firing up the IDE to work on something to improve the graphics.
So how are the new shaders / lightning progressing? :)
Now I feel sorry that I got myself so upset about your post.
Its so hard to get things over correctly on the forum... with the language and writing and everything.
I understand your point why we shouldn't redo things from scratch. I am aware that building the models is probably the smallest problem while doing new buildings. I don't know about scripting in Clonk and what needs to be done to get the things into the game. My technical incapabilities are also the reason why I didn't touch the existing models yet. Just yesterday I found out how I can even get the models, just to find out that Blender explodes its UI into my face when opening them (resolved). Its quite complicated to get into all the existing things in a big project like this.
At first I thought I couldn't do anything. Then I found out I could just draw my stuff and post it. I am so grateful about all the positive feedback I get and that people really start modeling after my drawings. But surely the real skill is to adapt to the existing things and expand on them instead of going around that by just pushing the own ideas. Its just way easier to build a new windmill in a program of choice instead of fighting with finished models with lots of extra stuff in blender.
All in all i'm just very happy that I can contribute with my drawings. It might seem that I do stuff like that all the time but its not like that. Sure I like to draw a lot but actually I am an mechanical engineer and only with OpenClonk I started to draw in color (see my first drawings all in b/w) and 3d-modeling. Its so cool to have a project to focus on.
So, I will continue to find my way into the Openclonk project and I promise to push harder to get into the existing stuff.
PS.: Good thing to know would be what changes a model can take without breaking the scripts and everything else related to it.
>PS.: Good thing to know would be what changes a model can take without breaking the scripts and everything else related to it.
Nothing really. Incorporating a new model for an existing building into the game is just about adjusting a fews numbers (dimensional stuff, position of objects falling out) and adding animations here and there.
That takes about 30 mins or so.
Please have at look at those images for inspiration:
FIrst of all, I do not thing it is good, to have only one graphic designer for the whole set of main buildings, because of that, all following buildings will simpliy fit into the whole set even worse than it was the case until now.
Just a texture guideline and a colorpallet would have been enough similarity of the already existing buildings, after some additional changes (or a redesign of the structures which fitted in worse). I think the elevator and the windgenerator, were already quite good (besides the texture/color issue which was mentioned around a month(?) ago)
Now some more related thoughts about the conclusions of the chat discussion:
the whole set looks very industrial/modern/exact:
the wooden beams and structures(or parts) are too small and too filigree. This applies to both: the main beams of the structures and the diagonal supporting beams and to the basement of the saw mill as well.. It just looks too elegant, especially when compared with the former models of the windgenerator and the elevator.
--> make the beams more skrewed, differing in length, use less diagonal beams, but bigger ones!
--> let the side elevator structure be not build from only one beam, Like the former one, let be it build with more then one single long beam
--> replace the curved roof of the elevator "tower" with a simpel wooden roof. It looks less technical-modern. ( like the one which is attached to the saw mill hut)
the foundry(?) with its robotic melting crucible, the perfectly adjusted rails, the exactly vertical chimney and the structure which looks like a nuclear reactor.
--> add 2 little(but not filigree) characteristical, curved chimeys made of metal plates, with these little cone-shaped rainshields on the top to the "nuclear reactor"
--> remove the railed robot melting pot, ore add some big wooden beams to enforce some skrewed metal columns
--> let the big chimney made of natural stone bricks, let it be skrewed and ther should be some stones missing on the top/ or just let the thing not be pefectly finished.
the blacksmith is very "block-ish"
-replace the cube-like-chimney/exhaust hood with two chimneys which could look like the the chimney form the Clonk-Rage castle structure where metal can be heated to use it on the anvil. They should differ in height, one of them could have such an already described curved additionall small chimney at one side(like the sawmill chimney)
-remove the hammer symbol
-replace the textil sun shield over the anvil with a sloped wooden one (like the one you should use on top of the elevator as well) supported by some skewed diagonal wooden beams.
- the hut lets me think about a outside lavatory, the wooden ones with a heart cut in the door.
--> remove the hut
--> remove the wooden basement, or replace it by greater beams
--> let the roof be a bit disangled and skrewed as well, netter replace the one big root with 2 seperated roofs slightly in differen heights but of course, the shoud overlap to protect against the rain
I was a bit busy with organizing my studies and trip, thats why I post all my thoughts now at once. BTW that's why my battery-model-project and the animal model were freezed as well.
But it is at allways: grumbleing is easy, to change all the stuff is written on another page.
> FIrst of all, I do not thing it is good, to have only one graphic designer for the whole set of main buildings, because of that, all following buildings will simpliy fit into the whole set even worse than it was the case until now.
Wait, what? I don't really get the point you are trying to make - is it something like "Well the player creations are going to mess up graphic consistency anyway, so we shouldn't even try!"? I sure hope not, but I can't extract any other point from that statement.
Let me restate some things that might have been lost in the course of the discussion: No one is excluding any designs now. The reason that only the fungiform/nachtfalter buildings are discussed is simply that they were the ones to tackle this task first. You obviously had some ideas about those designs, and it's completely fine to discuss them here like you did. (Although a picture would have saved you lots of words and would be much more precise and inspiring. ;))
> Just a texture guideline and a colorpallet would have been enough similarity of the already existing buildings, after some additional changes (or a redesign of the structures which fitted in worse).
We had this topic a bit further up. Please read the answers as well, it should explain why there are new sketches for existing buildings.
I agree with a lot of your points regarding the structures- to make everything less perfect and more cobbled together was one of my main wishes as well.
I would make an "imperfect pass" over all wooden beams and structures after the structures are decided on. I don't see why I should waste my time to model an imperfect wood beam when its not clear that it will be there. Until then just imagine everything is imperfect like you want it to.
>Wait, what? I don't really get the point you are trying to make - is it something like "Well the player creations are going to mess up graphic consistency anyway, so we shouldn't even try!"? I sure hope not, but I can't extract any other point from that statement.
Sorry for the foolish English! However, you got the point. I really like some of the old buildings, and somehow some of them already fit together nicely. I mean, not all of them are that good and that well fitting together, but some of them were only created for beeing a "dummy" or lets say as "not-beeing-the-final-model" Of course these ones should get remodeled sooner or later. Retexturing the good ones following a guidline woul'd have been a good alternative instread of remodel everything. So to work on a texture guidline, some examples first could have saved a lot effort.
This had some advantages:
1) Saving time
2)new buildings from other authors will fit in easier because yes! there are some little inconsitencies, but they are fine, they are good, and they are a part of beeing a project with free and sometimes spontanous contributions by single authors. Anyway little changes can be done if necessary, to keep "inconsistency" at a minimum level, but I dont think will be.
3) The project must not and should not have to rely on a single chief-executive-designer
You're right, this arguementation is a bit to late anyway.
> The project must not and should not have to rely on a single chief-executive-designer
As far as I understood it, the "graphics core team" consists of more than one person. Does it not?
Our goal was not to exclude anyone or anything. I can't emphasize that often enough. We just wanted to start a focused workforce for the graphics. There is no single chief-executive-designer (who should that be?) its just that we don't build the stuff alone but in a dedicated team? Whats so bad about that? If someone wants to work alone its fine.
Besides that it is now harder to modify a single structure now, because of this defined style by the other models of the set. If there is no set, it was easily possible to modify a single building to make it a better part of a "set" because the style was not so strongly defined(let's say there was no style at all, but a styleguide would have the benefit that it just makes sure that all the structures fit together somehow, which should and could be enough IMO
Of course it would not be a problem if open clonk would be a project with a defined end and when Nachtfalter would provide all structure models and the texture guys from the core team would provide all textures until everything is finished. But of course this game is made for creating new content easily.
To get a conclusion out of it: A main model design by a single person limits the possibility of remodeling single models or creating content of similar style by others more than just a styleguide.
In my thoughts of a graphic-core team's tasks, they would be limited on providing such a guidline, several textures and maybe some simple textured models like a modular system( e.g. wooden beams, colums, metal T-bar buckstays or even windows, furniture, roof- or brick tiles, which then can be modified by others) Besides that, the team is of course a bunch of people who have some expertise with graphics and design stuff, so they are the ones who should offer advises for models which were presented in the forum. Let's say, they are the guideline-jedi's they can make sure, that structures follow the guidlines, by giving the neccesary tips and advices.
That would save a lot of work and a lot of responsibility for this core team and it would allow others who are interested easier to provide own models and ideas. This is my vision how a somehow supervised but still "open" system could work.
Bigger Version. Please keep in mind: The models are more like sketches, not finished versions!
I still have no clue how to redesign the sawmill. I like it already very much. But it's still to soon to refine the design and put more details into it i guess.
If no, would it be possible for you, Nachtfalter, to post the finished models somewhere so others may access them?
>Will there be any more progress on this? Is something planned?
There is currently nothing ongoing between me and Fungiform. Maybe he can post a statement where we go from here.
>If no, would it be possible for you, Nachtfalter, to post the finished models somewhere so others may access them?
If there will be a negative statement. Sure!
If time's pressing you hard or you doubt that motivation comes back to you, please rethink whether the negative statement might be at hand and possibly let someone else rekindle the fire. I know that it is very hard, giving your work away to someone else.
>could be the next beacon of productivity to everyone.
I hope so! Motivation is a strange thing. Like a rollercoaster with with Loopings that lead into a wall. A wall full of spikes .
> I know that it is very hard, giving your work away to someone else.
Not at all. This models are not created by myself. There was nice teamwork involved! So here they are.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill