| 6 APR 2006 at 5:23pm |
SkyeSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 348
Joined: 20 OCT 2002
Status : Online | [quote author=Ivinia link=1113684450/75#75 date=1144278109
Pricing-wise, this is how they stack up:
POV - Free
Bryce - $100
trueSpace - $600
Strata - $650
Cinema 4d - $800
Rhino - $900
Lightwave 3d - $900
Maya - $1,800
3d Studio - $3,200
Unless you know something I don't, POV-Ray (while it is free) would be a brute to use without a Modeller. You can hand code everything into POV-Ray but that would be very time consumming not to mention not having any kind of wire frame to look at.
The best way to make use of POV-Ray is with the modeller Moray - it does the wire frame work and POV does the rendering. You can't use Moray without POV-Ray and get rendered scenes as far as I know.
Moray costs 80 Euros to register.
Skye
Indie Developer of Scavenger Hunter&&The Replayable Adventure Game!&&- 4,446 scenes, 5,796 overlays,&&- First Indie Adventure Game&& To Use A.I. Randomizer Technology,&&- 7 years in the making!!! RELEASED !!!&&&&Order yours now at:&&[url]http://www.Sagewood-Software.ca[/url]
|
| 6 APR 2006 at 6:47pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Yes, I had tried it before and was amazed that the examples were all done via hand coding. I really can't imagine people using it that way unless they were very determined. However, it IS free and it IS possible hence why I included it at the lowest (cost-wise) end.
Virtually all of these programs can use some outside programs to make them easier to use. For example Adobe Illustrator for creating intricate splines to import.
|
| 18 APR 2006 at 2:31pm |
David_QuestDomeIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 51
Joined: 24 APR 2005
Status : Online | well, it's a great thing us game designers won't have to worry our pretty little heads with this kind of detail. We will be using an ... adaption though. Looks like we're in luck [smiley=love.gif]
|
| 2 MAY 2006 at 5:40pm |
CalypsoIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 2
Joined: 1 MAY 2006
Status : Online | First game I ever played was an Adventure game, and to be honest it's still my favorite kind. Graphics (atleast to me) does not matter. At times I can honestly say that some of the older ones (Simon the sourcerer... or even so far back as the time when you had to write the commands) is more entertaining.
The older games had more humor and where more interesting and funn than most of todays adventure games, as I find some lacking soul, personality.... (Then again, we do have great games like MYST... but thats a whole other dimension of adventure games.)
so, simply put: Graphics is secondary, story and thought is the most importaint part of an adventure game for me.
Simon The Sorcerer, Monkey Island, Indiana Jones, Smoking Mirror, Roadtrip, Sam'n Max, FULL THROTTLE... Need I say more?
|
| 9 JUN 2006 at 6:54pm |
KAPIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 64
Joined: 25 AUG 2004
Status : Online | Hmmmmm, Ok I am a 3D instructor at a small community college. I am by no means the greatest 3D artist in the world. That being said, keep in mind one thing. The package you choose is just a tool. I saw a few lists of available packages that people were talking about..let me comment based on my experience with them:
POV - Free : can be very difficult to use if you have little 3D experience
Bryce - $100 : Completely impracticle for gaming. The raytrace engine is too slow and complex scenes can take
weeks to render....YES weeks!
trueSpace - $600... Solid package but you still need a foundation in 3D principles for it to be effective
Strata - $650.... Have not used it personally, Seen it used to perfection in DarkFall 1 and 2 and Barrow Hill
Cinema 4d - $800 ... Nice package Used in Scratches
Rhino - $900 .... Seem to recall this is only a modeler. You would need another package to actauly get full rez renders
Lightwave 3d - $900 .....Very nice but you need experience to use it effectively....
Maya - $1,800 ......Nice but not my favorite...seems to be a bit "micro managed" and with Autodesk aquireing it last year...well its a wait and see kinda thing..
3d Studio - $3,200 .....Expensive but well worth the cost. This is package I use to teach with basically because I can explain the fundemental concepts and they transfer from one package to another...
There is one GLAREING omition to this list and its one of the BEST modeling, rendering, and animation packages out today; BLENDER from www.blender.org. Its FREE and its well supported. I currently am redoing my entire home studio and I am leaving 3D MAX and going with BLENDER simply because BLENDER has all the bells and whistles for free....
Now 1 final note, Its not EASY to make 3D content. As for the earlier notes about DIRECTX making great graphics ...thats bull!! DIRECTX is nothing but an API between your hardware and software it does not create a thing!! It has some built in effects....flares and lights and things but you still need to be a heck of a graphics programmer to access these things. Most of your "cool" games use cheats to fool your eye. Normal mapping, HDR lighting and things like that are all cheats and they are programmed by the graphics programmers!!
Just remember your 3d package is a tool...no different from a pencil or pen. Therefore, if your gonna be a good 3D artist, pick a tool and become GREAT at it...learn it's quirks and tricks...do not get fooled by fancy renders that you see around....those are produced by PROFESSIONAL level artists who have a firm understanding of ART as it applies to 3D. Those that Drool over fancy graphics in games like Half-life2 or Oblivion...same thing goes there....ARTISTS created the scenes you see...so to have good graphics you need good artists...
CGI (Computer Generated Images) is a huge LIE!!! The computer does not generate the image....ARTISTS DO!!
|
| 11 JUN 2006 at 7:31pm |
tombraider333Intergalactic Janitor
Posts : 83
Joined: 11 JUN 2006
Status : Online | This is a tricky question. While I love the look of games like Fable and Dreamfall, I don't think I would have bought them for the graphics alone. I actually bought them because the stories and worlds they explore sounded interesting to me. I'm also happy playing them because of how the characters move through the environment. So, for me it's the story and world content as well as the ease/method of character interaction. I find that I do get frustrated with games where the interaction is clunky or awkward. Hope this helps.
|
| 13 JUN 2006 at 4:32am |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By KAP (9 JUN 2006 6:53pm)
Just remember your 3d package is a tool...no different from a pencil or pen. Therefore, if your gonna be a good 3D artist, pick a tool and become GREAT at it...learn it's quirks and tricks...do not get fooled by fancy renders that you see around....those are produced by PROFESSIONAL level artists who have a firm understanding of ART as it applies to 3D. Those that Drool over fancy graphics in games like Half-life2 or Oblivion...same thing goes there....ARTISTS created the scenes you see...so to have good graphics you need good artists...
CGI (Computer Generated Images) is a huge LIE!!! The computer does not generate the image....ARTISTS DO!!
I partially agree. While their is no doubt that artists create the visuals, it also takes a bit of technical knowledge in the tools as well. You can be great with the tools and be a crappy artist and the work will suffer. Likewise, you can be a great artist and be terrible with understanding the tools and your work will suffer. It really takes a bit of both to bring a creation to fruition. Whether that be one person with both skills, or two people working side by side, one providing the concept artwork (the artist) and the other bringing it to life in the software (the technician).
I've had this discussion before with other developers and the tools do make a difference. No, you don't need the most expensive feature rich one, but there is a significant difference between the output from POV vs. Cinema 4d, Strata, Maya, or 3ds. Likewise, MS Paint vs. Adobe Photoshop.
Also, you don't want to fight with the software to get the look you want. Some programs just do a much better job and make it much easier in the process. Its the equivalent of an artist painting with a stick vs. a brush. :-/
|
| 13 JUN 2006 at 4:45am |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By tombraider333 (11 JUN 2006 7:31pm)
This is a tricky question. While I love the look of games like Fable and Dreamfall, I don't think I would have bought them for the graphics alone. I actually bought them because the stories and worlds they explore sounded interesting to me. I'm also happy playing them because of how the characters move through the environment. So, for me it's the story and world content as well as the ease/method of character interaction. I find that I do get frustrated with games where the interaction is clunky or awkward. Hope this helps.
I totally agree that the graphics aren't the the most important aspect of a game. I also don't think they need to be cutting edge. I do, however, think they need to meet a certain minimum in order to make the grade so to speak. Other Worlds is considered a great game by many who have played it. Unfortunatley, many haven't just because they don't like the way it looks. I think if you want to maximize the number of people who will play your game, you just can't skimp on this area.
You don't have to break the bank either. Look at Hope Springs Eternal. It really nothing more than digital pictures imported into a paint program and had some paint filters applied to them. This gave the game a unique feel that worked. It was pleasant to look at, yet it didn't feel like someone just went out and slapped a bunch of digital pictures together to make a game. There was a consistancy to it all in using the methods they used. Yes, KAP, this would be the 'artist' side.
|
| 30 JUL 2006 at 5:04pm |
jalexSchattenjger
Posts : 2503
Joined: 5 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Calypso (2 MAY 2006 5:40pm)
First game I ever played was an Adventure game, and to be honest it's still my favorite kind. Graphics (atleast to me) does not matter. At times I can honestly say that some of the older ones (Simon the sourcerer... or even so far back as the time when you had to write the commands) is more entertaining.
The older games had more humor and where more interesting and funn than most of todays adventure games, as I find some lacking soul, personality.... (Then again, we do have great games like MYST... but thats a whole other dimension of adventure games.)
so, simply put: Graphics is secondary, story and thought is the most importaint part of an adventure game for me.
I agree as well. Almost every highly graphic adventure game I have played is missing all the little things you mentiioned that make them really enjoyable to play. It seems when an adventure game has fancy graphics it has nothing else. I think even for a great artist it takes so long to make them pretty that there is no time left for the polish and for me that's what makes a really good adventure game.
There is also the system requirement problem. 2D usually runs on a much lower end system so why not just make a good 2D game with lots of polish humor and the other things that make up for the lesser graphics. Now we have a game where anyone can play and enjoy the story and really get into the charaters and there quests and not just run around looking at the fancy graphics.
|
| 5 SEP 2006 at 6:02am |
noisecrimeIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 5
Joined: 13 MAR 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Ivinia (5 APR 2006 11:02pm)
Originally Posted By R.P._Corse (5 APR 2006 1:33pm)
maybe next time ill invest in 3d max
Pricing-wise, this is how they stack up:
Bryce - $100
If anyone is looking at using Bryce or just want to have a play around with it, you may be interested to know you can get it for free until the 6th of Sept.
Granted its one version behind the latest release and its not suitable for generating realtime content, but still, its FREE. All you have to do is register with Daz
http://www.daz3d.com/newsletter/2006/weekly/newsletter8_22_06_44.html?trid=363237204
|
| 21 OCT 2006 at 7:19pm |
jalexSchattenjger
Posts : 2503
Joined: 5 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | I don't think graphics it the most important for AG's. They are interactive story telling games so the story and puzzles come first. There are also many issues where lower end systems can't handle the high end graphics and most of these systems are owned by the people that play the most adventure games and people that are new to the gerne. It is very nice to have great looking graphics but it's not number one on the list.
|
| 21 OCT 2006 at 7:33pm |
MordallesIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 23
Joined: 3 AUG 2006
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Calypso (2 MAY 2006 5:40pm)
At times I can honestly say that some of the older ones (Simon the sourcerer...
well, i still consider simon the sorceror as a game with excellent graphics. some of the best pixelation around in an adventure game.
i would vote more for atmosphere, unique style and consistency when it comes to graphics, rather than cutting edge.
[url=http://www.bigbluecup.com/games.php?action=detail&id=747]Duty and Beyond - Now with cover art![/url]&&[url=http://www.bigbluecup.com/games.php?action=detail&id=729]Hallway of Adventures[/url]&&[url=http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/12900.htm]Cool pixelart by Buloght![/url]
|
| 24 OCT 2006 at 12:42pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Yes, I don't cutting edge is required, but a certain minimum level of quality is. The better the graphics, the more interest you will get in your game. It also greatly increases your chances of getting a publisher interested. Unlike other aspects of game development, graphics are truly the most expensive and time consuming. A mediocre game with great graphics will sell much better than a great game with bad graphics.
|
| 24 OCT 2006 at 8:19pm |
MordallesIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 23
Joined: 3 AUG 2006
Status : Online | i agree, it's about quality, not resolution.
[url=http://www.bigbluecup.com/games.php?action=detail&id=747]Duty and Beyond - Now with cover art![/url]&&[url=http://www.bigbluecup.com/games.php?action=detail&id=729]Hallway of Adventures[/url]&&[url=http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/12900.htm]Cool pixelart by Buloght![/url]
|
| 1 JUL 2007 at 7:04pm |
Egenfeldt75Intergalactic Janitor
Posts : 3
Joined: 25 JUN 2007
Status : Online | Sad but true, it probably do, even strategy games these days need it to sell at least...
|
| 6 JUL 2007 at 1:32am |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5587
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | I’m afraid you'd find a number of Adventure gamers that disagree with that opinion. Graphics can be a critical element, but they sure aren’t required for success.
For that matter, state of the art hardware isn’t a necessity either – developers that limit themselves to the latest and greatest requirements do more of a service to hardware manufactures than the folks that purchase and play the games.
It may be a publishing requirement (which is different) – but from a players perspective, a good Adventure game relies on more than just the graphics.
Nearly every high requirements title has had to publish a patch to undo the hardware restrictions. It sort of screams – No Thanks to the folks that built it into the game (kudos for trying, but we’d rather not have to replace our hardware for every new game).
The sad part is: It probably is a publishing requirement. All I do is buy and play the things, so I really couldn't say.
|
| 11 JUL 2007 at 2:09am |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | The number is not that big Inland I'm afraid. Self-published indie games with poor graphics sell VERY poorly (a few hundred at best, less than 100 at worst). Once in awhile you get a title that breaks that mold for some reason or another, but that is VERY rare. There are no numbers for games with really good graphics because those tend to get picked up by publishers - like Barrow Hill, Dark Fall, Scratches, and the latest Delaware St. John.
Like I said in a previous post, I don't think AGs need cutting edge graphics, but they do need to meet a minimal standard. The further you move above the minimum, the better.
|
| 11 JUL 2007 at 3:04am |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5587
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | Like I said in a previous post, I don't think AGs need cutting edge graphics, but they do need to meet a minimal standard. The further you move above the minimum, the better.
I don't think I disagree with that statement - However, I still see no reason that cutting edge graphics be made into a requirement. But then I'm just a guy that enjoys playing them --- lots of them --- and in my own experience a state of the art graphics package weighs in at the bottom of the enjoyment meter many times.
It may also be that I play for reasons that are different than most -- I started in 1974, when bleeding edge graphics where basically just ASCII characters (actually EBCDIC) displayed on a 24 by 80 CRT (an IBM 3270 terminal).. Back then my favorites were Hunt the Wumpus, Star Trek and The Colossal Cave Adventure (no graphics at all on that one).
Of course we only played these games when the business machines were completely idle, and no real company business was taking place (as often as we could).
|
| 21 AUG 2007 at 6:50am |
texasx96Intergalactic Janitor
Posts : 7
Joined: 31 OCT 2005
Status : Online | My favorite adventure game graphics are the classics: cartoon like in Runaway, and the video style from games like Gabriel Knight the beast within. I also really enjoyed the claymation style from Neverhood.
The new graphics they can do are really cool, but I'm just set on the old ones. Maybe it's because they take me back to the hayday of adventure games.
|
