| 24 OCT 2002 at 6:56pm |
mbc841Space Cadet
Posts : 194
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I touched on this in another thread on another board a while ago, but think it's a good conversation topic for this forum -
I had a friend take a look at some of my game graphics (interior scenes of a house - living room, kitchen, etc.) and I was asking him if he thought the images were realistic looking.
My friend, in his oh-so-innocent way, looked at me and said, "why don't you just take pictures of a living room, and kitchen, etc., and put them in your game?" ARG!!! How to explain to him the difference? Which got me to thinking, in attempts to make games, we "generate" our own graphics, and strive to make them as "realistic" as possible in appearance - why NOT just use photos?
Well, I've played games that used photos before, such as "Temujin", and "Byzantyne the Betrayal". For some reason, I MUCH prefer to look at computer generated scenes, such as the ones you see in Lighthouse, Myst, 11th Hour, and on and on and on, these images are so much more pleasing to the eye then mere photographs.
So, in an attempt to make our game graphics as real looking without resorting to photographcs, what are some of the programs you use to generate your graphics? For my game Harvest, I'm using Simply 3D by Micrografix, as well as Paint Shop Pro and Home Architecht Deluxe. Simply 3D is the easiest program I've found so far to make ray-traced graphics, and for truely realistic graphics, from what I've found, ray-traced images are the only kind. The challenge I'm facing right now is to learn to go from creating ray-traced single items, i.e. a vase, a table, etc. to making complete ray-traced scenes. I'm just figuring that out in Simply 3D. I will also just use Home Architecht Deluxe to create my rooms, use Simply 3D to create the objects to put into the scene, and use Paint Shop Pro to do all the touch-ups.
Any other ideas, thoughts?
[url=http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/index.htm][[img]http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/Graphics/banner1.jpg[/img][/url]
|
| 24 OCT 2002 at 10:02pm |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Software applications are just tools. Like platform wars, touting the capabilities of one application over another is an activity I find senseless. Granted, there are reasons professionals use the tools they do, but in the end, it all comes down to your, the creator's, artistry.
After recently ooh'ing and aah'ing at shorts created with Softimage, Maya, and 3D Studio Max, I watched Killer Bean 2, created entirely with Animation: Master, an application far cheaper than the rest. The pros can scoff all they want, but what Jeff Lew accomplished with this $300 application astounded me.
When it comes to 3D graphics, modeling is secondary for me. Texture maps and lighting are the key to photo-realistic (or better) imagery. One of the greatest tools of which I'm aware for creating texture maps is Painter; its emulation of natural media is phenomenal. Given that I'm a neophyte, and considering my budget, I selected trueSpace as my all-in-one modeling, rendering, animation package. It's got the flexibility and power of the "big boys," but doesn't carry their price tag. Another tool with which I'm most impressed is Poser. I've been using it since v2, and am amazed by how far it's come. I'd love to use it in a project one day.
Along with the software, I treated myself to some books on anatomy and on lighting. Finally, I keep a sketch book with me at almost all times, to practice things like light/shadow and perspective.
.gita
|
| 24 OCT 2002 at 10:14pm |
STooGE4444, EastCoastDoom...Schattenjger
Posts : 2099
Joined: 15 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I will make a quick reply because I have to go to the bank and store but I'll make a better reply later...
(That was my reply)...
Just joking...here. You can't only use photos because they are static; you can't go into them. Animation was created from static photos which later spurred full film. And we use film to give depth to static photos. Computer graphics are just like the camera in which they give depth to static objects....
~rbeeler SVT &&Name's STooGE$$$$ Valpurgius TNT; it's not PLURAL&&[img]http://www.riseaboverecords.com/sleep/image/sleepfront.gif[/img]&&151.Generally speaking Sludge Doomsters are Angry, Gothic doomsters are sad, funeral doomsters are barely breathing, death doomsters are dirty, drunk and dribbling, Stoner Doomsters don't care, drone doomsters are out of it and traditional Doomsters are permanently pissed off, mainly with other doomsters
|
| 24 OCT 2002 at 10:14pm |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I think there's a simple reason why using photos doesn't work. It just doesn't "feel" right. You'll always (until the technology is there) see some glitches that disturb the atmosphere you're trying to set.
A lot of the 3D games suffer from the same thing, beautifully rendered backgrounds, good looking character, but then the character has to move and you can just tell it's a cardboard thingy. It has ruined the illusion of a world different from the one you're living in.
So my advice would have to be to not strife for photo-realism, strife for "simpler" graphics which do feel complete (sounds vague, but I hope you understand what I mean).
As to raytracing a complete scene, lighting is almost the most important factor (colored lights can be very powerfull things to create atmosphere). And if you're building a more static game, it's camera angles.
The easiest way is to just rent some movies (Tim Burton movies are good for this type of thing) and see how they use color and lighting to do their thing.
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
| 24 OCT 2002 at 11:05pm |
MichalNGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7058
Joined: 14 SEP 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By justG (24 OCT 2002 10:02pm)
When it comes to 3D graphics, modeling is secondary for me. Texture maps and lighting are the key to photo-realistic (or better) imagery.
Texture maps are sooo 1990s Pixel (and vertex) shaders are the thing now, sometimes completely replacing texture maps, sometimes significantly enhancing them.
SCiV makes an importaint point and I'll expand on it a bit: You can never beat reality. It'llalways look more realistic than your game. People will always find things that don't look realistic (and complain) instead of marveling at those that do.
But there's a way out. You can set your own rules. You are the master of the game world and you can make it look like you want and not mirror the tired ol' reality.
I forgot my sig.
|
| 24 OCT 2002 at 11:06pm |
Cindy_KIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 56
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | For me, one of the most wonderful aspects of computer games is the ability to enter fantastic landscapes (Myst, TLJ, Schizm, Of Light & Darkness). While I have enjoyed a number of FMV games, I would much rather walk around a world that comes out of an artist's imagination than a world that is just like everyday life.
For me, the quality of the graphics is not nearly as importantas the creativity and innovation displayed in the game environment.
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 1:49pm |
mbc841Space Cadet
Posts : 194
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | JustG, I have read about Poser - I hear it's excellent for rendering people. It's one of the programs I want to get. I've never heard of Painter - is it shareware? I've also never heard of TrueSpace.
I know what you mean about Texture and Lighting being key elements of good scenes. Some of my earlier, hand-drawn scenes in Paint Shop Pro take on a completely new and realistic appearance just by adding shadows and lighting.
MichalN, can you cite some good Pixel Shader programs out there? I've never heard of this. What's the difference between Pixel shading and Texture mapping?
[url=http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/index.htm][[img]http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/Graphics/banner1.jpg[/img][/url]
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 3:06pm |
PharosGamesIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 50
Joined: 18 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I know what you mean. People just love beautiful artwork for the backgrounds. I used some photographs in the backgrounds of Cherokee, but altered using Photoshop. I used some hand-drawn stuff, and Poser (which is wonderful!!) and TrueSpace (aargh!) a little, but I found it very cumbersome and annoying.
Luckily I bought it at a low price from someone who just couldn't figure it out at all. :-/ I didn't do much better myself. :-[
I used hundreds of images, threw out hundreds more, and I think there are 185 animations (avi) in the game.
Some of the screens make me cringe, when I see little details like the shadow isn't right, but what can you do? There are only so many hours in the day.
I always think I must be doing things the hard way. But maybe that's what it takes...?
Someone told me once that the old Disney artists (before computers) would maybe produce only 20 minutes of animation in their ENTIRE career, because the production quality was so high!!
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 5:00pm |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | mbc841, if you'd like to take a look at output before investing your hard-earned cash, there are several - heck, innumerable - galleries online, with new ones popping up all the time. However, the 3 I'd recommend are:
Renderosity - galleries, forums, articles, tips 'n' tricks for just about everything under the sun here, 2D and 3D.
Renderotica - like the above, but they allow "naughty" pics, as suggested by the name of the site.
PoserPros - dedicated to Poser, for the most part.
Neither Painter nor trueSpace is shareware, unfortunately:
Procreate Painter 7
Caligari trueSpace
Fortunately, there are freeware/shareware applications that have at least a subset of the features these big names offer. I can elaborate and provide URLs if you're interested.
.gita
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 5:12pm |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Kathy, there are tons of online resources for trueSpace, and many freeware utilities (tsX) available to make your life easier; be sure to check those out before "doing things the hard way." I've tried most of the apps out there, and trueSpace is the one I chose because I find it to be like playing with play-doh or clay. I find its interface the most intuitive of them all. Like all things, there is a learning curve, but the provided manual is rather comprehensive and should definitely get you started.
Have you ever heard of Blender? It's freeware. It had quite the cult following before they closed up shop. Except.. hrm... I just checked the site again, and lo and behold, they're back up, and Blender is still freeware! Will wonders never cease? OK, so as I was saying, it's freeware. I couldn't wrap my poor brain around the interface, but if I had the time and a specific objective in mind, I'd certainly give it another shot. It's just the Blank Canvas Syndrome that impedes my progress At any rate, you should treat yourself to their galleries. The output is, in many cases, breathtaking.
A url would probably help, eh?
Here it is
Finally, regarding your comment about Disney animators, I can believe it! I took a cel animation class taught by a former Warner Bros. animator. It was tons of fun, and at the end of it, I had a real live pencil test on VHS to call my own. Several weeks of hard work for... 2 (yes, TWO) seconds of animation. Amazing.
.gita
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 5:20pm |
mbc841Space Cadet
Posts : 194
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I am absolutely AMAZED at the PATIENCE that goes into cell-painted animation. Those Disney guys were artists of the HIGHEST callibre. Sort of makes me feel guilty with wanting instant results in what I'm doing.
[url=http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/index.htm][[img]http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/Graphics/banner1.jpg[/img][/url]
|
| 25 OCT 2002 at 6:38pm |
PharosGamesIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 50
Joined: 18 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By justG (25 OCT 2002 5:11pm)
Kathy, there are tons of online resources for trueSpace, and many freeware utilities (tsX) available to make your life easier; be sure to check those out before "doing things the hard way." I've tried most of the apps out there, and trueSpace is the one I chose because I find it to be like playing with play-doh or clay. I find its interface the most intuitive of them all. Like all things, there is a learning curve, but the provided manual is rather comprehensive and should definitely get you started.
Thanks for the URL, Gita. I will check out Blender. I found the TrueSpace interface just terrible, and another game developer I know did too. Maybe our brains are wired differently. I did check out the on-line resources. I think I have Truespace 4 and it didn't help that it was SO Slow on my Dell P4, and kept crashing.
I tried to get a patch from the company. I had the sales receipt, and manuals, and even some extra books, from the guy who originally purchased it and sold it second-hand to me... But I wasn't the original owner, so the TrueSpace folks wouldn't let me have the patch, or support of any kind. :-/
Anyway, I eventually gave up on it, even uninstalled it from my computer.
I'm currently writing my games in C++ Builder.
Do you have any artwork you have done that we could see??
|
| 26 OCT 2002 at 6:29am |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By PharosGames (25 OCT 2002 6:38pm)
Do you have any artwork you have done that we could see??
*blush* No, not yet. I haven't done anything yet I thought worth keeping. I thought perhaps I might regret dumping my amateur efforts as I regretted throwing out all my old poetry and prose, but I don't. Perhaps one day... if ever I have the time to return to that hobby.
.gita, for whom 24 in hours a day aren't nearly enough, and who doesn't understand why we can't function properly without sleep. Hmph.
|
| 26 OCT 2002 at 8:02am |
JonasKyratzesSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 280
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | You're using Simply 3D? Me too!
[i]
|
| 26 OCT 2002 at 2:17pm |
mbc841Space Cadet
Posts : 194
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Jonas, how do you like Simply 3D ?
[url=http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/index.htm][[img]http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/Graphics/banner1.jpg[/img][/url]
|
| 26 OCT 2002 at 6:08pm |
JonasKyratzesSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 280
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I like it. It's cheap enough for a poor fellow like myself, and it's good enough for a couple of games. It's not the perfect renderer, but the controls are simple and you don't have to be a quantum engineer to be able to create some graphics.
On the other hand, it is rather limited and sometimes very hard to work with due to stupid design and a few bugs.
All in all, I'm really glad I got it, but I wish I had some great programs like Worldbuilder, Bryce and Poser . Perhaps some day I will be able to afford them, and then I will be able to make some truly amazing games. For now, S3D will have to be enough.
BTW, when you're rendering, don't forget to set rendering quality to maximum - it really improves the picture a lot.
[i]
|
| 26 OCT 2002 at 11:22pm |
MichalNGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7058
Joined: 14 SEP 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By mbc841 (25 OCT 2002 5:20pm)
I am absolutely AMAZED at the PATIENCE that goes into cell-painted animation. Those Disney guys were artists of the HIGHEST callibre.
I wonder what kind of technologies Disney uses now (for cartoons I mean).
Some Japanese animators are trying to blend CG and cel animation. In the movie Metropolis it worked out pretty well (Blood: The Last Vampire looked maybe even better). With cel animation it's pretty much impossible to do complex camera movement (because you'd have to redo entire scene from scratch every frame) but CG-only movies still look too artificial to me. Somehow they lack the human touch (I know it's hard work too!). Many people, including me, consider cartoon-style characters to be simply a lot more likeable.
Even more painstaking than cel animation is stop motion animation (think Tim Butron - Nightmare Before Christmas, James and the Giant Peach etc.). The problem with that is that if you mess up one frame, you have to throw away the entire sequence because there is no going back.
I still think that fully CG "photorealistic" games are walking down a slippery slope. An example in my fresh memory (finished only couple hours ago) is Syberia: Kate Walker has a pretty nice shadow (as any girl with a pretty figure like her should ) when she's walking around. But when she's walking up and down stairways, the shadow switches to a different, simpler version. I found the abrupt transition disturbing. I honestly wouldn't have noticed if she'd had no shadow at all. But the game tried to be realistic and failed. Another example - in Valadilene there is a number of highly reflective pools of water on the streets after the rain. But when Kate is walking behind them, there's no reflection in the water. What's up with that?
So what's my point? Sometimes less is more. I know I'm bitching about that wherever I go.
While I'm on the subject, another danger of CG animation is that it tends to become obsolete. Five year old 3D games and animation look pretty dated now. But 1930's Disney's cartoons don't. Think about that
I forgot my sig.
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 12:57am |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Disney went CG. Probably because it's a lot cheaper and certainly because it allows for some impressive (for a cartoon) camera shots. Beauty and The Beast has several of those complex shots (like the ballroom scene).
1930's cartoons did look dated btw, but they were all enhanced (the Disney ones) the last couple of years using... you guessed it, computers
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 1:44am |
MichalNGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7058
Joined: 14 SEP 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By SCiV (27 OCT 2002 12:57am)
Disney went CG. Probably because it's a lot cheaper and certainly because it allows for some impressive (for a cartoon) camera shots.
I don't think it's a good long term strategy. What looks impressive today will look ho-hum ten years from now. But of course, whoever heard of big corporations having a sensible long-term strategy?
Also by going for photorealism it is difficult (though not impossible) to retain style. Most CG movies look dreadfully similar to each other (it's even worse with 3D games).
1930's cartoons did look dated btw, but they were all enhanced (the Disney ones) the last couple of years using... you guessed it, computers
I don't think we mean the same by "dated". If you mean the fact that the old movies were faded, scratched and noisy... that's not what I was talking about.
And of course the old movies were restored using computers. What else should they use?
I forgot my sig.
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 2:15am |
PharosGamesIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 50
Joined: 18 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Originally Posted By justG (26 OCT 2002 6:29am)
[color=Maroon]*blush* No, not yet. I haven't done anything yet I thought worth keeping.
Ah-- too bad. It sounds like you are a perfectionist.
Well, I'd love to see what you are doing when you get to that point.
I know it is difficult to let other people see your work, and that has something to do with my ups-and-downs of late too, I'm sure. :
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 2:44pm |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Ya, I'm sort of a perfectionist. It's both a blessing and a curse. I'm learning to moderate it, tho'. Another thing that's both a blessing and a curse - I'm passionate about too many things. As a result, I'm never (ever) bored, but on the other hand, I occasionally do things half-arsed or leave them unfinished because I want to move on to the next thing, which is where that whole perfectionist part of me pokes its head in and goes "Um... What do you think you're doing?"
.gita
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 4:04pm |
SkyeSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 348
Joined: 20 OCT 2002
Status : Online | Wel, I might as well plunge right in here The game I am working on is all rendered graphics (as realistic looking as can be achieved). I use 2 programs, a modeller - Moray and a renderer - POV-Ray. Moray was written to work with the POV-Ray renderer. POV-Ray is freeware, Moray is not but the cost is around the $150 range US (www.stmuc.com/moray). The complete program is downloadable with a nag screen until registered. Both programs are quite easy to use. If anyone is interested in the type of results, I could set up some screen shots for viewing . . . . .
One thing I like about the rendered environment is that I can design just about anything I want, I don't have to be stuck with just the environments that I am able to photograph. The same holds true for the objects and furnishings that are used in my game. Having said that, I do use image maps for some of the work I do, particularily brick work and wall paper.
Anne
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]
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 6:09pm |
bleepnikPrivate Detective
Posts : 544
Joined: 13 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Wow, taking me way back in the day, Anne. POV-Ray was my introduction to the world of 3D graphics, back in 93-94.
.gita
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 7:18pm |
mbc841Space Cadet
Posts : 194
Joined: 10 OCT 2002
Status : Online | I just discovered 3D graphics this year - and POV-Ray was my first program - downloaded for free. It is HARD in my opinion - so far I've only learned how to do a couple of simple objects - and I've learned how to do lathing. I haven't figured out yet how to do a complete scene - but since getting Simply 3D, I've given up on POV-Ray - too difficult. I'm more of a visual person - and POV-Ray is more like coding and scripting. I've heard alot about Bryce and Poser so eventually I'll try them.
[url=http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/index.htm][[img]http://www.justadventure.com/IndependentDevs/TheArrangement/Graphics/banner1.jpg[/img][/url]
|
| 27 OCT 2002 at 9:27pm |
SCiVPrivate Detective
Posts : 671
Joined: 22 OCT 2002
Status : Online | An other alternative is gmax from Discreet. This is a freeware (though I suspect not for commercial use) version of 3DSMax.
http://www.discreet.com/products/gmax/gmaxconsumer/
--> Update
Good thing I kept clicking through on the website, gmax is a modeller only, so you'll have to render images using a different tool.
Playing: World of Warcraft / Monkey Island SE&&Reading: Worldwar: Upsetting the Balance - Harry Turtledove&&Watching: Repo! The Genetic Opera
|
