[Candescence]

Now, considering this is a 3D engine and all (and I want to reinvigorate discussion in this section), I figured that this stage in development warranted some planning for assets for actually testing the renderer. After all, without 3D assets, we can't actually render any pretty pictures, now can we? And then there's stuff like collision and whatnot for when we actually get into physics and whatnot.

What we need at this early stage, IMO:

- A Sonic model, with proper animations
- Basic level geometry

Neither of these have to be fancy at all. The Sonic model could be pure crap, for all we. Pretty simple, right? Of course, we will have to test these in various model formats to make sure they work correctly, but baby steps. As we move along in development, we'll need more assets to test the engine and eventually showcase it, but that's a while off, yet.

[Scarred Sun]

I want to come in before this gets too out of hand and note that for such assets, the functionality of the model matters faaaaaaaaaar more than the aesthetic, so I don't want ten pages of eyelid critique, OK?

You've been warned.

[Falk]

Would it be out-of-line to suggest using stuff like Sonic Adventure or Sonic Colors assets as placeholder or as a baseline? I mean the vast majority of 2D fangames use the 16-bit (or Advance) sprites for at least Sonic.

edit: Obviously this goes without saying that it could inadvertently set the precedent for Mobius Engine to become the next BlitzSonic D:

This post has been edited by Falk: 11 April 2012 - 10:42 AM

[Candescence]

Scarred Sun, on 11 April 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

I want to come in before this gets too out of hand and note that for such assets, the functionality of the model matters faaaaaaaaaar more than the aesthetic, so I don't want ten pages of eyelid critique, OK?

You've been warned.

DEAR GOD, THIS. As I said, the models could look like absolute shit, but as long as they're functional for our purposes, they will work fine. Nitpicking is right out, peoeple.

Or, hell, for graphical assets in general, the less nitpicking, the better. We all know what happens when everyone tries to nitpick visual stuff.

This post has been edited by Candescence: 11 April 2012 - 11:12 AM

[Rolken]

Candescence, on 11 April 2012 - 08:33 AM, said:

Of course, we will have to test these in various model formats to make sure they work correctly, but baby steps.

Is there context on what the engine is expecting for assets? The first character model might as well be a sphere or a cube, but if the engine can't work with it it's useless.

[Gen]

Rolken, on 11 April 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

Candescence, on 11 April 2012 - 08:33 AM, said:

Of course, we will have to test these in various model formats to make sure they work correctly, but baby steps.

Is there context on what the engine is expecting for assets? The first character model might as well be a sphere or a cube, but if the engine can't work with it it's useless.

Well, may as well put some things out there for people to think about.

First off, assuming we'll have a per-pixel lighting pipeline, generally speaking normal maps will be useful to test those, and different meshes that have proper UV maps applied.
Assume OpenGL-style normal maps.
Bonus points: bent normals tend to be good for testing different diffuse lighting techniques.

Character-wise, it really isn't going to matter. Internally the engine will have its own collider specified for character collisions in the world. This will probably be a capsule initially.

However, for the sake of testing animated models, if anyone has a sonic model with animations handy (that *they* created or otherwise have the rights to redistribute), I doubt anyone would complain. It doesn't have to be perfect, or otherwise follow any specific style, so long as it's rigged with a skeleton and is suitable for animating, we'll eventually use it once things have progressed to that point.

Eventually, it'll be necessary to test different collision hulls on static meshes, however this may not be an issue if Bullet has a means to create convex decompositions of meshes built-in.

Anything else anyone would like to add?

[winterhell]

Rolken, on 11 April 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

Is there context on what the engine is expecting for assets? The first character model might as well be a sphere or a cube, but if the engine can't work with it it's useless.

Recommended are COLLADA for the 3D format, and TGA/DDS for the textures. Its possible the engine to be able to work with more file formats but you shouldn't hold your breath.

[Polygon Jim]

If you want this shitty classic Sonic model I made a while back, I can try and fix it up, UV it correctly, and rig it.

This post has been edited by Polygon Jim: 11 April 2012 - 02:59 PM

[Dark Sonic]

Classic Sonic from Generations now until the end of time. Sega has rendered all other 3D Models of Classic Sonic crap in comparison.

There you go issue solved.

[Gen]

Dark Sonic, on 11 April 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Classic Sonic from Generations now until the end of time. Sega has rendered all other 3D Models of Classic Sonic crap in comparison.

There you go issue solved.

Gen, on 11 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

However, for the sake of testing animated models, if anyone has a sonic model with animations handy (that *they* created or otherwise have the rights to redistribute), I doubt anyone would complain. It doesn't have to be perfect, or otherwise follow any specific style, so long as it's rigged with a skeleton and is suitable for animating, we'll eventually use it once things have progressed to that point.

Also, that would be pretty cool Jim.

This post has been edited by Gen: 11 April 2012 - 05:51 PM

[Falk]

I know this is pretty way off the purpose of -this- thread and is going to make me sound like a smartass dick, but just so it's 100% clear on all aspects and for future reference, would the guideline on using self-created assets (which are obviously based on an IP anyway (Yes, I realize there's a fundamental difference)) also extend to sound effects audio clips? If not, why the difference?

edit: Wording to sound less smartass-dick-ish

edit2: and as a possible answer to my own question (like I said, I bring this up for discussion's sake, not to be antagonizing)- Sonic has had many, many different models/sprites over the years but some very, very distinctive sounds in the franchise that on recreation from scratch would either 1) sound too different and not be acceptable 2) end up sounding the same anyway, becoming a waste of effort reinventing the wheel. (Hence just use the original clips)

And on the other hand, square wave vs saw wave jump sound, to the weird, hollow SA/SA2 jump sound, to ditching it completely for a more conventional whomp/voice-clip/landing in modern games- Hrm. (Hence remake the clips)

This post has been edited by Falk: 11 April 2012 - 06:07 PM

[Dark Sonic]

Gen, on 11 April 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

Dark Sonic, on 11 April 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Classic Sonic from Generations now until the end of time. Sega has rendered all other 3D Models of Classic Sonic crap in comparison.

There you go issue solved.

Gen, on 11 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

However, for the sake of testing animated models, if anyone has a sonic model with animations handy (that *they* created or otherwise have the rights to redistribute), I doubt anyone would complain. It doesn't have to be perfect, or otherwise follow any specific style, so long as it's rigged with a skeleton and is suitable for animating, we'll eventually use it once things have progressed to that point.

Also, that would be pretty cool Jim.

Oh ok, I tried to find reasoning behind why the Generations model wasn't up for consideration, but I guess I overlooked that part. Oh well, Jim's is pretty cool.

[Candescence]

Jim's looks perfectly fine, so, yeah.

[Sofox]

So do we allow Jim to upload his model (possibly the original file and an exported COLLADA) to Mercurial source respository so we have access to it?
It sounds like the right approach to me.
Maybe a text file announcing what license Jim is releasing it under.