Levels & Items Art

No, this is (though they're pretty close).




Regarding height, I'll just quote myself:

<!--quoteo(post=270611:date=Jan 20 2009, 07:02 PM:name=Sciz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sciz @ Jan 20 2009, 07:02 PM)

 

<!--quoteo(post=271089:date=Jan 22 2009, 02:25 AM:name=ICEknight)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ICEknight @ Jan 22 2009, 02:25 AM) [/url][/quote]

I'm definitely liking the less perfectly-even grass alright - it seems to add a bit more 'character' to the grass[/quote]I disgress. I don't think deforming the original shapes so much should be the way to go.


By the way, is that the latest version of the grass tiles?
[/quote]

I suppose we already have 'wavy' grass already, as shown in the picture below

 

Every time I see all the artwork gathered together for a zone mockup I have to take a deep breath. This is going to look incredible once the playable builds start to come. And the more feedback there is on the art, the sooner that will happen! Thanks for the comments so far guys, keep it up

 

I'm sorry to say but that bush looks awful. It looks too plain, like an early 90's cheap low tech 3D render. Those too big squares look completely out of place.

Besides, I don't think that's a correct interpretation of it. Once again, you are not thinking about pixel limitations. In the original the small squares clearly represented some kind of semi transparent thick textured (yes, they're not plain...) leaves, it's definitely not some sort of even and plain 3D ball.

 

Sonic 2 does happen to be an early 90s era game, so wouldn't you say that makes it a more accurate recreation?

As it is, we've received a lot of positive feedback on that piece, and it was the focus of a lot of concentrated improvements. Could you provide an example of the styling you feel the bush currently lacks?

 

<!--quoteo(post=271537:date=Jan 23 2009, 04:55 AM:name=Fred PJ)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fred PJ @ Jan 23 2009, 04:55 AM)

There are ways they could have made a semi-transparent bush without using a 2x2 checkerboard. But they didn't. Instead, the artist put all sorts of fragmented squares around the edges to give it a smooth, spherical appearance and carefully worked on the colors of each individual square to make sure the entire thing appeared to be shaded smoothly.

You're welcome to submit your own interpretation, but don't insult us by assuming we've just ignored the principles and limitations of the original designs.

 

I couldn't help but noticing at the pic Sciz provided:

 

<!--quoteo(post=271596:date=Jan 23 2009, 05:25 PM:name=Sciz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sciz @ Jan 23 2009, 05:25 PM)

There are ways they could have made a semi-transparent bush without using a 2x2 checkerboard. But they didn't. Instead, the artist put all sorts of fragmented squares around the edges to give it a smooth, spherical appearance and carefully worked on the colors of each individual square to make sure the entire thing appeared to be shaded smoothly.

You're welcome to submit your own interpretation, but don't insult us by assuming we've just ignored the principles and limitations of the original designs.[/quote]
Hey, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to insult anyone. The squares look too big (they're almost double the size of the original) and don't have any texture unlike the original. The original texturing does a pretty good job of making the squares somehow look like leaves but this one just looks like an untextured 3D ball. I'm just being honest, sorry.

 

<!--quoteo(post=271825:date=Jan 24 2009, 07:26 AM:name=Fred PJ)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fred PJ @ Jan 24 2009, 07:26 AM) [/quote]

... (they're almost double the size of the original)...
[/quote]

Isn't that the idea? aren't they meant to be 4X the size?

 

They meant the blocks that make up the bush, they are larger than the 4x sprite's, like double size. I personally like it better like that.

 

Well, some of them are bound to look bigger and some smaller, since these have some volume applied to them... Although I guess another version with smaller squares could be tried, but I personally think these are fine.

Applying some individual shines and shadows to each square could solve this, but it might be quite hard to do without destroying the whole object's volume. Neverthless, if somebody has the time, it could be an interesting thing to see.

 

Perhaps it could do with some texture on the individual squares instead of each one having such a plain colour?

*edit* oops, Sorry Fred, didn't see your post there about the texturing ^^

 

Not to ignore Fred, but before we start making changes to the art I'd want to see others agreeing with his idea. Currently we've got a piece that doesn't need much more work. Unless someone can post up a good example based on his idea within the next day or so, I'm calling this one approved so we can move on to the next level piece.

 

I'm intrigued to see if the individual shading for each checker could work, but I personally think what we have is already good enough to be approved.

 

*Has just finished browsing through the whole topic*

I quite agree... Though, it is annoying that that status on the project targets topic isn't updated. I know there are at least two of those listed there that already have vectorized forms uploaded.

Also, the URL to the database is formatted incorrectly.

 

Thanks for the feedback King InuYasha. The Project Targets thread is usually updated once per week, and if you're referring to the status of the EHZ bush art, I'm waiting to put that one up as approved until tomorrow, as I said earlier; was it a different piece you were talking about? Not sure what you mean about the link to the database there, as it goes straight to the index.

 

This is the most recent version of the bush, if anyone wants to play with it. Short of possibly touching up the trunk a bit more if there's nothing better to do later, I'm done with it, barring an executive order otherwise.

 

Ok, for example, the turtle animal and boss mobile base ones are done afaik.

The link to the database at the bottom of that post is incorrect.

The BBcode should be:

 

This is why we are in the process of reorganizing the database. The overwhelming majority of pieces on the DB were up to Tech Demo standards for colors steps, not the 'Uber' shading that is now standard. The turtle and the mobile base (and most others you see currently uploaded) need to be brought up to that level, so while they have been approved, they are not complete.

I'll add another section to the Project Targets thread today outlining which assets are completed with Uber shading applied. Hopefully that will clear up any confusion there.

I thought you meant the link at the top of the post, I'd completely forgotten about the one at the bottom. It's now fixed, good catch.

 

I looked at the newly edited page and I hadn't realized how far we had come. I thought that we needed a lot more work than we do now!