3D characters in AGS?

[Pet Terry]

I don't know of any games that use it yet

Crypt by Mätzyboy
Evil Enterprises by Geoffkhan

[Crichton]

Thanks for the examples, scotch and petteri. This looks much more promising. Although to tell you the truth, I can still see jaggies even in the 640x480 example more than at 4x anti-aliasing setting with 3D characters and objects in games like Grim Fandango. Also, in the Alpha example by scotch I can see the character sprite edges losing some detail when the charater is smaller (further distance) than original size, the black outline has noticable gaps in it (the effect is somewhat of a "dotted" line). I have to say also that at 320x240 games, it seems anti-aliasing is actually hurting it a bit, the effect is a little strange, so it's much more suited for 640x480 and 800x600, at least the alpha-blended 2D style. I have not used AGS heavily yet and I'm undecided on which engine to use because right now I'm working on game resources in their highest quality and making sure they look good at 640x480 and above, so I sticktly go by the listed features on the site, and while AGS did mention use of alpha-blended sprites and scaled anti-aliasing, that does not automatically translate to anti-aliasing at native sprite size. It is nice to know it is there. But I still prefer the effect of 3D anti-aliased characters with fluid motion.

As for a lot of work on top of AGS to enable a complex GF-like 3D support, I too have already said that I understand it would be difficult, so I'm not disputing that. I'm just hoping a basic start can be given to some 3D char support and eventually become better one way or another, even if it means a seperate AGS 3D engine.

[scotch]

The antialiasing being built into the sprite can be better than 4 or 8x antialiasing on your graphics card in GF, it just depends on how you antialias it yourself in your paint or 3d rendering program, if you can see jaggies it's because I drew them.  My example was to test if it was working when it was first released, it's not the best kind of effect you could get with it.

Gaps in the outline are due to no scaling filtering, it didn't work on the first version that supported 32 bit (that that example was made in), I'm not sure if it works now or not.

Antialiasing doesn't generally look right in 320x240 because it's such a low resolution.  Try playing a 3d game with antialiasing on in that resolution, you'll see the same blurryness.

3d would be nice of course, but if it's mostly the antialiasing you want then 2d is just as good/better.
There are other reasons I'd like real 3d (lighting, smoother/smaller animations,shadows, perspective adjustment, being able to use lots of different angles with the same character etc etc), but it's a lot of work considering only a few games would probably use it :/

[Crichton]

That's what I was hoping for. Initially I believed you provided an example with its AA limitation, even if it wasn't a best example. Although 4x or 8x isn't what 3D is limited to forever, it's being increased with newer generations of cards, such as to 16x and so on. Of course, it would take a bigger framerate hit with action games but adventure games can handle it easily.

I think you misunderstood what I said about 320x240 with AA, I wasn't trying to say that a 3D game would look better with it, I was saying that it would look strange anywhere. There aren't many 3D games that support 320x240 with AA. Perhaps modern Direct3D and OpenGL Doom/Doom2 ports and maybe even Quake2, not sure.

As I said, it's not just AA that I'd like 3D for, it's mostly much more fluid motion than 2D sprites. Now, of course, I'd love it for all the other things you mentioned but I was talking stricktly if we only had a basic 3D character support. A lot of times different review sites complain about "wooden" animations of characters in adv. games, and a fluid 3D character would help with that, IMO. I realize that it's also a fault of a designer but 3D would allow for a much more room for smoothness, and more walking directions. As for only a few games using quality 3D, I wouldn't mind that at all. Do you prefer quantity or quality? Personally, I'd rather have one great game per year than ten mediocre.

[scotch]

People's criticism of 2d adventure game animation being wooden is probably less to do with the low framerate than poor animation though.Ã,  For example, there are many Japanese 2d animations that look very high quality and expressive, but use comparatively low framerates due to the time it takes to draw.Ã,  It doesn't detract much from good animation with frames used in the right places.

I agree with you that the fluid, interpolated motion you get with 3d would be nice, also combining facial animation and lip sync animations together with movements could be possible, it could look very slick.
But there's a big drop in expressiveness and animation quality between amateur 2d and amateur 3d games imo, I'm not sure more fluid animation would really make up for it. (it's possible a great 3d animator could make a game with it, but it's not very likely imo)

I think this feature is only likely to be added if lots of people ask for it, and I'm not sure many people but you would want non adjusted for perspective, non lit correctly realtime 3d, unfortunately.

But if moving to supporting 3d models had the side effect of bringing in 3d hardware accelerated 2d graphics, then I'd be all for it, I can see that actually being used

[shbaz]

But there's a big drop in expressiveness and animation quality between amateur 2d and amateur 3d games imo, I'm not sure more fluid animation would really make up for it. (it's possible a great 3d animator could make a game with it, but it's not very likely imo)

Once again, I'm going to be forced to respectfully disconcur.

Please look at one of my walkcycles

The expressiveness is in the style and textures.

This is well within the range of amateurs, I did this totally with free programs (pardon the textures, which Yufster did in Photoshop). Those who can't figure out the supposedly obfuscated 3d app I use will pirate another, like many have and will continue to do. The same results are feasible from any half-respected 3d app.

[scotch]

Shbaz, don't think I don't know that there are good modellers and animators out there in the amateur community, I've worked on stuff with some very good ones. I also know that poser models are not suited to realtime graphics (doesn't make them less likely to be used by newbies).  I am speculating on how many of the good 3d artists would want to model for what is on the cards here. We're talking about a non perspective adjusted, non lit 3d model on a 2d background.  I wouldn't and I'd love to make a 2d/3d adventure game.
Of course the model and textures make up a large part of the style of a character, but they can be done better in pre rendered 3d, we're only talking about advantages in animation here.  Smoothed out animation is nice but good animation is more important, people shouldn't assume realtime 3d is going to make their animations look much better, it probably won't make up for the losses in rendering quality.
So my position is that only a few people are probably going to get anything decent out of this feature if it were to be added, and considering that it's rather a large suggestion to implement, I don't think it's worth it.

BTW, if you come onto IRC sometime I'd like to ask some stuff about Blender

[shbaz]

Well, yeah, you're pretty much correct in that regard (that it won't be worth much until improved upon lots).

The thing to gain is that once it is there the ease of use will be LOADS better than other freely available game engines.

[Sylpher]

* Sylpher adds a couple pennies to the jar..

My opinions in list order because I feel like presenting them that way.

1. This is in no way a horrible idea. Many great games have used 3d characters on 2d scenes and it worked very well. Not just adventure games either.. Opens up AGS in more ways.

2. Just because you personally won't use the feature doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the engine.

3. Of course it is a huge task but CJ has proven resilient to many requests that would have crumbled many other freeware developers. High-res support, High-Color, Windows Engine, Windows Editor.. Many major improvements to AGS. I was here for all of them. The whole time before they were added there was much shit throwing and "Palettes 4ever!!" and "Who needs high-res?? FUG THAT!".. Now they just hang out on the couch and have casual conversations... 3D characters are the obvious next big step for AGS. Embrace it and support CJ to the fullest or sit in a corner and cry.

4. My only problem with throwing 3d characters in. Seems like the next step is 3d objects then 3d guis and then full blown 3d all together. The difficult part, for CJ, lies in that creating an engine that accommodates 2d and 3d and doesn't make your head bleed is a cumbersome task.. (Without the problem of 3d being hell in the first place)

[Crichton]

Scotch, the same argument about quality 2D can be applied for quality 3D. Yes, there are experienced Japanese 2D animators that can make the motion look fairly smooth, and that is actually strengthening the point that, with great skills, 3D difficulties or limitations can be overcome too. Certainly, just because you think that there won't be many experienced 3D modellers and animators using AGS if it only had the most basic 3D support, doesn't mean that we'll have the same quality 2D as you see with top Japanese animators. But there will still be gems coming out once in a while, whether they use 2D on 2D or 3D on 2D.

I do see what you're saying about not being as inclined to use the most limited 3D character support as opposed to full-featured. However, it would only be a start (to being testing things) with better, more improved support to follow, unless a better 3D support is planned at a later time anyway, then I guess we can skip the "poor man's 3D". As for amateurs using 3D, if you look at old games like Doom 1 and Doom 2 and their modern ports (written by amateurs), you can see that there are a lot of people willing to contribute to that with 3D models and such, considering the engine's limitations.

3D hardware accelerated 2D graphics would be even better with 3D character support. Don't fight the 3D, scotch. Build it and they will come! (j/k) By the way, you mentioned Runaway before, I think (or perhaps I'm thinking of another thread)... Did you know that even though it looks like 2D, the characters and their animations were actually done in 3D?

Syplher, good points but I don't think it will get out of hand. After all, GUIs aren't as critical as 3D characters, since they are mostly stationary. If Chris will want to add them, fine, if not, I won't complain.

[shbaz]

On 3d GUIs.. In all of the Blender games I've played, they actually emulated 2d GUIs by using an orthographic camera and rendered textures. I don't think people care so much about the GUI being 3d.. I mean, it's relatively unimportant.

[MrColossal]

Guis didn't [don't?] take advantage of alpha blending and people want it, so saying that the gui is unimportant isn't correct.

Saying that you can make a 2d GUI is like saying why use a 3d character. Since it can all be done in 2d why go 3d? Silly arguements I know but so is saying GUIs aren't important

to... uh... make my point twice apparently

[Joseph DiPerla]

I agree with Slyphers #3. I saw the same thing.

JD

[shbaz]

Guis didn't [don't?] take advantage of alpha blending and people want it, so saying that the gui is unimportant isn't correct.

Saying that you can make a 2d GUI is like saying why use a 3d character. Since it can all be done in 2d why go 3d? Silly arguements I know but so is saying GUIs aren't important

to... uh... make my point twice apparently

With a 3d character you can change the viewpoint to any angle you please and not need to redraw the character 40 times (assuming 4 frames of walkcycle animation and 8 directions, plus standing still) just to achieve that. The animation is smoother. You can turn in more directions. Once refined, the lighting changes, you can apply normal maps, and the character becomes part of the environment.

With 3d GUIs, you can have some kind of special spinny effect possibly. Maybe zoom in on an item inside an inventory menu in 3d. The latter is the only part I'd find useful.

[MrColossal]

or maybe you're just not thinking cleverly enough...

a GUI doesn't just have buttons on it for saving games as AGSers have shown, why can't i have lighting change on my GUI or normal mapping?

[shbaz]

or maybe you're just not thinking cleverly enough...

a GUI doesn't just have buttons on it for saving games as AGSers have shown, why can't i have lighting change on my GUI or normal mapping?

Then just let me say that I personally don't see it as necessary.

I guess you're referring to the type that hover around the character as floaty things, or other innovative types that get on my nerves.

[MrColossal]

again, i'm talking about anything that isn't a save load gui or something covered in buttons...

like the Englewood Stone from my game Spellbound, that's a GUI, if it was 3d the wells could actually be depressed into the stone, lighting from the hand creating magic could shine and light up the pits and grooves in the stone's surface. Particles pinging off of it as they flow from the hand's magic build up

this is an innovation that gets on your nerves?

anyways, if you don't see 3d guis as necessary for personal reasons that's fair enough. I'm just trying to make what I mean more clear not pick at you.

[shbaz]

I would label that as a special effect or an interaction. If you label that as a GUI, then you label everything you see as a GUI. Possibly technically correct, but confusing terminology.

I know you're not picking at me. Do I seem defensive?

[MrColossal]

It is a GUI, also as far as AGS is concerned it is a GUI. I made the majority of it in the GUI editor.

It's also a Graphical User Interface for making spells inside the game Spellbound, so it's still a GUI. A special effect would be the particles and lighting much like on the characters. If you haven't played Spellbound then maybe I'm not explaining what the stone does well enough. It's like the staff Bobbin Threadbare carries. You use it to make spells with.

I was just saying as a just in case that I wasn't picking, to avoid anyone else or yourself from thinking I am.

[shbaz]

I'll play it and get back to you.Ã, 

EDIT:
Oh wait, I played that. I had no idea how to use that system though.