Messages

I'll try to finish and paint this over:

WIP1:

WIP 2:

FINAL:
[imgzoom]http://i.imgur.com/qdHD4Lg.png[/imgzoom]

Things are going rather slow (my shoulder is messed up a bit), when the paint over is done, I plan to rework the image a bit in PS (fix the colors and some effects maybe). There's a even a story to go with it, but I'm still figuring out if I want to turn into a game or not. It includes broken families, priests, murders and a dash of the creepy occult and witches.

There's lack of detail, textures are a mixture of realistic and cartoonish, lighting is something you'll have to learn (3d sometimes requires invisible lights that make no shadows, in order to keep things lit the way it looks nice but is not completely realisitc), you need to sort out your uvs, the floor in the cabing for example is stretched.

Real funny, nice work.

It's up to you, what you want your game to look like, but if you're going for 3d into pixel art, I'd use the method Scavenger suggested (of painting over renders. In any other you're not really getting the pixel art look, but just a pixelated look and it will be noticeable. In this case it's also advisable to draw your characters in PS or Gimp, because they will look better with the backgrounds, but you can still use the 3d models as a basis for a paintover.

If you want to proceed in resolutions like 640x480px, that is fine too, but be sure to add more stuff into your backgrounds after you finish testing. The render looks rather nice as well, but you'll probably see  how it behaves when you try out more objects and textures. Be sure to keep the level of detail on all things consistent.

Ok, so recently I've ordered a Wacom tablet as I thought it'd be more proficient than my mouse, unfortunately I ordered the one without the screen on it but it's fine it still works.

This is so freaking funny in so many ways.

Why are you not sticking to standard resolutions?

Just as a player - please don't make me strain my eyes so I see stuff in your game. You can still indicate dark by actually not drawing anything except what you want the player to see. Don't make everything be just a tiny bit different shade than the rest as an indication of light intensity. Even if my computer can display the exact same colors as yours, what if I have a light turned on in the room, then I can't see almost anything.

Can't this be the same scene? I still get that it's supposed to be darkness, but now I can actually see things that are supposed to be seen:
[IMGzoom]http://i.imgur.com/6LBlW58.png[/imgzoom]

I was bored.

My initial impression is it looks very nice and fluid. Her right hand may have the extreme points a bit too far (it swings a bit too far back and forth), but that's a minor issue.

I always like the feel of a nicely animated sprite, you know, frame by frame...just kind of has more "soul". Again, with extra attention, anything can look nice (by that I mean that with enough effort it can look almost as fluid as manually animated stuff).

Problem is, with lower resolutions, you can't really do much, because even rotation morphs the original significantly. Flash games use it though and most modern cartoons.

I can't help my curiosity, could you elaborate? What prompted them to contact you? How did they contact you? What did they say? If you could share any details of your success story with fellow indie developers it would be nice.

It's like this - you draw Marvel fan art, by drawing over it and ignoring anatomy, all the time...and then DC calls you up.

I started watching TableTop on youtube, kind of made me wish I had more friends, but I went to local multimedia store and somebody actually asked one of the workers if they had Alhambra...and I kind of geeked out because I knew what that random word was.

You realise GFWL is shutting down? Might be something connected to that.

No, just no.
Make your own walkcyclces, this obviously doesn't work properly and is very creepy.

You can send people a link from almost any device these days. Yeah, I get it, I've maybe made it take as much effort to get someone to play one of my games as it takes to, for example, tie your shoelace. That ain't going to stop me calling a game whatever I want.

I'm not trying to argue with you (or say that you're the only one who's doing this or claim this to be a big issue), I just want to say I understand why somebody might have trouble with some times (in relation to searching for it or remembering the name).

Three major issues that I usually notice around game names:
1.

People always complain my game names are hard to google. Why the hell would anybody need to google my games? If you know they exist, you'll know where to find them.

I think the issue is if for example I talk to a friend and tell them to look up "!", how are they supposed to find it without me pointing them to AGS games collection, which again needs extra explaining and such.

2. problem again comes with names that are too common, create a game that simulates a life in a house and call it "House"...you'll probably never find it, the noun is too common and there's a bunch of dr. House stuff you'll probably run into first.

3. names that just point to something lame or bad humor, doesn't matter if the game is the best ever, I'll probably won't try it and there was a good recent example, I think the game was called "Shitty quest"...to me that indicates lazy toilet humor and unless I know what it's about or know the author or something, I won't even try it. Yes it's superficial, judging a book by it's covers, but when author has full control and chooses such a title, then I think judgement might be appropriate to a degree.

If you take Waheela's advice about the lights, which I think look better now, I'd get rid of the shadows in the corners of the ceiling and the walls that meet the ceiling. Thing is, when a light has a strong spot it lights, the rest (unless you're going for dramatic lighting) is going to be diffused and equally lit, thus no strong shadows. You can see that in the photo Waheela put as well, there's a slight gradient towards the corners, but nothing you can really simulate accurately (or to look nice) by pixels, and still keep the style you've decided on.
So I'd get rid of those corner shadows, they just kind of draw off focus from the center of the background to themselves.

I have a few questions:
- is that an open vault door, then another door behind it? does that exist? I think there's usually metal bars (like a prison door) behind the big round vault door.
- is this a house or a bank type of institution? Maybe a bank would put a red carpet that leads to the door, but the actual floor might be b&w or regular tiles
- not too happy about the doorway being right next to a wall, seems unusual enough to be thought of as a mistake in design
- is there some reason the door is not completely round? I'm not talking about the part that meets the floor but the upper parts

First of all, how rude of me to forget, thanks mr. Gilbert, informative and useful as always.

Personally I do not see any advantage of 16:9 over 16:10, but it seems that 16:9 monitors are more popular (I may be mistaken). 16:10 provides a bit more vertical space.

Yes, I do realize that, but if I already have a 16:9 monitor (or if I had the other), there's not really that much for me to do about it now. Web pretty much figured it out with putting huge areas on either side of the screen and everything else being pretty much adaptive.

Maybe an almost unimportant question, but it sometimes really bugs me - is it better to go 16:10 or 16:9? Or is not really that important between those two? I really have no idea what the majority of people have/prefer.

3d games basically don't have this problem at all because they do whatever you set the camera to do, but is there like a trend amongst gamers?

2 things:
- you say you need money for voice acting, but full voice acting is a stretch goal...so what kind of voice acting is included in the original goal?
- just a heads up, link to the indiegogo page is incorrect