Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Igor

#301
Oh, it seems i missed one of your replys yesterday DGM... no wonder with the speed this thread is evolving.
Well, wasn't there some talk about getting personal a few messages back? I won't respond though, as i think i'd get too low with any reply and don't want to additionally heat up otherwise interesting thread.
No hard feelings, but sometimes it's better to "go ride a bike or hang out at your bowling alley" as you wrote, before replying with big letters and exclamation marks.
#302
>>You can now have on_key_press and on_mouse_click functions in your room script.<<

Fantastic! That was one thing i was missing- it will make the whole thing much, much easier. Thanks!
#303
Well i for one am enjoying this :)

But, hm... i lost the track of what this debate is all about.
Yes, adventures don't need graphics. As a matter of fact, no game needs graphics (you can have a game where you need to type in "jump", "shoot" (etc.) fast enough- and you'll have arcade).
But nonetheless graphics are very important (needed or not needed) element of adventure. If you call this element, that adds another dimension (and for some make it more fun) to gameplay, "cosmetics", then ok, let's call it cosmetic.

Do we agree here?
#304
Very nicely put Loominous and Eric.

I agree- better graphics might be pure cosmetics... however i don't see a point in claiming that for graphics itself.
#305
I'd say ignore them. It's not worth the trouble. I don't think they asked me for permission either (could be wrong though) and to be honest, i don't really care.

But... "Trendy" games...? This cracked me up  :D
#306
>>But I am saying that adventures can exist without graphics, thus graphics are unecessary --- they're purely cosmetic.<<

True, true (don't agree completely with purely cosmetic bit, however i'll leave it at that), but i'm replying in context of original Dimidimidimi's post & argument.
#307
Quote from: DGMacphee on Thu 09/10/2003 13:51:27
QuoteThey both create atmosphere, that i find higly important when it comes to games.

Like I said before, graphics are mainly asthetic.

They contribute, but I don't consider them highly important.

If they were so highly important, then why did adventure games once exist without them?

Technological standards, thus blah blah blah repeat myself.

Yes, and we were playing them because we didn't know better (and some still do, because they find it either a nice *diversion* from graphics games or because they are replaying them out of nostalgia. But the point is- it's nice that's not all games have to offer).

Before color TV we had black&white- and we were just fine. Before TV there was just radio- and we were just fine. Before radio there was just newspaper- and we were just fine.
.....
Before houses we had caves, and we were just fine... Ok, you see where i'm going ;)

I also can't agree that "the advancement of graphics is purely to keep up with technological standards". Nothing would be more fantastic, than playing Fifa game, where you couldn't distinguish game graphics from TV. It adds to the game experience and is more fun. Fun, that's all that is about.

Ok, you don't find graphics&sound important and that's fine. The thing is, there's lots of players who do. It's not just a matter of "aesthetic"- for example music&sound in The Dig was 50% of the game. Turn off speekers and you'll kill all the great atmosphere.


Gameplay is of course *very* important- i never said it isn't. I'm just saying that i enjoy good game with good graphics&sound much more than good game with bad graphics&sound.
#308
Quote from: DGMacphee on Sun 05/10/2003 13:55:41
Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 05/10/2003 12:57:50
QuoteBetter graphics are nothing to do with the latest hardware.

Then why the hell do you need a graphics accelerator to view the latest wizz-bang graphics in games?

We didn't need graphics accelerators to play Day Of The Tentacle.

I think that was his point :) Lots of games, that need 3d accelerators, stink when it comes to graphic department. In short, they have no style. On the other hand you have a game with 320x200 2d graphics that can still blow you away. That's what i call good.
And i agree, good & appropriate graphics (note, that i didn't say "technically advanced" ;)) are very important for gaming experience- just as well as is sound. They both create atmosphere, that i find higly important when it comes to games.
And no, i never finished first Maniac Mansion- it might be good, but (non-appealing) graphics turned me away from the game.
#309
My hat goes off to you! Great, inspiring work!
#310
General Discussion / Re:What is wrong with me
Wed 08/10/2003 14:54:23
>>What is wrong with me?<<
Too much money?  ;)
#311
Critics' Lounge / Re:Colour help
Fri 03/10/2003 17:35:51
Great!
I like the black&white version much more than colored one though. I think, in the process of coloring, you lost some of the elegance, you managed to achieve with lines. It would be hard to point a finger at specific "fault" (because frankly, there is non- it's a matter of opinion). The colors themself are good... But i'd say that maybe the type of coloring you were using isn't very compatible with such line drawing. Simple, clear & thick black line drawings usualy work good with simple coloring. Here you created nice 3d feeling with shading, but you discarded it with thick black lines. So it would be good if you'd either change lines or make simpler shading.

Pessi's coloring example is great in my opinion, as shading doesn't clash with lines.
Here's my monochromatic try (with even more simple (one color) shading):
http://maniac.adventuredevelopers.com/ericversion1.JPG

Btw, smashing textures Loominous- it gives a pic very retro look- great!
#312
Critics' Lounge / Re:Playing with Poser
Fri 03/10/2003 17:28:19
Fantastic work Electric_Hare!
#313
Critics' Lounge / Re:Playing with Poser
Thu 02/10/2003 11:49:07
Agree with your points. When i said "i think the Poser system is the future of 3d progams" i didn't mean Poser as a progam is future, but its system of morphing itself (for characters of course). Right now are 3d programs still very clumsy when it comes to interface and every artist will tell you this breaks creative flow. So far 3d programs are more suitable for programmers and technical freaks than for artists (that's why studio needs 2 "technicians" (or more) on one artist- and this costs). I'm absolutely sure 3d programs will become more userfriedly as 3d will advance and i think Poser is a first step (even if clumsy) in that direction.
#314
Critics' Lounge / Re:Playing with Poser
Thu 02/10/2003 09:08:11
Electric_hare: those head shots are really fantastic!
Btw i have a question for you Migs and Electric_hare. As far as i know Poser now lets you create completely your own figures (from bone structure, etc.). Were figures on Daz3d created that way? I'm asking because, while majority of characters there still has something Poser-like in them, a few of them really show that a great variety of styles IS possible if done right.
I mean, i wouldn't buy a model (with existing models you are never able to do *exactly* what you have in mind and so you are very limited... plus, morphs created over existing model, always keep some characteristics of original- the result is, that in a time, those specific character looks become labeled as "Poser" ones), but if there's a way to build your own characters from a start i don't see a reason to not use a program like Poser for more serious stuff too.

In general i do think the Poser system is the future of 3d progams- maybe not yet, but without a doubt in a few years, when it will gain even more flexibility. It certainly won't be easy to create completely new character, but think of possibilities of great Poser morphs once you'll have an original model created. Making an 3d animated movie with bigger cast will be much easier.
#315
Critics' Lounge / Re:Playing with Poser
Wed 01/10/2003 10:46:33
Hehe, yeah Rodekill, looking at it she really reminds a bit on Christina and i guess a bit on Thora Birch too. Well, i guess this shows for which actresses i'm sucker for ;)

Keiko- i was using Poser 5

LilGryphMaster- i used morphs on this default model:



i then added hair manually and changed a little bit textures. But as i said, the thing that made the biggest difference was the lighting :)
#316
Critics' Lounge / Re:Playing with Poser
Tue 30/09/2003 20:35:25
Hey Pessi! Agree with you about using Poser for a game. Well... it's...eh... Poser :)
However i must admit it's *really* fun to play with it (not just because of nude models ;)). And now that it offers much more creative freedom&diversion, it could actually be useful beyond sheer toying.

About lighting- yeah, i did it manualy. I found out that lighting literary made or destroyed the pic (the defoult setting was typical Poserish and it gave the character that distinctive lifeless-doll look).
#317
Critics' Lounge / Re:A new character
Tue 30/09/2003 20:02:43
Great! New version is even better :)

Farlander- yours is great too (her face kinda reminds me on Trixy (or what was her name) from S&M).
#318
Critics' Lounge / Playing with Poser
Tue 30/09/2003 16:42:35
I was just playing with Poser today and found out it really improved since the version 2 i tried a few years back.
You have now much greater control over characters and can create them from beginning (with bones) or you can deform existing ones (more sucessfully than in previous versions), add your textures, create your hair, etc...
In general it's much less limiting and it gives you more freedom (cartoony characters are now completely possible). While, naturally, it still can't compete with full feature 3d programs, it's quite powerful and especially fun to use.
Anyway- here's one i just did:



If any of you did some stuff with Poser feel free to post here :)
#319
Critics' Lounge / Re:BGs for crossroad
Tue 23/09/2003 16:24:04
Wow! I love the style of backgrounds and character. It really looks great!

The only thing that could be improved is animation. Don't get me wrong- it looks nice, but when you have such wonderful designs it would be a shame to tone them down with average animation. Since design of character is quite advanced & detailed, it would require a bit more polished animation to look good, in my opinion. The biggest grip i have, is that you didn't animate his body (only move it up and down). The result is, that animations look quite stiff. Try to make it a bit more dynamic.
Other than that it's fantastic!
#320
Critics' Lounge / Re:Graphic tablet question
Sat 20/09/2003 14:55:29
Many thanks! :)
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk