Messages

Thanks Erwin - I will try it... I just wasn't sure what I was doing is all... i'll play around with stuff... do a full on shading, and then see what people think.

If anyone else cares to comment how I should go about doing this stuff, lemme know.

I'm really in uncharted territory here now -- shading.  I attempted a few things, one is the walls, basically the light is more or less coming from directly overhead... more towards the dresser than the foreground objects.

I'm not sure what i'm supposed to be doing here.  I have an idea of where the light source is, and i'm purposely not adding shadows yet.  The walls, and the side of the dresser (the one on the left)  I tried to do two things on the dresser, one is have it go from dark (that upper lip on the side) to light, as there's a bit of a shadow, but even that is probably incorrect since the light is above.  The other thing is the walls... local shading on the walls, dark towards the bottom lighter at the top.  I started with a little "burning", and then used the smudge tool to mush it out..  Also on the dresser I tried to add a highlight to the top of the dresser itself.

Really I just want some suggestions.  Ideas and tutorials on shading digitally (not shadows) and specifically using the mouse... I don't have a tablet nor money to buy one.

Thanks,
Keith

Neil that's pretty nice.  Actually as far as saturation goes, I figure I will desaturate a bit after it's all done.  Partly because of where this takes place - Pacific NW, in our world, verses where the first player character is going (Enchanted Lands, which will have nice bright colors, hopefully not garish though).

As far as the lines I should have explained... they are just the sketch lines over which i'm using to guide my "painting".  I'm just kind of partial to the 50% because it looks neat, but i'm intending it to look a bit more realistic.  I'm sort of following that hearts and spades tut...  Basic colors in (flat shading) some actual shading and shadows, and then probably re-adding the lines as painted.

I'm partly not doing cartoony on purpose, i mean it will be a cartoon but none of that bent and 5-point stuff.  Think broken sword (well think of it's cutscenes rather than the game, as the game uses some sort of shadowing that's reminiscent of pixeling, and it doesn't look like it was hand animated the way the cutscenes are).  As I was saying, i'm partly doing not doing it all DOTT because everyone else is, and the other part is because i'm going for a Disney look -- This is not to say i'm anywhere near the level of Disney artists, i'm simply saying this is what i'm aiming for.  The human characters are realistic,  the non-humans (and the humanoid characters like wizards, and dwarves, etc) will be more cartoon-like.

In any case I appreciate the comments.

Keith

Okay so basically i had another go at it.  I changed a few of the colors, I straighted some lines, it's almost starting to look decent.  Tell me what you think.

First one with the line drawing removed.


Second with 50% lines


Third fully opaque line drawing over the top.


Give me suggestions, thoughts, or opinions.
Keith

well it's been awhile, and after reading the excellent tutorial by mashpotato i started this -

Okay I started a basic paintover, using the technique of putting the sketch on a layer above the painting using multiply which basically means the white shows through and i can paint under the sketch lines.

I just decided to do it to show a friend, but if you're curious -- this part isn't even finished yet...  But I will work on it until it's perfect.

WIP 1


WIP 2


WIP 3


Actually the basic color blocking is generally complete until I get some feed back suggesting I change it before starting to apply shadows and so forth.

To make it less confusing, on the left side beside the computer desk is the dresser (it's the sort of light brown one).  Notice how it's shelves are more holes than shelves, they come to the edge and are seperated by the front of the dresser.  on the right side the gray thing is the bookcase, notice how the shelves are set in the case back from the edge.  Someone in the ags forums critic's lounge suggested I do this (maybe because of bad tangents or something) in any case I like it, it actually makes it look like a book case.

Basically this is the empty room before it gets all messy and the main character has to clean it up.  that's why there are no drawers in the dresser or books on the shelf.

The color choices are abit based on experience.  the dresser is a lighter wood, to contrast with the dark wood of the door and the trim, the bookcase is gray just to make it a bit different.  I made the desk something like mahogony or cherry, by adding a reddish tint, so that way it wasn't completely brown.  At one point in my life my walls were light blue with a light brown or tan floor (well the floor doesn't look tan exactly but close enough).  On the hole I think it's decent.  Note the dresser, bookcase, and door all have lighter tint on their sides, whereas the bed and the hamper and desk are darker on the sides facing the camera, not really sure if this is a good idea, but it makes me think that the foreground objects are closer to the camera, you can let me know if it isn't right.

Let's see... the hallway is on a single layer, the door is on it's own layer, the trim around door and closet are in it's own layer, trim around the bottom and outlet and switch are on it's own (same) layer... I basically put alot of things in their own layers, such as the insides of the bookcase, dresser, and desk... and then some of the sides.  the walls and the floor are the same as well... not really experienced with this software, using the gimp with a mouse but it seems to work.  at one time i thought of actually putting every white/negative space (any space bordered with lines to form a shape) on a seperate layer, but that may be overkill.
In fact this may be overkill.

I'll probably start working on the actual shading in a bit, the light is pretty much coming from the light bulb, that you can't see in the picture...  Any thoughts are appreciated, thanks!

Keith

Spaceship or ocean-going ship?

You might want to still change that "post" to be instead a large pipe, and probably going up to some pipes and girders along the ceiling.

Imagine the silly grin of satisfaction on my face when I realized it had been worth it.

Imagine the disgruntled look on your face when you realized you needed that coin you didn't get because you thought the point of the desert was that tent... and you couldn't get the staff because you didn't actually go to the temple in the first place to see them use the staff on the door.  And then further had to back up 5 or 6 save games and do all this over again in sequence. 

This is how most of Sierra's games used to be.

In fact the only reasoning behind dead-ends (and this is directly from the mouths of Ken and Roberta Williams) is so they could sell hint books.  Of course by the time we got to 6, lucasarts had gained enough popularity that they couldn't justify selling hint books ;-)

Why not just say "You slip and fall" when the player tries to climb the snowy hill, instead of "That looks slippery. Maybe you should get yourself some climbing gear"? If it's clear enough that the hill is an obstacle, then one of thesse messages will make the player feel clever, and the other will make him bored. Guess which is which.

We seem to be talking about two different things.  You're talking about an individual problem, I am talking about the direction of the story.  I wasn't talking about specific puzzles at all.  How do I know to even go in the direction of the snowy hill?  Note my original question was about why I would want to go into the desert (in KQ5) in the first place.  Not what to do once i'm there.  I think most likely I would have wandered around for a while, and resorted to a walkthrough anyways (even though I did so in the first place).  Either that or I would just stop because I was completely stuck.  I don't mean stuck on a puzzle, I mean just dead-ended.  To give you an idea for contrast of what is good verses not-so-good.  When you encounter the snake in the path, you realize that the path extends past the snake, coupled with the knowledge that you need to get over the mountains to reach Mordack's Castle then that sets up a proper direction.  I have no idea of how to get past the snake, but I know what I need to do lies somewhere past that snake.  This is a good design, verses, the desert puzzle, where you need a gold coin to talk to the gypsy, and the genie bottle to take care of the witch. 

In any case if you find offense in any of my future posts, just simply don't reply to them.  You don't have to talk down to me, in fact, it's probably a waste of your time, which can be devoted to making a really awesome game, the kind of which you like the best ;-)

Personally I think you need to tell us what kind of hall way is it.  Is it a hospital, prison, or some sort of administrative offices for something?

The top "trim" is neat and all but there's no place that has what looks like wall trim at the top.  Some utility cabinets and so forth are ok, although maybe what should be there instead is the cabinet for the fire hose and/or fire extinguisher.

The post looks out of place, firstly because it's brown, it might be painted white and it might be a bit bigger.  I could see another post inbetween the left door (along the wall) and the double doors at the end of the hall.

Also you might want a rather large ventilation duct towards the ceiling.

Also personally I would extend the floor in that completely black area, and then of course leave it in shadow.

I might not put lights over the doors but rather in the ceiling hanging down, again dependant on what kind of hallway it is.

Pardon me for ruining your experience.  I did say one of those unique experiences.  And rpg's are really the only other ones that do that.  I mean you can have a story in any game, but only adventures and rpg's really expose the narrative.

Actually adventure games are alot like books -- and yes usually you don't play them more than once at a time unless you really enjoyed it.

I don't get depth from having to walk 20 screens to get to some obscure road crossing or oasis.  I also don't get it while wandering around aimlessly.  You don't have to tell me exactly what needs to be done, but I at least need to be pointed in the right direction.

By the way if you want to explore so much, try something like Grand Theft Auto, supposedly those are "sandbox' games that allow you to go anywhere and do anything.  If that's your cup of tea, then more power to ya.

Personally I go for the straight narrative which means there's going to be linear aspects to it.

I also apologize for being such an apparent simpleton to you.

lead by the nose?  Adventure games are one of those unique genres of computer games that expose a narrative for the player to follow.  I don't play an adventure game to explore, but to reveal a narrative.  Thus I need to be "lead by the nose" in order to be directed to whatever narrative the story teller (game designer) wishes me to follow.  What do I care about anything in a game if I don't have a reason to do it?

hopefully someone will read this, because since this is similar to the other two questions I decided not to start a new thread.  I'm now playing King's Quest V (CD version I believe, as it's the one off the newest 2006 collection).  After going through a walkthrough I noticed that one of the things it said to do was to go into the desert, I want to know if anyone knows of a reason I'm supposed to go into the desert?  (That is, is there anything in the game that hints something might be in the desert to see?)

Keith

Unfortunately there's not a forum for non-ags adventures in production.  I'm using the wintermute engine, because of the high resolution, and the fact it uses 3d hardware for certain effects.  But maybe i'll put up an in production thread for my game in this forum :-)

Keith

Roger wakes up from a mid-shift snooze to find his entire ship uncharacteristically devoid of living crew, some exploration is in order.

Sure, it provides a goal but it does it in a much more clandestine manner.

Actually this is exactly what I was talking about.  It doesn't have to hand hold every bit of the way, but I mean, when he wakes up and it's devoid of crew, then you know something is up, so that provides the goal. 

I apologize for ranting about sq6 in any case it sort of ruined the game for me, so that's why I went off on a tangent :-)

Obviously I don't know anything about the situation of your game, and I don't want to impose, but if I may offer a  suggestion?  I think in the early stages of a game, before the proper story has really begun in earnest, then dropping the occassional hint is ok.  For instance, just having a character drop a hint that the player character hasn't cleaned his room for a while.

Well you need to clean up to find the library card (which will also be hinted at), I also kind of want them to finish cleaning the room after they've found the card.  (I'm toying with the idea of him letting the player know that he wouldn't hear the end of it from his mom if he left the mess for her to clean)... 

There is a couple of things I'm doing this for (and I'm sure this kind of thing has been done lot's of times) -- A) you get to know the interface, the interface is going to be slightly different (I guess you could say a modified verb coin... well actulaly pie menu), and B) you're instantly put into the action, even if suspension of disbelief doesn't occur yet (the character will talk to the player).  I figured we've all seen games where the intro scene really sets the stage, however sometimes players just want to play.  Also sometimes the players feel ripped off when the ending is rather short (see Curse of Monkey Island), so i'm considering doing it backwards.  The cutscenes toward the beginning of the game will be rather short, getting longer as the game gets to the climax.  With a decent end scene (I haven't determined length yet or anything, but just satisfying).

I just sort of felt you might like to start playing at a stage that was sort of pre-game, where you don't have to sit through alot of dialogue or whatever.

In any case I appreciate any opinions, criticisms, or suggestions.  Of course now i'm derailing the thread, but it is an interesting discussion none-the-less :-)

in all the examples for sq, I noted the goals in the beginning, weren't necesserily the goals of the end game.  But it gave you an idea.  SQ6 didn't really, I could have just skipped the dew beam inn, except the walkthrough told me I was supposed to do something there.  I like to know i'm moving in a direction, any direction, but a direction.

I am kind of struggling in my own game (that i'm making).  The first playable character gets brought into this fantasy world to help a wizard restore the tourist business to a magical kingdom.  But I don't really have any other goal for him in the beginning other than telling him to go to a couple of schools (in this tourists can train to be a knight, or a wizard, and the ladies can learn to be either princesses or fairy godmother's, but the schools are closed by this time), and ask a few questions to see what's going on.  But at least I tell the player that they need to go ask questions.  Still it seems weak.  The other thing is before you can go into the magical kingdom, you need to get a book from the library, and a candy bar (well i'll leave the details out for now), and before that he needs to find his library card and clean his room.  And I still haven't figured out a motivation for him to do any of this.

In any case the player needs an idea what to do, it doesn't have to be the full goal of the game, but it shouldn't be "well here you're in an adventure, now go adventure."

I'm also reading on the space quest 7 (fan made sequel) in their faq, someone (I assume it's Josh Mandel but I might have just read over who was being quoted), talking about how some critics of sq6 blasted it for not having a goal in the beginning, and then basically saying that the other space quests were the same way.  When I look at the earlier space quests, there's an extent to which it's true, but not really. 

In SQ1 I believe Roger is on board and comes back to find that the ship he's on has been taken over, so he at least has a mystery to go on, find out who and why these aliens are taking over the ship.  In SQ2 he's kidnapped by Sludge Vohaul, and then they crash land on a jungle-like planet, so there the immediate goal is getting off the planet.  In 3 he's in an escape pod that's been brought on board a garbage scow, so he has to find a way off of that.  In 4, some guys from the future come to help Roger get away from Vohaul again by putting him somewhere in the future, so you basically try to find a way off of space quest 12's xenon.  5 is sort of where it starts to stray (as only one guy from andromeda was involved instead of both).  But even then you start exploring, and usually most of the characters tell you where you're supposed to be (ie clean the floor, go to the classroom or whatever). 

sq6 just drops you off and then you're just supposed to explore (supposedly on shore leave, although why anyone would want to go there is beyond me ;-).  It would have helped if Roger made a comment about having to get accommodations or something (Then I would have known I was supposed to get a hotel room there).  I don't know I just feel kind of cheated. Plus you don't have any idea about the scanner/homing beacon puzzle, or especially (as at least you get some hints in the book that came with it) have no idea about the fuel intermix puzzle.  I had to look at a walkthrough, and then i pulled out my old book which showed the periodic table of elements.  Which I deduced had something to do with the codename.  (I didn't want to fully look at the walkthrough to solve the puzzle).

By the time I was toward the end, I was just relying exclusively on the walkthroughs, even though the last half of the game is not so bad.

But I think the biggest faux pas an adventure designer can make is not to give the player some kind of goal.  All of those I stated for each of the games were a starting goal, most of them didn't have anything to do with the end goal of the game.  (Like for instance space quest 3, where you get off the garbage scow, and then later learn about scumsoft which is the main plot of the game).  I just get annoyed when people go "You're playing an adventure, so go adventure."  If I want to play something where I have to figure out how to play it, i'll go play a crossword puzzle -- oh wait I already know how to play those ;-)

I originally thought 4 was not quite as good as 3... I like it a bit better now, but only because i've had a chance to play it a couple of times (Plus Gary Owens narration never hurts ;-)

But 6, i mean you had no idea what to do at all in the first half.  The characters weren't compelling at all, and you're right in 6 he wasn't saving the universe really.

The graphics looked like 16 color, with all the dithering in the background (Yes I realize it was 256 color, but using dithered gradient fills everywhere just makes it look bad.

well no one there is going to be original sierra anyways, so they're not going to care, they're vivendi-universal games (or whoever owns them)... we're lucky they re-released them at all.

And by the way space quest 6 really stinks.  You know I don't even remember it much when I first played it, maybe I didn't get around to finishing it.  At least having a walkthrough helps.

Hmm yeah.  I guess you're just supposed to explore, of course in ours we should at least give them a little hint.  I always think you should let the player know what he/she is supposed to be doing, even if you don't give them little more than that.

From what I understood of particularly Sierra games is they made it to where a hint book or the hint line was necessary.  So they could make more money.  I remember reading this somewhere about the real early ones.  King's Quest 4 is notorious for this (as i never played king's quest 1-3 originally).  You could get stuck in there bad because there was a specific sequence of events you needed to go through.

I don't remember troubles I had with space quest 3 though.  Because the parts were fairly clearly deliniated.  For instance you are on the garbage scow at first.... when you finally get off of it, you're presented with these different planets.  If you get off at Ortega without the thermal underwear then you die.  If you land on Phleebhut, you are chased around by Arnoid.   If you get the underwear and do your stuff on ortega only then will Pestulon be available to you, and you can't get passed the security measures without wearing the invisibility belt. 

Okay sorry for the spoilers but you catch my drift... in SQ3 you got an idea at least by dying.  in SQ4 if you're caught it doesn't matter if you die or not, you still don't know where to go, other than exploring where you've been to last.

Okay I have a similar question.  In space quest 4, once you head to Ulence Flats for space quest 1, you need to do some stuff there (I won't tell you what to spoil it).  Then you don't know what to do.  Basically the walkthroughs tell you to go back to space quest 12.  My question here is, how do you know you're supposed to go back to space quest 12?

Nothing tells you other than the fact you can enter in other coordinates, and if you wrote down the original coordinates then you can go back to space quest 12.  But again, the question is how do you know you are supposed to do this without looking at a walkthrough?