Messages

Thanks alot Khris, this is not only the solution to my problem but also very useful information. Thanks again!!

Hey Khris, thanks for the answer. I think you found the problem. So what would be the right thing to do. Declaring it in the script (instead of the header?) exporting and importing it again in the header?

Hey guys, this one is rather hard to explain.
I have two module scripts

In the first module script have a private struct that manages all the operations called _rectangle
I also have the public (imported) struct called Rect which has some functions and properties used to read and write the significant variables to the local structs

For example i can call

Code: ags

Rect.GetX(ID) 

from the Global script to get the x-coordinates of the given id

The same call will throw a null pointer error if i try to access it via my second module script.
The second module script has a public struct ("Rectangle") which contains the function "Move"
When called in the global script via

Code: ags

Rectangle.Move(ID, ..other parameters)

...it internally trys to get the coordintes via the Rect.GetX(ID) function which throws the exception
Even though the pointers seem okay from the globalscript's point of view.

Passing through the coordinates via parameters won't help because I also need to write data with a function in the same method, which also will gives a null pointer

So accessing any data structures of Rect via a member of the Rectangle struct wont work - why?

Damn, I seriously want to reply to this thread but everytime I try to write something this questions keeps popping up: What does a dancing Leopad look like?
Anyway back to the topic: What kind of rape are we talking about here - something like beaver rape? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp0vaHe-e70)

I was sticking to XP for a long time. Then I learned, I could get Windows 7 for free via University and decided to give it a try. Never looked back since. My 90s self would hit me for what I'm going to say: Microsoft did a really good job there.
The only problems I get is running some obscure hardware I got via parallel port.

Played it a year ago and loved it. Very polished, very funny, not to hard though.

Looks great, realy moody!

Whats a bit off putting is the lack of shading, it still works but maybe you want to rim-light the edges of the trees in the BG and in the FG.
Also the area right down in the middle look really really flat. I can't quite figure out why that is though. Maybe the brushes?
Also the texture on jetty(?) is a bit too strong. Maybe you want to soften is a little and paint in some bigger scale detail, maybe also put some more work in the construction. ask yourself, how was this thing built? To make it more believable.

This is all really nitpicking. The mood and the composition is just right and thats all you need for a game BG.

Love it!! Looks really really amazing!

Just noticed, that the colors are completely messed up,
this is a little better but still bad


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

@Armageddon: Hm I agree at the focal point thing, This piece wasn't planned out that well in the first place so the whole layout is rather chaotic
Well I disagree on the foreground background thing. The amount of haze makes the background apear brighter.

OK finished this piece but coloring still seems very monochromatic....any ideas?


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I think I'm the one to blame why this game isnt out yet. I'm doing the animations but because I'm in the middle of state exams I hardly get any work done.
Progress is made with snails pace but progress is made. Also I feel that troica doesn't deserve to be rushed.
Thx a lot for the patience, and sorry to all those who desperately wait for the game

Good point there, I think most 3d chars lack character, thats the reason for me why I dont use 3d backgrounds. The amount it takes to make, texture and rig a convincing 3d character is better spent practicing drawing, IMO.

BTW: Another tip: SketchUp + cgtextures.com + Kerkythea, Is an easy way to do realistic bgs.

Looks awesome, I think the lower lip is a tad to big, but thats nitpicking

[Possibility 1: Stock Material]

I think it's not so much about being able to do art but how much time one is willing to commit in (1) learning and practising (2) as well as creating the actual art.
I think everyone is able to create at least decent looking graphics with a bit of practise and commitment, as it's a craft up to a certain degree. Of course especially when you're inexperienced you will spend a lot of time with trial and error an get frustrating.

So the question is not really are you able to do art, but are you willing to spend quite some time learning it?
If the answer is no thats fine too. No reason to spend time on something which you generally dislike doing. (My personal position is that you should at least consider learning some of this stuff when making a game). Theres actually a few ways to cheat your way around them...

Possibility 1: Stock Material
I always disliked games which use stock material 'cause even with a strong narrative they tend to look generic. I know you basically asked for places and there's some stuff out here like the Instagame materials or you could try to make a RON game which has provided material, but if you want to create your own unique story, you'll always find that something is missing.

Possibility 2: Cheating
Thats right! sometimes its easier to pretend you are a skilled artist than actually trying to become one.

The principle I like most is the process of stylizing your game. It means making your weakness a feature.
Can't draw colors? Make a B/W film noir kinda game
Can't draw perspective? Leave it out and make a flat kinda game like Nelly Cootalot (Just a style example, I'm not saying that Ali can't draw perspective)
Your art looks like a childrens drawing? Make it the innovative style of the game (Can't remember the name of this duck game - that was hilarious)
Can't draw perspective and colors and art to lazy to spend much time with graphics? Make dacey in th dark using only photoshop brushes from deviantart and some cheep cutout animations (psst, don't tell anyone)

Another example I can think of is DuzzQuest, which uses deliberately bad animations and photos, which makes it even more hilaroius.

You can do whatever you're comfortable with. My principle is always less is more. (simplyfying = stylizing).

There's onle one rulle here: consistency
Once you have established a graphic style, stick to it. There's nothing more graphics ruining than inconsistencies , like putting a rendered model in next to your crudely drawn character.

Well, I went a bit overboard with this post but, belive me most of this stuff is true

The main problem is that there's no clear light source.
Also the rock shapes on the right look like cardboard box, mainly because the highlights are so thin and dont have volume shading.
You're on the right track on the more detailed rock on the left.

Since I like painting rock I made an edit and saved the steps so you can see what I did. Of course my style is quite different but some of the principles are universally true:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Here are some explanations tio the steps:

1. Established a light source, also desaturated the picture so you can see its missing dynamic, meaning there should be more contrast
2. Added contrast
3. Began with the shading, added highlight blobs everywhere the light hits the rock (the rock has a convex shape, its not flat)
4. Added shadows, where the rocks overlap there's hardly any light, also used the dark colors to define the rock shapes (also did some foreground shading, maybe a lit overdone here but generally a good idea to add just a little light)
5. Added another layer of shadow (darker) and another layer of highlight (brighter) with a smaler brush
6. Added some color, just something I'm currently experimenting with, but what's to keep in mind is that dark colors are cold colors and lights are warm colors.

EDIT: Sorry for my English, re-reading this post, it seems more retarded than usual.

Thx a lot Ilych for the edit,

I'm afraid you're right. It probably needs a color layer on top, at least for the highlights. Well, I had some fun with cleaning up and detailing the bg tonite. Also did this color test,
here's the wip:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Thx for the feedback everybody

I tried alis method and got some quick and nice result. Basically I've been setting the original to multiply putting the sky gradient underneath and a color layer with variing opacities on top.
Still the result looks rather monochromatic

Here's the picture and the layer setup:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I got sick of learning today and made this concept art for concurrence. Normally I already start with my color palette but this time I decided to make a volume study first like many people do it (saw it at theos work). My problem is now. I don't know how I should go about colouring this in. I heard most people use HSL adjustmendt layers but that doesn't seem to work that well for me.
Is there soem sort of trick involved?
Maybe someone has some advice



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Thanks for the nice feedback Viktorija,
I agree that the controls are frustrating. Once I get back to work on the game I will either have to improve the step-controls or dump them all together in favour of a more responsive control system (this would make the animations less smoot and realisitc though)

Actually I'd like to hear some feedback on this. Thats something I've been thinking a lot. Maybe someone knows a (2d)game which has smooth, realistic animations yet responsive controls.

For the sounds and music I can't stress enough how much credit goes to ptp88 for making this incredible atmosphere possible.

Little update:
I was able to fix the room 5 null pointer error. It has something to do with the sound channel.
However the infamous doorbug remains unfixed. I have no Idea why the door doesn't reset. It'll need more time to figure it out, time which I don't have. So I'm sorry but this won't be fixed until the final release by end of the year.