Graphics style

[F_Smith]

Hi:

Those of ya'll that know something about art need to hash out a basic graphics 'look' for the game.

So -- cartoon (Link) style? Realistic drawings? Something I can't even imagine?

---------------------

I believe we'll need graphics for --
1) units (armies, not individual)
2) map tiles
3) pre-game and post-game screens

What am I forgetting?

[Peter Dobrovka]

I would prefer something with clear contrasts.
Photographic quality is nice for the eye at first impression but makes headache after some hours of playing.
The way CIV and CIV2 was is very pleasing to me.

Probably you will need graphics for
- resources
- technologies
- buildings (?)
- map tile improvements (roads, castles)?

Peter

------------------
3DTT - the 3D sequel to Transport Tycoon - demo 4.0 coming soon
Path of Mankind. Turnbased Civ-like game - demo 15 coming soon

[Ladonna of Thar]

Photographic quality is more or less expected today. On the other hand, it's certainly not the best to play with, I fully agree.

1) Since the graphical units actually represent MIXED armies, shouldn't we really stick to the "1 image for all units" idea? On the map, at least. Maybe someone knows the board game "Mighty Empires" (Games Workshop), in which there are only ship and army models (all the same) to represent all (VERY heterogenous) armies. That's no problem at all, one could, however, flesh it out by drawing several alternatives for different cultures / epochs (people like their armies to look different than the "enemy").

It would be a good idea, however, to offer less playful, but clearer alternative to the "hardcore gamer", i.e. simple army counters as we all know them from tabletop game. This way you always have the option to switch between increased optical appeal and clarity. Since counters can be done very easily, this isn't that much an effort.

Thinking of this, it might even be worth it to offer an alternative map layout: on-top squares (with counters) and isometric squares (and pseudo-3D figures).

2) Do not forget the IMHO most important graphics in the game: The interface. With a standard java look, people will run away crying. Now, I really don't know how feasable it is to give all those little windows made-to-fit masks, bit if it ISN'T, consider drawing all in one big gfx window so we can have a nice-looking interface. Standard java/windows icons make people vomit when appearing in a game - do not forget that DirectX became so important for windows as a game platform because it finally allowed for games using ALL of the screen. When playing, people do not want to be reminded that they are sitting in front of their ol' computer - they want to be "in" the game, and thus a game must use every pixel there is on the screen to create the right atmosphere. Every other approach dooms a game to being trashed by most people out there today, believe me.


[This message has been edited by Ladonna of Thar (edited May 18, 1999).]

[F_Smith]

re: #2 above:

I agree wholeheartedly. If no one minds, I plan on working up a basic full-screen interface next (something similar to what was in the 'RT' demo, with a few more panels), after I finish learning about the grafix.

We can customize the look and feel of the windows easily. Actually, it will be better to use panels instead of frames -- we'll have much more control over the graphics.

[Mark_Everson]

Ladonna / Dominique:

1) I'm in favor of your several army pix per side / culture /era idea.

I think the alternative map views is an especially good idea. One minor point: To go from isometric to top-down we would need to use diamonds rather than squares, or the perspective of the map or distances would change. But I don't see any problem with diamonds... you can get higher-res figures in them anyway if they are a single individual.

2) Agree completely. It'll be good to see what you can come up with 'F'.

-Mark

[xiane]

Interface is crucial. There may be a core of people, large or small, who will play and buy this game based on how well reasoned it is, and how tough (or far from pathetic) the AI is.

But in some ways the interface is the game. If the AI is doing incredibly clever things but everything is muddy and difficult to control, who cares? (Though people do move all those units and manage all those cities in civalikes...)

What I mean by the interface is the game is, if you aren't going to have lots of micromanaging, then the decisions should be before the player from a very easy interface. Perhaps added flexibility of decision making, or "powers" added by in-game choices could be incorporated into the interface. At first there is little on the interface, as there is little to do, but as time rolls on, more elements appear. If you do not make the choices, the elements don't appear.

Anyhow, the interface should be as clean and "ergonomic" as possible.

[Dominique]

Wow, there's really a creative buzz in here... if it stays that way, Microprose should get frightened...

Now, F_Smith, how about setting up that demo screen asap - I'll simply take a screenshot and "decorate" it in a more or less nice manner , i.e. give some ideas how the interface could be made visually appealing.

As much as I hate CtP, I must admit they have done a good job as far as the GRAPHICS of the interface goes (never mind the interface as such / it's functionality absolutely SUCK).


------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[F_Smith]

Dom:

This basic demo is our starting point. Please do give me some ideas how to make this thing a bit prettier.

Thanx!

[Dominique]

"F" :

Will gladly do so, but please allow for some days since such a thing can't be done in 2-3 hours.

Will post it when ready.

[Blade Runner]

Just two thing:
1. I totaly agree to produce a full screen interface will help to the gamers to feel they control an imperium not a computer.
2. We need to develop an interface with mouse AND KEYBOARD support. I pref. to use keyboard if the game is long. I think Clash will be enough long (I hope longer than an average CIV II). We need to find LOGIC key combinations for the interface (i.e. in CTP I CAN NOT CLOSE the popup windows with ESC or ENTER!).

Blade Runner

[manurein]

I've seen an interesting idea on the CivIII forum : having different graphics styles for the different epochs of the game (a stylized map at the beginning, then at the renaissance a map like a painting of Michel-Ange, then at the modern epoch a photo-like map, fe)

[Dominique]

manurein:

As far as maybe varying screen MASKS are concerned, I think that would be fine - for the in-game graphics DEFINITELY NOT. There will be enough icons etc. for the user to identify; letting THEM vary in style as per epoch would IMHO unnecessarily confuse the player.

As for the interface, my ideal would be to handle it in such a flexible way as to enable players do their own "skins" (as e.g. for WinAmp) if they like.

And do not forget that the game itself needs a face - with so many things changing over the course of one game, there have to be SOME consistent aspects. Doing too much fancywork here is like playing with one of those highly elaborated chess games: They are nice to look upon, but you never can distinguish queen and bishop


------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[Dominique]

Mark:

Hm, I really don't know about the "pop indicator" function...

First, if at all, I'd represent pop by little farms and towns (VERY little, indeed)... but I'm afraid all this would clutter the map too much, yes - it's one more overlay gfx, mind you.

I have no idea what plans you have for the interface - my personal ideal would be the following:

Have the map tiles contain the really essential information only (more or less what you can see in CIV, too). Then, as soon as you move the mouse over a tile, all necessary information (e.g. population level) is shown in the info window. Of course, this implies some really qquick routines. Maybe one could allow for a certain amount of time so the the info window only is refreshed after the pointer hasn't been moved for, say, 1/2 second.

Left-clicking would activate any units on the tile, while right-clicking would show detailed information.

As you want to include a small overview map, too, maybe the player can switch betwenn, say, geographical / economical / cultural / population / military mode for this?

I don't know whether you deem the population information really essential, so in the end it's up to you again.


------------------
If somebody asks you "Art thou a god?", you tell him "YES!"

[Mark_Everson]

Nope, Population on the map is Not essential, I was just brainstorming, or perhaps braindumping .

[F_Smith]

Great discussion, so far. I, too, prefer simplicity and clarity. I think Dominique is right on in his comments.

re: coding for different map 'types' (diamond v. square). yes, it's a trivial matter.

We can put together a simple map designer whenever someone can get me a few basic map tiles. I've worked up a basic map editor example in which you can click on the map and change it, square by square, by way of example.