Map Graphics Thread, Part II

[Mark_Everson]

Yeah, the look is a little better, but still not really good. Thanks for posting it. Other than what you (Fiera) say, I don't get any big messages for us out of it.

[Richard Bruns]

This isn't technically about map graphics, but this seems to have become the general graphics thread...

Thanks to my CAD class, I have developed some (limited) skills in 3-D modeling and rendering. I can now make replicas of various structures without much time or effort. You can see some screenshots here:
http://wcuvax1.wcu.edu/~RB22393/buildings.html

Do we have any use for this sort of thing? In addition to the 2-D pictures, I can also provide 3-D models of the various structures. Can Java use and/or display .dxf files?

[LDiCesare]

quote: Originally posted by Richard Bruns on 05-04-2001 06:45 PM Thanks to my CAD class, I have developed some (limited) skills in 3-D modeling and rendering. I can now make replicas of various structures without much time or effort. You can see some screenshots here: http://wcuvax1.wcu.edu/~RB22393/buildings.html Do we have any use for this sort of thing? In addition to the 2-D pictures, I can also provide 3-D models of the various structures. Can Java use and/or display .dxf files?

I happen to make a living out of... coding CAD software (I let you guess which 3D CAD software developped in France that could be). I honestly don't like games that use 3D because that's slow (at least on my old machines) and I still like the graphics of civ1. Shouldn't say that in a graphics thread...
Anyway, I don't think java can read dxf, because it's really pain in the ass in terms of format, but I can probably find something at work that does and convert it into something usable. I'll check if there is anything in java for reading dxf, but I'm afraid that wouldn't be public.
Converting a 3D file into a gif or something I can do easily I think. You can send me some files at
laurent_di-cesare@ds-fr.com (corrected, I mangled my both e-mails... )
and I can tinker with them.
[This message has been edited by LDiCesare (edited May 07, 2001).]

[Fiera]

Wow, Richard, I must say you've posted some impressive buildings there. I especially like the Colosseum.

But, I wonder if there's really a purpose for these kind of rendered images in a turn based strategy game. I mean, what benefit can you take out of a 3d image when you can not actually "surround" it? I say this 'cause I'm assuing that the player will be always seeing the same perspective of a given building or unit.

[Richard Bruns]

quote: Originally posted by Fiera on 05-05-2001 09:17 PM But, I wonder if there's really a purpose for these kind of rendered images in a turn based strategy game. I mean, what benefit can you take out of a 3d image when you can not actually "surround" it?

The benefit is that I can make these images faster than most people can make 2-D images. It only takes about 10-20 minutes to make one of these. And once I make the models, I can take many different shots from them from different angles.

[Simon Loverix]

Can we put 'big building' type wonders in a square or in the skyline of cities? I think it would look nice. Richard, we can use your pictures to display such a wonder from different sides if there will be an option to turn the map view.

That reminds me of another issue: the style of all the graphics in the game should be equal or comparable. A very good example of this is Imperialism. A very bad example of this are (too) many home-made civ2 scenarios. So using 3D pictures in a game with mostly 2D graphics could 'break' the style, unless it's a very small picture (like on the map) or when it's retouched to fit in.

By the way, can we include an option for a map view from above? Very simple, for slow computers owners and civ1 nostalgics (I think I qualify for both ).

[Lord God Jinnai]

Well I had thought the world could be seen from any of the 4 basic veiws. Anyway atleast for things like cities even if that were not possible, you should make 4 views for each type for variety. Or atleast 2 that you can flip.

There will be differnt styles as in cultural styles if that is what you meant.

[Simon Loverix]

Cultural styles is certainly a must (scenario's etc.) - but include a standard.
What I meant by style is to have a coherent set of graphics. For example, a game that involves spaceships etc. usually has its interface designed like a spaceship dashboard, in Warcraft the cursor was a gauntlet,..
Every graphic in Imperialism is drawn in the appropriate style of the age, even things that don't necessarily need to be so, like trees and rocks. This makes that the game has a very distinctive look.
But that's not everything. They mixed up 3D and 2D, drawn stuff. This causes a little discontinuity when you encounter a screen with such pictures on it and that strains the suspension of disbelief.

I think the style for clash is best not too realistic, because we want (don't we) to display lots of detailed information on the screen. And displaying realistic detail with pixels is like painting a portrait with a broomstick: a mess. So if we want to draw buildings, draw a single, or two, or three recognizable buildings instead of a myriad of three-pixel-huts. Make sure the contrast is always clear, and the lines are always smooth. The main purpose of the graphics is, after all, presenting the game information as pleasant and as clear as possible to the players.

[Mark_Everson]

Richard:

Your new things look pretty cool! The only direct use I can think of for them offhand is as backgrounds either in skins, or behind character advisers. So when your adviser character pops up to tell you about the economy or what ever, some sort of commercial institution could appear behind them.

BTW, how is the tech stuff coming along using Gary's tech editor? Perhaps best to refer to this in the tech thread rather than here...

Fiera:

Any luck on the new art? Do you think we should try and put the new style tiles in demo five? If so, I need plains, mountains, hills, and swamp. That's all we are likely to use in demo 5.

There was a guy looking to help out on the art front, and I asked him to coordinate with you here, hopefully he will show up soon...

[Fiera]

Hi, Mark and everybody!

Everything's great with me, the only thing is that I've been hopelessly busy with some papers I had to write.

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 05-12-2001 10:55 AM Any luck on the new art?

The only thing I've been able to put together is a new try on the farmed squares. Look at it here:
http://www.geocities.com/fiera_com/demo.html

The new squares are those at the right. I know it doesn't make that much of a difference, but I think it looks better know...

I've also tried something for the roads, but I don't like at all what I've got.

quote: Do you think we should try and put the new style tiles in demo five? If so, I need plains, mountains, hills, and swamp. That's all we are likely to use in demo 5.

I say let's go for it. I think everybody's happy with the plains and mountains that I already have, so I only need to work on the hills and swamps. I'll focus on it, leaving roads and rivers aside for the moment. Is that alright?

quote: There was a guy looking to help out on the art front, and I asked him to coordinate with you here, hopefully he will show up soon...

That's great, I've already posted something in the other thread. I'm looking forward to his comments on my graphics.

[Fiera]

I've now put together a demo for a new swamp terrain. It's here:
http://www.geocities.com/fiera_com/demo.html

Please tell me how you like it.

[Richard Bruns]

I'm afraid that I really don't like the swamp much. It almost looks like bread mold. However, that could be decieving since we probably won't see that bare tile in the game; the swamp will have trees or other vegetation like the other tiles do.

I like the pattern of unobtrusive basic terrain covered by little vegetation tiles. Perhaps the swamp could be a single color like the others. Then rivers and/or discrete vegetation would add the detail.

I still have to squint to see the farmland. Could you make it stalks of wheat or something that stand out like the trees do?

[Mark_Everson]

Sure, leaving the roads and rivers aside for now is fine. On the swamp... I can't say I like it, I thing its too blobby and indistinct. Here's my idea, and we'll see what you think. Just like you have individual trees that can be assembled for a forest, how about a few different kinds of 'swampy patches' that cover maybe 10% of a tile each. Each swampy patch could show a little standing water and some swamp-type vegitation coming out of it. But each bit should look a little like the real thing, just like your military units do! For a very swampy area we'd put 5 of them down in random non-overlapping positions. (Ideally in areas where roads don't normally go.)

The thing I like about my idea is that when the land is drained we can do it just like deforestation -- gradually. But the player will see a big swampy area change over many turns into good farmland! This should give the player a sense of progress and ownership. And the best thing about it is that the player will achieve this without needing to move around many settlers by hand!

What do you think?

[Fiera]

quote: Originally posted by Richard Bruns on 05-16-2001 09:30 PM I still have to squint to see the farmland. Could you make it stalks of wheat or something that stand out like the trees do?

Right, look at the new farmlands I've done. I think you'll like then now. They're here:
http://www.geocities.com/fiera_com/demo.html

You can see that I've put two different types of farmingsquares in the grassland tile. In fact, I think we should have something like six different types in order to get a realist feeling. Perhaps something we could relate to the Ecology model, I don't know...

[Fiera]

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 05-16-2001 09:34 PM how about a few different kinds of 'swampy patches' that cover maybe 10% of a tile each. Each swampy patch could show a little standing water and some swamp-type vegitation coming out of it. But each bit should look a little like the real thing, just like your military units do! For a very swampy area we'd put 5 of them down in random non-overlapping positions. (Ideally in areas where roads don't normally go.) What do you think?

Sounds good, I'm working on it. In fact, also Richard's idea is a good one, but we would end up having too much trees on the map, which could be confusing. Some players wouldn't know at first glance if they have a swamp or a forest there. And last but not least, it would be more work for me...