vurt on 10/10/2012 at 00:27
Quote Posted by Vae
The plant-life of The World is supposed to be strange and surrealistic...not a look-a-like of earth-based vegetation.
Not really. For example the giant trees in mission 10 are Sequoia trees. The 3D model is called that, the textures too, so my textures are also from that tree.
It's important (somewhat at least) to pay attention to what they were trying to create, but probably not always succeeding with completely (since at the time they were very limited by both polycount and image quality). When i create models I usually try to google concept art for the games, then you can get a good idea of what they were trying to create, but also paying attention to texture and/or model names is important, and ofcourse trying to be true to the mood of the game.
But whatever, i can't please everyone and i dont intend too :P if i make something surrealistic people will complain it's too fantasy-based, if i make something realistic people will complain it's supposed to be fantasy/surealistic. I really don't care, i'll just do what i think looks good based on my personal preference.
Also, low-poly and low-res usually looks rather surrealistic, that's not the same as they were trying their best to make the trees look like that, it's just how plant-life looked in all games at the time. I can't remember that the trees in Thief3 were "alien" or surreal.
LarryG on 10/10/2012 at 00:57
Quote Posted by vurt
I can't remember that the trees in Thief3 were "alien" or surreal.
T3 was a different interpretation of the franchise by a different group of folks than the LGS originators, and a lot of people feel that T3 took the franchise in a bad direction artistically. The feel of the Thief universe is very different in T3 from the T1 and T2 games. If you make textures for T3, make them look like they belong in T3. But if you make them for T2, they should look like they belong in T2 and not in T3. Make better objects and textures, but make them look like they fit in with the rest of the artistic vision. Yes the trees were modeled on sequoias, but sequoias that never grew on Earth. Consider the eyeball plants. Don't you think those are just a little surreal? T1 and T2 are mystical. magical, off kilter, surreal places. T3 is more realistic and less interesting overall because of it.
Vae on 10/10/2012 at 01:21
Quote Posted by LarryG
Not a
100% look-a-like of earth-based anything, but it should still be recognizable. I don't know how many years I had played Thief before I figured out that the flower pots were actually flower pots! The limits of the day forced some artistic oddities which can and should be improved on. Grass should look like grass, brick like brick, flagstones like flagstone. And at the same time they should look old and dirty and gritty and angular. Thief takes place in an old, dirty, gritty, angular universe. It's not round and fluffy and soft and sunny; it's sharp and angular and dark and damp. And yes, surreal.
Exactly...You simply just elaborated on what I was saying...It's an
edge to the look and feel that makes it unique to The World.
Quote Posted by vurt
Not really. For example the giant trees in mission 10 are Sequoia trees. The 3D model is called that, the textures too, so my textures are also from that tree.
Right, but you don't want to make it look exactly like a picture-perfect earth-based Sequoia, simply because you don't want to make it feel like you're on Earth.
Quote:
But whatever, i can't please everyone and i dont intend too :P if i make something surrealistic people will complain it's too fantasy-based, if i make something realistic people will complain it's supposed to be fantasy/surealistic. I really don't care, i'll just do what i think looks good based on my personal preference.
Keep in mind, that I'm giving you constructive criticism and not bitching at you...Previously you stated that you're not a hard-core THIEF fan, so I thought it helpful to offer a more intimate and knowledgeable perspective of The THIEF Universe...Yet, if this doesn't concern you, then that is your own choice.
Quote:
Also, low-poly and low-res usually looks rather surrealistic, that's not the same as they were trying their best to make the trees look like that, it's just how plant-life looked in all games at the time.
Many of us here understand this, and have taken this into account...Nonetheless, the
unique surrealistic edge is an important component for achieving the THIEF atmosphere.
Quote:
I can't remember that the trees in Thief3 were "alien" or surreal.
TDS is a completely different matter, and should not be used for reference here...as there were many inconsistencies.
vurt on 10/10/2012 at 01:21
Quote Posted by LarryG
T3 was a different interpretation of the franchise by a different group of folks than the LGS originators, and a lot of people feel that T3 took the franchise in a bad direction artistically. The feel of the Thief universe is very different in T3 from the T1 and T2 games. If you make textures for T3, make them look like they belong in T3. But if you make them for T2, they should look like they belong in T2 and not in T3. Make better objects and textures, but make them look like they fit in with the rest of the artistic vision. Yes the trees were modeled on sequoias, but sequoias that never grew on Earth. Consider the eyeball plants. Don't you think those are just a little surreal? T1 and T2 are mystical. magical, off kilter, surreal places. T3 is more realistic and less interesting overall because of it.
How are they modelled after sequoias that never grew on earth?? I do agree that there's surrealism involved (the giant vines etc), but it's also not my intention to remove it and i don't think i have. More polygons will always make things look more realistic because objects are no longer looking like lego blocks. And again, that hasnt got anything to do with them trying to make it look surreal, it's just what they could do at the time and i'm pretty sure the trees and other stuff would look pretty much like in T3 (which also was rather surreal, though i agree it was different).
Edit: you're also way too vague for me to take this as any kind of constructive criticism. Constructive criticism would be an image example of a sequoia tree that doesnt grow on earth, for example ;) ...Or if we're going to be serious, examples of hi-res textures or models that looks good and fits the game / universe. It's easy to say this and that and don't come up with any type of examples, in other words what we usually refer to as "bitching". You havent even mentioned which specific texture/s you're refering to, is the water "too realistic" as well?
As for my personal opinion about T1-T2's artistic design (textures specifically), i think it's rather crap. I've never liked art where they mix very cartooney hand-drawn images with photos, that's an awful and sloppy design choice. Stick to one style.
Vae on 10/10/2012 at 01:59
Quote Posted by LarryG
T3 was a different interpretation of the franchise by a different group of folks than the LGS originators, and a lot of people feel that T3 took the franchise in a bad direction artistically. The feel of the Thief universe is very different in T3 from the T1 and T2 games. If you make textures for T3, make them look like they belong in T3. But if you make them for T2, they should look like they belong in T2 and not in T3. Make better objects and textures, but make them look like they fit in with the rest of the artistic vision. Yes the trees were modeled on sequoias, but sequoias that never grew on Earth. Consider the eyeball plants. Don't you think those are just a little surreal? T1 and T2 are mystical. magical, off kilter, surreal places. T3 is more realistic and less interesting overall because of it.
Well said, Larry.
Quote Posted by vurt
How are they modelled after sequias that never grew on earth? I do agree that there's surrealism involved (the giant vines etc), but it's also not my intention to remove it and i don't think i have. More polygons will always make things look more realistic because objects are no longer looking like lego blocks. And again, that hasnt got anything to do with them trying to make it look surreal, it's just what they could do at the time and i'm pretty sure the trees and other stuff would look pretty much like in T3 (which also was rather surreal, though i agree it was different).
Edit: you're also way too vague for me to take this as any kind of constructive criticism. Constructive criticism would be an image example of a sequoia tree that doesnt grow on earth, for example ;) ...Or if we're going to be serious, examples of hi-res textures or models that looks good but also arent too realistic.
The surreality ranges from subtle to extreme...yet, is always present. Here's an example of something more subtle...
Inline Image:
http://imageshack.us/a/img193/3687/rclqb.jpgNotice the difference in
feel between the old and new...The original plant feels spider-like, giving off a remote feeling of uneasiness, and compliments the black forest-ish effect on the atmosphere...whilst the new one looks great, yet gives off more of a brighter, pleasant, relaxing feel. Barring exception, this will work against the general tension of THIEF gameplay.
LarryG on 10/10/2012 at 02:03
Quote Posted by vurt
How are they modelled after sequoias that never grew on earth??
No, they are modeled after sequoias. BUT they were made into trees that are not exactly sequoias. They are a little bit off.
Quote Posted by vurt
I do agree that there's surrealism involved (the giant vines etc), but it's also not my intention to remove it and i don't think i have. More polygons will always make things look more realistic because objects are no longer looking like lego blocks. And again, that hasnt got anything to do with them trying to make it look surreal, it's just what they could do at the time and i'm pretty sure the trees and other stuff would look pretty much like in T3 (which also was rather surreal, though i agree it was different).
No. You don't get it. They would definitely not look like trees in T3. Low poly vs. high poly issues aside, the T1/G/2 universe is not intended to be a photo realistic virtual version of our normal reality. It is intended to be a surreal place where your expectations of what is normal is played with.
Quote Posted by vurt
Edit: you're also way too vague for me to take this as any kind of constructive criticism. Constructive criticism would be an image example of a sequoia tree that doesnt grow on earth, for example ;) ...Or if we're going to be serious, examples of hi-res textures or models that looks good and fits the game / universe. It's easy to say this and that and don't come up with any type of examples, in other words what we usually refer to as "bitching". You havent even mentioned which specific texture/s you're refering to, is the water "too realistic" as well?
I apologize for not making point more clear. If you can't look at the games as you play them and see the difference, I don't know what to say. How do you describe an edgy, angular look to someone? Also, consider that some of the trees around the buildings are supposed to look artificially shaped by the gardeners and not natural at all. Imagine Disneyland trees and shrubs, but not for the happiest place on earth, but for a place with torturers and sadists.
Quote Posted by Vae
The surreality ranges from subtle to extreme...yet, is always present. Here's an example of something more subtle...
Inline Image:
http://imageshack.us/a/img193/3687/rclqb.jpgNotice the difference in
feel between the old and new...The original plant feels spider-like, giving off a remote feeling of uneasiness, and compliments the black forest-ish effect on the atmosphere...whilst the new one looks great, yet gives off more of a brighter, pleasant, relaxing feel. Barring exception, this will work against the general tension of THIEF gameplay.
Exactly. I think the rock works (assuming that you can stand on it and reach every place you could on the original and no further) and the plant does not. The original rock was forced into that shape because of poly restrictions. The original plant was an artistic choice for the feel that was wanted for the terrain.
Edit: Oh. Look at the original. Doesn't the rock look like it fell off of the cliff behind it? It is the same type of rock. Now look at the new one. It doesn't look like the cliff behind. Where did it come from? The cliff and the rock should be the same type of stone. What shape would a sedimentary rock have that fell off that cliff? Rounded and worn or sharp edged and layered?
vurt on 10/10/2012 at 02:39
@ Larry
Quote:
No, they are modeled after sequoias. BUT they were made into trees that are not exactly sequoias. They are a little bit off.
Speaking of "vague".. i also doubt you know how the trees would look in T1-T2 if they could model them like we can today.
A forest can contain many different types of rocks, sometimes they happen to be close to another rock type. But yes if we must asume it's from the cliff behind it i guess we can consider it as a bit off, i'll color match it to the cliff.
So the plant and the rock, at least that's some progress, though the plant i thought we already discussed and i gave my explanation for why i made it that way.
Quote:
Imagine Disneyland trees and shrubs, but not for the happiest place on earth, but for a place with torturers and sadists.
Ah, Emo trees? :p Again, i doubt you've really studied the models or even colors in Thief. Thief uses very happy and bright colors for the plant textures, see previous examples i made.. The exception would be that "spider" looking plant (which is almost invisible at all times because it's too dark).
LarryG on 10/10/2012 at 03:41
Given the type of cliff, I would expect boulders shaped (ignore color) more like
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1269[/ATTACH]
or perhaps
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1270[/ATTACH]
Which are also more in line with the sharp faceted shape of the original than the glacial moraine looking granite boulder you replaced it with.
Don't get me wrong. That boulder you did is a great boulder. But the more I look at it in place, the more I think it is inappropriate for that location in that mission. It is a terrific boulder, but the wrong boulder. Just as your replacement plants in that screenshot are great plants, but the wrong plants. I don't know what more to say. I thought you wanted feedback. I'm trying to give you the best constructive feedback that I can. You are clearly very talented. But in places you appear to be missing the "vibe" of these games.
sNeaksieGarrett on 10/10/2012 at 04:17
Quote Posted by vurt
Speaking of "vague".. i also doubt you know how the trees would look in T1-T2 if they could model them like we can today.
Oh, and you do? What makes you think you know any better how the trees should look than Larry? You can't know what the artist's original intention was without asking them, can you? You can only go off what you see, and clearly what you see and Larry see don't match for some reason. I think people in this forum tend to like textures/models that look familiar to the originals, rather than flat-out rehashes. More on that below.
You are coming off as stubborn and a little arrogant. Sorry. You criticize long-time fans/players of thief as if you're somehow more qualified than anyone else. If you didn't intend that then I apologize.
All that said, you definitely have something going here, and texture packs are great. It's just that when you make textures for a game so unique as thief, you really have to take into consideration the style of the game. I also think that unfortunately (I'm guilty of it, no denying it) there's the nostalgia factor and people don't want to see their beloved thief with textures that don't have a resemblance to the original. I know there were quite a few thief fans that looked at the NTEX package for example, and didn't like what textures were used where. I just took at look at your latest images from running interference that show the one room where garrett comments about the butler being out, and there's an example of something that looks more in line with the original style of the room. (At least, if memory serves me.) I think the key here is upping the detail in textures/models, whilst at the same time preserving the integrity of the design.
Though I suppose, if you were to (or any other texture artist out there) flat out say from the beginning your intentions, and went full out with it, it'd just show a clear deviation and people would be okay with it (and others not.) If you look at say, Gecko's texture replacements for thief gold for example, there's some textures (at least initially, and I realize he's changing things too) that feel out of place somehow. It's not that their "HD," it's that they don't seem to match the type of environment their in, either in type/scale of texture or in the color palette of the texture for whatever reason. I do agree however that there are some textures that simply must be replaced to make more sense, such as rooms that have a stone slab(? not sure if that's what it is specifically that I'm thinking of) floor that should really have, say, cobblestone for example. There's a pic I saw where Gecko replaced a stone slab floor with some other texture and it did seem to make more sense for that room.
tl;dr :
the type and style of texture here is being contended with, not that the texture is HD. Although I don't think that's your problem with Larry's posts, but I thought it was necessary to get out in the open in general for everyone. I think your problem with Larry's posts is more to do with him contending the type of texture being used rather than it being HD or not. In that case, it's the difference between staying true to the originals while at the same time making something look better that is the debate here.
