Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Scouting Ninja

Member Since 04 Mar 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 06:18 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: 3D software for mobile games

Yesterday, 11:42 AM

Well, Unreal 4 has Blueprint, if you have no intention of learning a real programming language like C++/C#, and actually can get on with the Blueprint system (I found it not really useful, many did find it good), it is a more artist friendly engine in that sense.  
 

 

True the Blueprint is one of the key features that makes Unreal better for artist but it isn't all.

Unreal import and exports better allowing for a work flow between engine and 3D software, very important for level design where the basic level starts as just cubes and stuff.

Unreal's material editor allows for full control of the shaders with no need for code.

Unreal has animation tools that allows you to pull parts from a animation and use it on other rigs, saving a huge amount of time as you don't need to do a walk cycle for every character, combining this with physics also allows for unique animation based on the skeleton.

 

The largest drawback from using Unreal is that it's made with professionals in mind, making it a lot less forgiving than Unity.

 

Unity is the better engine for mobile games at the moment as Gain-Reto pointed out and because of it's forgiving nature and documentation it's better engine for new developers.

 

It's not that Unreal doesn't have documentation on very thing, it's just that 90% of those documents say the same thing as the tool tip. If the tool tip was clear I wouldn't need to check the documents, so why does it say the exact same thing!

 

Even if I would, I'd say you can get multiple different visual scripting systems for Unity starting at about 25-50$ from the Unity asset store, and some of these are actually quite good. As tightly integrated into the engine as Blueprint? No. But still, its an option.

This is the thing I hate about Unity, just to have a proper workflow you need to buy so many addons for things that should have been built into the engine. It was fine when Unity was the best engine in it's price range, now with Unreal free it just feels redundant.


In Topic: 3D software for mobile games

24 August 2016 - 12:50 PM

Should I stick with c4d or change sides to Maya / Unity?
 

Cinema4d has very little tools focused on 3D modeling, it is even missing some of the basics, switching is recommended. However when it comes to rendering and effects Cinema4d is a good option for graphics so you will want to use it for cinematics, logos and 2D stuff especially because you know how to use it.

 

I will recommend attempting Blender before you get Maya, Blender is free and small to download no reason not to give it a try.

 

The top three modeling software is 3ds Max, Blender and last Maya.

The top three animation software is 3ds Max, Maya and last Blender.

 

Cinema4d isn't on the list as it isn't really a 3D modeling software, it's more of graphics software, making it a bad choice when making game assets.

 

A Maya+ Cinema4d combo or Blender+ Cinema4d will give you all the same abillitys as 3ds Max has. As for a game engine I will recommend trying Unreal 4 it's a better engine for artist, however Unity is just as good a option although with less control over things than Unreal.

 

Is there other way to develop the graphic for a 3d game ? 

Yes, there are lot's of software that make instant models and things, the down side is that they are all low quality, you can attempt to use them.

 

We want to make a living from game developing

More people win lotteries, than developers make successful games. As long as you don't plan on getting rich it's possible to make some kind of living from games; however it won't be glamours.

People often ask me why as a 3D artist I don't just make games for a living, the truth is it's easier to make money as a 3D artist.


In Topic: Does anyone have any advice for my unique situation?

24 August 2016 - 02:41 AM

and the possibility of someone actually having the capacity to make my games if they wanted to does exist... How do I go about even doing that?

So I'd really like to know, if there is any way for someone like me to find a way to make their games... how do you do that?

 

You can make the game yourself, if the design is as good as you say people will see it even if it has bad art. Once people can see how it plays they will be interested, just taking your word for it won't work.

Dwarf fortress is a good example, a great game with bad graphics and controls.

 

You first need to prove there is oil before people will dig for it.

 

A persons word and design document means almost noting. I only do freelance work for people who can show me they made a game or have a design document, even then only one out of eight ever get to the point where the game is lunched.

 

You know, this was a lot easier in the old hobbyist game industry where they just hired game designers to design their own games for them.

 

The hobbyist game industry moved, it's now stationed in the Indie market, where a single mistake doesn't cost millions and people can be more open with ideas.

 

 

But how do you even go about finding anyone who might be interested?

 

Only I can make them, nobody else has the knowledge required to do that.

 

The only way is to find my own funding for it in some way, and there aren't going to be any existing game companies that would ever be interested.  By that I mean that there is no such thing as "being hired as a game designer to make your own games".

 

So, now... how do I even try to do that?  VC doesn't pay attention to "one person with an idea" no matter what the story is.

 

So I am back to Rube, which is definitely not looking good so far in ever getting anyone to so much as even look at that, either. 

At least I have that to think about if I can't find a more direct path to giving that Cold War game the "AAA" production it actually deserves

 

Making "AAA" games is expensive and a single mistake from any one of the staff can cost millions, a mistake from the game developer could ruin lives.

The "AAA" industry can't effort to gamble on a idea that has no prove of working, you can't blame them for not working on every idea proposed to them.

 

The problem is that every person in the world has a good game idea, every one of them.

If you ever want your idea made, then you will either have to prove to those who can make it that it's better than their ideas, or make it yourself.

 

Have you ever considered that their ideas is better than yours?

If that upsets you, then just remember that every time you ask them to work on your game idea, instead of there own, you are saying that your idea is better than theirs. It's up to you to convince people you already insulted that your ideas is worth making.

 

If that is the case, then I am still looking for some way for a whole new company to be created around me as the only way of making it happen.

The only way this can happen is for Lost Art Studios to be made real.  So, now... how do I even try to do that?

 

Making a company before you made a game is like putting cart before the horse, make a game that can fund a company first. A company that can't pay for it's own running cost can't pay for a game.

 

 

 One of those side games was designed specifically to be an Indie project, but because of that is very simple and does not demonstrate my unique style of game design and the "Rube" that creates.

 

A good design doesn't need bells and whistles to be good.

 

Only Sid Meier can make Sid Meier's games, only Steve Cole can make Steve Cole's games... and on to infinity.

 

I knew it! Ubisoft is practicing dark magic, how else did they make "Tom clancy's the division"  :o

The fact is a game is made by a team, just because your name is on the box doesn't mean it's yours.

 

In the end unless a developer makes every thing by themself, their name doesn't deserve to be in the Title. When ever some one else makes any thing for your game, they will influence it and change it from your original idea.


In Topic: Nedd help with some guidness, 3d, animating, and rendering

23 August 2016 - 11:53 AM

so my question to you is, what articles should I read to help with the process? (free, or not doesn't matter)

 

To learn about animation read "Disney Animation The illusion of life".

To learn animation practice and get a copy of "Animator's survival kit" for reference.

 

Although 3D animation is considered to be like animating a wooden puppet, it's only true for IK rigs other rigs work on the same principals as normal animation. Even with IK rigs you will need to keep in mind the principals of animation.

 

For 3D modeling there is no book or any one source that you could read to get a better understanding. 3D modeling changes too much, a solid rule today could be completely wrong tomorrow and a week later the rule is back.

 

To learn 3D modeling you must do 3D modeling, there are online courses however they are expensive as they are intended for people who want to make a living as 3D artists.

Some of it is dated and some of the older ones can be considered wrong.

 

 

I set a goal for myself for the next year to learn animation basics and advance with it together with rendering so I can look at my products as something I can be proud of

For 3D modeling it takes 3-4 years before you reach the point where you can make any object you want, it takes years of experience after that before you can make models to be proud of.

 

I am learning animation myself at the moment and it's my 3rd and last year learning the basics.

 

What I am saying is that it's going do be a long time, even longer if you learn game development at the same time, before you can be proud of the work(Unless you have low standards).

 

 

 

I feel like I should know more about geometry of animations

Topology that is the word, search for "animation topology" It will be focused around characters, however it's used even in hard edge animations.

Topology decides the form of the mesh and how it will move.

Learning material on it is sparse, mostly because no one wants to say some thing that could be wrong on such a important subject, most of the seminars I have attended regurgitate the same basic knowledge to the point of nausea. The only thing people can really tell you about topology is that it's important.

 

 

 

how to devide the models to the correct grids because sometimes when I put the texture some parts are messy 

Texel density and UV unwrapping.

Texel density is where you decide how many pixels will be in a unit, that way all the art is constant and looks professional.

 

UV unwrapping is 40% of 3D modeling and one of the largest time consumers, there is no in-depth explanation on it that I know of(If any one knows one, please link) even the courses I have bought only have the artist showing how they do it, as it is hard to explain topic.

 

Clothing design can teach you a lot about UV maps, as it almost is the same thing: making a 3D object from a 2D pattern, except UV is the reverse.

 

 

 

I heard Zbrush is good for texturing, any thoughts about it?

 

What?

Yea, it has tools for texturing, however Maya has the same ones and so does Max and Blender.

Buying Zbrush for texturing is like buying a car for it's wheels.

 

Zbrush is worth it's price if you plan on learning 3D sculpting, there are more affordable sculpting software if you can't buy Zbrush.

Most 3D modeling software has a basic form of sculpting tools built in.


In Topic: Which Software?

20 August 2016 - 09:40 PM

I dont think i will use photoshop as i will have to pay for it to use at home (so i believe), so im looking into Gimp. But can Gimp be used to create animations for 2d and textures for 3d models in the future? As in the future i will be using Blender for 3d.

 

Yes you will have to pay for Photoshop. Gimp is a great alternative as it can do 90% of what Photoshop can when it comes to making art assets, I have Photoshop and still use gimp for fast editing.

Photoshop has a patch tool that is great for making tiled textures and removing artifacts and is the only reason I believe it's better than Gimp.

 

Photoshop and Gimp can make animations however it isn't the best tool for the job, that is why so many 2D animation software exist.

If you are learning Blender then you can use it for your 2D animations, you will just do your rendering in 2D. Blender is a better animation tool than some payed 2D animation software and is the best free 3D animation software.

 

 

 

Also are Gimp and Inkscape pretty much same thing?

 

No Gimp uses pixels and Inkscape uses vectors.

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/32597/whats-the-difference-between-pixels-and-vectors/

 

Basically Incskape is between Blender and Gimp.

Vectors are great for making the base of a texture as you can scale it and define basic colors and gradients for your texture.

 

 

 

Basically i dont want to learn 3 programs that individually do each thing so photo editing, 2d models and 2d animation when 1 program would do all of that.

Just think how huge such a program would be.

 

Photoshop is attempting to be that software with all of it's addons, it can be expensive to buy the addons and you won't use them allot. With each addon the loading time of Photoshop increases up to a point where you don't use it because it takes forever to start.

At the moment I only have the Quixel addon and still when just inverting a texture or adding some thing simple I use Gimp instead. When I open Photoshop it means I am doing textures and nothing else.

 

In the end you will be using lot's of different software, you stop noticing it, Gimp and Blender is the best staring software there is.

 

 

For making game assets I recommend: Gimp, Blender(3ds Max if you are rich and don't know about 3D software.), Photoshop, Zbrush(Not necessary), Marvelous designer and Krita(For stylized textures).

Sketchup is good if you struggle with other 3D software.


PARTNERS