Archer (Working title) Devlog.

Show us your works in progress and request feedback

Post » Mon May 15, 2017 11:50 am

cjbruce wrote:
Drat. Now you have me worried, as I am getting close to starting the level design process with Q3D. Using block art and a top-down level layout I hadn't anticipated too much of an issue.

What specifically were you seeing that was giving you trouble? Was it doing things like trying to match up Q3D models with their shadows?

Also, I concur that the 640x360 looks a little better.


It's just that i have sooooo many objects of different kinds in different sizes from small pebbles, mushrooms, twigs, flower, to large houses, and trees. Placing all that on the map without any accurate representation of what it would look like until I press preview was my major turn off. If i had the patience I could probably pull it off. If I had a lot less assets and a flat level (instead of height variations as i was doing) it would be a lot easier. If you're game is pretty simple, and most assets are on the same plane, and similar size i guess it's okay. I guess my game is just too complex in terms of the details

That's my only issue... visual representation in the editor.

I just didn't have the patience to place something, preview, tweak position and scale, and test again for thousands of objects..
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
41
S
18
G
19
Posts: 1,046
Reputation: 13,984

Post » Mon May 15, 2017 12:55 pm

tunepunk wrote:
Darth Crusher wrote:Based on the mock ups I'd go with 640

320 ruins the look of your game


Thanks :) Yeah I think I'll go with that... I think I would save enough memory just by optimizing the assets for 640x360 instead.
Separating trees and other assets to - tree trunks and canopy, i could save a bit of memory as well, and mixing and matching, instead of using several full trees sprites in different variations. Characters and animation I could also separate to smaller parts, to save more memory, but a bit more work.


If there is any chance your game might end up being played on living room TVs, eg through androidTV/shield or even console then you might want to consider 1024 576, I found, unless you are specifically aiming for a blatant pixel art look, lower resolutions on big HD TVs just look too pixelated and expose a lack of detail you don't notice on smaller HD screens.

I found 1024 576 was a good compromise. It gives a sort of amiga500 higher res pixelart game look on big TVs.
...
B
46
S
24
G
7
Posts: 331
Reputation: 8,227

Post » Mon May 15, 2017 1:43 pm

NetOne wrote:
If there is any chance your game might end up being played on living room TVs, eg through androidTV/shield or even console then you might want to consider 1024 576, I found, unless you are specifically aiming for a blatant pixel art look, lower resolutions on big HD TVs just look too pixelated and expose a lack of detail you don't notice on smaller HD screens.

I found 1024 576 was a good compromise. It gives a sort of amiga500 higher res pixelart game look on big TVs.


I was aiming for mobile to start with. All the assets are rendered in high res, so I could release a "HD" version later, for TV's and tablets. I just wanted to optimize the game to be playable on low-mid end phones without running into memory issues.

I wish there was a way to chose what assets to load. Now I have to settle for something that looks okay, on High end phones with big screens, but is playable on low-mid en phones. >_<
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
41
S
18
G
19
Posts: 1,046
Reputation: 13,984

Post » Mon May 15, 2017 1:56 pm

tunepunk wrote:
cjbruce wrote:
Drat. Now you have me worried, as I am getting close to starting the level design process with Q3D. Using block art and a top-down level layout I hadn't anticipated too much of an issue.

What specifically were you seeing that was giving you trouble? Was it doing things like trying to match up Q3D models with their shadows?

Also, I concur that the 640x360 looks a little better.


It's just that i have sooooo many objects of different kinds in different sizes from small pebbles, mushrooms, twigs, flower, to large houses, and trees. Placing all that on the map without any accurate representation of what it would look like until I press preview was my major turn off. If i had the patience I could probably pull it off. If I had a lot less assets and a flat level (instead of height variations as i was doing) it would be a lot easier. If you're game is pretty simple, and most assets are on the same plane, and similar size i guess it's okay. I guess my game is just too complex in terms of the details

That's my only issue... visual representation in the editor.

I just didn't have the patience to place something, preview, tweak position and scale, and test again for thousands of objects..


Got it. I wonder if a lot of the really small stuff could be taken care of algorithmically?

FWIW, now that we aren't sure what is going on with @X3M, I've been looking into what it would take to do a C3 port of babylon.js. It is a little overwhelming, but I think it might be easier to create the necessary plugins for babylon.js rather than three.js. I'm definitely not the ideal person to start the process of creating a set of 3D plugins for C3, but if no one else volunteers I might consider taking on the project.

I think it would be wise to wait until we have z-ordering capability in the editor though.
www.simbucket.com - HTML5 Science Simulations / https://www.airconsole.com/#!play=com.n ... obotrumble - Robot Rumble on AirConsole
B
51
S
16
G
25
Posts: 425
Reputation: 17,423

Post » Mon May 15, 2017 2:09 pm

@cjbruce Yeah both of the 3D plugins for C2 is pretty good. I understand that scirra don't want to make Construct a 3D editor, but I do keep my hopes up that somewhere down the line they would consider adding some functionality that plugin creators to make use of, to get a better viewport for those plugins :)

For now I'm going put my efforts aside with the 3D plugins. Technically it works great, with good performance, it's just the editor that doesn't support it fully yet, so it's tedious to work with. :)
Follow my progress on Twitter
or in this thread Archer Devlog
B
41
S
18
G
19
Posts: 1,046
Reputation: 13,984

Previous

Return to Works in Progress/Feedback Requests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: NetOne and 0 guests