your right it is shaping up, I would animate to now
4 what/whom are you doing the model?
i like how you work on the model. i dont watch that much on colors, so i just wanted to ask still why you are painting that wide black(just dark) stripes to divide the armor. at the shoulders it looks great but at the elbows its kinda too wide.
2 cents given by Ingurum
Ingurum, it’s for Garage Games. They’re making an RTS Game Pack for developers, so that they can easily make RTS type games.
Here’s what it looks like in their engine…
(it’s not going to be viewed up that close in the Pack though, but I like the way it looks in the engine.)
Here’s some team colors:
Also, I fixed the black band at the elbow so that it looked more shadowy and rounded. The reason it’s bigger there than at the shoulder is because I thought it should look more flexible…
That’s funny, I like it, I was wondering how the arms would look animated, based off the frame that you put up, I thought it would tear but it turned out nice, and it still looks good for a low poly count, I love it man, you should imitate some Tekken moves just for laughs, but I really like it, I’m trying to learn here, but I’ll pull it together
Hey I just read over something I missed, are you using the garage games engine too? I’m actually doing tutorials out of there right now, is there a huge difference with the RTS and the regular one? this is really good, and I’m amazed at some of the stuff that’s already created with the engine, some of the games are really good, even thoe there basic, but there really good, thanks for posting this
Thanks, rookie …glad you like it.
Yes, I’m using their Torque engine. works great.
They (Garage Games) decided to make this because there were so many people saying “I know Torque can do FPS games, but what if I want to make an RTS game?”… so this RTS Pack will save people who are interested in doing this from having to build a basic RTS game structure from scratch.
RTS Pack Technical features:
*Powerful RTSUnit class is highly optimized for networking and simulation, yet supports Torque´s 3Space object rendering technology, including shadows, complex animations, and LOD. You are free to customize your game´s rendering capabilities, to tune performance versus visual quality.
*Efficient networking update system allows you to create games supporting multiple players each with several dozen units
*Script-oriented design enables rapid development, and easy game customization
*Built on Torque. Supports powerful networking, flexible GUIs, demo recording, particle systems, all of Melv´s fx components, profiling, and editors
RTS Pack Gameplay features:
*Building animation and placement system with visual feedback
*3D RTS camera
*RTS units support an easily customizable attack model, easily modifiable abilities, and can be individually buffed in a network-efficient manner
*Fully capable RTS Minimap can be used to control the camera, and displays map terrain, unit and building positions, current camera view box, and alerts
*Full drag-and-click RTS unit and building selection system
*RTS-friendly, flexible GUI features
*Multiplayer game lobby
*Complete unit grouping and selection system enables robust player control, and utilizes a network-efficient update scheme
…so, that’s to answer you question about the difference between this and the engine itself. It’s essentially an extension of the engine tailored for RTS games.
I’m not a huge fan of RTS games myself, but this is pretty cool and alot of the Garage Game community really like the idea.
They will be shipping the pack soon…
Nice work there! Quick question, what size texture map are you using? I’m guessing 256x256…?
Though I usually don’t post on these forums I saw this and well I had to. The work is awesome and the pack your working on sounds even better. I can’t wait to see it all done :). Nice animation, model, texture, everything, turned out very nice.
jeah man, turned out very well!
thats cool that you do that rts pack, so you are a professional modeller? like that
keep showing us animations
the only thing that bothers me is that if they release that awsome unit in an rts pack, many rts developed on that pack will have that unit in it. I hope that the unit not will be used in every rts… or ppls may get upset with it and the model doesnt deserve that!
@ironikart: It is 256x256, how’d you guess? hehe They said, make it any size, because they can scale it down or whatever if it need to be. But, out of curiosity, does anyone know what size texture map a typical RTS game uses?
@Eclipse: thank you! good to hear positive comments.
I just made this… (death animation, keyframes only):
and, here’s the idling animation:
I’ll post back when I can get some in-game screenies.
what means key framed only? did you use bones or not?
Good point, Ingurum… it’s just a “placeholder” model really, but I could use it myself to make something. I guess developers/artists will see it in the engine and it should inspire them to make there own stuff. I don’t mind if people modify it.
…oh, and I’m not a professional, I just finsihed school and I’ve been working and doing this in my spare time. I guess you’re not a professional until you get paid, eh?
(although, I am getting a free copy of the pack and “will be prominently credited”… so it’s all good )
Well, keyframes are what you would call the main frames of an animation. The computer fills in the in-between frames… this is called tweening.
So that’s why it looks kinda jerky, cuz all the tweening isnt there, just key frames.
ah right but you have bones, right?
i taught you are a professional because they gave you that task
we are using 512 * 512 textures, that should be standard for a game nowadays and we are working for computers in the future.
hey phil, …isnt that a bit high though? I mean, from a distance all that detail would be lost… hmmm
@Ingurum: yeah, there are 14 bones. 2 for each of the limbs, 1 for the back, 1 for the head, and then 4 extra bones for parenting to the pelvis and neck.
not really. Thats the artistic “challenge” that if you zoom towards the model that it has details and that if you look at it from further away it still looks good.
It also depends what you plan to do with the game. Our player should have fun when he looks at our models close up.
C&C:G’s infantry units, even at full detail, were using (i think) either 32x32 or 64x64 - they were not very detailed at all. However, the nice thing about having lots of units on screen at once is that you can re-use that texture data. Even if you make it 256x256 instead of 128x128, that SHOULD (if its a good game engine) be basically a one-time expense. The renderer chooses that texture, and then blasts all the polygons that use it at the same time. The real issue in this case (more than tex memory) is whether or not there is any point to adding the detail. Like I said, C&C:G was an absolutely beautiful game, and their infantry units were just detailed enough so that you could tell their hands from their sleeves, basically. Depends on screen size - somebody on here said before that you basically want to figure out how many pixels the object will take up on-screen on average, and base your texture size on that. So if this guy is never going to be more than 32 pixels high on-screen, i definitely wouldn’t use more than a 64x64 texture!
That’s what I guessed. C&C:Generals was pretty fun, I only played that once though.
Of course, you’re right Phil, it’s more fun for the player when they can look up close at something and still see the details. That’s why I chose 256x256.
The good thing about it is that you can always scale down, or scale it up and refine it and add more details if you wanted to.