Character: RTS melee soldier


#21

Nice work there! :slight_smile: Quick question, what size texture map are you using? I’m guessing 256x256…?


#22

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.


#23

jeah man, turned out very well!

thats cool that you do that rts pack, so you are a professional modeller? like that :smiley:
keep showing us animations :wink:

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!


#24

@ironikart: It is 256x256, how’d you guess? hehe :slight_smile: 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. :slight_smile:


#25

what means key framed only? did you use bones or not? :smiley:


#26

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? :smiley:

(although, I am getting a free copy of the pack and “will be prominently credited”… so it’s all good :slight_smile: )


#27

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.


#28

ah right but you have bones, right?

i taught you are a professional because they gave you that task :smiley:


#29

we are using 512 * 512 textures, that should be standard for a game nowadays and we are working for computers in the future.


#30

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.


#31

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.


#32

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!


#33

That’s what I guessed. C&C:Generals was pretty fun, I only played that once though. :slight_smile:

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.


#34

jeah let it 256, you can scale it later down. have you to do more of them? any concepts that you may show?


#35

:slight_smile:

There’s the concept in the corner (it was the start of the tex map). I really just did a couple of quick sketches and then got to work on it. The details came later. I really like how the spikes on the weapon turned out for some reason.


#36

This is cool and thanks for the specs on the engine


#37

thats gorgeous, thanks


#38

Okay, well here’s the last of the animations… Job’s all done now. :smiley:

Thanks to everyone for their comments and interest in this.


#39

I am really getting interested in the torque engine, and now with this RTS engine, do you know when its going to be released (the rts engine)


#40

I ask them when the pack is shipping… and they said “soon”
so i guess no firm date is set

but i will post some screens here when they’re done with it… so you can all see how it turned out. And seeing as how i’ll be getting a free copy, i’ll probably make a little demo game with it and post a link to that as well.

and about the rts engine, they havent set a price yet, but it sounds like it’ll be $30-50US, but i dont know for sure. You will probably need to get the main Torque license ($100) first in order to use it though…