Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

New AoD art

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Yes. Yes, it did.
 

Section8

Cipher
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
4,321
Location
Wardenclyffe
"That's funny, the damage doesn't look as bad from out here."

It's not quite as evocative as the one nearer the wall, where you can see the ruin of the city inside, but it's still another fantastic piece of work.
 

corvax

Augur
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
731
LlamaGod said:
did magic turn them into lego men?
:lol:
Well the new art is looking fucking awesome. Oh, and scrap up some money to make at least few boxed editions cus that other design was just sick.
 

Stark

Liturgist
Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Messages
770
Vault Dweller said:
Another art piece, an "overview"

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9093/c ... s012df.jpg

Opinions, please.

excellent work.

i didn't realize there's a hole on the ground until i read later comments. it just does not jump out to me. your artist may want to enlarge it or make it more visible. it blends to the ground too well.

i actually prefer the black and white sketches alot more. its alot more atmospheric.

all the art pieces are excellent. its as good as the commercial fantasy art. it's definately done by professionals.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
Stark said:
excellent work.
Yes indeed.

...i didn't realize there's a hole on the ground until i read later comments. it just does not jump out to me...
I saw the hole, but I don't think I was really seeing it correctly until recently. I think the "problem" is this:
There is a fairly bold horizontal line formed by the ridge two thirds of the way up the wall on the left. This line can be followed past the wall onto the scaffolding (??) to the right of the wall. The back of the hole then continues along the same smooth line.

When I first looked at the picture, this gave me the impression that everything on this line was on the same elevation - i.e. that the back of the hole was at a height similar to the ridge on the wall. This made the hole look less hole-like, and smaller, if anything.
Looking at the picture for a while longer, I saw the hole as it is intended to look - after which it's difficult to see it wrong again.

I think this effect would be eliminated if the scaffolding on the left of the hole were angled so that it didn't continue a smooth line from the wall to the back of the hole.

It's a wonderful piece of art, of course, but it's important that people see the hole as it is intended. It seems at least one other person is as blind as I am. We need help :).
 

Slylandro

Scholar
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
705
At the risk of sounding insincere, those are some great pictures. There's lots of atmosphere in them. How long did it take to make these? I second the suggestion of turning these into wallpapers.
 

FrancoTAU

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,507
Location
Brooklyn, NY
I like the new art piece. Minor nitpicking would be the dude with the big helmet. It sticks out too much when it doesn't really seem important enough to warrant the attention.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
I guess it depends on the effect you're going for.
The second one appears more convincing to me - more in keeping with the feel of the other pictures. The first seems more other-worldly (as in fantasy-like). I think it's because the buildings are all so tall in such a (relatively) small settlement. In reality you'd usually have a wide surrounding area of low lying buildings. Of course it might make sense in the setting that buildings would be tall and highly concentrated, but it still seems odd (for good or bad).

If you're going for a "These settlements were constructed using powerful magics..." feel, then the first one makes more sense. If they're supposed to seem "realistic", I'd go for the second. The lighting also brings out the hole a bit more, which is good [though that pesky scaffolding still confuses me...].
 

RGE

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
773
Location
Karlstad, Sweden
I agree with the previous speaker. Will the buildings be tall in the game, or will they be of the more reasonable height as in the second image? There's nothing wrong with making things look good, but I think it's kind of nice when it looks good while also remaining faithful to the contents of the box/book.
 

spacemoose

Erudite
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
9,632
Location
california
The second one! Also, there should be some farms around the town, if there are people still living there, how/where do they get food?

There should be more damage to the walls, and smaller buildings, those still look too big.

But honestly, its good as it is. This is really such a trivial part of the game why worry so much about it?
 

FrancoTAU

Cipher
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,507
Location
Brooklyn, NY
The taller buildings one looks more impressive, but i'm not sure what angle you're going for with the town. If it's supposed to be a lively city with a large population than go with the taller version.
 

fraunclein

Novice
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
67
I too fancy the second picture over the first. The first goes maybe a bit too over the top in the "awe-inspiring eronomous ancient fantasy metropol" kind of way.

Curious question: Is that particular city accessible in-game? If so, is the presentation 1:1 hand-crafted(gasp) or the BG2 style "handful points of interest with random content in-between"? Or perhaps something else?
Sorry if this has been asked before.

Overall, the art is great. Keep up the good work.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
galsiah said:
If you're going for a "These settlements were constructed using powerful magics..." feel...
No.

RGE said:
Will the buildings be tall in the game, or will they be of the more reasonable height as in the second image?
More reasonable height in general, although there are some spires and minarets.

FrancoTAU said:
If it's supposed to be a lively city with a large population than go with the taller version.
Not that large

chaedwards said:
Second one - devastation is much more apparent, draws it away from generic fantasy.
That's what I think

fraunclein said:
Curious question: Is that particular city accessible in-game?
Yes, both the town and the devastated area.

If so, is the presentation 1:1 hand-crafted(gasp) or the BG2 style "handful points of interest with random content in-between"? Or perhaps something else?
Something else: one large chunk of the town, as much as can fit into a normal map. The devastated area is a separate map though.
 

Twinfalls

Erudite
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
3,903
Shitfucks - these pics are great. Second pic is better - looks more realistic, first looks a bit incongruous, too much a futuristic super-built-up SF city.

Definitely use them for some PR.
 

protobob

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
332
Location
USA
The first one is more interesting to look at, with the tall, exotic looking buildings. It exudes a Sci-Fi feel. The second one looks more realistic, but is less interesting to look at.

It's a matter of deciding which picture sets the proper tone and texture for your setting.

If you went with the second one, you might want to change the angle so that the hole in the city is more prominent, which would make the picture more interesting.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom