Game News Torment Kickstarter Update #6: Meres, Castoff's Labyrinth and Brian Mitsoda!

[Infinitron]

Of course, oldschool "handpainted" 2D could be great too:

Blackthorne, how were these made back in the day?

 

[Kosmonaut]

There's a tutorial on the fan-made Indiana Jones adventure game, where they explain how to do a background like that. But it's low-ress (just like the Lucas games).

Edit: WTF! They already released the full game? I thought that it was another vaporware.

Edit 2: Not is not. It's just the link to the page where they tell you that the game isn't ready. Bummer.

 

[Tigranes]

This is a 3D model with texture mapping. Can someone make the case for exactly why 2D backgrounds are inherently superior to high res textures and 3D, especially with Mudbox and Zbrush being so popular? I'm not convinced quite yet.

It is a prerendered 3D. Aka if you wanted to use it in a game it would be a 2D static picture and you'd move and scale character models around it. No one is asking for hand drawn or anything when they talk about 2D backgrounds, they are asking for prerendered or pre-drawn backgrounds to that the world can look better. W2 engine isn't really good and wouldn't do justice to visual side of the setting.

And if you wanted to have actual 3D game engine look like that? Well that scene you show is at or above what Cry Engine 3 can do in pure tech dome mode. So a bit outside InXile's budget .

That's exactly what they did with Final Fantasy VII-IX. It looks really good, of course, and I think Torment could easily use it, except that if you have a different perspective for every single shot like those games, I imagine it makes the environment lot less interactable because of the work you need to do, and obviously combat would be very compromised because it's not isometric. Now, could they set the perspective at isometric and then use backgrounds like this? Well, yes.... that's pretty much getting close to what the IE 'painted background' style is.

 

[jewboy]

It is a prerendered 3D. Aka if you wanted to use it in a game it would be a 2D static picture and you'd move and scale character models around it. No one is asking for hand drawn or anything when they talk about 2D backgrounds, they are asking for prerendered or pre-drawn backgrounds to that the world can look better. W2 engine isn't really good and wouldn't do justice to visual side of the setting.

And if you wanted to have actual 3D game engine look like that? Well that scene you show is at or above what Cry Engine 3 can do in pure tech dome mode. So a bit outside InXile's budget .

Well you could use it in a game. You'd just have to import the 3DSMax polygon model, which would look like this. I'm not opposed to 2D backgrounds in principle. All I ask for is a proper argument since it is clear that 3D is not inherently inferior to 2D even for backgrounds. Although the sample I posted from that excellent Burmese artist (maybe inXile should hire that guy) was rendered with the 3DSmax 4 built in renderer which is obviously not real time capable I think it is possible to paint detailed artwork onto a 3D surface as a texture with Zbrush / Mudbox, but of course eventually it comes down to what the in-game renderer, Unity in this case, is capable of. The Unity 'asset store' has some nice stills, but I'm not clear on whether those were actually rendered inside the Unity engine. I'll assume that they were since otherwise it would be kind of deceptive to post them there.

What I'm getting at is that (1) the 2D > 3D argument needs to actually be made explicitly and posted where it's being voted on and (2) that a sufficiently talented artist may be able to do an equivalently detailed background to what the 2D proponents are hoping for as a texture that is mapped to a 3D surface. 2D vs 3D is an implementation detail and arguing against 3D is an argument that requires knowledge of digital art pipelines in general and the capabilities of Unity in particular. People are treating the subject as if the superiority of 2D is a given and obvious to everyone and neither is actually the case. You can point to the early W2 video, but maybe inXile just needs to hire more and better artists.

 

[tuluse]

arguing against 3D is an argument that requires knowledge of digital art pipelines in general and the capabilities of Unity in particular.

Not really, all it takes is simple math. Something some lets render overnight is going to look better than something being rendered in real time.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Well you could use it in a game. You'd just have to import the 3DSMax polygon model, which would look like this.

That simple, huh? Just import the model. I wonder why nobody thought of it before! Quick, go tell inXile to stop using lowpoly models for W2, they obviously don't know what they're doing!

That "model" alone would probably kill Unity, let alone render it in real-time with huge textures on it.

People are treating the subject as if the superiority of 2D is a given and obvious to everyone and neither is actually the case. You can point to the early W2 video, but maybe inXile just needs to hire more and better artists.

How about you point me to REAL TIME 3D (not fucking pre-rendered scenes) that looks that good? What? Only in high-end engines and with assets that costs a ton of money to make? Hmm. Maybe inXile should just have tens of millions and "sufficiently talented" artists, and it would be just awesome.

Or maybe they could just import it. It's really simple in Unity too. You just drag and drop it in the scene!

 

[Scruffy]

Of course, oldschool "handpainted" 2D could be great too:

Blackthorne, how were these made back in the day?

what's that?
QfG?

 

[Infinitron]

Of course, oldschool "handpainted" 2D could be great too:



Blackthorne, how were these made back in the day?

what's that?
QfG?

Yes, Quest for Glory 3.

 

[Scruffy]

ahh, good times.

 

[jewboy]

So it's not 3D, but it is 3D? Yeah, that makes sense. Obviously it has been rendered. Otherwise it would just be wireframe showing a bunch of polygons. Was your point supposed to be that the rendering engine the artist used is far better than Unity? If that is your point then make it. Just throwing out the term 'pre-rendered' is not an automatic win.

"2D backgrounds" in the Infinity engine are pre-rendered 3D scenes. The engine doesn't render them. That's what you have there as an example too. A pre-rendered 3D scene. You're just saying: Hey, why do you want 3D pre-rendered scenes when 3D pre-rendered scenes look this great????

3D in games means real-time 3D. Like W2. Not that the backgrounds were pre-rendered. That's 2D.

So yes, it's an automatic win because you really have no idea what you're talking about.

You haven't shown that Unity cannot properly render the 3DSMax 4 model that I posted. Until you do that you don't have an argument. Others have made proper arguments however. It seems the argument is that the 3DSMax 4 renderer or other non-realtime renderers are far superior to Unity. So the results are not comparable. If the reason I 'don't know what I'm talking about' is that you believe I don't understand that the still I posted was not rendered in Unity then you are wrong. I was well aware of the fact that that scene was not rendered in Unity. That however does not show that it could not be. What I would like to know is what features Unity lacks that makes a beautiful in-game rendering like that impossible. Or something like that.

A potential coherent argument might be something like: 1. Unity is not capable of rendering detailed backgrounds (include evidence). 2. So if you want detailed backgrounds then they must be prerendered bitmaps instead of hand painted textures mapped to a 3D polygon surface. The argument would essentially be that Unity cannot handle detailed, high resolution textures or lighting and shadows etc. That seems plausible enough, but the argument should actually be made. If true then I would be happy to vote for prerendered bitmaps instead of in-game rendered polygons for the backgrounds/environments. BTW, since prerendered bitmaps are not the same as scanned drawings or hand-painted scenes that needs to be clarified on the inXile site. Hand drawn bitmaps require 2D traditional drawing/painting skills. Prerendered bitmaps require 3D modeling skills.

 

[tuluse]

Bitmaps, what is this 1999?

 

[Alex]

Personally, I dislike 3D graphics. Or at least the 3D graphics we have got up to now. I don't know if it is a problem of the technology, a problem with the modern visual taste or if we just don't know how to avoid it. But to me 3D games look very similar, looking either photo-realistic or, when using something more stylized, looking just plain awful. Whatever the problem may be, 2D games allowed artists to put in a whole lot more of styling into them, and I would love to see we go back to that.

 

[Orma]

Castoff's labyrinth sounds quite nice, not nice enough to make me die on purpose though.


And Mitsoda!

 

[Alex]

2D games allowed designers to put in a whole lot more of styling into them, and I would love to see we go back to that.

What has one to do with the other?

Sorry, I really meant artists there.

 

[jewboy]

So as I understand it the reason why people are asking for 2D backgrounds is because, essentially, Unity sucks. Badly. If that's the case then how about switching to a better engine for a stretch goal. Maybe Unigine:



Or ID Tech 5:

 

[Infinitron]

Oh god jewboy is a Drog alt

 

[Jaesun]

Yeah obvious alt is obvious.

 

[Jashiin]

 

[jewboy]

Personally, I dislike 3D graphics. Or at least the 3D graphics we have got up to now. I don't know if it is a problem of the technology, a problem with the modern visual taste or if we just don't know how to avoid it. But to me 3D games look very similar, looking either photo-realistic or, when using something more stylized, looking just plain awful. Whatever the problem may be, 2D games allowed artists to put in a whole lot more of styling into them, and I would love to see we go back to that.

Prerendered backgrounds won't fix that problem though. Only hand drawing each bitmap by a talented 2D artist would give you that more organic and potentially more stylized look. Presumably that is not what is being proposed, but the request on the inXile site doesn't specify what kind of 2D they want.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Oh god jewboy is a Drog alt

Yeah obvious alt is obvious.

Don't be so hasty in your judgement bros, it's possible he's just mentally challenged. That is a very ableist attitude you're displaying right there.

 

[FeelTheRads]

You haven't shown that Unity cannot properly render the 3DSMax 4 model that I posted. Until you do that you don't have an argument.

You pointed that scene out as an example of 3D (when it actually isn't). YOU show me that it can be done real-time. Your argument is just: look at this cool thing, why don't they import that??? Which shows you're absolutely clueless.

is that you believe I don't understand that the still I posted was not rendered in Unity then you are wrong.

I believe you still can't tell the difference between a pre-rendered scene and one rendered in real-time and what each of them imply.

Presumably that is not what is being proposed, but the request on the inXile site doesn't specify what kind of 2D they want.

Presumably it is. The backgrounds in the Infinity Engine games were pre-rendered 3D scenes, but they were Photoshopped afterwards and had details painted over them.

 

[MasPingon]

Oh god jewboy is a Drog alt

Yeah obvious alt is obvious.

Don't be so hasty in your judgement bros, it's possible he's just mentally challenged. That is a very ableist attitude you're displaying right there.

Awkward, I was going to write exactly the same worlds, what the fuck are you?

 

[SCO]

I can't even tell who you're speaking to. Another victory for the pre-emptive strike.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Oh god jewboy is a Drog alt

Yeah obvious alt is obvious.

Don't be so hasty in your judgement bros, it's possible he's just mentally challenged. That is a very ableist attitude you're displaying right there.

Awkward, I was going to write exactly the same worlds, what the fuck are you?

Wyrmlord2 Alpha, now with elaborate predictive models based on extensive data collected by v1.

 

[jewboy]

You pointed that scene out as an example of 3D (when it actually isn't).

Actually it is. It was created and rendered in 3D Studio Max 4. it's a bunch of polygons. I even posted a screen shot of the wireframe version.

YOU show me that it can be done real-time.

I have no idea if it can be done in real time. It would depend on the engine / real time renderer as well as the hardware running it. That speaks more to the issue of exactly what any particular real time rendering engine is capable of.

Your argument is just: look at this cool thing, why don't they import that??? Which shows you're absolutely clueless

That was not my argument. My argument was (1) Here is how good a 3D scene can look and (2) You cannot simply dismiss UV mapped textures as looking worse than 2D out of hand. It can actually look quite good. The example I posted showed that. Whether the Unity renderer can do as well as the 3D Studio Max 4 renderer is another question entirely. And actually not relevant to my point, which is to show that 3D backgrounds can look quite good in general. If the argument in favor of 2D backgrounds is just that Unity sucks so we have to bypass it with prerendered bitmaps, then you have a real argument, but I haven't seen the argument stated that way.

I believe you still can't tell the difference between a pre-rendered scene and one rendered in real-time and what each of them imply

The only difference is what renderer you are using. No argument, or at least no detailed argument, has been made that the Unity renderer was inadequate for the task. Whether I understand what 'rendering' means or not (I do) is actually irrelevant. Well it's only relevant if you want to make an ad hominem 'argument', something you clearly cannot resist.

Presumably it is. The backgrounds in the Infinity Engine games were pre-rendered 3D scenes, but they were Photoshopped afterwards and had details painted over them.

Nevertheless it is unspecified in the stretch goal request. The best assumption would be that either hand drawn or computer rendered bitmaps are acceptable. So long as they are bitmaps and not 3D models.

When it comes to my knowledge or lack thereof about digital art it is certainly true that I am no expert. I am not an artist. I was requesting an actual argument in favor of 2D backgrounds, not making one myself. I can code in C++, and I have some basic familiarity with how artwork is done in computer games, and I've played around a bit with Maya and 3D Studio Max and Zbrush and have followed some organic modeling tutorials. Expertise in the subject is not necessary to recognize the fact that no argument whatsoever has been put forward in favor of 2D backgrounds on the inXile forum.

You may not feel that such an argument is necessary, but we clearly disagree about that. Whether the pro-2D faction can convince me or not is almost certainly of no practical importance since I only have one vote, but others may also be unconvinced that 3D environments are necessarily ugly and those votes could make a difference and in any case the burden of proof is on the person who is actually making the claim. The (implied, unstated) claim on the inXile site is that static 2D environments are superior to dynamic 3D environments and therefore, since we are such graphics whores, we would like the better option (2D) as a stretch goal. In my view that unstated premise of the superiority of 2D backgrounds is unproven in general, but it may be that Unity is kind of a low end, shitty rendering engine, and due to that, prerendered or hand drawn bitmaps are needed in order to have detailed and/or just good looking environments.