If Xenonauts sells well enough...

[Max_Caine]

Just to fill in some background information re. sprites. and rendering. From this Xenonauts news update, dated December 23rd, 2011, rendering seems to be done on several refurbished corporate servers. If anyone remembers Nuttss, he asked how much work the sprite rendering process inolves, and there's some useful information on the process. As far as I know, only tiles and tile props are hand-painted after they have been rendered out (there was a news page on that with some nice examples but it vanished when the old Xenonauts site got hacked and the Wayback Machine doesn't have it archived).

[Gorlom]

It's a cartoon. And, among cartoons, its animation style is really primitive - look it up. Yet even that is done through 3D rendering.

2D today is really limited in application. Most anything trying to look even remotely real, and a lot of what doesn't, uses 3D technology under the skin. In sprite rendering, in surface presentation, elsewhere.

I am aware of what southpark is and that they use digital animation and 3D modeling. I just don't see your point or the relevance to my preference... that's why i listed the things I had previously mentioned to be things i don't see the point of having them to be in 3D.

what does it even matter if it is done in 3D if the end result is displayed in 2D? (not talking about southpark here)

I don't have an exaggerated avarice towards anything made to be 3D. I just generally don't find it as esthetically pleasing as most 2D representations. It is quite possible to make something look good in 3D. I just happen to think that rendering on the fly as games do aren't up to the level of prerendered stuff (such as Southpark and 3D animated movies) or 2D animations yet. And I still think 2D is more likely to be esthetically pleaseing to me than the prerendered stuff for game purposes.

It's probably the uncanny valley phenomenon.

If I wanted X-com in isometric 3D there is already UFO:extraterrestrials.

PS: thank for that Max, so it was only tile images that got hand painted. Knew something had been hand pinted other than the portraits.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Gorlom

[HWP]

what does it even matter if it is done in 3D if the end result is displayed in 2D?

It matters because it allows the game to work with 3D models and textures instead of sprite sheets. So you can have separate armor and gun models, male/female models, colored soldier heads and hands, etc.

You can have tiles in any orientation, they need much less redoing. Buildings and UFOs can have complex shapes yet every piece of it destructible in several stages. Shooting mechanics can be done better.

[Gorlom]

Your fluid switching between TV and game is confusing and isgiving me a headache.

Also please fix your quoting. there should be a at the end of the bit you are quoting.

And can you please clarify what your point is. what all this advocating the mechanics of 3D over 2D has to do with anything. what are you trying to do? what are you even discussing?

[HWP]

I'm saying that it makes total sense to have possible Xeno's successor - if there is one, and that won't be soon (there's a lot of work till release, then there will be a post-release rush of bug reports and need for post-release patching) - use a 3D engine.

Hand retouching can make pre-rendered tiles look a bit nicer, but a lot of that effect can be replicated with shaders. Which, by 2016, the closest possible date for any successor, just about any computer will be able to handle with ease. Using non-perspective rendering will keep the current look with identically sized tiles.

Gameplay and modding flexibility can be improved so much with a 3D engine that it's well worth whatever little loss of visual quality may occur.

[Gorlom]

I'm saying that it makes total sense to have possible Xeno's successor - if there is one, and that won't be soon (there's a lot of work till release, then there will be a post-release rush of bug reports and need for post-release patching) - use a 3D engine.

Hand retouching can make pre-rendered tiles look a bit nicer, but a lot of that effect can be replicated with shaders. Which, by 2016, the closest possible date for any successor, just about any computer will be able to handle with ease. Using non-perspective rendering will keep the current look with identically sized tiles.

Gameplay and modding flexibility can be improved so much with a 3D engine that it's well worth whatever little loss of visual quality may occur.

Fine, but I wouldn't find it as appealing as a 2D representation

[KingBork]

Gotlom: You say that, but the whole point of his post was that it could be done to look the same while still saving a bazillion dollars in time required to create the graphics.

To me the characters in this game are already 3d models. They look like 3d models and thus wouldnt really change with a 3d engine playing them live rather than exporting them to sprite sheets first.

[TrashMan]

It's a preference. same way you prefer to be able to change the name and not just the nickname. I don't find 3D games that appealing if there is not a sufficient point to the 3D ( First person or Third person games and racing games has more point to it than point and click adventures, sidescrollers, RTS or isometric games.)

It is a stupid prefference then.

What logic is there behind it? 3D, if you don't rotate the camera effectively looks exactly like 2D.

The point to 3D is that it makes the process easier, faster and the palyer isn't constrianed to have just one angle (which can sometiems be a pain).

[Chris]

The only thing that would be hard to reproduce for Xenonauts' look in 3D would be the ground tiles, which are hand-painted by our very talented 2d terrain artist. If you go back to the screenshots of how the game looked prior to getting him on board, you'll see how much difference it made. It'd be possible to make his art a texture and apply it to a flat plane for the ground, but that'd look a bit weird in 3D.

And yes, if I were to do it again, I'd have done it in 3D. That said, being limited to 2D did force us to go for this more cartoony style because it was the only way to plausibly have the game not look terrible. I suspect if we had a better engine we would have gone for a more realistic 3D art style instead.

[Gorlom]

Gotlom: You say that, but the whole point of his post was that it could be done to look the same while still saving a bazillion dollars in time required to create the graphics.

To me the characters in this game are already 3d models. They look like 3d models and thus wouldnt really change with a 3d engine playing them live rather than exporting them to sprite sheets first.

He argued against me saying what I preferred. And I disagree that it is the same thing. Theoretically it is the same thing, but lighting works differently with sprites and 3D. Most of the time 3d models shine and sparkle because everyone of us is thinking "ooh shiny". Tell me I'm wrong about that! go ahead! Tell me that sprites reflect light sources the same ways 3D models do.

Tell me XCOM:EU would have used those oversized supersoakers as weapons if they were sprite based. Yes, I'm really arguing that character design is affected by the method used to display units. I'm assuming the art style differs as well.

and btw KingBork that is a new way to misspell my name. I haven't seen that one before.

I probably should because r and t are so close to each other on the keyboard but I don't think I have. not without something else too like the second o turning into an a.

Bah. I was trying for a sarcastic jovial tone, but it still comes off as angry... I threw in some smilies in the post and hope it help. Don't think it did that much though

Please try to read it without thinking 'm angry at anyone or anything, thank you

It is a stupid prefference then.

Oh since I disagree with you it must be stupid. Really? I thought we tried to be above calling others or their opinion stupid if we disagreed on this forum. I'm disappointed in you trashman. I ignored the first one because I thought it was a one time thing but you keep iterating that word.

The only thing that would be hard to reproduce for Xenonauts' look in 3D would be the ground tiles, which are hand-painted by our very talented 2d terrain artist. If you go back to the screenshots of how the game looked prior to getting him on board, you'll see how much difference it made. It'd be possible to make his art a texture and apply it to a flat plane for the ground, but that'd look a bit weird in 3D.

And yes, if I were to do it again, I'd have done it in 3D. That said, being limited to 2D did force us to go for this more cartoony style because it was the only way to plausibly have the game not look terrible. I suspect if we had a better engine we would have gone for a more realistic 3D art style instead.

which I would not have found as esthetically pleasing. Therefor I'm happy that they went with the 2D approach.

I think Chris pretty much has made my point obvious for everyone to see.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Gorlom

[XenoMask]

Why do xcom fans want to make realistic xcom fan game(another fan game UFO: Alien Invasion also has "Realistic military" look for soldiers in beginning..) anyway when original was cartoony? D:< Sprites for the win!

[Egocentricion]

Isn't this too early to talk about an expansion overall?

[XenoMask]

It is but don't say that or you get reply like I got when I complained about someone asking about sequel before game is released

[TrashMan]

Oh since I disagree with you it must be stupid. Really?

If you keep equating the display technique with art design? Yes.

Because you can use practicly any art design in both 2D and 3D.

In other words, the only reason why XCOM: EU had oversized super-soakers or shiny reflections because someone in the design/art deparment decided it look good that way.

3D can look as cartoony or as real as you make it. Same goes for 2D.

[Egocentricion]

Well people shouldn't get me wrong, i hope this game's and company's longevity will be huge but thinking about an expansion when this game is in alpha is a bit far stretched

[HWP]

Why do xcom fans want to make realistic xcom fan game anyway when original was cartoony?

Huh? What was cartoony about it?

Not photorealism, but the game was surely going for a realistic look, as far as its time period and technology go.

[Egocentricion]

Huh? What was cartoony about it?

Not photorealism, but the game was surely going for a realistic look, as far as its time period and technology go.

The new generation of players aren't used to the low colour variety of old games, that's why they picture it as cartoony, while it was not quite cartoony for the 90's, the graphics are a bit outdated for today's standards.

Not a thing everyone comprehends today.

[XenoMask]

@HWP: Umm, you did see intro right? Cheesy tone of it and ending? Flattops which looks like guile hair? Ghost buster jumpsuits? Purple men in green leotards? Greys? Mysterious cloak aliens? Snakemen? Xenomorph with smile? Alien brain with multiple eyes and goofy big NO moment with its monitor when its shot in ending slideshow? Miniguns and big ass canons and rocket launchers? Skin tight muscle suit armor? Mini flying saucer scout? Silly goofy looking purple caped aliens with stomach open and having metallic gravity dwelling ball there? Multi armed mutant humans on game over screen?

Are you sure that we played same game? Fricking box advertised it as having "Manga graphics"(even though style looks more like something out of graphic novel/comics).

@Egocentricion: Besides that remark being condescending its also not true I've seen much more realistic sprite games than original XCOM. Heck, even Apocalypse is less cartoony and it has retro future aesthetics! Original Fallout doesn't look cartoonish, it looks stylized.

Edited October 18, 2012 by XenoMask

[HWP]

Well, the graphics in UFO are far outdated.

Relatively high color saturation was a product of the times. The subtle play of undertones that works in 1920x1080x24-bit is quickly lost in 640x480x8-bit. There wasn't enough spatial resolution to resolve fine detail.

Another factor is that games were played on CRT screens, which have deeper blacks, lower brightness, lower color saturation and higher natural gamma than LCD displays. I notice that many people today run their LCD in graphics mode all the time, adding to oversaturation. Colors look different on CRT, much less standing out than on LCD.

[Chris]

Gorlom, whether your aesthetic sensibilities are worth my sanity is another matter entirely

[HWP]

@HWP: Umm, you did see intro right? Cheesy tone of it and ending?

Ehr, it's about an order of magnitude less cheesy than EU's.

Flattops which looks like guile hair? Ghost buster jumpsuits? Purple men in green leotards? Greys? Mysterious cloak aliens? Snakemen? Xenomorph with smile?

What do you expect the aliens to be, straight from star trek, or that's cartoonish too, perhaps a product of long biological research?

You're picking on borrowing from ufology lore, but Deus Ex is based on conspiracy theories, so unless you consider it cartoonish too, what's left... hairstyles?

At least they are not wearing plastic gundam cosplay suits, don't hold guns that look like they're 2" in caliber, and the aliens just shoot your guys, not "scarily" pound their chests.

[Chris]

But yes, the original is quite cartoony. As people have pointed out, you only need to look at the fact the Floaters are bright purple and wear *capes* to realise that. They're like rubbish, brightly-coloured vampires!

[XenoMask]

Yeah, Star Trek's aliens are silly too, whats with majority of them being humans with rubber foreheads if even that(wasn't there space hippies?) And you consider original's intro to be less cheesy than new game?

....They are both about same level of cartoony(just style of cartoon from different eras, compare old GI Joe to GI Joe cartoons from 21th century), though new game's cheesiness is b action movie cheesy while original is GI Joe cheesy if GI Joe had casualties.

Trust me, you are bit biased here I don't really blame you since I'm biased towards Apocalypse, but still people tend to remember things from their childhood in rose tinted way, or in this case really gritty way. Game does have tone of horror, but its aesthetically very cheesy. Its not realistic, its cartoony and yes it still can be bloody and tense in horror way despite being cartoony. I can understand that if you have played game as very young it does have struck out as "non cartoony" because of its atmosphere, but that doesn't change facts about its aesthetics.

Edited October 18, 2012 by XenoMask

[Gorlom]

If you keep equating the display technique with art design? Yes.

Because you can use practicly any art design in both 2D and 3D.

In other words, the only reason why XCOM: EU had oversized super-soakers or shiny reflections because someone in the design/art deparment decided it look good that way.

3D can look as cartoony or as real as you make it. Same goes for 2D.

Sure. On paper. but it never does look like that if you generalize what 3D and 2D looks like.

People will change the art style depending on the display technique, therefor I can have a preference.

In other words, the only reason why XCOM: EU had oversized super-soakers or shiny reflections because someone in the design/art deparment decided it look good that way.

Assuming that what I consider to be buttugly reflections isn't uncanny valley because of technical limitations... Technical limitations that prevents sprite based graphics to use those ugly things all together.

Oh, what do you know? I listed something that differs because of the display technique and not just art design.

You are free to disagree with me but at least be civil about it and stop calling it stupid if you can't understand what I'm talking about.

Gorlom, whether your aesthetic sensibilities are worth my sanity is another matter entirely

Aye, it is. I've never said that 2D is a better approach. Only that I (generally) prefer the end result.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Gorlom

[HWP]

But yes, the original is quite cartoony. As people have pointed out, you only need to look at the fact the Floaters are bright purple and wear *capes* to realise that. They're like rubbish, brightly-coloured vampires!

That's campy, not cartoonish.

That is, they look like campy vampires, but they don't look like vampire-shaped plastic toys. In EU some aliens seem to be deliberately made to resemble toy figurines.

but still people tend to remember things from their childhood in rose tinted way, or in this case really gritty way. I can understand that if you have played game as very young it does have struck out as "non cartoony" because of its atmosphere, but that doesn't change facts about its aesthetics.

My first play through UFO was in college. My last run was in 2008.

Employing a lot more saturated colors than today was common in almost everything done in the 1990s. I think the trend only ended with Quake and then golden era RPGs.

And remember Quake? That's what it looked like (for people who haven't played: like the inside of a sewage pipe) when you tried to render in realistic color gamut with mid-1990s technology.

That was in 1995. The golden standard was Duke Nukem 3D.

Today is 2012. We have Skyrim, Human Revolution, Ass Effect, Heavy Rain, Dirt 3, and IDK how many more games with decent graphics. Photorealism is the norm today.