glob2-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [glob2-devel] Is this project dead?


From: Stéphane Magnenat
Subject: Re: [glob2-devel] Is this project dead?
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 16:59:57 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2

Hi,

I agree with your analysis overall, I specially like the idea that a building is progressively improved by going through the different phases. I also like the idea of artistic curved wood architecture for the first level.

Regarding saturation and visibility, I also agree with you. Your new water on https://globulation2.org/wiki/WinterDryad's_artwork is better than the old one, as are the grass and the sand.

As for building changing sizes over levels, it was by design, the idea was to force players to have long-term thinking if they want to be efficient. But it is indeed a bit weird so we can ditch that. However, it would probably be good to think more in details how it would affect gameplay before doing so. One thing we might want to consider if we do this, is whether we want buildings to evolve into different paths, for example a barracks could be evolved to train different types of units (melee warriors, range warriors) with different visual designs. But of course it opens the big question of the lack of diversity in strategies in Glob2, that should probably be tackled for itself.

Regarding bars, what do you mean proportional? Currently a bar of length N represents N * k elements, with k being proportional to the width, respectively the height of the bar for vertical, respectively horizontal bars.

Probably in general it would be good to explore ideas through some visual mockups before changing the code.

Concretely, how to progress? This thread is already far too long ;-)

cheers,

Stéphane

On 28.12.19 16:43, address@hidden wrote:
Well, from this point of view: https://globulation2.org/wiki/WinterDryad's_artwork I'd say that I would just scrap those image and remake all of them (I know I did them, but times change...)^^ Reason: they look too realistic, unsaturated and gritty. They wont really fit it. Same goes for the steampunk tower.

So...
- Globules are made of gelatinous material, they change color in
function of the team, the swarm (which should probably be called the
hive) is made of the same material, and spawns globules,
- Vegetation is colorful and candy-like,
- Terrain is basic color a bit over-saturated.

I think that we should pay a lot of attention on colors first and in which part of the interface and game we want to use them for differentiating units, buildings and so on. (Just a note, this is the right moment to think about a colorblind alternative for the interface. Since the need of using many colors, we can't adapt a single color scheme to all the three different kind of color blindness. The main problem is to know which player a unit or building belongs to. A small readable number or symbol, for example, overlayed in the corner of the sprite of the unit should suffice. I don't mean that we "have" to do this, but it would be cool to have a native system that allows these people to enjoy the game too.)

- Globules are made of gelatinous material
We should really go for different globule shape for each functional unit. Now builders and warriors have the same shape, just different size. We should clearly differentiate them.

- Buildings of tier 1 are made of wood and earth,
- Buildings of tier 2 are made of stone,
- Buildings of tier 3 are made of metal,

I'd remove earth from the first one and go for some wood architecture.
If you look on google for "artistic curved wood architecture" you get an idea.
The goo used for sticking pieces together gives the team ownership.
Now, the evolving of the buildings:
We could either use the approach:
It is roughly the same recognizable shape, but once it is made of wood, another it is made of stone and finally made of metal.
or:
the first one is made of wood, then reinforced with stone and in the end metal is added.
I personally like the second approach even if it is more difficult.
We also have the "more or less" problem to chromatically distinguish the 3 types. Considering wood yellowish and stone grey, we have the metal that is usually recognizable in between. On the other hand it blends well among the two, giving a sense of completeness. I would avoid to put grass on stones, cause we already have the green background.

- Vegetation is colorful and candy-like,
This affects the mood of the game. Globules in a candy-like world fight each other in a candy-like way. Would be odd to see them gather candies and then splat each other with an extreme level of gore^^ So, we should go for something funny and mature at the same time. (defining this part is possibly the hardest choice)

- Terrain is basic color a bit over-saturated.
If for basic color you mean to keep it as simple as possible I'm ok with it. Features should highlight more but they shouldn't recur too often. The overall frequency of the graphic of a single tile should also be reduced. Let's say flat, but not too flat. As for the saturation, it should be really a bit, cause otherwise units and resources would not stand out and we also risk to burn players'eyes^^

That said, I think something like a lightly stenciled graphic could also apply. Not completely marked, but just a bit.

If we add shadows they should not be too much blurred and they should also point to the same direction^^ I'd suggest top-right or top-left.

Since the game is squared spaced, we must ensure that interacting units actually touch each other in some way. I remember that there were moment in which warriors didn't seem to attack anything. So, squares must be filled.

Gameplay related problems:
Some buildings were far too large.
The fact that some buildings change size between different tiers... mmm, I never really liked it. We need a better way to represent bars. They should stick all together and be proportional in length. Scattering them all around the buildings just clutters the graphic. They also look odd if they are a single point or larger then the unit itself.
I'd also remove the clouds.

What do you think?

On 2019-12-28 10:57, Stéphane Magnenat wrote:
Hi,
Either 2D or 3D i think that some coherent guidlines for style, theme, colors and so on should be defined. I remember that a steampunk style was proposed, but honestly in the current state it just looks like a mix of everything^^

The current state is indeed a bit of everything, but with an internal
consistency, which is:

- Globules are made of gelatinous material, they change color in
function of the team, the swarm (which should probably be called the
hive) is made of the same material, and spawns globules,
- Buildings of tier 1 are made of wood and earth,
- Buildings of tier 2 are made of stone,
- Buildings of tier 3 are made of metal,
- Vegetation is colorful and candy-like,
- Terrain is basic color a bit over-saturated.

Anyone willing to discuss it?

Yes, I'll be happy to.

cheers,

Stéphane

_______________________________________________
glob2-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel


--
http://stephane.magnenat.net




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]