Legend Zero Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 http://artbypapercut.com/A few game artists have made a couple of volumes of books which are available for free. Haven't looked at them yet, but seem interesting enough.Participating company artist include Naughty Dog, Blizzard, and Ubisoft. If that matters.http://kotaku.com/game-artists-will-show-you-how-to-be-a-game-artist-1511081466Discuss the fact they are doing this for free because they are frustrated at not having enough help books available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cin Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I think it's a good idea to encourage people to go into the field, because they can pick up little tips to improve their own work, it also gives you alot more respect for the discipline given the complex nature of some video game design. So having professionals, that people have seen the work of, providing the advice makes it more useful. I do enjoy rough sketches and do wonder how much work goes into making them into the final design. (I remember seeing rough sketches for Dragonfable (a Flash game) especially by Tomix and wondering how much work goes to get the whole thing to work.) It is a little sad that there isn't more guides out there though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I prefer sprite work to 3D renders. =\With computers changing and evolving, what was good this year would look like crap 4-5 years from now. Sprites always look good though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I'm totally glad for this. I'm massively into concept art, and tried my hand at game art incredibly briefly (it's tough), but obviously one of the issues is that art is often really exclusive as an industry. Art schools are expensive, and training yourself can take years. I'm usually buying ImagineFX magazines, but they're expensive, and this? Great on them, because this really does help lift the lid on a hard industry.Obviously, the fact that these are all industry experts (Naughty Dog's concept artists, I think, are some of the best in the business) is a big bonus.I prefer sprite work to 3D renders. =\With computers changing and evolving, what was good this year would look like crap 4-5 years from now. Sprites always look good though.Sprites technically do look crap, if we're gonna go by time. We just treat all pixel art as cool because we have fond memories of computer and console games, and the sprite work of those games. The only reason the style is even still popular is just because we like retro games. Spriting definitely had the same issues as 3D rendering; isometric spriting took a while to develop, but if no-one had done the early work on spriting, the style wouldn't be as fleshed out as it is now. We just have to wait a few years for 3D renders: I'm fairly sure the technology is close to reaching a peak.I think it's a good idea to encourage people to go into the field, because they can pick up little tips to improve their own work, it also gives you alot more respect for the discipline given the complex nature of some video game design. So having professionals, that people have seen the work of, providing the advice makes it more useful.I do enjoy rough sketches and do wonder how much work goes into making them into the final design. (I remember seeing rough sketches for Dragonfable (a Flash game) especially by Tomix and wondering how much work goes to get the whole thing to work.)It is a little sad that there isn't more guides out there though.The character design process can take massively varying amounts of time. DragonFable and its ilk probably are pumping out characters quite quickly: lots of focus sessions over a month to flesh out some characters. Other games can take years to finalise characters. The game Journey spent pretty much the entirety of its three year development finalising the main character. Potentially more for big, big productions.To see more guides like this is perhaps too hopeful. Some artists in the industry do tutoring for money, but free guides? It's a downright rarity. Notice that only when you get lots and lots of companies to collaborate to make a guide do you even have enough people to split work between. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Sprites technically do look crapUm, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I just downloaded the first one and see it is 300 pages. I'm not sleeping tonight. @.@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 uh, some of us do prefer 2D from 3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Sprites technically do look crap, if we're gonna go by time. We just treat all pixel art as cool because we have fond memories of computer and console games, and the sprite work of those games. The only reason the style is even still popular is just because we like retro games. Spriting definitely had the same issues as 3D rendering; isometric spriting took a while to develop, but if no-one had done the early work on spriting, the style wouldn't be as fleshed out as it is now. We just have to wait a few years for 3D renders: I'm fairly sure the technology is close to reaching a peak. Yeah no. It's not even sprites, it's just simple graphics. Graphics and textures that try to show more detail than current technology can handle with look like absolute ass 10 years from now. Compare: http://images.nintendolife.com/screenshots/13065/large.jpg to http://static.trustedreviews.com/94/17e54a/5cf2/2140-2.jpg I'm not saying realistic graphics look bad, but that's exactly what I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Sprites as a phenomenon isn't exactly some miracle of time, we don't (as a culture of gamers) see it as 'crap' because we've decided to turn a graphical restriction into an art form.It took almost 20 years to get from the simplest spriting of Pong, to anything akin to what modern sprite artists do (probably circa Final Fantasy VI) into a game engine. The 3D graphics have only really been in development for about 10 years. Wait another ten years, and it'll reach the peak that spriting has reached with its development.I think spriting's a vital and great style, so I'm certainly not hating on it, but spriting only looks so 'timeless' because it's been through 20 years of development. 3D graphic engines haven't been through this development yet.Besides, to be honest, 3D graphic engines are almost totally unrelated to this topic. The topic's about concept and brand art, not about the game engine. If we're talking about actual 3D art, well, the technology is pretty much already at a peak:[spoiler=seriously not photos][/spoiler]It's just a matter of how to make game consoles better, not the art. Different topic. This topic has literally nothing to do with actual game consoles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 It took almost 20 years to get from the simplest spriting of Pong, to anything akin to what modern sprite artists do (probably circa Final Fantasy VI) into a game engine.>"Modern Sprite artists">Talking about a game from 20 years agoYou can't seriously be this stupid can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airride Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 >"Modern Sprite artists" >Talking about a game from 20 years ago You can't seriously be this stupid can you? to anything akin to what modern sprite artists do (probably circa Final Fantasy VI) into a game engine. Italicized the main part. He's saying that that's when we started to get things that looks like what we do now. For me, it really depends on what the art style is for 3D'ing stuff. If it's realistic-ish, then I'm fine with it, but it feels weird on more cartoon-ish or Anime-ish styled art, personally. I know some might disagree, but I feel those types of games should stick to Sprites/2D art, while things aiming for more realistic or whatever look are fine in 3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 >"Modern Sprite artists" >Talking about a game from 20 years ago You can't seriously be this stupid can you?It's fairly obvious what I mean to say. Spriting within video games has not had a great deal of development for about 20 years. It's hit its metaphorical ceiling. We hit that ceiling around the time Final Fantasy VI came out. 3D graphics within video games have not yet hit that ceiling. Both statistics are irrelevant, because the topic isn't about in-game graphics. If we're taking sprinting and 3D graphics as styles, since the art we're talking about won't actually be animated into a game, both art forms are pretty much fully developed. 3D art won't 'look crap in 10 years' when the technology is almost perfect right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 See, you're looking at this like a robot, purely from a technological standpoint. Yes, 3D art is more advanced. I honestly don't give a toss. This is art, regardless of whether you're looking at as standalone visual art or its application in games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 My points seem to be lost in my posts. Total misunderstanding there, so maybe I should just sum it up in bullet points. Of all people, I'm the least likely to want to take art from a robotic perspective.This topic is not about game graphics. It's about game art. Different. In-game and out-game, respectively."With computers changing and evolving, what was good this year would look like crap 4-5 years from now. Sprites always look good though." - PikaI'm saying that this statement is false, because we're talking about art, not graphics here. 3D art is pretty much almost a perfected artform now. Spriting is pretty much almost a perfected artform now.3D graphics on the other hand is still in progress. Irrelevant to the topic. I never used 3D art's more advanced method as an argument point. Besides, how advanced an artform is also totally irrelevant.I enjoy both styles of art, and I'd probably say that I like pixel art better just for its kitsch charm. I mean, that can't have been that confusing to bring across. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Sprites technically do look crap, if we're gonna go by time. We just treat all pixel art as cool because we have fond memories of computer and console games, and the sprite work of those games. The only reason the style is even still popular is just because we like retro games. This would be why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 This would be why.In the context of game graphics, since Pika was talking about graphics. Probably badly worded, but, you know, the general point was there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.