Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ror6ax]

Tree mock-up. Just wanting to get an impression of what you think.

Sweet baby Jesus I want this so much. Maybe with less 90 degree branches tho

[Starver]

Also, remove block plz. In ASCII you have 1/4 tiles, which break up the jagged outline of the tree tiles by not being completely filled in. I think something like that would do well here too.

After monentarily misidentifying it as a tree(stump[1]) with a multitile tree(stump[1]) to the SSW, without context[2], I realised (or am now mistaken about?) it is a 1x1 tree trunk (slice) surrounded by leaves-and-branches artwork that includes a mini-riser to its NNE and clearly has quarter-unit/etc elements on the fringe that are breaking up the fringes.

And if it's not, well, I return to the excuse of it being in isolation. Can't complain too much about the pixels as put, darned fine art even if we all seem to have differing limits to our at-a-glance understanding.


[2] And agreeing the plan-spread branches need more contrast, they sort of looked like floor-flavour 'roots slughtly exposed out of the ground-cover'. But I feel confident that this is mostly the hacked-out nature of the image that wouldn't be so bad in-game, so...

[1] :p - though, seriously, once I worked out it was a tree-slice I was happier with it as it is, as my brain adjusted to mid-air slices where it couldn't handle ground-level (+ ground height atop) stuff.

[Meph]

We can easily round the edges more. Tarn already added directions for leave edges.

The leaves hide the branches on purpose, since a tree seen from above is probably mostly green. Once winter hits and the leaves are gone you can see all of the wood.

The smaller trunk is a thick branch that also connects to the zlvl above.

I can mock-up a somewhat darkened trunk center, but probably not as much as the example by Putnam.

Technically I could do 45° angles on the corners for branches. But it's hard to get right of straight lines if working on a grid that repeats and has to line up with the next tile.

[Manveru Taurënér]

Looks pretty good overall, though I'd still chime in along the rest arguing a teensy bit more contrast to the branches would be nice, at least to the point of not having to strain the brain to be able to see that they exist at all and aren't just differently colored leaves (representing the 8% of males with some degree of color blindness).

[ror6ax]

I guess what I dislike the most is not the angle but the symmetry of it. A big branch is going three ways - left, straight, right. More natural look would be something where two out of three go into one direction and third in another one. Nature is chaos, order is quite rare.

[voliol]

I guess what I dislike the most is not the angle but the symmetry of it. A big branch is going three ways - left, straight, right. More natural look would be something where two out of three go into one direction and third in another one. Nature is chaos, order is quite rare.

That's an issue with the tree generation already present in "classic" DF, not the graphics
I would also argue that order and geometry are, on the contrary, really common in nature, but I digress.

But these are very nice! Are there any plans of varying the leaves according to tree species, such as different tints or even different leaf textures? Having alders with the same color leaves as birches would irk me.

[ror6ax]

I guess what I dislike the most is not the angle but the symmetry of it. A big branch is going three ways - left, straight, right. More natural look would be something where two out of three go into one direction and third in another one. Nature is chaos, order is quite rare.

That's an issue with the tree generation already present in "classic" DF, not the graphics
I would also argue that order and geometry are, on the contrary, really common in nature, but I digress.

But these are very nice! Are there any plans of varying the leaves according to tree species, such as different tints or even different leaf textures? Having alders with the same color leaves as birches would irk me.

I knew someone would get back at me with counter-examples I probably should have worded it better but this Monday is brutal.
+1 for the different tree species. In terms of gameplay mechanics I would want to see birches from the fruit trees fast.

[Meph]

Are there any plans of varying the leaves according to tree species, such as different tints or even different leaf textures?

From my side: Hell yes! Though I'd base it on RL photography of the bark/leaves, which means that they will come out non-pixelartsy enough for this tileset, just like the walls I did. Probably end up in a private set.

Like this (Looks much better with leaves):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think for the Steam Df set, we do broadleaf, conifer, mushroom, and a few unique ones, like feather, glumprong, palm, saguaro... trees that look very different in RL.

[Cruxador]

Are there any plans of varying the leaves according to tree species, such as different tints or even different leaf textures?

From my side: Hell yes! Though I'd base it on RL photography of the bark/leaves, which means that they will come out non-pixelartsy enough for this tileset, just like the walls I did. Probably end up in a private set.

Like this (Looks much better with leaves):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think for the Steam Df set, we do broadleaf, conifer, mushroom, and a few unique ones, like feather, glumprong, palm, saguaro... trees that look very different in RL.

I'm going to strongly contest what seems to be the underlying premise here; it is most definitely possible to do a good enough job on individual tree species for them to be in the main tileset without basing directly on photos. Trees, like animals, plants, and grasses, are part of what adds color and variety to the game. I'm not saying it definitely needs to be top priority if there's a hurry to get out the minimum functional product (it seems like that's Toady's intent for the initial Steam/itch release, with some further enhancement over whatever period of time fits with however his and Kitfox's contract works) but by no means should representing each species correctly, regardless of the mechanical category of the species, be considered optional for a complete implementation.

I would also argue that order and geometry are, on the contrary, really common in nature, but I digress.

None of these are in any way representative of tree branching. Meph's version already has symmetry in the shapes of the leaves and the trunks, perhaps even slightly excessively so in the latter case. No doubt when he implements the spring flowering version of the leaf sprites, for those where it's relevant, those flowers will be symmetrical as well. I don't remember any trees having shells or crystals on them but I'm sure if I'm misremembering something (It must be many years since I last played in a Good zone, which sounds like where that would apply) he'll presumably do so there as well.

[Rose]

Trees when viewed from the top don't have a lot of branches visible, but these aren't trees from the top, they're a cross section of a tree, and trees don't have a lot of leaves inside the outer shell.

[Cruxador]

Trees when viewed from the top don't have a lot of branches visible, but these aren't trees from the top, they're a cross section of a tree, and trees don't have a lot of leaves inside the outer shell.

This is an issue with tree generation, not the graphical representation thereof. Trees in DF have their foliage distributed homogeneously throughout the area. It also can happen in real life, but usually in orchard trees that have been specifically pruned and trained with this in mind. I wouldn't be surprised if this were to be added when/if Toady adds orchard management in general, instead of just foraging existing trees, but in general Toady doesn't seem that agriculturally oriented (which is consistent both with his background and with general fantasy stereotypes about dwarves) so this kind of thing shouldn't be expected in the foreseeable future. It certainly shouldn't be expected from the graphical update, although the graphics may shine more of a light on imperfections like this.

[Rose]

Trees when viewed from the top don't have a lot of branches visible, but these aren't trees from the top, they're a cross section of a tree, and trees don't have a lot of leaves inside the outer shell.

This is an issue with tree generation, not the graphical representation thereof. Trees in DF have their foliage distributed homogeneously throughout the area. It also can happen in real life, but usually in orchard trees that have been specifically pruned and trained with this in mind. I wouldn't be surprised if this were to be added when/if Toady adds orchard management in general, instead of just foraging existing trees, but in general Toady doesn't seem that agriculturally oriented (which is consistent both with his background and with general fantasy stereotypes about dwarves) so this kind of thing shouldn't be expected in the foreseeable future. It certainly shouldn't be expected from the graphical update, although the graphics may shine more of a light on imperfections like this.

Nope. Trees in DF don't have leaves on the larger inner branches, actually.

[Pillbo]

That tree looks great!  I agree with the contrast statements, and (if it's true that leaves in game aren't all over the inner branches) the leaves sticking to the outside of the tree's 'shell'.

Just a suggestion as far as rounding off the square leaf tiles- Leaves may be a good candidate for spreading beyond their designated tiles a few pixels.  If they could overlap each other without looking weird it may be a good way to make trees feel fuller, less on a grid, and more natural. I think the effect a few z-levels up in a forest might be really nice.

[PatrikLundell]

Trees when viewed from the top don't have a lot of branches visible, but these aren't trees from the top, they're a cross section of a tree, and trees don't have a lot of leaves inside the outer shell.

This is an issue with tree generation, not the graphical representation thereof. Trees in DF have their foliage distributed homogeneously throughout the area. It also can happen in real life, but usually in orchard trees that have been specifically pruned and trained with this in mind. I wouldn't be surprised if this were to be added when/if Toady adds orchard management in general, instead of just foraging existing trees, but in general Toady doesn't seem that agriculturally oriented (which is consistent both with his background and with general fantasy stereotypes about dwarves) so this kind of thing shouldn't be expected in the foreseeable future. It certainly shouldn't be expected from the graphical update, although the graphics may shine more of a light on imperfections like this.

Well, if I recall correctly, Toady has said his parents were some version of gardeners, and that he'll get back to a proper implementation of soil nutrients, proper seasons, weather effects, fertilization, blights, etc. eventually. It's possible with a starting scenarios tangent on this, but otherwise it's likely in the grey mist of "much later". The map rewrite may change the tree structure as well, depending on how well the current trees will fit with the new map structure, but it's more likely the map structure is made to allow for later adjustments of its parts.

My understanding of the graphics strategy in general is to firstly ensure all parts reach a minimum acceptable level for the Premium release (which makes a lot of sense), but it would be odd if the artists were put on hold from then on until after the release (as it has been said work is intended to continue), so I'd expect the time after the minimum level has been reached to be spent on gradual refinement, possibly with the last of these not making it into the initial Premium release because they're still uneven at that point.

[Meph]

Just a suggestion as far as rounding off the square leaf tiles- Leaves may be a good candidate for spreading beyond their designated tiles a few pixels.  If they could overlap each other without looking weird it may be a good way to make trees feel fuller, less on a grid, and more natural. I think the effect a few z-levels up in a forest might be really nice.

We are going the opposite way, with crown shyness.

Good point Rose, though I'd still like to use some greenery to cover some of the branches. They are quite overwhelming in large forests, it's a big wall of brown.

Cruxador, yeah, sure we can do barks in pixelart, it just takes longer. Not high priority enough to actually do it atm.