Print

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

[Idiom]

Could we have some thoughts on how to properly represent diagonal paths?

The rotated cavalier has my vote over anything else so far.
---

That's giving me flashbacks of the SNES days. We need a "nostalgia" tile set and character set in that style when isometric is implemented.

[Mel_Vixen]

The rotated cavalier looks nice. Any idea how different levels of water would look?

[Mike Mayday]

As for the  Mayhaps some more common joined objects, like the Trade Depot, common bedroom designs, and a dining hall.

I tried building up on the previous one, but got carried away and included some wishful thinking:
cabinets aligning themselves to nearby walls
chairs aligning themselves to nearby tables
doors, stairs and some tables taking more than one tile



I will consider working on a mockup with actual textured walls later.
Also, since I've butchered the beautiful Ultima sprites when rotating them, here's the original.

SURPRISINGLY ENOUGH Ultima 7 uses the exact same wall size as I was planning for this tileset- rotated 32x32px. So if we chose not to rotate the Z-axis back to vertical, we would be able to just use the graphics directly from Ultima 7!

[Footkerchief]

I know you said it was wishful thinking, but doesn't tile bleedover destroy all the advantages of cavalier anyway?  If you're going to do sprite layering then you might as well just go for a projection that looks good, i.e. isometric.

[Mike Mayday]

Ah, no. The main reason to use cavalier is that THE WALLS don't bleed over to other tiles. I'm perfectly fine with objects doing that.
Take a closer look at the mockup- all the bleedovers are minimal. In isometric, the walls are likely to obstruct the view of entire tiles.

So if there is a good reason to let the artist outside the tile- I think it should be possible.

[Footkerchief]

Oh, you like cavalier because nothing gets hidden.  Hm.  That is a legitimate concern, but at the end of the day you're using sprite layering for a topdown display, which means a total engine rewrite with no clear increase in visual clarity (I personally think it looks worse and more confusing than simple high-res tiles, with the Z-disconnects etc), plus a whole bunch of headaches from tile-centric concepts like engravings, which don't translate well to any 3D or pseudo-3D projection.

[Tormy]

Oh, you like cavalier because nothing gets hidden.  Hm.  That is a legitimate concern, but at the end of the day you're using sprite layering for a topdown display, which means a total engine rewrite with no clear increase in visual clarity (I personally think it looks worse and more confusing than simple high-res tiles, with the Z-disconnects etc), plus a whole bunch of headaches from tile-centric concepts like engravings, which don't translate well to any 3D or pseudo-3D projection.

Well engravings will be problematic, if the iso view won't be rotatable.

Question to Mike: Implementing a [rotatable] iso view means full engine rewrite?

[Granite26]

Put engravings on top of the tile?

[i are not good with compu]

Re:rotated cavalier
Would it be possible, in this view, to extend the tiles to the edge of the 'screen', even though it means using half-tiles at the edges?  Obviously this could be done in graphic representation, but would rendering the game itself that way be problematic? 

Of course, I could be the only one who hates the diamond view ;p

[Mike Mayday]

which means a total engine rewrite

...which is coming anyway...

with no clear increase in visual clarity (I personally think it looks worse and more confusing than simple high-res tiles, with the Z-disconnects etc).

Ah, yeah- I'm really biased cause I've spent a large part of my childhood playing U7 so I'm just used to it. I guess it's personal preference all in all.
uhhh... and what're Z-disconnects?

plus a whole bunch of headaches from tile-centric concepts like engravings, which don't translate well to any 3D or pseudo-3D projection.

In this case we could resort to the horrid thing that is bicubic filtering (and rotation and scaling). But if you can think of any other tile-centric problems please mention them, some might be harder to fix.

Tormy: again, it's coming anyway.

I are: yes, these are just small mockups of a screen-slice.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Very interesting, you are starting to win me over to this projection method.  I'd recommend you make additional mock ups of that same scene from the other 3 directions to get a feel for how well rotation will allow objects and if their are perhaps unforeseen problems with things being obscured.

Currently the way the game handle engravings is quite poor.  I've heard theories that DF remembers from what direction engravings/smoothed are made but it can not display it nor would it seem can you have both sides of a wall modified.  Something needs to be done to allow the 'facet' between two tiles to hold things be they engravings, blood splatters, candle holders, goblin skull trophies or frescoes.  Only then can they be represented well in a 3D projections.  Designations for engraving things would act on all the wall tiles inside or in contact with the designation so by designating inside the open space of a room you get an interior side engraving, designating in the hall gets the exterior side engraved.  It might be necessary to have 'only floor' and 'only wall' options for engraving and smoothing so you can do the independently and objects that need to be embedded in walls like candle holders, frescoes and trophies can use wads to resolve ambiguity.

[Mikademus]

at the end of the day you're using sprite layering for a topdown display, which means a total engine rewrite with no clear increase in visual clarity

Agree with this assessment. If you say a total engine rewrite is coming that's one thing, but as it is every thing "should" occupy one tile which also would have the benefit of you not having to create rotated tiles. Your adjusted cavalier is really nice enough as it is, so start with that and add more features as they're enabled in the game. If a bookshelf hugs the wall now I'll be confused why the dwarf can't occupy that tile too.

As for the aesthetics of placing a cupboard smack in the middle of a tile, I dunno, perhaps dwarves suck at interior decoration or something...

[Mike Mayday]

Hey, but dwarves CAN occupy the same tile as a cabinet. This is the exact reason I made them this way.

As for rotating, it's a GIANT "meh". All you need is two pics of chairs. The rest can be done with flipping vertically.

[Impaler[WrG]]

I just realized your still going to have obscuring problems if you allow viewing of objects on lower levels.  Say for example you have a two story tall dinning hall surrounded by walls on all sides.  You could see the two rows of wall in the back and one row in the front but you would have one row of floor 'under' that being concealed.  Theirs really no way to stop that, you projection at least prevents obscuring when your viewing one level which is a marked improvement over Isometric and will handle 90+% of normal game play.

[Mike Mayday]

That's a given. When you want to focus on a room, you strip all the layers above it's floor level.
Also, to all the other bleedover naysayers, let me remind you that at this setting I get to work with a 23x23 pixel square. That is REALLY not enough