Well, it's been a highly eventful year for me, but I feel like my work doesn't show it. As I've learned a lot and grown in my knowledge of the 3D arts, I've gotten a little overwhelmed with what I've learned. And rightfully so, when you consider what I've started with. I basically taught myself as much 3D as I could, and sought help from peers when I got stuck. Everyone should be so lucky. Before this year I knew how to model and make materials and textures, how to rig vehicles and humans to work in an interactive environment, and stuff like that. This year, I've learned how to normal map, create occular occlusion maps. I've learned about paralax mapping, quite a few modeling shortcuts, and a number of other things.
On top of that, I've been updating my GI Joe models, and before I could even finish, it is time to update again. I shoulda started them hi-poly. Actually, it is just as much of a proportion and design update that the GI Joe stuff needs, as I find exact specifications of these vehicles. So this project has a deep impact on my feeling like I've gotten nothing accomplished. I've been working on the GI Joe vehicles and characters since 2004, and here it is about to be 2008. None of them are finished to a point of satisfaction for me. I have in mind what I want but I can't produce it fast enough. I want to delegate the work out to people, but I am afraid that they won't be able to show me what I am looking for. Colin is one of the few people who understand what I'm trying to do, but now his time is spoken for.
Now I have a contact in the Animation Industry who saw my GI Joe vehicles online. He contacted me to possibly do some work for them. But when I look at his concept art, as cool as it is, I don't see how my vehicles would fit into that picture. I'm excited about doing the work, but I wonder if I would be putting all my previous efforts in the toilet. I really, really, strongly believe that doing GI Joe my way is THE BEST THING for the series. Not to sound prideful, boastful, or arrogant, but it is well thought out. You see... I am basing my ideas off of the most pivotal, successful designs in the GI Joe line-up. I don't think it's very cool to come up with a new generic idea and slap on a well known name that already has its own story line and history.
Before I go off on a Star Wars tangent in an attempt to illustrate my point. I'll stop right here.
I guess things just seemed to have moved along a lot faster with the less I knew. I pumped out nine fully-working game vehicles for a UT2004 mod in three months back in 2004. This year I have nearly finished three vehicles for BF2. I hope 2008 is a lot more productive.
Read More...
Summary only...
Holy crap, I'm updating! I've been going through a lot of stuff, so I'm trying to keep from thinking too much about stuff. But Ive graduated, I'm job hunting, and I'm also playing A LOT of Team Fortress 2! The game is amazing! I'm going to do some mapping for it to add to my portfolio, as Hammer isn't too hard to work with and it would be fun to do some cartoony props for the environment. Anyway, add me to your steam list, CuddlyColin's the name, I'll shoot you in the face then wave at you! And you'll like it, of yes...you well.
Read More...
Summary only...
New blogger Scot Gilmore has posted his first blog, and hopefully not his last! If you or anyone you know is interested in bitching about video games, their production, or ANYTHING about the industry really, let me know! I'm definitely not adverse to having an amateur staff of angry people.
Read More...
Summary only...
When a game server has to create a long list of "do's and do not's" does it reflect poorly on the server admins and community, or the game itself?
Let's face it, there are always going to be people who try to ruin a game experience for everyone, creating a ridiculous unbalance and strategic advantage for themselves and people who are in their graces. I'm not talking so much about hackers, but more about hack abusers - asshats who get their hands on a hack that someone else created, for the sake of having a few fleeting moments of ill-gained, empty-felt power at the expensive of other people trying to have a legitimately enjoyable time. Yawn and Boooo. Almost any genre that involves online competition suffers from the likes of such people, and almost all gamers have at one point succumb to the temptations of having that power. In particular, it is most irritating in the first-person-shooter games, where there is plenty of emphasis on actually developing a skill to play successfully.
On the flip-side of that coin are the stiflers. The over-authoritative server administrators who create, in perhaps an effort to quell the hackers, more rules than that which were included with the game. They box people in to an extremely restrictive environment based on merely the complaints of people who are unable to cope with people who use the default characteristics of a game in a creative way to their advantage. I'm not talking about unrealistic exploits like hiding in non-geometry buildings and shooting outwards so that no one can find you or shoot back. I'm talking about scenarios where a person gains a significantly overlooked advantage by doing feasible actions that make sense in a real setting. Case-and-point: Pod-surfing to a rooftop in Battlefield 2142. It makes sense to be able to do it in the BF2142 setting, but as a game it creates a very strong advantage to those who abuse the ability. In my opinion, instead of eliminating the ability to do it, there should be more available countermeasures to such tactics.
Although the developers do not fix the problem, many servers prohibit what they deem to be exploits. In some cases, their opinion of an exploit is irrational. Being a creative thinker myself, over-prohibiting is just as annoying as dealing with the hack abusers, if not more so. The real problem here is that these rules are not usually enforced until they are being broken by someone on the opposing team of the admins and server members. It would be really a non-issue if there were more servers to choose from, with more flexibility for tactically thinking people.
Epic's Unreal Tournament 2004 had a very big following (still does), and even though there was more liberty to cheat (they actually teach people how to make their own content for the game), people just didn't abuse that privilege too often. If you wanted to, you could find a server that allowed people to pit their cheats against each other, or you could find a server where the people just want to play the default game without worrying about someone messing up the experience - no problems. Because there was an outlet for either of these types of gaming fun, the two rarely collided. It was a masterstroke on Epic's part.
The lesson learned is to create a solid enough game, but don't inhibit others in their need to be creative.
Read More...
Summary only...
Here's another one the few readers from school are sick of hearing, so read on at your own discression.
Overdeveloping things in a video game (or anything for that matter) bugs the shit out of me! It's hard to come up with some good examples at the moment, as games are getting a lot better at it I think. The concept is, if you're ever watching a movie, or a t.v. show or playing a video game, and you see something that combines to things to make something useless or makes something really cool but it's obvious that it wouldn't work or defeats the purpose of the orginal design. No? You don't? Well, I guess it's just me that says "bullshit!". I suppose it's probably annoying that I can't just enjoy a good piece of fiction, huh?
If it is a good piece of fiction, there are obviously things I can over look. I'm not saying I pick at EVERYTHING, but it's just over the top, "what the fuck where they thinking?" that bugs me. Steam punk is a good example of a setting that this is easy to do in. When ever I doodle things, I try to think about functionality. What would someone slap together to make it work better? When thinking about ways to redesign a German tank from WW2, I played around with all the far fetched sci-fi ideas. Spider legs, chicken legs, etc. and it came to my attention that everything you did to a tiger tank to make it "cool" like that (because a tiger tank with spider legs WOULD be cool looking) only makes the core design weaker, easier to defeat, or simply doesn't do anything extra. This is the sort of thing that bugs me. I can see adding more armor to the tank, bigger treads, flame throwers, rocket launchers, that sort of thing, but a WW2 tank mech, fighting another tank would be toast.
Maybe that's too geeky of me to be thinking. Maybe I'm taking it all to seriously, but why not? Why not think seriously about the things you shove into a game? I pay $50, I suspend my disbelief and then you give me a shotgun that fires howitzer shells or some other crazy shit that you put in there, that looks cool, that might even function well for the game play (this helps me ignore it, despite what you might think) but just hasn't been planned out well. Even if you did do something completely crazy and off the wall, how hard is it to explain it, plan it out and make the object look like it would be capable of doing what you say it will.
It all comes back to the "Why are we using revolvers in the future?" question about BF2142. It does look pretty darn cool...but it doesn't make any sense.
I know this is a week argument, again all you have to say is "it's fiction, deal with it" or "everybody does it, deal with it", but what ever, it's content! It's annoyed, over analytical bullshit, but it's my bullshit! Despite it all, I can enjoy things that don't adhere to this rule, I just think it makes a game better when you think about every little detail, breathe life into it and populate it with things that make sense!
-C.G.
Read More...
Summary only...
Completely unrelated, and more of a guilty apology than an article, but I know I complain a lot, and I mean a lot, but I hope it's understood that it's not something that prevents me from getting a job done. I don't feel like my complaints are invalid, such as with my cover letter, and it may be over the top, but it's just an opinion, it's not going to stop me from making a bullshit, suck up cover letter, it's just something I'm annoyed about (and also have a hard time doing, so it's easy to complain about). I'd also imagine that you could easily say "but that's just the way it is" to anything I complain about, but why? Why leave it at that? If you stepped on a nail everyday since the beginning of your life that's sticking out of your carpet, would you just get used to it? I'm not saying anything I write actually changes anything, that's not the reason I write. The reason I post all this crap is to just get it out of me. Now that my rant about the cover letter is out, you wont here me mention it at school again. I've got what I want to say out, uninterrupted, and it feels good. That's all. If you don't like it, stop reading =P
C.G.
Read More...
Summary only...
So here I am, tackling a giant. The game alone is quite huge in content and digital space, but that pales in comparison to the huge amount of words and opinions I have on the experience that wrapping my written words around them seems like a daunting task. I'll give it a try though.
Yes, Grand Theft Auto is a visceral, potentially mindless, gun toting romp through an almost uncanny representation of a real life city, but what game isn't? Why would you deny yourself the potential fun of doing it again, in a new setting, with new toys and supper shmexy graphics? There's nothing to complain about taking a solid game design and changing the local, it's nothing "innovative" or "new" in the sense of game play, but it's FUN and there's nothing wrong with that in my books. Besides only observing that games from the same series have the same mechanics (I dunno if you've noticed, but all the Call of Dutys are just FPS, and until recently haven't even attempted to change their setting), there are different stories and characters to discover.
People seem to forget about GTA's increasingly deep storylines, granted it's only been occurring for 2 iterations, as I wouldn't consider GTA 3's story very deep, but the way San Andreas really plays with emotion and character development takes the series to a whole new place, advancing it beyond the "sand box slaughter fest" and, for me creating an almost action adventure experience.
All in all though, the story telling remained interesting and the characters, when not bugging you via cellphone, were quite fleshed out and made for a compelling single player experience. Despite having finished the major plot points, there's still a lot of activity that's improved greatly from previous post story encounters, a lot of which involved driving fast and shooting lots of baddies which, with new mechanics has never been...funner? funnest? More fun! The gun play mechanics are now solid and hunting down enemies with a rifles and shotguns is now fun, where as in previous GTAs it's been quite a chore. The driving takes a little getting used to, but in the long run gives a more entertaining and "realistic" experience when sliding around corners and spinning out in tense chases. These minor changes set in place a great system for the online play, co-op and versus which boggles the mind having so much space to run free while competing with multiple people. It's no Battlefield, but it's definitely adds replay-ability.
