Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

3 Dimensional Chat / Full Models -vs- Modeled Parts

Author
Message
TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 29th May 2010 09:26 Edited at: 29th May 2010 11:57
There appears to be a common school of thought in the modeling field to create full models for game entities, not modeled parts for them. I've set on a course to challenge this paradigm. Why? It is my belief that modeling Parts for Game Entities offers more flexibility than Full Models, especially for Indie Developers with minimum 3D Art development resources.

The bottom line, no-one wants the same old models everyone else is using. Sure you can modd textures, most often, that is not enough. This fact has steered me away from puchasing some really top-notch models/model packs. I've asked many modelers/model pack developers to develop a Part Set pack. Other than a Building Set, none, have been willing to develop parts for characters, weapons, furniture, props, etc.

I cannot understand why the idea of a Part Set pack for a variety of Game Entities hasn't caught on. This idea is fairly simple: Model 2-3 Sets of Parts that can be interchanged and assembled to create 1000s of Game Entity variations from within a Modeling Package or Game Engine. Its a logical assumption that a 100 Part Sets could produce millions of variations.

Azunaki
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2009
Location:
Posted: 29th May 2010 14:20
while it offers more flexibility it is often much harder to model separate pieces then it is to model one whole object(in most cases)

[url]http://myportfolio.x10hosting.com/[url]
visit my site.(still in progress)
TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 29th May 2010 14:50
Quote: "while it offers more flexibility it is often much harder to model separate pieces then it is to model one whole object(in most cases)"
Thanks for your response Azunaki. How is modeling separate parts more difficult? Would you be able to offer an example?

I'm most likely blinded by bias. I would speculate that some modellers excel at crafting 3D feet better than hands. Within a Parts paradigm, an Artist can focus on the part(s) they're good at. More than one artist can work on Set of parts.

CoffeeGrunt
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th May 2010 14:54
I think you're talking about "modular design." I know this is used alot in the UDK, but I'm unsure if it'd be useful for DBP, FPSC, etc...

Woolfman
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2007
Location: Cave
Posted: 29th May 2010 14:59
Why model it out when a simple re-texture can do the trick. When producing games things like HD space and time are factors. So image editing is faster and takes up less space then a separate model and new set of images to make. That's kind of why it hasn't caught on.
Dia
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Jan 2005
Location:
Posted: 29th May 2010 16:46
the other thing to remember about modular design is that although the variey is staggering, the output tends to look like some sort of frankenstein's monster, with many differing styles all kit-bashed together.

To combat this, you can limit yourself to only a few module styles, in which case you lose most of the flexibility you are trying to attain in the first place!

This is not the Sig you are looking for....
TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 29th May 2010 18:34
Quote: "I think you're talking about "modular design." I know this is used alot in the UDK, but I'm unsure if it'd be useful for DBP, FPSC, etc..."
YES! I call it Modular Entity Construction Sets (MECS). DBP's Limb management is primed for it. Models can be made available to a variety of engines in a variety export/import formats.

Quote: "Why model it out when a simple re-texture can do the trick."
Often re-texture is not enough. But, I'm not ruling it out. Imagine the versatility of interchangeable parts with interchangeable textures.

Quote: "the other thing to remember about modular design is that although the variey is staggering, the output tends to look like some sort of frankenstein's monster, with many differing styles all kit-bashed together."
There are algorithms to weld and smooth vertices, blend textures and animations on demand and in real-time. The statement suggests that these methods are not available or that frankenstein's monster isn't desired. Frankenstein Design could be the Art Style in itself. Give the decision to the Game Developer.

We must change the paradigm my friends for the sake of the Indie Developer.

Quik
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 29th May 2010 18:36
havent a thread like this been up before...?


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
Woolfman
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2007
Location: Cave
Posted: 29th May 2010 20:39
Come on now. You never heard the saying "Change for the sake of change is not progress." Or "Don't fix what's not broken."
lazerus
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Apr 2008
Location:
Posted: 29th May 2010 20:48 Edited at: 29th May 2010 20:49
"A stagnent tree bares no fruit"

Modulisation is very tricky to keep too. I was thinking of ways to do this a while back with characters. The way i seen it, you need to have the 'joint' areas to be of a X' amount for it to work seamlessly. That said Spore really blew that out of the water since it created a system to merge and seam the mesh together. Inorganics is pretty easy, Mecha systems tradionally use a ball joint so affixing new parts is a doddel.

Organics would requre some sort of cover over the seam. Some shoulder plates, clothes fron the torso that overlap, generally inogranic objects. Though if you decided to create a mutant you could create the same effect with corupt mass coming out of the should seam area.

It is a very good idea, it requres alot more work to set up, while modelers like me work on a whim or single motivation.

Asteric
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jan 2008
Location: Geordie Land
Posted: 29th May 2010 21:18
I would think vertex painting, or a similar method would be good for modular asset very useful, s it lets you paint on unique texture details straight onto individual verticies.

Oolite
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2005
Location: Middle of the West
Posted: 29th May 2010 21:23
Possibly been said, but organic objects should not be built in seperate parts, having an arm as a seperate object, not attached to the body looks terrible, even covering up the nasty seam, or lack of would look tacky, not all characters in all games wear shoulder pads.
Hence why building sets are good for this type of modelling practice, the ability to mix and match a different building works perfectly when trying to create a varied level, or scene. At the end of the day though, it will still require creativity and certainly won't look unique. One thing that bugs me the most is that a lot of people overlook a consistent colour scheme in their artwork. Any building set, or free media like this would still have to be edited within a 3d package and it probably would have been easier to create it from scratch yourself.

The possibility of welding the seams together internally would work, but the animation, textures and topology would most likely suffer for it, however good your algorithm is, it's not going to be as good as if you do it by hand.

That being said i can see what you are going for, but at the end of the day it's much easier to just create it all in one. The topology can only work better this way. Call me a cynic but people should just learn to model,.
However good your game mechanics are, placeholder/free models are still never going to stand out, even in the indie community. People are just looking for a quick fix, some free models they can slap onto an existing engine and call it their own.

TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 30th May 2010 20:48 Edited at: 30th May 2010 22:38
Quote: "However good your game mechanics are, placeholder/free models are still never going to stand out, even in the indie community. People are just looking for a quick fix, some free models they can slap onto an existing engine and call it their own."


Not everyone is looking for a quick fix and eventually one will seek out replacements for placeholders. Where do they turn when every model pack is designed to be placeholders?

Modeled parts can still be applied to organic objects and single meshes. As I stated in the first post: Model 2-3 Sets of Parts that can be interchanged and assembled to create 1000s of Game Entity variations from within a Modeling Package or Game Engine.

I see lots of assumptions as to what game developers want. I'm a game developer, I suck at 3D Modeling/Animation, and I'm telling you what I want. We need a change my friends.

Azunaki
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Feb 2009
Location:
Posted: 31st May 2010 11:02
techlord i will admit that for small time developers(most of which don't hire many modelers or work for a company) it would be far easier for you to just have a system that could generate the models for you, but i hope it never will. because it is an art that should never happen with. in some situations like borderlands weapon system it worked fine. i like whole models it is much easier to work with and to make especially for organic models(humans animals ect) and most high poly models should agree with me on this. a randomly generated system removes the art from 3D Modeling. and makes it just another algorithm in an engine.

[url]http://myportfolio.x10hosting.com/[url]
visit my site.(still in progress)
SJHooks
12
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Aug 2009
Location: Where you least expect me...
Posted: 31st May 2010 20:00
Well, speaking of this sort of subject, (correct me if I'm wrong), but if you want to make something like a mirror, don't you have to have the actual reflecting mirror itself as a seperate model with a shader added to it, and the frame of the mirror as a seperate model that doesn't have this shader? Or is there such a thing as reflection mapping

TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 1st Jun 2010 13:28 Edited at: 1st Jun 2010 13:36
Quote: "techlord i will admit that for small time developers(most of which don't hire many modelers or work for a company) it would be far easier for you to just have a system that could generate the models for you, but i hope it never will. because it is an art that should never happen with. in some situations like borderlands weapon system it worked fine. i like whole models it is much easier to work with and to make especially for organic models(humans animals ect) and most high poly models should agree with me on this. a randomly generated system removes the art from 3D Modeling. and makes it just another algorithm in an engine."

I'm not implying that the artist be removed, in fact, the very opposite. I see that the common theme for sticking to the full model its easier. For game developers like myself, finding unique artwork on little to no budget is not so easy.

Master Man Of Justice
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Feb 2008
Location: Between Insanity and Intelligence
Posted: 1st Jun 2010 19:04
Take a look at borderlands. How do you think they got millions of unique guns.
They use the premise you suggested along with texture changes.

TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 2nd Jun 2010 00:36 Edited at: 2nd Jun 2010 00:37
Quote: "Take a look at borderlands. How do you think they got millions of unique guns.
They use the premise you suggested along with texture changes."
I'm not sure if you agreeing with me or Azunaki, but, I'm not talking about auto-generation although that could also use a system of modeled parts. Has anyone actually tried using a modeled parts? How can fair assessment be made, when no one has actually tried using it? Modeled Parts just makes more sense to me. It appears that developing such a system is up to to little ole me. Blender here I come. Wish me luck.

Quik
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 2nd Jun 2010 10:22
to be honest, a system like Spore could work, meaning that the program automaticly attaches the limb to the model, adding extra polies ofc, which can manually be reduced later.

but i will always prefer making my own models from scratch.


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 2nd Jun 2010 11:12
Quote: "but i will always prefer making my own models from scratch"
Quik, I don't know about creating them from scratch, but, i would like unique models in my game projects. The problem for most of us modeling-challenged indie game developer's is 1) unique artwork is out of budget, 2)affordable model packs dont offer enough unique-ness.

Quote: "to be honest, a system like Spore could work"
Agreed, and the parts could vary in art direction and style. In the Spore Creature Creator, I believe that parts such as hands, feet, etc are manually created and a lot of procedural magic going on to weld mesh seams and blend animations/textures.

Theres a Spore Creature Creator cheat that permits export of creatures in Collada format for use in Maya. I can easily visualize the system being expanded for use on a much wider scale in variety of formats.

The Spore Creature Creator is challenging the paradigm and it wont be long before the mainstream takes notice. This is an opportunity for the Indies to lead the way, but, I have feeling that this concept (like many other advancements in the industry) will be left up to the commercial devs to pioneer.

Quik
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 2nd Jun 2010 11:28
Quote: "Quik, I don't know about creating them from scratch, but, i would like unique models in my game projects. The problem for most of us modeling-challenged indie game developer's is 1) unique artwork is out of budget, 2)affordable model packs dont offer enough unique-ness."

if your serious about being an indie developer, then getting an freelance/indie modeller to work for u, wether it is free or for money, is a must. u wont get far without one, there really isnt much choice but this, either that or you learn modelling yourself. I personally model as a hobby, and i believe loads out there does, here for example: http://www.moddb.com you will find that most models for fun, and make mods for fun. if you wish to get a modeller for your team, or even an coder, i would look there.


[Q]uik, Quiker than most
TechLord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 5th Jun 2010 16:30
Quote: "if your serious about being an indie developer, then getting an freelance/indie modeller to work for u, wether it is free or for money, is a must. u wont get far without one, there really isnt much choice but this, either that or you learn modelling yourself"
Its statements like this that have motivated me to challenge the current paradigm.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2022-05-27 16:50:26
Your offset time is: 2022-05-27 16:50:26