EPTalso, i ponder why python/fighting spirit isn't used here in sc2. especially FS.
The State of SC2 Aesthetics Part 1: Lighting - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
also, i ponder why python/fighting spirit isn't used here in sc2. especially FS. | ||
|
colanderman
United States66 Posts
On October 28 2011 14:41 0neder wrote: 1 - High-Noon lighting. Note: Cast Shadows reflect true position of air units. Harsher lighting and shadows. You do know that's true only in tropical latitudes twice per year, right? If you are at X° latitude, then even at "high noon", the shadow will still be cast at X+Y° angle from vertical, where Y varies ±23° due to the seasons. If you are outside the tropics, the sun will never be directly overhead. | ||
|
BlueBoxSC
United States582 Posts
While I don't really find a problem with the currently standing graphics engine of SC2, ( and more specifically, I think the lighting engine is fine, low Gold Terran on low graphics here) I think that more 'graphically hard to read' maps could add depth to the game that BW never had, especially with the potential of the 3D engine SC2 boasts. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On October 28 2011 16:48 0neder wrote: Good point althaz. One reason my OP original image has harsh shadows is that I changed it to linear falloff instead of exponential. I have made a new image that better shows the different contexts of overhead shadows, with them being slightly less stark. I believe that we can soften the darkness of them even more, I've only spent a few hours in the editor though. i just got excited so I probably made this post prematurely. I will include this new image here as well as in the OP. Quick rundown of lighting changes from memory: Tone Editor: Diffuse multiplier increased from 1 to 2 Terrain: Creep Specular Multiplier decreased from 3 to 1. Key: changed to H:0, V:272 (overhead lighting) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IpeLz.jpg) Notice how you could see when mutas are over a Thor, when an air unit is hovering above a cliff, etc? This is the idea for spectators and players alike. More clarity, looks cool. Progamers could adapt quickly and would probably welcome the clarity. as you can see, team colors can become an issue with too bright of lighting | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 29 2011 02:32 a176 wrote: as you can see, team colors can become an issue with too bright of lighting Not really. As long as it's not dark blue and light blue you're fine. | ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
On October 28 2011 15:17 VaultDweller wrote: I 100% agree with this post and i'm a product designer as well. Simplicity and consistency are important requirements for an eSport and should be prevailing over aesthetics in this case.As a product designer I'm sure you don't only pay attention to how things look but also how they function, right? You can't design this amazing looking thing if the shape or colors or wtv affect it's functionality. Everything about starcraft was made with e-sports in mind, and it may look bland at times or there might be only one type of lightning but that makes perfect sense, I wouldn't want my game to look significantly different on various maps... Imho it has to be consistent no matter what, for both players and spectators. The options to change the lighting are available in the editor, so people can have fun with this in custom games. But it doesn't add any value to competative maps IMO. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 29 2011 01:58 colanderman wrote: You do know that's true only in tropical latitudes twice per year, right? I don't want perfect realism, just a balance of clarity and something that feels like mid afternoon. | ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
| ||
|
driftme
United States360 Posts
On October 29 2011 01:58 colanderman wrote: You do know that's true only in tropical latitudes twice per year, right? If you are at X° latitude, then even at "high noon", the shadow will still be cast at X+Y° angle from vertical, where Y varies ±23° due to the seasons. If you are outside the tropics, the sun will never be directly overhead. You do realize that these maps are all on fictitious worlds, right? =] Kind of an inane post, it totally doesnt matter what our sun does, nor do you know where these maps are actually located on their respective planets. They could all be in the tropics. In regards to the OP, i do like having varied texture/tilesets, but im ok with the lighting as currently implemented. | ||
|
_Depression
United States251 Posts
On October 29 2011 02:43 Sighstorm wrote: I 100% agree with this post and i'm a product designer as well. Simplicity and consistency are important requirements for an eSport and should be prevailing over aesthetics in this case. The options to change the lighting are available in the editor, so people can have fun with this in custom games. But it doesn't add any value to competative maps IMO. As much as I agree with this, we also have to remember that there is room for variance within the "consistency" that eSports needs. For example, college football. The prevailing color scheme of fields is green grass with white lines denoting yardage, but then we see Boise State University's field which has blue turf. It's a variance from the norm, but it doesn't stop the game from being playable. In a similar way, during winter months there can often be covered in snow and yet the game will still be played. So I think we can see variation in maps, within reason of course. | ||
|
chillpenguin
United States90 Posts
| ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
I agree that it's possible to wring more mood out of the SC2 engine. Your screen shots look pretty nice, though if you really want to feel more like harsh outdoor daylight, try tinting the fill color in your shadows blue, since in daylight the sky fills the shadows and the blue provides a nice hue contrast to the warm colors of the sand. That said, most outdoor cinematic photography is done in the morning or afternoon, because lighting more from the side better brings out the shape of the subject, because lighting angled from the side provides some neat effects when light bounces off vertical surfaces like walls into the shadows, and because the ratio of sunlight to fill light tends to be somewhat less than at noon, so the shadows don't read as darkly. I'm guessing that the illumination angle for the Blizzard maps was chosen mainly for the first reason, because lighting that's more from the side than from the top will make the characters feel more dimensional and in many cases will be more attractive. There also will be a range of light angles where the shadows read nicely without being awkwardly long (or, worse, causing artifacts related to depth map resolution or low precision in the depth calculations to cast the shadows. These kinds of artifacts can be very difficult to detect and correct -- you've probably seen them in buzzing shadows and shadow edges in the cinematics.) Also, I'm pretty sure that the Starcraft level design team doesn't have any dedicated lighting artists -- it's being done by people with broader expertise, so while they certainly know what they're doing, they're unlikely to really be pushing the lighting hard for creative purposes, particularly because they are aware that doing so can interfere with gameplay. | ||
|
Roxy
Canada753 Posts
Look forward to Part 2  | ||
|
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
I jumped on maps like Bel'shir beach just because aesthetically, it was so different. I never considered other little aspects like this, but there's no reason it can't be explored. | ||
|
Dystisis
Norway713 Posts
So I agree, there's really no reason map makers should not study the lighting aspects of their maps more. I think they have kept off of it because it is so easy to screw up, and in previous iterations of the editor it has been a bit buggy. But it should be used, though with some care, just like any other visual element you want to include. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
On October 29 2011 02:32 a176 wrote: as you can see, team colors can become an issue with too bright of lighting There is this issue, but another thing is that having a map with lighting that bright is painful to look at for so long, especially if you are practicing for 8 or more hours per day. I remember in BW, there was a lack of snowy maps due to the same problem; they are harder to look at for so long, and darker tilesets solve this issue. An example would be Brood War's El Nino and its remake, Great Barrier Reef. I believe that the changes to Bel'Shir Beach in the upcoming GSL are for the same reason. Something like this is likely a large factor as to why Starcraft 2 map makers tend not to make desert themed maps. | ||
|
Sighstorm
Netherlands116 Posts
On October 29 2011 03:12 _Depression wrote: I do agree there should be variance, but in IMO this should be done with the tile sets, not lighting. I've seen a competative game played on a map that had different lighting (darker), i think on ESV KOTH, and the caster(s) were talking about how everything looked different instead of the match that was going on.As much as I agree with this, we also have to remember that there is room for variance within the "consistency" that eSports needs. For example, college football. The prevailing color scheme of fields is green grass with white lines denoting yardage, but then we see Boise State University's field which has blue turf. It's a variance from the norm, but it doesn't stop the game from being playable. In a similar way, during winter months there can often be covered in snow and yet the game will still be played. So I think we can see variation in maps, within reason of course. If I would have to draw the line of what can and cannot be changed, i would say the units should look the same on every map, so they are easy to recognize on first glance. Changing the lighting affects the visual apperance of the units... this would be a 'no go' for me. | ||
|
Panzamelano
Colombia248 Posts
| ||
|
latan
740 Posts
| ||
| ||
