I expected so, but I doubt that would be of much use outside zbrush. I have never worked with that program however, so I can only guess how it coverts these sketches into actual geometry, especially in how far it makes nice edgeloops out of it.
P.S.: I forgot to add: I also don't think in-game editors are particulary suited to the FOSS development style or many games. Sure in some it might be nice (see track editor for racing games as mentioned above), but IMHO much more focus should be put on using standardized editors for many different games.
Why newly implement a lacking in game editor (Cube2 I am looking at you, even though the coop editing is nice) when we have a really good and mature level editing suite already (GTK Radiant). This is of course not always possible do do technology differences (which is I guess the case with Cube2), but in general the strength of FOSS is in collaboration and reuse of parts or tools.
If (on the other side of the spectrum) the implementation of a game into a editor, like it is sort of done with Blender is a good idea I am still unsure of ;)
The lower legs are much better now. The inside of the upper legs is still to strait however. Have a look at really skinny girls (models) to to see it in a exgerated form.Edit: See here for a good idea of the shape: http://www.denverdoll.com/images/fairyland/chicalagirl.jpg
Also the front of the upper leg still lacks any actual muscular form. Look at this to see the actual muscles there:
Otherwise the pelvis area is still somewhat strange, can explain it exactly but right now it looks like she sticks her butt out in a really arkward position.
Also keep in mind that both the breasts and the butt are largely sacks of fat, so the underlying muscle doesn't really follow the outward shape so much. In fact the butt should bulge inwards at the sides (like you can see with mucular guys) and the fat sort of just fills in the gap and adds some nice round shape ;)
P.S.: Is there any way to export this into a usable non zbrush format? Some edge loop topology conversion? Well one could use a retopo tool to make a real mesh out of it, but it might be quicker to do it by hand then ;)
@bart: yeah the entry barrier should not be too high either ;) Just something that makes it necessary to think a bit about your creation and maybe put an extra step into the publishing process to spare the world of all these: "look world, here is my first crappy box room I have done in 5 minutes, and will probably never bother with editing again, since I am 14 years old and have better things to do"
And it also depends a lot on the game type if it works or not. I think racing games, where you can relatively easily put together a nice new track from pre-made parts are the easiest. But other games simple don't lend themselves very well to this kind of thing.
I agree to a certain level, but if too much time is spend on creating these tool the actual game might be lacking after all. Also I think it's not bad to have a certain entry level to keep down the noise or crappy creations and to make people actually learn a little bit during the process.
That said, editing could sure be easier in many games. Glest is btw also a good example of having an extremely easy 2D map editor and quick to understand xml files for the rest.
And Sauerbraten, well it's currently hard to find something else than coop editing servers or those damned instagib ones :(
But what I find equally interesting, and maybe even more promising for FOSS games is the quite similar idea of sandbox games where the creation proces is actually part of the game instead of switching to an editor mode.
You bring up one interesting additional point however... first impressions often count and high quality art definitly attracts more people to a site.
IMHO this is something OGA does not do perfectly yet. I think the featured art should be probably put more prominently on the main page (like CGTalk for example has their eyecandy pictures up front) and very carefully selected for good pieces with a "wow" factor (including the removal of older pieces). Also someone should make sure the pieces there have really nice preview pictures.
The new 2D and 3D art selection is much less important and could be made smaller and below the featured art section!
This is ment as a base for sculpting right? Overall not bad, areas that might need improvement are the upper legs (have a look at how diagonal, expecially in womans anatomy, the upper leg bones are inside the upper leg and how this effects the muscles around it), and the back of the lower legs, which seem to lack any real muscle detail so far.
In the side view the propostions of the upper body vs hips and legs is also completely off, but I guess you are aware of that.
In the short run I agree to you, and often I have thought about licensing my stuff completely permissive too.
But the real strength of the GPL is based on the long term network effects! And as long as you play by the specific rules the GPL isn't all that different from a permissive license (e.g. your walled garden analogy, just that when the walled garden is big enough you will not notice that you are restrained).
To further elaborate it: There was an interesting article on slashdot I thing a few months back (sorry can't find the link) explaining why Linux is working well while OpenBSD never really took off. They put the blame on OpenBSD's permissive license. Not only does the GPL allow commercial companies to cooperate in a "save place" with mutual benefits, but the permissive nature of the BSD license has led to many ruptures, forks and abstraction of code from the project. Especially the latter is highly problematic. If for example a company decided to use a certain subsystem of the project (and even hires the main developer), the GPLed project benefits, while the BSD project fails. Looking at the history of both projects, this was clearly the case several times.
To come back to a more game centric argument. Sure some indies might now decided not to use some art because of it's license, but if decided to do then the entire network effect starts. They might need to use an open source alternative for a license, which is currently maybe a bit worse than the commercial version, but the additions the indi project now does to it makes it better.
An indi might chose to use a copyleft rig for their models to save time, and then by contributing animations (no extra work by then) they help myriads of other projects for free, and so on and so forth. And if fact it is very likely that this feeds back into their projects sooner or later.
What we really need is not a move to a more permissive licenses, but a change in understanding that the GPL is not anti-business or prohibits commercial use, but by the contrary is very much pro business and perfectly compatible with for-pay projects.
There is nothing communist about it ;)
What is does though is that the business becomes more about end-products while middle-ware and tools are developed cooperatively. This also lowers the entry barriers for new players on the markets, thus destabilizing monopolies and cartels and speeding up innovation in general.
I expected so, but I doubt that would be of much use outside zbrush. I have never worked with that program however, so I can only guess how it coverts these sketches into actual geometry, especially in how far it makes nice edgeloops out of it.
P.S.: I forgot to add: I also don't think in-game editors are particulary suited to the FOSS development style or many games. Sure in some it might be nice (see track editor for racing games as mentioned above), but IMHO much more focus should be put on using standardized editors for many different games.
Why newly implement a lacking in game editor (Cube2 I am looking at you, even though the coop editing is nice) when we have a really good and mature level editing suite already (GTK Radiant). This is of course not always possible do do technology differences (which is I guess the case with Cube2), but in general the strength of FOSS is in collaboration and reuse of parts or tools.
If (on the other side of the spectrum) the implementation of a game into a editor, like it is sort of done with Blender is a good idea I am still unsure of ;)
The lower legs are much better now. The inside of the upper legs is still to strait however. Have a look at really skinny girls (models) to to see it in a exgerated form.Edit: See here for a good idea of the shape: http://www.denverdoll.com/images/fairyland/chicalagirl.jpg
Also the front of the upper leg still lacks any actual muscular form. Look at this to see the actual muscles there:
http://www.exrx.net/Store/OtherImages/MuscularSystem3.jpg
Otherwise the pelvis area is still somewhat strange, can explain it exactly but right now it looks like she sticks her butt out in a really arkward position.
Also keep in mind that both the breasts and the butt are largely sacks of fat, so the underlying muscle doesn't really follow the outward shape so much. In fact the butt should bulge inwards at the sides (like you can see with mucular guys) and the fat sort of just fills in the gap and adds some nice round shape ;)
P.S.: Is there any way to export this into a usable non zbrush format? Some edge loop topology conversion? Well one could use a retopo tool to make a real mesh out of it, but it might be quicker to do it by hand then ;)
@bart: yeah the entry barrier should not be too high either ;) Just something that makes it necessary to think a bit about your creation and maybe put an extra step into the publishing process to spare the world of all these: "look world, here is my first crappy box room I have done in 5 minutes, and will probably never bother with editing again, since I am 14 years old and have better things to do"
And it also depends a lot on the game type if it works or not. I think racing games, where you can relatively easily put together a nice new track from pre-made parts are the easiest. But other games simple don't lend themselves very well to this kind of thing.
I agree to a certain level, but if too much time is spend on creating these tool the actual game might be lacking after all. Also I think it's not bad to have a certain entry level to keep down the noise or crappy creations and to make people actually learn a little bit during the process.
That said, editing could sure be easier in many games. Glest is btw also a good example of having an extremely easy 2D map editor and quick to understand xml files for the rest.
And Sauerbraten, well it's currently hard to find something else than coop editing servers or those damned instagib ones :(
But what I find equally interesting, and maybe even more promising for FOSS games is the quite similar idea of sandbox games where the creation proces is actually part of the game instead of switching to an editor mode.
I suck at overdraws ;)
http://imgur.com/pJH0A.jpg
I agree ;)
You bring up one interesting additional point however... first impressions often count and high quality art definitly attracts more people to a site.
IMHO this is something OGA does not do perfectly yet. I think the featured art should be probably put more prominently on the main page (like CGTalk for example has their eyecandy pictures up front) and very carefully selected for good pieces with a "wow" factor (including the removal of older pieces). Also someone should make sure the pieces there have really nice preview pictures.
The new 2D and 3D art selection is much less important and could be made smaller and below the featured art section!
Well maybe something to consider for OGA 2.0?
Not sure if this was posted before:
http://www.openfootage.net/
This is ment as a base for sculpting right? Overall not bad, areas that might need improvement are the upper legs (have a look at how diagonal, expecially in womans anatomy, the upper leg bones are inside the upper leg and how this effects the muscles around it), and the back of the lower legs, which seem to lack any real muscle detail so far.
In the side view the propostions of the upper body vs hips and legs is also completely off, but I guess you are aware of that.
In the short run I agree to you, and often I have thought about licensing my stuff completely permissive too.
But the real strength of the GPL is based on the long term network effects! And as long as you play by the specific rules the GPL isn't all that different from a permissive license (e.g. your walled garden analogy, just that when the walled garden is big enough you will not notice that you are restrained).
To further elaborate it: There was an interesting article on slashdot I thing a few months back (sorry can't find the link) explaining why Linux is working well while OpenBSD never really took off. They put the blame on OpenBSD's permissive license. Not only does the GPL allow commercial companies to cooperate in a "save place" with mutual benefits, but the permissive nature of the BSD license has led to many ruptures, forks and abstraction of code from the project. Especially the latter is highly problematic. If for example a company decided to use a certain subsystem of the project (and even hires the main developer), the GPLed project benefits, while the BSD project fails. Looking at the history of both projects, this was clearly the case several times.
To come back to a more game centric argument. Sure some indies might now decided not to use some art because of it's license, but if decided to do then the entire network effect starts. They might need to use an open source alternative for a license, which is currently maybe a bit worse than the commercial version, but the additions the indi project now does to it makes it better.
An indi might chose to use a copyleft rig for their models to save time, and then by contributing animations (no extra work by then) they help myriads of other projects for free, and so on and so forth. And if fact it is very likely that this feeds back into their projects sooner or later.
What we really need is not a move to a more permissive licenses, but a change in understanding that the GPL is not anti-business or prohibits commercial use, but by the contrary is very much pro business and perfectly compatible with for-pay projects.
There is nothing communist about it ;)
What is does though is that the business becomes more about end-products while middle-ware and tools are developed cooperatively. This also lowers the entry barriers for new players on the markets, thus destabilizing monopolies and cartels and speeding up innovation in general.
Pages