Create Brand New Hedge Graphics...

[datahead8888]

In task #256, we removed the SMB3 style hedge for now. On @SonOfBowser's suggestion, we're probably going to make it use a different image that we already have in its place for now.

This task is to create a brand new hedge image to replace the old one directly. It will need to not be recognizable as a Mario style hedge.

The SMB3 style hedge SVG is at https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/blob/devel/drafts/game/frostbringer/level/ground/green_2/hedges/small_2.svg

cc @sydneyjd, @DarkAceZ

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 @Quintus Do we still want this, or is it too late?

[datahead8888]

There probably is still some time given that we haven't resolved the music issues and given we still have level editing work to do. This is probably one of the easier Mario replacement tasks (though it does somewhat depend on how we do it).

[sydneyjd]

Hey all. @datahead8888 @Quintus @DarkAceZ @Aakburns WHats your opinions? How can i improve upon this design?

[datahead8888]

I was just thinking if the 1 big hill and 1 small hill is still too similar to the SMB3 hills. I might be wrong here, though. I really do like how it captures the same feel as the old ones, and the quality is very good.

A couple other options are to to use different shades of black in the eyes and to use three hills, one big and two small. They're just possible thoughts.

Does anyone else have thoughts on what works best for this?

[datahead8888]

cc @brianvanderburg2 (you're probably still online :) )

[brianvanderburg2]

What if the hills were replaced with other things. Imagine background trees with a face, branches as arms. I'm not an artist, but something like this: http://picpaste.com/b56958db99057db60542e0fa5ea08649.png

Could also have background mountains, background houses, background books (fit's the library theme).

As far as the legal issues, I don't know anything about that so I can't really comment on it other than to state my own personal disgust with the system.

[sydneyjd]

Here. Opinions anyone? @brianvanderburg2 @Quintus @datahead8888 ?

[datahead8888]

Most people probably will not connect this with the old svg, which is good. We were eliminating eyes on clouds, etc, but since this has a complete face, I think it eliminates the problem. We probably need to give it a try in a level, post a screenshot, and let everyone offer their thoughts.

[sydneyjd]

It seems to have lost its "cuteness". Any thoughts @datahead8888 @Quintus @brianvanderburg2 ?

[brianvanderburg2]

What if you get rid of the outer edges or make it thinner, and give the eyes, nose, and mouth some color and shading?

[datahead8888]

It seems to have lost its "cuteness".

Graphics don't necessarily have to have a cuteness -- we've been going for a new look in TSC. This graphic is a bit of an exception, since it would be nice to retain the feel of the old graphic.

The size should probably be closer (we'll have to see what works given this has 3 parts to it now) to the size of the original, but we will probably have to do a little digging to get those dimensions if we want to compare. You might play through the Clear Night level for now -- I think that level used the SMB3 hedge, so you could see if it looks bad with sizing in that level.

Giving the eyes a little shading as Brian suggested might also help to make it even more distinct from the SMB3 version. I still lean towards shades of black, but trying a red mouth or yellow spots in eyes are other possibilities that could be tried. I'd be curious to see what effect thinner edges have, too.

Good work!

[datahead8888]

@sydneyjd - The dimensions for the original hedge you are replacing were: width 32 height 32

If you use those dimensions, it should avoid compatibility (sizing) issues for old levels that used the SMB3 style hedge.

This is the link the the old settings file: https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/blob/3d031fe4a692d26b798793de4c1e59771ca87a2e/tsc/data/pixmaps/ground/green_2/hedges/small_2.settings

This is where I got those dimensions from. In fact, that is the exact settings file I think you should be able to use on your computer when you decide to try out the hedge later.

Switch your hedge settings file to that, then add the png named as small_2.png. These files go in tsc/data/pixmaps/ground/green_2/hedges

[datahead8888]

cc @SonOfBowser

@Quintus - do you have any thoughts on this replacement (stylewise or dimensionwise)?

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 @Quintus Here is a redone one with the hedge 32x32. It looks so small! I shrunk the outer lines and addded some shading.

[Quintus]

I’ll leave it up to you with what you replace it -- create what you find fitting.

Vale, Quintus

[datahead8888]

It looks so small! I shrunk the outer lines and addded some shading.

@sydneyjd -- do this -- show it to one of your brothers, and ask what he thinks. Don't show him the big version at first. After that, go ahead and show him the big one. This eliminates any subconscious bias.

We could look at making the rightmost sad hill a little larger -- it already is the smallest hill and may need to be larger to compensate for the shrinking. Once we've tried that, it will probably work at the new size. The new size is needed of course to maintain level compatibility. We could add some larger hedges (with other styles) as larger assets if we wish, though.

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 Is this better?

[datahead8888]

@datahead8888 Is this better?

Yes, I think so, but we'll need to try it in a level (where it shrinks) to be sure.

I'd also be interested in trying some sort of color in part / all of the eyes so that it's not black like the original SMB3 hedge. I guess it's debatable, though. It might be difficult to come up with a good coloring.

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 This is in level.

[datahead8888]

The sizing looks good.  I'd be curious to try a few color options (with shading) in the mouth / eyes (ie maybe pupils of a different color in the eyes), but it's your call. If you give me the SVG, I could also play with it later, though I don't know most of the paint options yet.

 On Sunday, January 18, 2015 2:39 PM, sydneyjd <notifications@github.com> wrote:

@datahead8888 This is in level. — Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 ? How about this?

[datahead8888]

It's looking good. I was thinking if we needed a smaller eye pupil size, but it can't go any smaller given that the image must be shrunken.

We might also see how white pupils in the eyes look. This might offer a little more contrast if the white color works. Alex's eyes are also white pupils on black eyes. Keep a backup of the last one if you try anything new.

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 Here is white.

[datahead8888]

If we go with white pupils, we might consider making the pupils a little smaller (smaller radius) so that the ratio of pupil to eye feels about right. If we go with blue pupils, we should probably continue using the same radius, since blue is a bit harder to see on black, necessitating the larger radius.

It'd probably best for me to let you make a judgement call as to which of the options (and sizes) work best and then commit it to git.

I do think having some sort of color (white, blue, etc) on top of the black as we just tried is good, since it differentiates it from the old SMB3 style hedge. I'm always open to discuss other ideas, though.

Great work!

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 Is this any better? I dont think it seems right to go much smaller.

[datahead8888]

Yes, I think that's good. Could you post the SVG and PNG? We could then get it in git some time soon.

[sydneyjd]

@datahead8888 https://cloud.openmailbox.org/public.php?service=files&t=9449024f2674ebd57f6b5eec1ba37e0c

[datahead8888]

@sydneyjd -- is the png graphic you last posted in this ticket the correct png? If so, I can just upload it when I get a chance (with the SVG).

Also, could you confirm the type of license (CC-By-SA-4.0 is what we often use now)?

[sydneyjd]

Yes it is. On 01/22/2015 09:32 AM, datahead8888 wrote:

@sydneyjd https://github.com/sydneyjd -- is the png graphic you last posted in this ticket the correct png? If so, I can just upload it when I get a chance (with the SVG).

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/issues/298#issuecomment-71028372.

[datahead8888]

Yes it is.

Thanks for confirming.

Could you confirm the type of license (CC-By-SA-4.0 is what we often use now)?

This has to be confirmed in github (as opposed to the forums) because there is no checkbox to signify acceptance of a default license. Licensing has also been a major focus for TSC 2.0.

[sydneyjd]

How do i do that? On 01/22/2015 10:21 AM, datahead8888 wrote:

Could you confirm the type of license (CC-By-SA-4.0 is what we often use now)?

This has to be confirmed in github (as opposed to the forums) because there is no checkbox to signify acceptance of a default license. Licensing has also been a major focus for TSC 2.0.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/issues/298#issuecomment-71036323.

[datahead8888]

State something such as, "I license these SVG and PNG files as CC-BY SA 4.0", and give a link to the files again.

This is what Quintus suggested for me to do on my own stone graphics task (though I can't just use this license on them because they are derived from images under a different license).

[sydneyjd]

Ok, as @datahead8888 requested...

I license the following .SVG and .PNG files in this post as CC-BY SA 4.0...

https://cloud.openmailbox.org/public.php?service=files&t=9449024f2674ebd57f6b5eec1ba37e0c&download

[datahead8888]

This is what it looks like in a level. You probably wouldn't want to dot your level with a ton of these, but they could work really well here and there as attention grabbers. The old asset was also used sparingly, so this should work well.

[datahead8888]

@SonOfBowser - We finally have a direct replacement for the SMB3 style hedge that we had outright removed before. @sauer2 - You had said you sometimes saw hedges appear with a red background behind them in levels (and that you were removing them I think). If you still have a level that displays this red object, could you test again in case this change happened to fix it? I am curious...

[ghost]

@datahead8888 OK, will do. @sydneyjd Nice job, but please don't keep the noses. In particular, not the triangle nose.

[ghost]

@datahead8888 That seems to be fixed at the first and second glance.

[datahead8888]

sauer2 said:

Nice job, but please don't keep the noses. In particular, not the triangle nose.

We've been posting pictures for quite a while :P

The idea of having a nose is to have a complete face, which is supposed to differentiate it from the old SMB3 style hedge. The old one only had eyes. Another option might be coloring it, but I can't think of any way to add color without maybe making it over goofy. I could be wrong, though. See: https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/blob/devel/drafts/game/frostbringer/level/ground/green_2/hedges/small_2.svg

sauer2 said: @sydneyjd, what do you think about the nose?

@datahead8888 That seems to be fixed at the first and second glance.

Great!

[sydneyjd]

I like the noses personally, I think it would be weird without them. A nose-less face? I’ve never heard of such a thing. :P On 01/24/2015 11:23 AM, datahead8888 wrote:

Nice job, but please don't keep the noses. In particular, not the
triangle nose.

We've been posting pictures for quite a while :P

The idea of having a nose is to have a complete face, which is supposed to differentiate it from the old SMB3 style hedge. The old one only had eyes. Another option might be coloring it, but I can't think of any way to add color without maybe making it over goofy. I could be wrong, though. See: https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/blob/devel/drafts/game/frostbringer/level/ground/green_2/hedges/small_2.svg

@sydneyjd https://github.com/sydneyjd, what do you think about the nose?

@datahead8888 <https://github.com/datahead8888> That seems to be
fixed at the first and second glance.

Great!

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Secretchronicles/TSC/issues/298#issuecomment-71325150.

[datahead8888]

like the noses personally, I think it would be weird without them. A nose-less face? I’ve never heard of such a thing.

You could go either way in TSC, but I think the noses work.

We might see if anyone else has any thoughts.

[Bugsbane]

I would definitely suggest avoiding the noses, at the very least. Personally I would also suggest leaving off the eyes, too. Remember, one of the things that made the mario games so enchanting was the feeling that everything was alive, even if it wasn't a character in it's own right. They did this by giving most objects eyes, without giving them full faces.

Now elsewhere, we discussed wanting to get away from putting eyes on everything to distance ourselves from the Mario games (although personally, I see the eye's as being more of just a Japanese manga thing, rather than Mario specific). What I suggested there, which personally I would prefer to be just part of our general style guidelines, is that we use no eyes / noses, but just subtle mouths, as I've already been doing with the crates.

Regardless of this though, I do feel that the noses look a bit strange, and unnecessary to give expression.

[datahead8888]

Personally I would also suggest leaving off the eyes, too. Remember, one of the things that made the mario games so enchanting was the feeling that everything was alive, even if it wasn't a character in it's own right. They did this by giving most objects eyes, without giving them full faces.

Yes, this is what we were originally doing in ticket #236. In this hedge ticket, we were basically trying to find some way to keep the hills "fun" and not make them just be a bare texture, so as to speak. Sydney put a glimmer of light in the eyes in order to try and give it a different look than the Super Mario Bros. 3 counterpart. My thought is that having eyes on some objects in the game isn't necessarily a Marioism, depending on the frequency and eye style.

We can continue to discuss this, though. If eyes really are a problem, they will have to be removed. I'm fine with or without noses myself. We could also try triangle noses rather than circle noses if that might work better. We should probably ask @sydneyjd for his input before anyone touches this image. He's already edited this image quite a bit, though, so if you're able to try a few edits for evaluation, it will give him a break from this task.

[sydneyjd]

If you waht to edit it @Bugsbane To see if you can improve, go right ahead. I personally like them very much as they are, but if you feel otherwise, feel free to say so.

[Bugsbane]

I'll try and take a play with it in the next few days to see what I can come up with. Very busy right now, but I'll see what I can do.

[datahead8888]

Now elsewhere, we discussed wanting to get away from putting eyes on everything to distance ourselves from the Mario games (although personally, I see the eye's as being more of just a Japanese manga thing, rather than Mario specific). What I suggested there, which personally I would prefer to be just part of our general style guidelines, is that we use no eyes / noses, but just subtle mouths, as I've already been doing with the crates.

@Bugsbane, if you think a ban on eyes should be put in place for all background objects, this seems reasonable. Much as I followed a line of logic on the the 1-Up ticket, you are following a line of logic on this style standard. I do want to respect Sydney's thoughts on this, though, as he put a lot of time into the hedge.

I'm not sure on banning eyes on power up objects such as the lemon, but we can certainly discuss this.

If you make a new version of the hedge, try to incorporate what you can from Sydney's work if you can.

[Bugsbane]

I don't think eyes need to be banned outright, but I do think that we need to be consistent and work it into the style guide. The key is think about how things look in the context of the whole game, not just whether we like the look of one asset.

Personally, I love the look of having eyes on everything, and would be happy to keep them throughout. That is clearly a strong SMB reference, which people seemed against elsewhere (thus the discussion of just eyes vs just mouths etc in the first place).

If we're not doing that, my thinking is that we leave eyes off background objects (including massive and half massive ground items), but allow them on interactive items such as enemies, powerups etc. This way, eyes are used as another element that focuses the players attention the most on the key objects in the game.

Either way, I do feel that noses just distract as they're not actually a facial feature that expresses any emotion. As to an example of faces without noses, just look up any smiley. :)

[Quintus]

I’ve followed this discussion silently, now I think I want to express my opinion on this. I think we should avoid eyes, because we are aiming for our own style. SMB may be a nice game, but we don’t want to be the eternal clone of it. We should aim to not have more references to SMB than any other platform game (though subtile references to several games can be really cool if used sparingly so they will only be seen by those paying enough attention to the gameplay; I love how later Zelda games tend to make references to OoT).

Vale, Quintus

[datahead8888]

Personally, I love the look of having eyes on everything, and would be happy to keep them throughout. That is clearly a strong SMB reference, which people seemed against elsewhere (thus the discussion of just eyes vs just mouths etc in the first place).

No, I don't think having strong SMB references (ie lots of eyes on lots of background objects) is a good idea. We need to heavily diverge from Marioisms in the next few releases in order to break the Mario clone perception and stop suffering the consequences that come with it.

The main question was whether eyes on just a handful of background objects (or with a different style of eyes on these few objects) is too major of a consistency break or if it still gave this Mario impression.

I get the impression people want to enforce the no eyes rule across the board on all background objects, in which case this hill will have the eyes and nose both removed. I'm not sure a mouth by itself would work on the hill, honestly. In this case the hill will wind up being fairly bland (which is what we've been doing on some other background objects), but I guess we'll see how things turn out.

If we edit the hill further I propose we reopen the ticket.

[sydneyjd]

well, if you all feel it is a must to remove the eyes, we might as well. I personally like them on, but i will run up a draft of it with them off. I will probably remove the mouth as well then, since only a mouth on them would be awkward IMO.

[datahead8888]

Just to explicitly ask this question - does everyone feel that having eyes on one object or a few objects but not on most objects breaks style or otherwise looks like a major Mario reference?