Topology

Topology has quite a complex meaning and is a major area in both mathematics and sculpting. Topology is essentially the way in which you can redefine a shape through deformations that include stretching, but not tearing or gluing. This is similar to the core mechanic of how ZBrush and Mudbox work, and Topology can be very useful to keep in mind when finishing a sculpture.

When you create a digital sculpture in either ZBrush of Mudbox, the resolution and sub-division is normally very high to accommodate all the detail present. ZBrush converts the on-screen polygon level into their own specific display format called 'Pixols', whereas Mudbox presents the polygons essentially as they appear in the render view. The difference this makes is that ZBrush generally runs a lot faster, and you can achieve higher levels of sub-division on less powerful machines, however sculptures that you create in Mudbox are essentially what-you-see-is-what-you-get, unlike ZBrush who's rendering can often display graphical glitches not present in the draft view. Because of this, models creating in ZBrush and Mudbox need to be reduced in polygons without losing detail, which has to be done in a very efficient process to maximize the amount of polygons saved. It is also essential that the muscles in the face are all in the correct position, otherwise when animating the muslces in the face won't behave as they should (stretch), and instead the muscles will appear to 'tear'. This is where Topology comes in handy.

Topology can be used to calculate the most efficient way to recreate a model. By following the muscles in Facial Topology, you can more accurate reconstruct a face while minimising quality loss. The Facial Topology i used for my sculpt can be found here: http://www.foundation3d.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/430/cat/500/ppuser/4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology
http://www.pixologic.com/home.php
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/pc/index?id=13565063&siteID=123112

Tale of Tales vs. Activision

Tale of Tales are an independent games development company based in Belgium. Their aim is to target people who are "not enchanted by most contemporary computer games". The company is run by Auriea Harvey and Michaél Samyn, who then outsource parts of the game such as 3d assets and sound to other companies such as Ringtail Studios and International Hobo. All of the games released by Tale of Tales have an underlying 'artey' feel to them, and appear more as interactive 3d motion artwork than necessarily games. Tale of Tales also base their games and characters around popular literature and folk tales, such as Sleeping Beauty and Little Red Ridinghood. The games are all linked together by the recurring character of a deaf-mute girl in a white dress.

The Endless Forest is Tale of Tales current most popular game, with over 200,000 downloads and over 25,000 registered players. Although this is nothing compared to other mainstream MMORPG's such as World of Warcraft boasting more than 10 million subscribers (January 2008), it is still fairly impressive for small games developers. Before i began researching Tale of Tales, i had already heard of (and played) The Endless Forest. The artistic expression present in all Tale of Tales games certainly shines through, but perhaps not as much as some of their other games such as '8' or 'The Path'. My opinion was that in some ways, Tale of Tales were defeating themselves. They are trying to produce very artistic, expressive games to target people who aren't into mainstream gaming, but i feel that if they fused the two concepts together, that The Endless Forest could be an incredible game. The Endless Forest doesn't have amazing graphics, but they are certainly acceptable - where it falls down is in the gameplay. I think the concept of playing as a deer from a young age in an 'endless' forest, interacting with other deers (players), is a fantastic idea, but it feels very much like they have left it at that. I'm not sure whether this is because the Flemish Audiovisual Fund is refusing to pay for further development on The Endless Forest, or whether its simply because they want to keep the game very simple, but the whole game really lacks depth for me. There seems to be next to nothing to accomplish within the game except wander around communicating with other deers through emotes and waiting for the next 'ABIOGENESIS' (appearance from the developers playing as gods), but maybe that's the point. I just think if they added some more depth and borrowed features from sucessful MMO's such as World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, Runescape etc. , they could have an award winning game. My suggestion to them would be to incorporate a guild/clan system, where players can form groups to roam around in accomplishing tasks. Another idea would be to have some type of traditional RPG (customisable) equipment, which could be bought from in-game vendors for in-game points (perhaps by completing or participating in events, or recovering acorns/other special items) or bought with real life currency through a micro-transaction system. These items would add certain benefits/buffs to the player's deer, such as being able to do certain types of unique emotes or simply to just change the appearance of the player's deer (different coloured fur, hats, etc.). Not just would this widen their playerbase, but it would also bring in the funding they desperately need to continue development. Even the ability for players to be able to either compete or be randomly chosen to play a (limited power) god that the developers play would be enough to spark the interest of more players. I do understand how this game can be very inviting for people who want to retreat from the outside world into a peaceful, relaxing environment.

I can't say that Activision are similar to Tale of Tales in many aspects. Activision began producing game cartridges for the Atari, and are now one of the largest third party developers and publishers of video games in the world. Activision have published some of the most popular game franchises in history, such as the Guitar Hero series, the Quake series (with the exception of the original 'Quake'), and the famous Call of Duty series (with Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops being the fastest selling games of all time). In July 2008, Activision merged with Vivendi Games (owners of Sierra and Blizzard) into the new company 'Activision Blizzard'. The brand Activision will still exist as a subsidiary of Activision Blizzard, and will publish games such as the Call of Duty, Crash Bandicoot and Spyro the Dragon series.

Unlike Tale of Tales, Activision are very much about making money and producing mainstream games. Activision's games generally contain a lot of violence, explosions and realistic visuals, all of what Tale of Tale's tries to avoid. When Tale of Tales talked about 'contemporary computer games', Activision is one of the publishers they were (indirectly) talking about. In some ways, Activision is trying so hard to be mainstream now that many of their titles have become so over-the-top, blockbuster film, that it has detracted several fans of the series. To use an example, the original Call of Duty and Call of Duty 2 were loved by fans of first person shooters due to their realism and relevant accuracy. So much so that it completely took over the first person shooter market from Medal of Honor. Call of Duty 4 was also a brilliant idea from Infinity Ward and Activision, as it moved away from the oversaturated World War II genre. In Black Ops however, the plotlineActivision's titles, you almost feel more compelled to play Tale of Tale's games. Call of Duty, Doom, Quake etc. are all so intense to play, and i do see a market for perhaps those kind of players relaxing afterwards by going on a game such as The Endless Forest.



http://tale-of-tales.com/blog/information/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tale_of_Tales_%28developer%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_warcraft#cite_note-13
http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/a158552/guinness-announces-gaming-world-records.html
http://tale-of-tales.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3052
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision#2010s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activision_Blizzard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warcraft#Corrupted_Blood_plague_incident

StudioPixel vs. Bethesda Softworks

The two games design companies I've decided to compare are StudioPixel (a near one-man operation run by Dōkutsu Monogatari, aka. 'Pixel') and Bethesda (worldwide developers and publishers of game franchises such as The Elder Scrolls and Fallout 3).

Dōkutsu 'Pixel' started work on Cave Story in 1999 over the course of 5 years till it's independent release over the Internet in 2004. Cave Story quickly gained popularity and developed an increasingly large cult following. In 2010, Independent game company Nicalis approached Dōkutsu to propose a version of Cave Story to be released on WiiWare with improved graphics and more detailed gameplay.


In an interview with TIGSource, Dōkutsu was asked about the production of the game. He mentioned that he began work on Cave Story when he was at college, and continued in his spare time as he began work as a software developer. Dōkutsu's production pipeline started with him designing the title screen music, followed shortly by programming rudimentary character movements. In that same interview Dōkutsu admitted that his lack of a well structured pipeline meant he faced problems at later stages. These included a lack of data management tools and difficulties with map editing.

Bethesda Softworks works completely different to StudioPixel. Whereas in Cave Story, Dōkutsu wrote the large majority of the game himself (only drafting in some sound designers and additional coders for tiny bits of the game), at Bethesda they have a core team of over 60 people working on the project in synergy with small teams from other companies.

When Bethesda were making Oblivion, they needed to decide on the story, art style and game mechanics. What they wanted is for each new release in The Elder Scrolls series to be something new and fresh, and to work on next-generation technology that hadn't even been invented. After the basic elements of the game were decided, their first objective was to make a pre-production demo. This would contain a small ~60 second scene that would try to show off what the full production would be like. This involved all members of the team co-ordinating effectively including modellers, coders and texture artists. The reason for this was because E3 was rapidly approaching at the time, and unlike StudioPixel, Bethesda are specifically targeting a mass audience and need to get their game recognised (and recognised as good). As Pete Hines (the VIP Marketing and Public Relations Manager for TES: Oblivion) said, "There are two big focuses for E3, one is the demo... the second thing would be the trailer. It has to be awesome. It can't miss. It's THE most important thing we do, because it gets seen by everybody."

Overall, there are some major differences between the two companies. Bethesda always have a working budget that they have to keep in mind throughout the entire design process. This budget is significantly more than StudioPixel's (which is essentially zero), meaning Bethesda are able to employ experienced designers and incorporate the latest technology into their game. The main objective of the CEO of Bethesda is essentially to make money, so the budget is reflected by this. StudioPixel, on the other hand, originally didn't care less whether they made any money or not, which is why they released Cave Story for free initially. The fact that at the core Bethesda are releasing games to make money means they need to be bought by a mass audience (as Pete Hines mentioned above), and this restricts the content that the artists are allowed to put into the game. To use an example, imagine Formula One became almost instantly unpopular overnight, and that Hot Air Ballooning became one of the most popular things in current public interest. The directors at Bethesda would want to add some elements of Hot Air Ballooning into their games to increase sales, due to the mass popularity of the subject, and would also want to leave out any references to Formula One, unless they were perhaps satiric ones. StudioPixel wouldn't have any such restriction, and could make a game revolving around Formula One to separate themselves from the mainstream game designers, and target that small group of people who still liked Formula One. Obviously an extreme example, but it shows the censorship put on Bethesda and the complete freedom of StudioPixel.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_Story
http://blogs.vandal.net/12458/vm/13302725112007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethesda_Softworks
http://www.bethsoft.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWvbVhfWnK0

The 12 Principles of Animation

1) Squash and Stretch

defining the rigidity and mass of an object by distorting its shape during an action

BAD EXAMPLE             GOOD EXAMPLE

2) Timing and Motion

spacing actions to define the weight and size of objects and the personality of characters

GOOD EXAMPLE

BAD EXAMPLE

3) Anticipation

the preparation for an action

GOOD EXAMPLE

 

BAD EXAMPLE

4) Staging

presenting an idea so that it is unmistakably clear

GOOD EXAMPLE

BAD EXAMPLE

5) Follow Through and Overlapping action

the termination of an action and establishing its relationship to the next action

 GOOD EXAMPLE

6) Straight Ahead action and Pose-to-Pose 

the two contrasting approaches to the creation of movement 

 

7) Slow in and Slow out

the spacing of the in-between frames to achieve subtlety of timing and movement

 GOOD EXAMPLE

8) Arcs

the visual path of action for natural movement

 GOOD EXAMPLE                      BAD EXAMPLE

9) Exaggeration

accentuating the essence of an idea via the design and the action

 BAD EXAMPLE                    GOOD EXAMPLE

10) Secondary Action

the action of an object resulting from another action

 GOOD EXAMPLE

11) Appeal

creating a design or an action that the audience enjoys watching

 GOOD EXAMPLE

BAD EXAMPLE

12) Solid Drawing

the principle of solid drawing means taking into account forms in three-dimensional space, giving them volume and weight. 

 GOOD EXAMPLE

 BAD EXAMPLE