modding : Not enough 3d artists problem

Hey,

In another thread there was the notion that on sup com the units mods where low in count vs TA because of a lack of artists. I can believe very much that this is true but there might be some kind of sollution to help this.

Some of you might know about the Spring RTS engine. It's an open source 3D engine created to run strategy games like TA. It was basicly inspired by TA since nobody would make a TA 2. The guys over there figured out the lack of artists problem as well. But then one guy got the idea why don't I create a library of set 3D parts that fit together.

So somewhere on the net is now a library in some kind of format (I'm a programmer not a 3D moddler) with pieces of chassis, arms, legs, guns, cannons, missiles etc... Where all an inspired mod maker can choose from to mix and match his own 3D models. And granted some of them might look alike but still the variations are unique in their own way.

So maybe once we know how to create units, some nice 3D artist might get the same idea and release "LEGO" sets of the same stuff in the future in the format PA will need.

Just a thought

greets

Celludriel

I don't think lack of artists is ever a problem. It all depends on whether the community is willing to make them for the game. Super MNC isn't exactly thriving at the moment but there are a LOT of custom content projects up and running right now, all requiring 3D modelling projects in Maya or Blender. It all comes down to how complex it is to mod, how much the developer supports modding, etc
And creating premade parts wouldn't take all the work out, you'd still have to have knowledge of the program, likely Maya or 3DS Max (as the latter is what Uber uses in house, and former is part of the same family) to fit the pieces together in a smooth and optimised fashion, and then texture and UV map and everything.

Counting myself a veteran modder for C&C generals-ZeroHour, making mods for RTS games is just very very time consuming, at least when building total conversion mods.

My experience is that you will have enough modelers and concept artists, but only a few people who are willing to do UVmaps and texturing, or knowing how to do those in the first place. At least this was the case 5 years back. So if you are willing to learn those, you can probably get a mod from the ground.

I am considering reviving my C&C mod and converting it to a PA mod...

Maybe some of the Supcom modders are also willing to upgrade their mods to PA.

My suggestion to a starting modder is to learn the basics of the modeling software of your choice and try to reverse-engineer models and textures from the game itself when it is released/in beta. This way you will have a lot of pieces or "legos" to use.

I do think that if you go reverse-engineering, you cannot use the parts for mods for other games, as it is still partly intellectual property.

Some general modding advice: make sure you know how to do all the steps required (modeling, texturing, animating, scripting) before starting a mod. Even though you may not need to do all of them by yourself every time, being entirely dependent on other people will net a very small chance of your mod actually releasing.

As some who took some 3D modelling courses I can say this; modelling easy, texturing is a pain (that includes UV mapping). Animation isn't too hard, but rigging the model for animation is a pain and a half.

I'm pretty sure the OP is referring to some posts I made in other Modding threads, so I might as well chime in.

First off, each game's community is a bit different, so it's not all that accurate to use one community to make assumptions for another, but it can give some good estimates with the right context.

Anyways, from my experience, the problem SupCom had was in part due to experimentals, people new to 3D would come in and try to make they 'epic' experimentals and fall flat on thier face because they didn't have the skills yet to complete their vision and lose the will to continue, also with the more in depth code side it made the forming of teams ideal, and sometimes people just can't find a good match, I myself got really super lucky with the other members of the BlackOps team, we're all practically on teh same page so it's super easy to throw ideas and the actual work around.

One thing I hope to do for PA once the modding kicks off is to revisit my 'Modeler List' thread but more focused on team building, so people who have a project idea can post a little bit about the project to see if anyone is willing to work with them while others can post a bit about themselves to see if anyone wants to work with them.

As for the 3D skills, modeling is easy, UVs are easy(almost therapeutic for my OCD xD) and Animating I can handle if I can build a proper Rig(rigging is also easy for me as it's something I think about while modeling so by the time I get to the Rig stage I've already got most of it in my head anyways) it's only the making of the actual textures that held me back, right now I'm looking into some tools/processes to make PA style textures in an easier fashion for myself, but nothing to report yet ;p

Mike

That sounds SOO familiar . it was basically the backlog of texturing I needed to do, that sort of killed my C&C mod :/...

I am really thinking about creating my own procedural texturing tool to fix this .

I don't forsee a lack of artists.

Me neither, however artist =/= game/mod developer automatically. If you can draw well in Photoshop that is a plus, but creating textures requires to think in a different way from traditional art.

I for instance can't draw for s**t (not from the top of my head), but I do know how to create textures with more or less correct lighting.
Most modders start with modeling and get confident, until they have to start uv-mapping and texturing. At least that is my experience, my personal experience even, before I started my uni. modeling versus texturing is about a 30 vs 70 division in workload, when hand-drawn in my experience.

Coming from the Blizzard custom map scene the Supcom mod scene has always seemed so strange to me, like it has the exact opposite priorities and motivations. It's all about, how do I model new units and terrain, how do I code in new AI.

In Blizzard modding this isn't really a topic. Blizzard custom maps are based on repurposing the game assets for new games using a very simple terrain editor, unit wizard and trigger system. The incomparable advantage is that you can make whole new games without knowing anything about coding or modeling, increasing your potential creator base by, I would guess, several orders of magnitude.

I think PA should try to get the best of both worlds, the power of Supcom modding and the accessibility of War3 modding. An editor like the War3 editor may be the free DLC with the highest possible ROI. If the word spreads that the PA editor is a worthy spiritual successor to the War3 one, it could attract much of the experienced Blizzard mod community, meaning thousands of sales on its own, and the resulting mods could mean millions if Starcraft and War3 is anything to go by.

It was entirely possible to re-purpose units when modding SupCom, a lot of it was just done with a text file that had Damage = 10, and similarly named variables.

It's pretty much the first stepping stone for coders. I imagine that PA will do similar.

Definitely! I can't code etc, but I do have a creative side, and used to make sooo many maps back in the C&C red alert days. I hear Far Cry 3 has a great map editor, so I'd be keen to try that out.

In some ways, we do already have basic mod tools in PA, with the procedural planet generation, but a unit modeller for n00bs like myself would be awesome too! I wouldn't even mind if it wasn't that detailed.

Im all in favour of the Blizzard method myself, although not necessarily as powerful as that would take a lot of work to create, and to learn, but allowing the creation of new gameplay styles / game modes is great. New units are all well and good, and credit to the guys making them but a new type of e.g. assault tank doesn’t hugely change the core gameplay when you already have perhaps 3 assault tanks in the standard game.

The problem with the blizzard method however is the rankings of the games which can stifle innovation. Without going into the multiple pros and cons of any system I have two suggestions – firstly a method whereby uber/official community group give a map a seal of approval and a mini review – which is updated with each version of the game – viewable in the lobby, and follows a set standard, e.g. performance, number of bugs, game style, optimum players, game length - so players get an up to date easy to read independent view of the game. – and one that is updated regularly so accounts for any changes that have been made. Admittedly there are rating systems in place but as plenty of mods are released too early, played, and so badly reviewed (which is fair), as the reviews are permanent and don’t take account of any major fixes since the rating was originally given a poor rating can kill off the mod permanently, often despite its eventual post0update worthiness.

Secondly - and this partly ties in the first point, and is arguably controversial in its current form. Not everyone has the skills/time necessary to complete their vision, so an ability for uber/official mod community to petition the creator to release the map to the community so they can tidy up a good idea into a finished polished article would be great (or combine 2 similar mods into one etc) – whilst appropriately acknowledging and involving the creator of course. It effectively says “we like your idea but your implementation is poor, let me show you how its done” which is a very backhanded compliment, but if handled correctly I for one would have welcomed such offers and have been keen to learn from a continued involvement.

So, a good mod community with an “official” voice.

Can you make DOTA in Supcom though? How about a WWII map, or Diplomacy, or Risk? How many people have the skills to make that happen?

I'll concede that you need to do some scripting yourself if you want to make DOTA for SupCom.

StarCraft integrates mods into maps, and has a really polished map maker to do it. SupCom separates maps and mods so that mods can work on every map. Would the DOTA concept work on BGH?

It should also be noted that SupCom had a decent number of "Scenario" type maps, like Zone control and several flavours of _____ Defense among others like LAB Wars, and yeah SupCom wasn't the optimal platform for modder created scenarios, but hey,when SupCom was released, Starcraft BW wasn't optimal for creating 100% new units either was it?

Neither method is better, both had/have pros and cons, but PA can't take the same approach as Blizzard did, because Blizzard is an anomaly, they have the cash to pour into making a user friendly editor(seriously, it's a huge undertaking), PA doesn't have that, what they do/will have is a well crafted engine, and while it's not as user friendly, its just as powerful if not more so than any fancy editor that could be created for it.

Mike

Blizzard's MO as I understand it is actually to build the best possible design engine, and they actually use their own editor to create their game. As I understand it, Starcraft II was made with the SCII Galaxy Editor. Although perhaps it would be more accurate to say the editor was made to make Starcraft II. And their editor is easily the best and most powerful editor I have ever seen, at least available to the end user. Starcraft II is no Brood War, unfortunately, but their engine and editor are incredible, and SCII's shortcomings are from idiotic decisions like Colossi and Infestors.

The major difference is that Blizzard has a large staff capable of producing much higher quality assets, including models, animations, sounds, etc. and they are also able to do things like Battle.net where a modder obviously lacks the resources.

I'm completely unfamiliar with Starcraft 2's modding scene - my question is, with all the modding tool effort they have put in, has it resulted in significantly more / better mods? Especially compared to the original?

Yeah better tools always create better products.

And looking at the market now modding really can help the sales of a game. I'd bet a lot more people bought ArmA 2 to play Day Z who wouldn't normally be interested at all in a super realistic military FPS. And a lot of hipsters bought a cheap copy of Half Life 2 to play Dear Ester.

So it's definitely "worth it" to make modding easier.

Now back to 3D modeling....

When making a mod the two big things are art assets and coding. I have noticed that 3D modeling programs Maya, 3D Studio Max, aren't too terribly difficult to do use but they are amazingly prohibitively expensive. And on the opposite end of the spectrum coding is more difficult to do, but you can get Eclipse or Visual Studio 2010 and some other nice dev tools for free.

So here goes a question -

1. Where are some good resources for modeling low poly models?

I have 3DS max I just need the information on modeling low poly stuff.

Just.....use less? I'm not sure what the question is here, or rather it makes me worried about how you've been modeling up until this point, what's you average triangle count?

Mike