so much soul. try to keep it 90s
Do what now?
Why do you faggots always confuse nostalgia with "soul"? Most of very early 3D graphics were actually devoid of any fucking soul. Very little human factor in it and couldn't look more lifeless and bland. Compare that to hand drawn animation of that era.Not saying that today's 3D graphics on average has more soul in it but generally you have way more possibilities to make things look more lively.
anyone have that 90s commercial (might have been early 2000s). its of a skateboarding kid at night in a city. and there's guitar music playing, I think it was a sketchers commercial
>>711122Well, you aren't wrong because soul is just an obfuscating expression for good art direction.
>>711118Boring composition, bad motive, horrible colors.Something about this just screams low quality, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
>>711134Don't let nostalgia cloud your judgment. Both pictures suck.
You all suck
>>711139nah left one is way bettter
>>711122Bruh this post really got no soul, it's S O U L E S SNow this, this is S O U L
>>711125I remember that intro, something before movie starts on FR3 if I recall correctly.
>>711118Remember /3/ to rewatch Transformers Beast wars all of it is early CGI glory.>>711122>>711134>>711147>Why do you faggots always confuse nostalgiaEarly CGI has a look that was never seen before or after.Yes most of the time it looks ugly as sin. However its a look that looks different and this is the point for me. Its about seeing something that was never seen and I fear is lost, we have toon shades however where is the early CGI shading?Its eye catching in the same way as a cartoon looks totally different to live action.
>>711742yes Beast Wars is absolute kino
>>711118I lived through it it was shitI am genuinely annoyed by people nostalgic over N64 era graphics
>>711742>where is the early CGI shading?I'm pretty sure it's just regular low poly models/low resolution textures combined with very primitive lighting systems. No true reflections, no ambient occlusion, that sort of thing. Also the rigging/skinning is very primitive when it comes to organic shapes. Like how you see on Dinobot's arm it just clips into his body since it's probably a separate piece, instead of deforming with the rest of the body "skin" like in a modern rig. It's why lots of early CGI involved robot looking characters since you didn't have to worry much about deformation. I think nailing the lighting system will probably be the hardest part. You might get something similar from Blender's internal renderer since that shit is like 20 years old.
night time city enviroments are my fav
>>711750Fuck you asshole
imagine how mind-blowing it was back then
>>711750Lol I just downloaded a 64 emulator to play ocrina of time and majoras mask again, I havent had one on my PC in a while. There will always be a spot in my heart for those graphics
If a new show/game/movie came out with this aesthetic, do you think it would be popular thanks to nostalgia, or will it be ignored because it looks bad compared to modern CGI? Imagine everything else about the production is done skillfully, like the animation is good, designs, cinematography, direction, etc.
>>711805I was born in 1982. It was a game changer, I particularly remember the effects in Titanic being spectacular.But then you had Lucas shitting up everything with the prequels and setting the stage for the massive over-use of CGI and the exclusion of practical effects (Titanic was a lot of practical effects, almost absurdly so with the use of water + SOME cgi)Game wise it was pretty amazing to live through the PS1 era with its extremely long games spanning multiple CDs.Warcraft II / Starcraft I cinematics were absolutely spectacular for their time Even though the graphics were shit, we were so used to using our imaginations with sprites and text and shit that the pizza box characters looked amazing.FF8 was probably the apex of "wow I can't believe how good this looks compared to how everything else before it looked"But I mean being nostalgic is one thing, but to say it had "soul" is kind of wrong; it was just work being done by a huge team of very skilled people working for months, instead of today's game cinematic shit that's turned out by a third party company working with a handful of people as fast as they can for several clients at a timeIt's like how indie games today rarely capture the quality of NES games despite looking similar because the NES game (if you look at the credits) was made by 60 people working as hard as they could to get the most out of the limited machine, while the indie stuff is 1 to 5 people following a retro tutorial
>>712064If this was done in early 90's hardware I'm curious as to how the got the snow to work
>>7120741. Procedural textures with hand-painted b/w masks + 2. Procedural textures with ramps/gradients based on surface angle
>>712074bumpmaps have been a thing for a long time
>>711870If I was a horror movie it'd do great. Any other genre no
>>711767>Blender's internal renderer since that shit is like 20 years old.>Blender's internal rendererRemoved from current version of blender.And this makes me sad.
>>711122The soul comes from how much effort people had to go through to make it. They had heaps of passion for 3d graphics and their enthusiasm shows through in the pictures
>>712775They might decide to bring it back in a future version, like they did with bevel.
>>712775You can reproduce that look in any modern renderer if you know what you're doing, emphasis on IF.
>>712064Queen Street in Toronto. I wonder if this image was made by a 3D company I applied for a job at when I got out of college in the 80s.
A Thread where I can show my low poly graphics test made using eevee.
And this car
>>711118Here's my low poly progress at a character. I was making a handheld console with my own game engine and I needed to keep the poly count and textures low.
>>715069Not working on that anymore, I switched to UE4 and I started working on remaking the model with ZBrush. Here is the texture for that, I only got through the head but just UV wrapping with that few pixels was difficult. It's actually quite difficult to do low resolution UV maps, I go back and look at half-life/quake textures and they can show so much more in so little space.
Can anons stop posting Nintendo renders and start posting obscure renders from the Ps1, Saturn Dreamcast and from other obscure places?I like Nintendo stuff but there comes a point where these threads are oversaturated with it.
>>715193Reddit spawns in, loves nintendo because they don't appreciate anything else.
>>715034>A Thread where I can show myactually no.
>>711782What software or advice would you consider for making this type of environment but for a video games ? thanks
>>715860Any current 3D package will do.
>>715458You're sad about it?
>>715906no he's saying this is a thread for authentic 90s visuals, not imitations
I used that software back then and it was fantastic.
>>716539less noisy than cycles lol
>>716539Same here. Also Videoscape 3D and Aegis Modeler. Later some Imagine 3D.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WslSzQydnNs Then came the VT and LW days, very productive timehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L94DC7Lm-pY Later the switch to Intel and a (loaned) Alpha Station. First contact with 3D Studio.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8azQEceSJo&t=166s I also was an early adopter of Maya(workplace got the license in april '98).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHFLapfliN8Due to my jobs there was some extensive Softimage and Alias use in between this.
>>716565Dan Silva was the genius who programmed DPaint and later 3D Studio
>>716567I've met him at Siggraph, 1993, maybe 1994. Still got a box of 3D studio, signed by people from the Yost Group.
>>716568Lucky guy3ds Max 20th Anniversary Interview with Gary Yosthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUIi7zo04RA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OPZV1v14a8Another one from the 5.5/5.6 days. Tons of 3rd party plugins, super productive time for me. Always some job to do.
>>715034Neads linear interpolation to look like old style. Bezier interpolation doesn't really catch the vibe.
Just downgrade your computer to something your 3d program can only barely run on, and try to do something in a limited amount of time and only using the most basic interface - no advanced features. Boom! Retro.Also use the crappiest shaders you can find. Write your own. Especially if you've never done it before.Every decision has so much more significance. No noodling, you MUST plan before doing anything.
>>717030We had Bezier interpolation for motion curves in the mid 80s you absolute retard.
Top this you glowing CIA african americans.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FKpU0pnne8Damn, those background scenarios are full of soul.
>>711739Look at them jojos, thats the way you do it
>>716539any current software with this simplicity?Just wanna start making some fun retro shit
>>712775Just write shaders using any old non-PBR shading model (blinn, phong, whatever it's like one line of code and that's assuming someone else hasn't already done it), boost the ambient color, don't use normal maps, and turn off shadows AO and GI. Use a rasterized rendering engine like cycles. Don't be a blendlet who cries wah wah I want my old shitty garbage deprecated features feed me more for free.
>>717891Literally: this image, the soulest
got a shitload of old stuff from the vintage thread on cgp forums. lightwave 5.6, 3d studio max 2.5, photoshop 5, after effects 5.5 (all with tons of plugins) aura video paint, organica, canoma, poser, elastic reality and so on.probably all for nothing kek
>>718657Make a megadrive and I'll share you some of my warez.
>>718015Just use an Amiga Emulator and Sculpt 3D LOLor Videoscape or Lightwave
>>716672Yep. I rewatch this every now and then. It’s both primitive and yet hellish and creative. Cats2019 is arguably more horrific, for different reasons.
>>718657>3d studio max 2.5
>>711400Wario fucking dies
>>718657>>718778Yeah, could you upload this somewhere? I'd like to archive it.
>>717891>mario is pure subdivision surfacing
>>711287>>711118surely there's a modern commmunity that still bathes in making this kind of stuff? it should be easier then ever now.
>>711400>back of the train is blurred while the front is perfectly stillwhat the fuck, that's not soul
>>722685You still need need to understand framing, composition, lighting, color theory among other things...something 75% of the people posting here probably completely lack. >>722762Idiot, that MB was done by hand in post
>>711409Stanley and Stella in: Breaking the Icethis was pre-SGI stuff from 1987They used the Symbolics systemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolics
>>723122...funny enough, some of it lives on in Wings 3D.
>>711750Well jokes on you because I'm nostalgic for Nintendo DS graphics.
>>711750Get a life.
>>722685No, because nobody wants it (before you start: figuratively, not literally) and most people would just think you're terrible. The only people still don't it are doing so for pragmatic reasons rather than stylistic ones, which is to say you're either for some reason stuck with software from a billion years ago, or you for some reason haven't done anything to improve since the late 90's. Scott Cawthon's the best example, using it to great effect.
>>723166Some of us simply give no fucks about what fags like you think
>>723190He was just answering that guys question dude.
>>723302Hey, at least it's 3ds. Not that much has changed regarding to Indian CGI.
>>711134I see a bunch of words but no kind of justification for them.
>>711138bad motive? lol what a stupid critique what does that even mean
>>723929just a buttmad blendlet who failed at the donut tutorial
Any other advice on how to replicate parts of this style? Like color palette, texture size, etc limitations? I've been interested in trying to create a style half-way between the PS1 type pre-rendered backgrounds and this ancient CGI type stuff.
>>723975That was done in 3D Studio Max R1.2 and R2 btw., with the standard scanline renderer. Prepare a set of textures for your scene that matches in terms of quality, style, etc., sketch and plan your scene, make blocking and perspective tests, know what you have to build and what not.
>>723977Thanks, but I guess I mean: are there any old hardware and software limitations I should keep in mind when trying to replicate?So for instance, I've also been trying to replicate the PS1's audio compression sound, so I've been taking note of how it had 512 KB of audio RAM, a 16-Bit sound chip, 24 channels of ADCPM @ 44.1 KHz, and so on. I'm just wondering about those kind of limitations.
>>723980Delving into old software/hardware takes time and nerves. You are probably better off trying to replicate that look as close as possible in your current software.
>>723981Oh absolutely, so I'm just trying to mimic some of the limitations on modern software. Like PS1 textures were, max, 256x256, so if I try anything bigger I'm cheating, and the effect will look off.
>>723975mandalore gaming haha :)
>>723982>256x256 texturesNot for the prerendered stuff. I personally looked for the highest quality textures available back then. I built my own library over the years, but mostly relied on texture libraries from commercial CDs in the 90s and early 2000s. I still have a ton of them, mostly stuff from Artbeats, Dosch, Arroway, Total Textures or Marlin Studios.
>>723987Could you upload them to mega or something? I'd love to look at them.
>>723988Sure thing. Could take some time.
>>723990https://mega.nz/#F!fixBHCYD!52vxQu2yM-prW88cMTTLawI found some CDs, not all. Thrown in some texture stuff from my old workstations. Dunno if any of that junk is useful. File formats are all mixed up, also some older types, so you probably want to convert that.
>>724028>3.8 gbsHoly shit. You're amazing
>>724030No prob. Good luck with your project.
>>717965>We gotta move these>refrigerators>We gotta move these>color TVsssss
>>717965it's funny to think that most pre-viz these days looks better than this
>>724643How to make this in Blender?
>>724028>megafuckin transfer quotaid love to see this but I guess I'll need to wait a bit
>>711134>>711287>>711400>phong and cubemaps>maybe raytracing in parts>bump maps (not normal maps)>catmull-clark subdiv>no gamma correction>manual post processing>shitty colors (from printing and scanning?)honest to god it looks atrocious but it looks easy to emulate in any modern renderer/engine if you're willing to throw away every lesson we've learnt since 1995just do everything in the most hacked together ad-hoc way
Surprised what I was able to do with a 23 year old tool this morning. Getting soft raytraced shadows relies on spinning/wiggling lights and motion blur. 100 hand placed point lights to emulate bouncing light. Abysmal render times due to no multithreading.Guy and fire are flat billboards. 3 or 4 image maps, everything else procedurals. Post processing done directly in the application. Overall not a pleasant experience.
>>727416getting some might & magic 6 vibes here, anon
>>727416and the tools used?
>>727433Lightwave 5.6 for everything.
>>726985it's great if you're going to make small animations / shorts.Modern crap takes too long to render
>>711118I take it you like vaporwave too anon
>>727416The absolute mad man.
>>727581More like incredibly bored.
No one linked them?For shame, /3/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEWeP2YPKzohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5zMtCvWhG0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vG3FZfwn8Mhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlxMd3-YlAk
>>711742gotta admit, the beast wars masterpiece toys really show that the weird, semi realistic-semi stylized look of the character's beast forms could work with more realistic details.
>>715860keep shading really shitty and simple.No joke, the least PBR you get the more retro it will look.
I bet you dopes think the horrific Baby in Tin Toy looks good because it's old.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffIZSAZRzDA
>>727665I like that short. It marks the premiere of Renderman. Also, there is nothing more difficult than the human form. That's why all these animation studios stylize humans heavily, which clashes incredibly with all the realistic shading and lighting going on in modern productions. They effectively maneuvered themselves into a corner with this.
>>711805Born in 1978. The T-1000 effects in Terminator 2 were genuinely mind blowing. The effects in Jurassic Park also amazed us back then.
>>728371All the CG(ingame and cutscenes) for SC1 was done very economically in 3D Studio Max(R1&R2) and Character Studio. Also, the concept of handing the cutscene work to external studios wasn't really a thing yet, so like with Westwood's C&C, the regular artists did them./useless information
MystdumpingExcuse the cursors.
>>728433They used StrataVision 3D on Macintosh Quadras for this. Really weird. But at least for Myst 2 they used Softimage 3|D
>>728433So was the mist in Myst here as usual due to draw distance issues? or intentionally there as atmosphere for that shot? Because I thought every frame in that game was prerendered since there were limited movement options and it ran at like 5 fps.
>>728443Why? There wasn't much else that capable on Macs at that time. The alternative was doing in on Amigas, which by that time had a few comparable tools or or shell out 100k for an SGI plus software(Alias). >>728471The mist was a purely artistic choice. Fog/mist helps to convey distance and scale.
>>711118how do you even achieve this with say blender?
>>727416a lot of soul, gj anon
>>728477guess you mean the refraction of the glass? You need to use ray tracing for that, blender prob have one since they've been around since the 70's
>>728411Maybe that is why the art was consistent over everything. I still miss the gritty Aliens inspired SciFi look of SC1. SC2 is basically Warhammer 40k miniatures combined with Warcraft 3/WoW art style.
>>711125soul overflow as you go through that window.>>711134thanks, agreed
Here you gohttps://youtu.be/YlUKcNNmywk https://youtu.be/kWChhdIgT6Qhttps://youtu.be/AwdjreJKggg
Is there anyway I can get these visuals in Maya or something? Are there any good tutorials on how to go about making stuff looking like this?
>>729276Use the software rendererlooks pretty crappy and flat
>>729276No global illumination
From the time when the "flying logo" craze reached its peak. I think I had this on some VHS, together with other SIGGRAPH stuff. Also the Mind's Eye compilations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hIOfEiy4lc"We do bump mapping, texture mapping, reflection mapping, uhhh...road mapping, you-name-it-mapping"
>>711118The Real Adventures of Jonny Quest ; Quest world episodes.
I LOVE THIS KIND OF 3D MODELS how is this called? Vintage 3d? I love the aestethic it makes me feel in home
>>729476Yes welcome home white man.
>>716510Why does it say retro in the subject then?
taste the 90s
>>726719what makes it modern but suited for retro?
>>724028Vagrant noob to 3d here, what exactly is in here?
>>723981Like blender or something? Can you point me in the right direction what features I should be looking for? Would older hardware even run on modern pcs from the last decade?
>>716565I've never even heard of any of these programs beyond Maya, it seems like a decade or two or three ago instead of there only being a few major player 3d programs, there were a larger amount of competing ones. Was there more variety back then in picking a software?Now things like Blender and Maya evolve and always update to stay relevant, why didn't those earlier ones do the same and stick around? was the code just fucked and not worth trying to update in comparison to building new software from the ground up?
>>730680box modeling>>730681old textures/junk from my two workstations, used in commercial projects during the 90s and early 2000s>>730682you can emulate the style of old CG with modern tools, it's mostly about lighting, surfaces and the way objects are modeled. we had no global illumination back then. also no PBR materials, just old diffuse and specular models. there was no sculpting, we either did poly modeling or NURBS. box/sub-d modeling appeared in the latter half of the 90s. >>730684high end 3D software was expensive, as was the proper hardware you needed. so most people just pirated them for home use. shelling out $20k for Softimage or $13k for Maya was something reserved for studios.I don't know. tools come and go. companies get bought up and their products are cannibalized for tech and finally discontinued. Autodesk for example has a dubious history when it comes to that. Softimage/XSI fell victim to that. Alias is still around in different form, as are 3D Studio(now max) and Lightwave.
>>730706You've suddenly reminded me of all the specialized rigs and workstations that predominated industry work at the time.
>>711122I agree. Half the appeal of this era of art is its obvious artificiality and soullessness.
>>730706would blender be a good match for retro 3d modeling? It seems to be suited for box modeling. Or would something like wings 3d be a better choice? blender seems to have good box modeling but i know im over simplifying it.Where did you guys get your textures from back in the day? Sounds like you did it as a career for quite some time, thanks for all the interesting insight.
>>730819blender will do just fine. either bought texture collection CDs or got access to them by employers/studios. I also started building my own collection when digital cameras got better.
>>730821The idea of buying a CD with textures on it is really cool and interesting. Were they divided by theme like a disc of textures relating to say, houses? And a different disc for "space" stuf? Or were they just completely miscellaneous? Was it sort of like those old shareware 100 video game cds were a handful were great and the majority were just eh? Very interesting to me even though it probably is boring to everyone else. Did you have to pick the discs from a catalogue or something?
Godamn 3D hipsters should be hanged
>>730836>Was it sort of like those old shareware 100 video game cds were a handful were great and the majority were just eh?Not that guy but I would imagine it was more like buying those 12,000 clip art image CDs
>>730836they were usually sold by category; bricks/stones, metals, wood, interior, city, sci-fi and so on. sellers like Dosch, Artbeats or Marlin advertised them in 3D magazines or sold them directly on their websites. some shovelware collections existed, often with maps of dubious quality.didn't matter, I grabbed everything I could get my hands on.
Holy fuck this thread is a rushAnyone else watch YTV in the 90s and catch those clips of the Minds Eye and other early GC shorts?
>>730902Thats awesome. I wonder if those old cds are floating around anymore. Thanks for uploading those textures though, i might check them out later. No viruses or anything right?Leads me to another question, how do artists build up their texture libraries without infecting their computer with all sorts of weird shit? Im new enough to all of this that its a concern I have. I doubt most people are buying the majority of their textures from vendors.I dont blame you for buying them all even if you couldnt confirm the quality. With internet speed being so shit in the day even if you could find them online it would take forever.Thanks again for all the cool knowledge, that era of 3d modeling is fascinating to me. I think a few anons on here have talked about a book or two that talk about the history of 3d design and I want to check a few out to learn about all of the older ways of doing this stuff.
>>7111342 can play at this game.
>>731099at least you tried anon
complete noob question herewhat makes old 3d LOOK old? Obviously its a culmination of things, but what are some terms you can throw out that contribute to those retro renders looking so obviously dated? What techniques and new technologies came about in the last decade that made things look more realistic? I love both old and new 3d and have an appreciation for both.
>>732125Lighting for example. You couldn't do GI, only fake/approximate it, for example with dome-like light rigs or an ungodly amount of fill lights.
>>732128GI??can you elaborate a bit more?i wanted to find a list of advancements and research each one. i thought it would give me a better ability at understandning not just old cg but applying those advancements to new stuff.
>>732133Global illumination, to simulate the effects of indirect lighting(bouncing light and color bleeding). Also no ambient occlusion, but that and things like contact shadows were kinda faked by the light rigs. Materials were obviously still non-physically based, so you had parameters like specular strength, shininess/glossiness, etc. to define the looks. Phong for specular highlights(early 3DS still had optional Gouraud). Also no normal maps, just greyscale bumpmaps(or procedurals as bumpmaps).
>>732143im still a bit confused what a normal map is, is it a texture that has an illusion of 3d?
>>732279It's a texture that uses RGB to describe three axis, which is further computed into depth but without altering geometry. Bump maps are 2D only, but function the same otherwise. Displacement maps actually alter the geometry. They're non-destructive but very expensive depending on the resolution you want.
>>732279"A normal map is an image that stores a direction at each pixel. These directions are called normals. [...] A normal map is commonly used to fake high-resolution details on a low-resolution model. [...] However, the silhouette of the model doesn't change."http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Normal_map
>>732294so its basically....a texture with interactive areas? That sounds gross. Why would you pick that over just picking the old school way of painting the detail into the texture, or actually modelling the detail on? What sort of fringe scenario makes it worth it if its computationally expensive anyway?
>>732294Do games still use this today? Is it worth learning? I feel like I remember seeing this in Halo 2 honestly on a lot of metal surfaces when I zoomed in. Pretty cool.
>>732279>>732445Its a textures that maps how light is suppose to interact with the model.How fancy it can get depends on the shader stackss, but you need some kind of reflection/highlights/diffusion to get any benefit.So instead of making a model with 10x the detail, you instead bake in light behavior as if the model had 100x the detail.But talking about it doesn't make sense without understanding what gourard vs phong is.
>>732482idk if im using the phrase correctly, but PS2 era graphics sometimes had textures with subtle (or not so subtle) painted on highlighting to create the illusion of extra lighting or surface geometry. I think some people called that baked lighting but idk if thats the right term. could bump mapping be thought of as the next step in that sort of thing? a sort of smart baked light?Could you combine the two or would it be pointless?The gourard thread is mine btw, im desperate to learn.
>>732482in halo 2 i remember a lot of strange surfaces that if i used the flash light on them they acted like they were 3d but zooming in on them it was a 2d object, so im assuming the holes on the floor here are bump mapped? This is cool to finally learn. Thank you. back in the halo 2 Xbox days how much more efficient would it have been to do that for all of the floor tiles and such?
>>732485>>732483>>732482god damnitI think that the drone enemies bodies which were exoskeletons made a lot of use of the same technique and maybe hunter shields.
>>730805Yeah, the soullessness gives it more soul. It's almost like soullessness as a deliberate aesthetic choice.
>>726985Jesus, I'm just passing through /3/, and this post is an example of how having knowledge about a field can make you seem rather like a snob.I have no idea what (aside from shitty colors obviously) your list of complaints are. I admit that, because I have never looked into this board's topic in any depth. But those 3 images look great to me, I don't see your "atrocious" at all. The motion blur on the Mario one is the only negative I can see.
>>711750oh really that's interesting?
>>711750Is that so
>>732485>im assuming the holes on the floor here are bump mapped? This is cool to finally learn. Thank you.Yeah. Another neat effect that Halo had was that in Halo CE a lot of walls had detail textures. If you got close to the wall another texture would load over the current texture so you couldn't see the low resolution.
>>733516The original Unreal also did that, a first (I think) in games due to the improved texture compression debuted in that game.
>>711118Since this is /3/ and not /v/, let's discuss what makes a render look "soulful" instead of how much we hate video games.>no colored lighting, only black shadows and white highlights>low resolution, blurry textures, often with visible stretching (especially on environments)\>only the most basic of material effects. almost everything looks like shiny plastic>saturated colors
>>733674Just thought of another one: textures for real materials were usually just literal photos that'd get stretched to hell and back to avoid ugly tiling.
>>733675do people not use photos for textures?
>>731255Ok 30 something
Mission critical: a comfiest videogame has never been made, great graphics, very "soulful" as you autists say. Also must be one of the best sci fi videogame plots out there, which is not to say much but still
>>733691>>733690You're past 30 faster than you think
>>733674Some of that is nonsense.
>>733682no, only monsters
>>733682For "modern" low poly efforts? Can't imagine that. Back then? Absolutely. At least I did. Everything got kit bashed into usable parts for textures. Pictures of animals, photos of co-worker's faces or own body parts, etc.
>>733724>own body partsthat explains mara in shin megami tensei
is this the longest living fagchan thread ever
>>711122it has character. Not soul. The character comes from trying to work with the limitations of the technology.
>>733788Not even close
>>711750this. they were low effort with absolutely shite lighting engines.
>>734561Nobody cares zoomer
>>734561Imagine being that retarded
>>733724i dont understannd, isnt a brick in a modern videogame using a high res texture that started out as a photo of a brick?
I want to fucking die
Alright, I'm going to 'treat' myself to some era-appropriate CG making after work. LW 5.6 it is again, maybe with some 3D Studio MAX R2 to supplement dynamics & particles.
>>736218can you show some of your work ?
>>736224When it's done sure lol.Don't know if I really want to bother with something like characters. Probably more 90s era stuff like mechs or spaceships.
damn man, lighting is such a bitch. who knew.still can't figure out how to do phong shading in blender.I also should decrease the roughness on everything, all old cgs just look so wet
>>736305Does blender even have a phong shader?
>>736310Apparently the old blender internal used to look pretty similar. But no, I don't think so.
>>736305specular highlights reference from autodesk 3D studio DOS for comparison
>>736315That shiny dot and immediate cut off is really what nails it. All the old Nintendo CGI ads have it everywhere. I wonder if it'd just be easier at this point to run a virtual machine and use old programs than try to make blender 2.8 do it. I'm gonna check out blender's internal to see how it compares
>>726985>>bump maps (not normal maps)What's the difference?
>>736355OG bumpmaps invented by Jim Blinn in the 70's just calculate the normal from a single channel heighmap determining the altered normal slope by looking at adjacent pixels. They are excellent for showing high detail microstructure like say cellar skin or the roughness of smooth concrete, any micro features on large flat surfaces. They can not show large continuous features and slopes like a modern normal map that uses the RGB values to store a full 3D vector.Those surprisingly did not became a thing until the 00's despite the idea already being part of how you derive an altered normal from a classic bump/height map.Confusion arise when the term 'bump map' is often used interchangebly whenever a 'normal map' is used.Got that way because normal maps are more useful and for the most part replaced everything we previously did with bumpmaps.Some people decided to keep calling them bumpmaps for no good reason, I've written this very post like a 100 times since the days of HL2.
>>736396I still use greyscale bump maps on top of normal maps to introduce secondary detail into surfaces
>>736325Couldn't get 2.79 to work on my computer for some reasonMan, there is like no documentation on this stuff. You'd think it'd be easy to use the oldest shaders on the newest programs
>>736456Shame. Ask some plugin dev to write you a phong shader for recent versions of blender, lol.
>>736495Got 2.5 to work though! Definitely closer to the look I want.It's incredible how unintuitive just moving around the workspace was initially. You're basically glued to the keyboard instead of zooming around with your mouse
>>711118not technically 90s but might as well be
>>712905it's funny that you're so invested in this internet meme that you've developed a belief in literal esp just to justify it. enthusiasm ether is not a thing and the people who made this stuff were just bored wage slaves thinking about what to have for lunch, not starry-eyed children on a magical quest.
I loved this when I was a kidhttps://youtu.be/m0WbPaGqeoc
>>736538what, have you scanned the past with your enthusiasm esp and determined my parents weren't really into it when they were fucking?
>>736325are you talking about the phong shader?>>736310what shaders does blender use these days anyway with 2.8.3 being currennt?
>>711118some 1989 CGI for yallhttps://vimeo.com/305014785
>>736588I recognize Renderman everywhere I see it
lol beast wars
>tfw when you really want a tamagotchi virtual pet so your parents buy you ones you can only have on the one family PC
>>736666oops meant to be this pic
>>736663that hair actually looks really good. wtf? how.
>>736218I really need to start drawing storyboards or at least sketch something out. I'm fumbling around here with no real direction.
>>711767Max still has all the legacy lights and renderer does it not?
>>7330703d is the snobbiestand cuntiest of all hobbies but at least on 4chan you expect it. try polycount for a really bad time
>>737413Ofc it has. But notice the running theme how the guys trying to figure out how to do 'simple graphics' are also simple people.Simple in the sense they're daft as absolute fuck and need someone to hold their hand every step of the way.It never dawns on them to go into the render settings and switch to the most legacy option and turn off features til it looks old and charming (read crappy).Instead they keep posting amongst eachother trying to analyze what great secrets the ancients used and pretend it's all a big mystery.For them disabling rendering features with labels written in plain english is like reading hieroglyphs before the rosetta stone.
>>737500This. Every single time.
>>737500you seem upset
>>737628Well I wrote a minorly salty post so perhaps by millenial standards? I'm from the 80's, 'upset' meant something else back then.We lived thru the cold war with the risk of nuclear annihalation still being a very plausible concern so we were not so triggered by minor infractions.Back then when someone was described as 'upset' it was like this elevated state of distress that went far beyond simply showing ones emotion.
>>737654did the cold war give you autism too grandpa
>>737721He called you out and now you're assblasted
i love everquest's grafx
>>711870This style came about from people giving a shit about the science and not the art. That was necessary, considering the medium, but...If the designs, and animation, and direction, and all that, is missing, I'm not sure that it would even be obvious that this is what they are trying to emulate.
>>711118How about some fully rendered morphing spaceship CGI from a movie made in 1986? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pNhdeFPl60
>>711870>>712215Look up Five Nights at Freddie's
>>732445Because everytime anything moves the illusion would break. It affects things like specularity, which would be tricky to paint since it creates sparkles when the camera moves. The game RAGE 1 baked shadows, AO, GI and specularity into a giant texture to save performance. It looks alright in certain angles from afar, but if you look closely or move even a bit you can see it's just some fixed pixels that are white.So bumpmap/normal map is a lot easier than painting light by hand, it gives the illusion of 3D, and it's cheap to compute, as Half Life 2 and Doom 4 were some of the first games to introduce it in 2004.Nowadays the main texture only stores the color, everything else is in separate textures or computed in real time.
Has anyone ever tinkered around with Bryce?
Tomb Raider Cutscene
>>742536Yes, kinda as a supplementing tool back then to create landscapes.
>>736662It still looks better than Transformers Energon.