I am really getting tired of "Realistic" being used as the latest Doom put-down. I am not trying to be as realistic as possible.
I am trying to simulate the context with a better sense of believability than previous attempts. The context is a city, maybe burning.
The game is not a photo journal, nor a calender, nor any of the other things where you might admire a nice photo.
Photos suffer from being too realistic. They clash with the level buildings.
This really grates me when my attempts to get the scale right is bashed as trying to be "Realistic", and then realistic photos are preferred because they look neat.
I cannot understand at all why a eye-popping calender pic would be preferable.
I cannot see the sky as providing the context. In most level maps it just fills in the gaps between the buildings. In maps like Map19, the player is best off not focusing on it, because no version of rsky2 would fit well.
The sky is best when it is the least noticeable. A seamless visual from the level map far-ground to the sky pic would seem to be the ideal.
This leads to my to using a level map to generate the city. The buildings look reasonable enough. The GIMP scaling does hack them somewhat, but it would do the same to a photo.
Just what is wrong with them.
Contrast ?, color ?, style ??, not modern enough ?...
I am trying to eliminate the clash of scales that occurred with the previous black rsky2. The feeling of how big the rsky2h buildings are differs with each level map they are seen against. I did try several building scales. What I found was that too small just looks distant, too big visibly clashes in a way the mapper cannot fix.
I have been working on Map19 at the same time and I am fully aware of how hard it is to deal with the visual of those sky buildings in something like Map19. So I err on the side of too small because it can be lived with.
DoomLegacy has its own rsky2, with buildings that are about twice as tall as in rsky2h. If you don't look at them, they can be ignored because they are so brown (like the sky).
I have been drawing clouds for 2 weeks, almost every night. The rsky2h is the best of the lot, yet. Could still do better, but I am getting freaky sick of drawing clouds. The color quantization is doing a hack job on them.
Complaints are not much use if you cannot give any feedback or criteria for exactly how tall the buildings should be, by what measurement, or give some reasoning that could give a relative height.
How should the clouds be different? Should they be darker, more fluffy, more storm-like ??
rsky2a has no buildings, this would eliminate the building height problem entirely.
rsky2h has the darkest sky, but it is starting to look like columns of smoke (which is is not).
The others have different building heights. If there were several replies that those heights were preferable, then I would have found out something for another iteration.
Am working on a revised Map19. I would like to eliminate some of those level connections because it has gotten so big, but also feel I should preserve something from the original author's work. Should use another thread for Map19 discussion.
Last edited by wesleyjohnson on Feb 3 2014 at 19:23