/3/ - 3DCG

>>572332
This too many polygons?

wish we had the models ripped from the misadventures of tron bonne, they're really good

>>572340
looks awesome

the gran turismo 1 and 2 cars were beautiful

from bloody roar

>>572332
I made this some time ago.

>>572703
That's not low poly that's faux poly.

>anything with less polygons than the average zbrush sculpt is now low poly
I want all normies to die

>>572720
Lowpoly this fucker.

>>572720
Nah bruh get this bruh now that the standards for high poly have changed that means the standards for low poly change too!
*conveniently ignores the fact that this would make "low poly" a near irrelevant distinction in modern realtime graphics since everything has a varying poly budget to hit and uses the same workflow otherwise*

>>572340
That's sick

Some of my favourite ones

>>572787

>>572356
those unfiltered textures and baked in highlights are sooooo good

<3

>>572789
Those were in the Dragon Ball Origins games, for Nintendo DS.

>>572791

>>572792

>>572713
what is the difference

>>572793

>>572795

>>572796

>>572797

>>572799

>>572800

>>572801

>>572802

>>572803

>>572804

>>572805

>>572806

>>572807

>>572811

>>572814

>>572815

>>572816

>>572818

>>572819

>>572820

>>572822

>>572823

>>572824

>>572826

>>572827

>>572831

>>572832

>>572833

>>572834
Now some from DB Kai Ultimate Butouden.

>>572835

>>572837

>>572839

>>572841

>>572843

>>572844

>>572850

>>572852

>>572839
Are friezas arms not attached? Looks like the meshes are intersecting

>>572854
Yeah, most models are built like this. Look at Boo and Goku's arms >>572844 >>572837

Wish there were more tutorials out there for looks like this but I guess it's kind of a niche thing to go for that 'true' lo poly look that isn't just a reduced mesh.

>>572855
Thats neat, I like how they sort of 'hid' the separation by making part of gokus gi part of the arm instead. Keeps it looking good when it moves

I've always enjoyed the style of the Legends games and I think a big part of that is because it seems the concept artist was pretty well aware of what was technologically possible when designing the characters.

We had an amazing low poly thread on /vr/
https://desuarchive.org/vr/thread/4061145/

>>572857
What I find hard isn't the modeling, and not even the texturing, but the UV unwrapping.

>>572870
Oh man you mean in comparison to regular models? I was actually thinking of finally learning UV unwrapping with this kind of stuff because I assumed it would be simpler.

>>572871
Most indie trash developers and amateur modelers just unwrap as usual, texture it in high resolution then shrink the textures, but this isn't how it was done in the past. Most textures were painted in low resolution to keep details sharp. Some were even drawn in pixel art.
Meanwhile, you need to be careful with the UV isles sizes to compensate for the small texture size, the low geometry and the low resolution and make it all look consistent. Areas like faces get bigger isles.
But which techniques use? How to conciliate texture distortions in a 128x128 texture map for a 500 poly model? Everything needs to be tweaked by hand.

It doesn't look that hard. Until you try it.

Lowpoly this motherfucker!

>>572713
just because it has flat shading and vertex painting doesn't mean that the poly count is any lower anon

>>572863

>>573611
Can that model be rendered on a PS1? Nope, here's what an actual low poly dragon looks like nigga.

>>573635
honestly does that model even have that many less tris than the other dragon? the "memepoly" dragon has a couple useless edge loops but otherwise id say its low enough

>>573640
Depends on the game and limitations of the system you're trying to replicate. If you're trying to aim for a lowpoly style you have a pretty strict budget to work with if you want to capture the integrity as well as aesthetic of low poly.

>>572931
Awesome. I'm having trouble getting hips and shoulders done on all my lo poly shit. If you guys have tutorials or experience, I'd love to hear your takes on dat shit.

>>572787
how the hell are these textures made?

>>575473
Pixel art
The key is in the texel density distribution. You make the face and other high detail areas take up a lot of the UV while less detail intensive areas get small

What programs do you guys use for modeling and texturing?

>>575487
maya and photoshop

>>575487
CLIP PAINT STUDIO , blender
this is semi low poly too, for webgl(slow realtime render) presentation

>>575517
>this is semi low poly

>>575517
why do you keep posting this shit everywhere, this is a cluttered unappealing mess

>>572791
>>572792
>>572793
>>etc
I've been trying to rip models from DS games myself but my results are extremely hit and miss. For instance, I was able to get through Bravely Default's just fine, but Animal Crossing and Eternal Oasis I absolutely cannot find the NPC models for after decryption.

do you know of anywhere that I can just download low poly models from these fucking games (e.g. animal crossing)

>>576168
https://www.models-resource.com/3ds/animalcrossingnewleaf/

>>576208
thanks m8

>>572720
>implying everything above your comment isn't low poly

I'm currently working this corrupted knight
my low poly is pretty weak though

Daily reminder that simple model rips aren't enough

Early 3d consoles did graphics very differently from modern day consoles and pcs, and most people designed their models with these limitations in mind

>>576681
What sort of limitations?

Not OP here. Do you guys have any good tutorials/tips on how to make textures like in
>>572340
or those dragon ball meshes?

>>576966
First off, must counsels outputted at very low resolutions, pixelating/blurring everything

The ps1 spyro games would swap out models with lower poly variants when they were far enough away from the camera

On an emulator that renders everything at your computer's native resolution, this is really obvious, but on actual hardware, it's way too pixelated for you to really be able to tell

Second, consoles of that era had some really funky texturing

The n64 had really crappy bilinear filtering that used three samples instead of four, the playstation didn't render textures in perspective, instead skewing them to the shape of the polygon, and the sega saturn (lol) couldn't do transparency

>>576678
I would have gone with a large amount of tiny tentacles spewing out of the helmet like a beard.
That way you don't need to animate a tentacle.

Anyone here experienced in lowpoly environment?

How do I make a modular low poly dungeon? How many polys per mesh? What the texture resolution should be? Do I include normal maps and PBR related maps?

>>578147
First, do you mean lowpoly or stylized?
Because stuff like WoW, League of Legends, does not really count as lowpoly anymore.

>>578167
I mean lowpoly. I don't think my other questions correlate with stylized.

Any tricks for managing low poly deformations?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON3gsB5AxII

>>578221

>>578226
Shorten the inner faces as the animation goes along?

>>576966

Old consoles you have to limit polycount to keep frame rate high. The more poly the slower the rendering the lower the fps. A ps1 had 1 to 2k polygons on screen on average. They also had to fit the whole thing on 2mb of vram. So there you go. Make a scene that's less than 2mb and has no more than 2k polygons that includes textures for models sprites. And make it good enough to look good on old TV resolution.

Also this is very limited generalization. You'd have to dig up a ps1 Dev kit and hardware to get a good feel for developing art for it.

>>578234
>You'll have to dig up a PS1 Dev Kit
Got you covered, Anon.
http://ffhacktics.com/wiki/PSX_SDK

>>578204
Yeah, fair enough.

You're asking technical questions with an artistic goal. There's no target polycount because your polycount will depend on the size, complexity of your meshes. How you use your polys matters a lot more than how many you use - just look at low poly environment art you like and take notice of how they use their geometry.
The same applies for textures, resolution will vary a lot though you could always UV with a pixel grid to see the size of your pixels, since pixel size is probably something you wanna hit a certain spot for, rather than minimize as much as possible like in modern texturing.

The nicest lowpoly art I've seen uses diffuse maps only, you can try to include normals and PBR maps but they're probably gonna look like ass with that style.

>>578319
ok thx, anon.

>>578226
This technique is also great when making wrinkles in clothing. In blender just use alt+S to scale along the normals on the medial edge to create a convincing wrinkle, then UV your shades accordingly for a nifty cel shaded effect.

>>572332
This pic could have been a 10/10 satire (from the thumbnail I thought it was) if it was just a plain wireframe.

how do i git gud at low poly texturing

low poly you say?

I'd like to learn about hip and shoulder deformation on low poly models. Does anyone have any good pics or guides?

>>578226
I sure could have used this info 5 days ago, thanks though, I'll save this for sure.

BTW fellow anons, making a low poly ant. I can't seem to avoid triangles in the tessellation. Is this fine? Is there a better way I could do something like this?

I want to have a shitload of these in a game at once. I'll have to play around with it but I'm hoping 612 tri isn't too much for it.

>>580818
all game engines convert geometry to triangles for rendering. keeping it at quads is good for edge flow and easier modelling. There is nothing wrong with triangles if it doesn't fuck up your normals, deformation.

>>580819
so you're basically saying the only reason to keep things in quads is to make modelling easier and keep animations smoother? That's honestly pretty reassuring, I was always worried some engine would fuck up try to do something like insert quads into my tris to convert into more tris.

Maya's crashed so many times I'm starting to give up hope in computers.

I guess I got memed on pretty hard by people shitposting about NO TRIS shit.

>>580828
it's not shitposting. Only use tris if you have to, but there's nothing actually incorrect about using them. Best practice is to always keep quads if you can.
>maya crashes
welcome to the club. If you haven't learned to ctrl+s after every action you soon will.

>>580818
What, you can't add the support loops in now?

>>580831
>support loops
edge loops you mean? I could but I dont see any better ways to lower tri count

beginner here, i suck :/

>>580818
This looks really bad and wasteful. You should take a look on some Playstation models.

>>581323
this is not low poly, it's faux-poly

>low poly modeling is super fun and i love it
>hate unwrapping
>be absolute shit in texturing
>don't even know how to rig stuff
fuck me

>>575610
He's excited about what he's doing, don't be rude.

>>575517

>59k tris
>as many polygons as a hero character mesh in a modern AAA videogame
>semi lowpoly

Is a human mesh with 512 polygons low poly? Or should I aim for 256?

>>581832
polys mean nothing. How many TRIS?

>>581835
shit dude how do i find out?
Cinema 4D -> Object Information only lists polys and points

>>581832
Depends on which platform, generation and game type you base your standards. I don't know jack about low poly but you should try to look for the polycounts of characters from known games (PS1 era like Metal Gear Solid).

>>581898
Triangulate your model and look at the number again?

>>581902
>Triangulate your model and look at the number again?
ok so left: 530 triangles, right: 290 triangles
both are still WIP

>>581962

>beeg lowpoly teetees

my dude!

Is there anywhere a topology guide like the left face but even more lowpoly and has side views too? Because most stuff like this is already triangulated or lacking in side views

Is there a term for early 00s realtime visuals? The sort that aren't quite classic low poly but don't use bump/normal maps or anything newer than that and still stick to only using the bare minimum polygons required to make stuff look decent.

>>581978
thanks m8
i always start doing normal bodies but always end up with exaggerated THIQQ models

>>582021

I mean, its still technically lowpoly by todays standards. Early PS2 era graphics I guess? I remember those looking better than PS1 yet still markedly worse than something near the end or even middle of the systems lifetime

>>582007
By the point you start putting edgeloops on a mesh you left low poly territory, best advice is to go look at ripped game models and study the topology.

https://www.models-resource.com/

>>582070
>its still technically lowpoly by todays standards
>>582118
>By the point you start putting edgeloops on a mesh you left low poly territory

Who's most right, then?

>>582021
>bare minimum polygons required to make stuff look decent
This is the key to low poly. Make a model that looks like something and do it with as few polygons as you can manage with the style you're going for.
Most of the detail is in the textures.

>>582375
What's the limit? Is something like the models UT2k4 shipped with applicable now?

I think lowpoly's a bit of a busted definition if it's going to be pushed beyond really early 3D. It's worthwhile making a distinction between the workflow that involves traditional modeling/diffuse texturing and post-normalmapping/sculpting workflows since there's major differences between the two and having a name for it would definitely be useful but it sort of has to stop being lowpoly at some point. It's really hard to consider something like Half-Life 2 low poly, for example, despite the workflow being so radically different to today's realtime 3D.

>>582400
The problem is the poly count needed for a low poly model is completely dependent on the object being made and the style being used. So there can't really be some number limit to define low poly.
A blade of grass with 200 polys would be considered high poly. But a human with 200 polys would be low poly. Trying to make something realistic vs making it highly stylized can also affect how many polys need to be used to get the desired model.
Half life 2 isn't low poly because of how it's modeled or textured. It's not low poly because the models use more polys than they need too to be recognizable. Those models could still lose several polys and be recognizable.

Rate mine

>>582471
8/10

>>582471
comfy / 10

>>582466
I'm not trying to start a debate on whether or not Half-Life 2 is low poly, just saying that there's a lot of artstyles and modeling methods from that era that sit somewhere between low-poly and modern realtime that share more in common with low poly (rendering methods & workflows) than modern graphics since they're essentially the same methods extended to a higher polycount. That's the term/classification I'm trying to figure out.
Also, PS2 era graphics are 100% using polygons that aren't necessary for the style to be "recognizable", extra polygons are present in these games for the sake of fidelity. Like I said, where's the line drawn on what can and can't be claimed to be a necessary polygon? If it's any polygon that is placed deliberately to have a noticeable effect on the shape/deformation of the model then suddenly obviously not low-poly stuff like Half-Life 2 becomes applicable. If it isn't, then you can safely drop the entirety of the PS2 library off the "low poly" classification since they're all deliberately adding polygons for fidelity. That's why I think it's busted to apply to the term to styles that aren't, at least in spirit, trying for *really* early 3D.

>>582471
Not sure if the small, cylindrical details needed that many verts. But pretty good.

>>582471
EXPAND DONG

>>572340
Possible to do this stuff in C4D? This is one of my favorite things I've seen on here.

>>582868
This is just box modelling. If your program can place vertices, make boxes and planes, extrude, and uv map, then you can make things like this.

>>582870
Where do you even start with things like this?

I hope that this is not too out of place to ask, but I am trying to understand topology more since I am new to modeling. I have heard that it's imperative to keep quads, but I see in these models some triangles instead. When would it be best to use triangles? Topology is hard to wrap my head around.

>>582872
You start with appropriate primitives, which are basic shapes like cylinders and cubes and spheres.

We can see some basic shapes in the model right here: The torso is basically a cylinder with maybe 12 sides, the legs are cylinders with maybe 8 sides, the head is a cylinder with maybe 8 sides.

So for the leg you'd take a cylinder and, by this model's topology, add three loop cuts around the knee. Then you would pull the back of the knee in a little. Then some more edge loops add to the bottom of the legs so you can pull it around a bit for where the fabric bunches up at his shoes.

For the arm it's the same deal essentially, except without the fabric bunching up at the end.

Now you may have noticed on the arm that you only see two loops. Loop closer and you'll see that there's a triangle on the back where the third loop was. This is so that when the arm bends there's still a sharp point, and the edges of that center loop were removed from the inside of the arm so that when the arm bends there's one single flat plane. This was also done on the knees.

With the torso you add edge loops to pull in or drag out the shape to make the waist, hips, chest, and back.

From there it's lining the parts together and cutting in holes for them to fit into, which you can see screenshots of in the later link.

Look up character modelling / character box modelling. They'll typically be intended for subdivision modelling realistic figures but the principles for the base mesh are the same.

https://cgi.tutsplus.com/articles/game-character-creation-series-kila-chapter-1-high-resolution-modeling--cg-24776 This one looks nice.

>>582873
Quads are ideal in modelling only for subdivision, which low poly doesn't use. The catmull-clark smoothing is better at following edges when it's quads.

It doesn't matter for low poly. Use triangles all you want if it helps you create the shape, all that matters is that the model can still deform properly when it animates, which won't be too difficult with low poly since it's not going to look realistic.

>>582879
Oh, I see! So, quads are ideal for models that are higher poly. Thank you very much for answering my question. I'll continue to practice and try to understand more.

>>576168
THICCpoly

>>582880
You can also model in quads and collapse vertexes to optimize the low poly mesh.

Also polycount has taught a great deal of game artists over years, it was and still is a great resource. Specially the forums.
http://wiki.polycount.com/wiki/Polycount

>>572356
There any more of these?

>>578107
>The ps1 spyro games would swap out models with lower poly variants when they were far enough away from the camera
You mean LoD? The thing that everyone uses?

Anyway
>this thread
>low poly
Am I too old or something?

>>583298
>You mean LoD? The thing that everyone uses?
PS1 Spyro games were one of the first games to use LODs. It's why the PS1 Spyro games actually looked pretty good compared to a lot of other PS1 games.

>>583368
eh that's pretty basic 3d optimization for games.
Spyro games looked great cause they exploited vertex coloring to push the ps1 rendering capabilities. As in vertex colors are cheap and dont take space like textured do.

>>583368
>PS1 Spyro games were one of the first games to use LODs.
Virtua Fighter was the first to use LOD, way before Spyro.

>>583699
if there was ever a series that needed a remake or mmo. fuck

>>583700
That's why I said one of the first, not the very first.

>>583715
Spyro was released in 1998, Virtua Fighter in 1993. Most 3D games had LOD before Spyro, so dozens of games.

Is texturing and coloring shit hard? What is the workflow from design, texture, model?

>>572340
He reminds me of Con Carne from Grim & Evil. That and he looks like he belongs in a TimeSplitters game. Very good.

>>580818
Take a look at Global Defense Force on the Ps2 for good examples of how to make low quality ants that can take up the entire screen.
If you can make the framerate chug due to how many ants there are you've done good.

Reposting from another thread, some genuine retro 3D tutorials I've saved.

https://mega.nz/#!VpVjgShL!iYF1U-NMGaRxZKDaQx4fXkHjlwkEE0_aWwimGSa98ks

And Paul Steed's book http://36.82.106.167:8484/bahanajar/download/ebooks_komputer/Modeling%20a%20Character%20in%203DS%20Max%20-%20fly.pdf

Paul Steed is the Quake 1/2/3 3D artist.

If you're down for a challenge then try to find Quake modelling tutorials and sift through broken websites and barely functioning Archive.org backups until you get some real information.

>>586325

Pal, you've got a pass to heaven.

>>578226

So basically put elbow pads with straps on all joints

posted in other thread, but trying to git gud @ painting

>>586377
Low poly doesn't mean no smoothing groups and the roots' ends shouldn't be squares but collapsed into triangles.

>>586384

Is it okay if i use maya auto triangles or should i do it manually?

>>586466
I think he means it should come to a point, not that it should be triangulated.

The bird on the left, rabbits, chickens, and polar bear are not mine, everything else is

>>586513
I'm not really a fan of high poly models that are flat shaded and then called low poly because you can see polygons.

>>586513
This ain't low poly nigga.

Why do you like low-poly so much, anons?

Hard mode: don't say it is "comfy".

I see stuff in WIP threads and almost everything is some stylized, low-poly game meme with handpainted textures. I'd like to see some photorealistic stuff for a change.

>>586597

Because it makes them feel better about their shitty rigs.

>>586597
From a gamedev perspective low poly is really the only way any 3D indie games can get done. Not many people have the resources for photorealistic game art. And it's just quicker to make low poly models. Also I just prefer stylized art over realistic art. Although stylized doesn't necessarily mean low poly, it just seems like a lot of people that make high poly models end up going for a more realistic style.

>>586597
I'm already a 2D artist, meaning I already paint and already have a painting style. That painting style carries over best to low-spec (won't say low-poly because idgaf about polycounts, really) models. I can employ stylization and "cartoon" animation tricks to low-poly/painterly models without any of it looking out of place.
It's also more appropriate than realism for solo projects, since it generally takes less time to make. Next to just liking stylized low-poly as a visual style, I'd imagine this is the reason most people are using it. I could make a scene look like something from an AAA game or movie in reasonable time but making an entire game/short film like that as a solo effort would be a real pain in the ass.
Also I consider any time spent away from ZBrush's interface to be a blessing.

>>586513
>memepoly

>>586597
I've always enjoyed a more illustrative style in all mediums and lo-poly just seems more functional in the long run, especially since I consider myself an animator first and foremost.

>>586597
I would assume it's the same reason people like Impressionism. Sure you could paint a more realistic and detailed scene but realism is a dime a dozen. It's also much harder to distinguish yourself as an artist when your goal is to replicate rather than express. There's a certain skill and craft that comes with capturing the essence of something without simply replicating it and the stronger the artist can express this connection the more it resonates with the viewer. Also while I can't prove this I do think that the abstract nature of lowpoly stimulates the viewer's mind which is what makes it visually appealing.

>>580818
Hey man, u can have the antennae and legs and even the jaws as separate things. Getting them out of the same geometry is just unorthodox

>>582471
It's good man

>>586513
>>586583
>harden edge
>call it low poly

just why

>>572340
how do you get these textures? can anyone post a tutorial or share something on this matter?

>>586513
Pick a style and be consistent please

>>587452
>>587471
It was at least consistent, until the person I made it for wanted the main character to be "Smoother"

Worth noting several of the animals I modeled here are 500-600 tris. And the terrain? Come on. I'm proud of that terrain. But anyways, I now understand the zero tolerance policy in this thread and will leave in shame

>>587454
By knowing how to paint and photomanipulate.
You've used Photoshop, right? The clothes are just a texture with effect layers + stuff drawn on top. It's hard to get perfect, but it's not *that* hard to do.

>>582471

>>580818
There's nothing wrong with clipping through, you know. You don't need to connect the eyeball to the head in way, for instance.

>>572344
This is excellent. I love the minimalistic texturing. Tell me, how did you start? How long did it take to get the basic model ready? How did you texture it, which are the source textures..? Do you have progress pics?

I work in 3d for my job and don't generally do anything at home but this made me want to model and texture something (that's not my job as well) and this style kind of makes my balls tingle.

>>572789
>>572791
>>572793
Every time I see this kind of characters it makes me want to do something.

Maybe doing some nice spaceships for shooter game? Technical looking, enough detail but still cutesy somehow. Bright clean textures but still having greebles and stuff.

>>582471
Neat job. Two things I would have changed, but overall excellent work.
>bbq grid base can be substitutes with fewer planes and a grid texture
>bottom of the cell has two tris I would convert into a single quad

>>587483
The terrain is fine, I just get irrationally mad at high poly models that people call low poly just because it's flat shaded.
Because I really love actual low poly models, old PS1, Vita, and DS game models. There's something magical about them.

There's nothing wrong with high poly models, I just think they look real bad when they're flat shaded when they're meant to be smooth.

At least you made 3D art and not that god damn 2D vectorized photo art that people call low poly. God, I hate that shit more than anything. Pic related.

>really want to be able to do sick mograph and 3d animation
>screw around with it off and on for a while
>eventually lose interest because I suck and it's complicated as fuck
>bunker down and start watching tuts again
>getting grasp on some shit
>tuts are so long and dry
>desire to create overwhelming
it's happening again, lads. too fucking intelligent to stick to anything long enough to become good.

>>587732
You are not too intelligent you are too fucking lazy.
But that is ok, the best pleb-filter there is. Just revel in your laziness and never push to get better. You deserve it.

>>587732
>too fucking intelligent to stick to anything long enough to become good.

what is this bullshit?

>>587788

>>587789

>>587790

>>587792

>>587793

>>587795

>>587797

>>587798

>>587799

>>587797

Damaged version

>>587801

>>587802

>>587803

>>587804

>>587805

>>587806

>>587807

>>587808

>>587809

>>587810

>>587811

>>587812

>>587813

>>587816

>>587817

>>587818

>>587788
Hey I remember you from /agdg/.
I've always enjoyed seeing your models.

>>587820

>>587821
Thanks, Anon!

Sorry if I'm spamming too much, by the way. Just ended up having fun browsing through my old stuff.

>>587823

>>587824

>>587823

Woah, this is amazing, have any tips to share about making lowpoly models?

>>587830
Thanks a lot, man!

I'd say it's 90% texturing, really.
I made a shitty video tutorial on pixel spriting which could be helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8L7QIXIsrcc

I also have a couple of short videos showing how you can UV unwrap on a premade texture map:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A-xmR7cIwA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjVMD-nR6ws

I also have some writeups on my tumblr, but they're pretty far back, and I don't have time to look them up right now.
You can see if you find them here, if you want:
theonian.tumblr.com

>>587834

You're magic, hope the best.

>>587843
Thanks, me too... I have still yet to make any actual video game outside shitty jam entries.

>>587825
( _( _( _( ´०w०`)

>>587826
damn that ship if good.

>>587844
Weren't you modelling for an fps 3ds hunters game?

>>587861
Yeah, but the programmer gave up...

>>587898
Weren't you modeling for a Spyro like game with a griffin?

>>587906
Yup. That too was abandoned. Weehaw

>>587854
Haha, wow

>>587860
Thanks!

>>587898
>>587907
What happened to your game dude?? The 2d one. I remember seeing your progress last year

>>587909
Haha, yes, let's just list all my failed projects

I really should have pulled my shit together and learned some programming by now, so that i don't have to rely on other people to make use of my graphics, but I just keep pushing it away...

>>587910
You know, GZDoom is fully GPL now. You could make a game using an updated Doom engine and sell it with no problem, plus it's easy to program Doom / Hexen / Duke Nukem esque games with a community that would love to help someone that can actually make their own graphics.

I wouldn't use it with (many) 3D models though, kinda chugs with it what with it not really being made for 3D models. For that there should be a GPL Quake sourceport you can sell games through, pretty sure that's what DUSK is doing, but I don't know how useful a community exists for that.

>>587911
DUSK is unity with some sort of .bsp support added in.

>>587911
>>587912
Also, Unity/Unreal are probably just as easy as G/ZDoom at this point if you're already well versed in 3D. You can turn the stock blueprint FPS into something competent just by wiki surfing like you would with G/ZDoom. You'd have to really want the Doom gamefeel to opt for it over a modern engine.

>>587911
>>587912
>>587913
Thanks for the advice. Might have a look at GZDoom. Have already considered Unity and Unreal for some time, but I've never taken the plunge.

Recently I've been toying around with SM64 ROMhacking, which is surprisingly easy (for basic alterations and level importing).

>>587912
Oh, that's fucked up. I thought it was DarkPlaces.

As long as it runs good and plays better tho

>>587914
GZDoom is really only worthwhile if you want to make a game exactly like Doom or exactly like a Doom mod. It chugs trying to render 3D models and has poor support for them so you'd need to render them to sprites most of the time, and it uses a technically 2.5D level format that severely restricts the sort of architecture you can get away with. It's not really a suitable engine for your everyday idea for an indie game, unless your idea for an indie game is an actual, literal Doom clone. Anything else and you're inevitably going to have to cut back your design to suit the limits of the engine.
Just so you get an idea of what you'll be working with, this is what a GZDoom level looks like. It's a bit like a floor plan or a planar view from any other 3D software, right? This is the only level information you can actually modify. This flat plane. Everything to do with level geometry can only be defined by its boundaries on this plane and its floor and ceiling height. If you do slopes or floor-over-a-floor, it has to use this information to do it, meaning that any floating or over-hanging geometry is even more restricted and has to be built using what amounts to engine hacks referencing "Sectors" placed outside of the level boundaries. Going with this engine means resigning to a "look" that involves walls that always go straight up and almost always attach to the floor/ceiling at a 90 degree angle.

>>587929
Yeah, adding slopes, stacked sectors, portals, and really detailed areas isn't something you immediately dive into.

Well, 3D experience would probably help with detailed maps. That and copy and pasting.

>>587931
Check out this neat trick. This room has a floor in it and the floor is also rotated. None of the surfaces on this .bsp object can exist in Doom geometry. The engine dies if you try to slope a 3D reference sector two ways. You could import it as a model but you know how those perform and the collisions can only be represented as boxes.

>>586597
I'm just interested in the solutions people come up with to make low poly figures look good.

>>587812
>>587811
>>587808
>>587806

I just remembered what your stuff reminded me of. Evil Twin for the Dreamcast and PC. It's got that same grungy look.

>>588008
Oh, that looks really cool! Never heard of it before!

>low poly thread
>pretty much everything is low res
Does /3/ not understand the difference?

This is technically low-poly:

https://sketchfab.com/models/4e04e763221246288d21ed2e920e8633

>>588075
>low poly thread
>pretty much everything is low res

>>572332
>To kick this off:
>-I'm looking for good examples of low res/low poly or "pixel art on 3D' type models.

>>588075
You should probably end your life, little autismo

>>588075
Poly count is 3d resolution so low poly is low res you idiot

>>587844
It must have hurt pretty badly to smash his face right into the wet grass. I wonder if Fitz wore something like a blanket as a mask.

>>588075
>Lowpoly
>17800 polygons
fucking idiot

>>588149
Lowpoly is a relative term. On modern hardware, 17k can be considered lowpoly. But no one really uses that as the definition for lowpoly except for very smart posters that want to act superior on anonymous boards. I would consider those models to be "game models" or "medium poly".

Most people consider lowpoly to be models that use as few polygons as necessary to get the shape and style they want.

>>588155
Our production team just uses the term game poly, or production ready models since it's a relative term that changes as technology advances. Lowpoly should have a definitive meaning in order to avoid confusion in cases such as this.

>>588214
Yeah, this. Especially since you're using the exact same process to bake a current-gen model down to game ready polycounts regardless of your polygon budget, whereas the low poly being discussed in this thread has a radically different workflow. You know, something that defines it as different from an average game model. It's not a relative term because there's no real use for it if you make it a relative term.

>>572340
I loved this game

>>587818
Your pigman vs my pigman, who would win?

My texture is a preliminary. I'm going for a Die Hard Arcade look (and that's pretty ugly).

I have been following your work for some time and you're really talented. Shame that the programmer gave up on the FPS game. I like your grungy, grimy style.

I made this when I was 18 I think. Someone paid me $50 for it. I was so happy, it was my first job. 2000 triangles. A lot of animations.

>>588750
Oh right, the guy showed me a concept art someone else made. It was a very professional picture but I didn't save it.

>>588750
512x256 texture. It was a custom model for good old warcraft 3.

>>578228
I think the extra 8 polygons would end up being less of a drag on the CPU than a vertex animation.

Any tips on blocking out the shape without adding geometry?, I get the chest, the neck, the head and the legs but the arms and the hands become a pain.

>>588888
Hands should pretty much just be a rectangle with a thumb maybe.

what the fuck happened to shrapnelsoup??

First try at low-poly, as well as first try at modelling a human, and first try at rigging.

I wanted to have an army in the background of a picture I'm working on, so I tried to make the a model that consumed as few resources as possible.

Brutal criticism appreciated.

>>590304
Kinda looks like N64/PS1 era model. Looks fine. Head could be a little more detailed if you want, instead of being a cube.
Also they're all in the exact same pose in the background, it should be more random.

>>590304
That's not lowpoly. That's just lazy.
Take a look at the stuff posted ITT and try again.
Apply yourself.

Yay low poly

Started learning blender a week ago, this is as far as i can go without a tutorial. Have yet to do the hands and head. I'm thinking about doing it from scratch tho' because it's kinda shit.

pixel art + low poly is my favorite style.

>>591632
Go through a good tutorial FFS!!! Why do people feel proud about not following and learning good practices and instead immediately want to figure out everything on their own? It will look like shit as long as you don't apply yourself and learn from a pro.

>>590307
>Kinda looks like N64/
no.

Are there good example of torso edge loop topology for low and medium poly models? I have been looking for some reference on that.

>>572802
Nice bewbs

Im looking for a specific low poly image i saw in a much older thread on /3/.

It was a low poly girl or woman, she was wearing a blue top and i think and black leggings and/or socks and was somewhat realistically proportioned
the thread also had a link to the creators deviantart and another image that showed a painting of the womans face
please help?

>>591737
sorry, by thread i mean reply, the thread was a regular lowpoly thread

>>591737
This?

luk at my low polie cuub

>>591802
Hey that's a pretty nyc lighting! What renderer are you using?

>>591802

>>591747
Not that, but I did find it. Unfortunately I don't have any sauce on it.

>>591869
>>/3/thread/483148

Low poly is garbage and i wish it would die. It's the equivalent of painting with crayons. GJ you can do it, but it's still kiddie stuff and not very sophisticated.

Here's mine. I've been hacking at it just today, I have a little experience with CGI. I am an above-average artist (the average of the average artistic ability across all humans, not across all artists). I started with a cube, and created rings and bevels and hammered out the head shape, some details accentuated for cartoonish purposes. i posted it earlier and, as a result, was reamed for my lack of skill. I took the criticism I got and cleaned up some polygons. I am currently in the process of redoing the ears.

I'm no artist but I like to contribute.

Sorry for bad English.

I'm not foreign or anything. Just a brainlet.

same character, didn't realize facial features were missing.

Subtractions leading to eyes and mouth are a stylistic choice.

He's supposed to look afraid.

He doesn't want to exist.

>>591876
if it's so trivial then why can't YOU do it?

>>591921
What kind of argument is that? He didn't say that he can't do it, and no, criticizing something does not automatically mean that somebody is salty because he isn't good at it.

>>591922
well i've never seen someone who was good at this claim it's easy. it's actually very hard to make this stuff look good. the only people who say it's easy have never tried it. i don't care if he likes the style or not but the actual claim he makes - that this is so easy that a child could do it - is moronic.

>>591876
Well, I guess this comes down to perspective. There's been plenty of oldie stuff posted in the thread that involved a brutal amount of forward thinking in regards to geometry count and UV layout. To even consider doing a full character model with less than something like 1000 faces, on maps that are even smaller than 512x512, you'd have to embrace the fact that you're going to hand-paint every single detail onto the color layer itself, so a decent amount of artistic skill is necessary in that regard.

Keep in mind most models were probably done on a schedule on top of having hardware constraints shoved on top of the 3D artists.

If anything, it should be much easier to do things without any sort of constraint in mind; no need to carefully consider where and how to place geometry when you can subdivide and model every detail in zBrush. No need to know anything about painting specific details by hand when you can just bake every map under the sun, slap it on your model and let the computer do the rest. Honestly, even painting with crayons at that point sounds like more of a challenge.

It's perfectly legitimate to not enjoy the low-poly-ish art style, but to say it's kiddie stuff and not very sophisticated is very short-sighted.

>>591937
To be honest, some things like you mentioned are easier, but the challenges just shifted to something else and standards keep increasing on top of it.

Not that guy, but I also personally don't really like low-poly. I've seen some nice stuff, but I still prefer the advanced things that push the boundaries of 3DCG. Low poly happened just because of the inferior technology at the time anyway, didn't it? I get it that people can like the aesthetic of it (probably partly from nostalgia), but now that we have surpassed the limitations of technology, I don't see much point in it.

>>591941
>I get it that people can like the aesthetic of it (probably partly from nostalgia), but now that we have surpassed the limitations of technology, I don't see much point in it.

whenever people say stuff like this i feel obliged to remind them that the second best-selling game in history (after tetris) is minecraft, a low-poly game played primarily by kids. you can't tell me millions of children who are younger than call of duty are just nostalgic for quake 1 or whatever. minecraft isn't even very good low-poly but the kids don't care, nor do they have any idea about the history of computer graphics or how minecraft relates to it. for them it's just one way a game can look. if they were articulate enough they would tell you that it's just a style and that it's appropriate for the task and that not seeing individual pores on the square pig is not something they would ever consider a problem.

see, it's actually your perspective that's obsolete, not low-poly. you lived in a period of rapid development of graphics technology so you can't think about this stuff in any way other than as a struggle to "surpass limitations" but that's just a rapidly disappearing historical aberration. subsequent generations do not and will not care about the technological origins of these art styles. they'll just play a game on its own terms without needing to relate it to some quest to create the holodeck or whatever.

>>591946
I'm not talking about games, but 3D as an art itself. Of course it doesn't matter in Minecraft, where it's not the center of the attention. What do opinions of millions of children who don't care and "best-selling" status of some game have to do with 3D art? Are you looking at 3D exclusively through the prism of vidya?

>>591941
Whether you make a 30k or 1k model nowadays does come down to personal preference, except in mobile markets where 3D still has constraints, and you have to create models that have to run well in a staggering gamut of phones, both crappy and godly. Games like the Etrian Odyssey series and Pokemon also still make very good use of this due to 3DS hardware constraints.

Yeah, the standards are changing, but the practice of only using as many polys and maps as you absolutely need to craft something in a certain art style, is certainly not pointless yet, and as standards change, it probably never will be, because it'll evolve together with the "high ceiling" of what we can do with this technology as well.

>>591946
The massive popularity that stems from Minecraft doesn't come down to its voxel-based approach to graphics, it's the creative freedom that it gives players, to build whatever they want within the constraints of its rules.

Whatever art style Minecraft has is actually completely inconsequential to its success. As long as it had blocks and you could stack them together, Minecraft would be successful, though admittedly having its colorful art style did help it break into a younger crowd more easily.

>>591950
what a strange post. when's the last time you saw cgi "by itself", as opposed to serving as a visual tool for a game, a movie, a painting? how can the primary method of communicating with the player "not matter" in a video game? how can the fact that a whole generation of children is growing up with a certain style of cgi not be immensely relevant to cgi going forward?

the children aren't failing to notice the graphics of minecraft. they see them, they understand them and they like them. they don't voice any barely-coherent complaints about "limitations" not being "surpassed" (limitations to what?), because they enjoy the game they're playing right now. the children are smarter than you.

>>591953
you're arguing against the reverse of my point. it's irrelevant WHY minecraft is absurdly successful, but it unquestionably is. this means every child on earth is exposed to ubiquitous imagery of blocky character models with pixelated textures. they play the game, they watch thousands of hours of youtubers playing it, they surround themselves with minecraft toys and books and candy and pajamas and all of it carefully recreates the blockiness and the exact pixel patterns of the game's assets. this means that low-poly has already firmly established itself as simply a popular style of artwork, independent from the technical limitations that spawned it, from nostalgia for the 90s, and possibly even from video games. it's done, it has already happened, it's not going away. you're only going to see more of it as these kids grow up.

it's like it's 1964, all the teenage girls in america are experiencing their first orgasms from just looking at the beatles, and you idiots are sitting there going "i think the guitar is done as an instrument. SO DONE."

>>572764
edge loop not decimate my niqqa

>>591960
You say this as if kids know or are even interested about the intricacies of Minecraft graphics. The dumbasses probably don't even know what a polygon is.

Little Timmy is interested purely in stacking a bunch of TNT together under a mountain and watching it blow up like a nuke. It's not pixel art or low-poly that picked up from the success of Minecraft, it's voxel-based sandbox games, and that ship has sailed and sunk already.

>>591983
the fact that you apparently despise children is beside the point. the children are smarter than you.

>>587471
THIS, EXACTLY

>>586513
This is really bad - it lacks any sense of artistic direction, sensibility, or skill. Lowpoly can be great, but this is not

>>588075
correct, this is technically low poly
..but people itt seem more focused on low poly "aesthetics". nobody cares precising which they're talking about

>>588214
sounds fair
"game poly" makes more sense than "low poly" nowadays, or we just need to constantly keep updating what "low" means in our mind as technology evolves

>>591880
>>591882
just give up m8
this board sucks, but you're finding new lows

>>592047
I can see it as a /3/ meme in a near future.

>>592041
Okay.

>>592061
no, seriously. your bitter criticism of children is that when they play a video game they want to blow up a mountain instead of counting polygons and complaining. the children get it, you don't. you've worked and worked to get to your present state of willful idiocy and now you're stupider than a child.

>>592064
I respect your opinion on this.

Any resources on 1990-2005 lowpoly models tutorials for games such as half life or quake?

Got this dumb idea that I might use Maya live surfaces and quad draw to make low-poly by mashing primitives/more basic unconnected modeled shapes together to make the base that I build my topology ontop of.

Does that sound like *too* dumb of an idea to work? An alternative would be using zbrush sculpts as the base.

>>592465
Isn't that basically how all models are made? Either mashing lots of primitives together or making a sculpt. Then making a clean low poly model based on it.

>>592583
I've always modified primitives and then bridged them together for poly modeling, never actually used retopo tools to get a shape outside of retopologizing high poly meshes
I went and tried it after posting and the results weren't great, but that could just have been because it's a first attempt. Main thing I'm looking to work around is getting stuff to follow specific curves consistently, and managing vertexes so that the shape doesn't become a mess.

My... Edgeflow, I guess you'd call it? gets ugly doing any character poly modeling that isn't subdiv modeling. I've generally got organized topology, but if I was doing something like a hand or anything that has a lot of vertexes following a specific curve like an arm or something, they'll come out messy because it's difficult to organize so many vertexes. I thought maybe I'd be able to get around it by using primitives as a guideline for how those vertexes get placed, but I think I'll be looking for another solution to manage it. Possibly just attempting low poly from a sculpt.

Here's an example from a (non-low-poly, but poly-modeled) model I worked on ages ago. From most angles, it's hard to see how this vertex is out of place. It's also hard to manage the amount of vertexes that could be messing with the form like this, since I'm managing a lot of vertexes and the angle I'd have to view them from to even see the issue is hard to work from. There's another vertex a bit closer than the one I've circled, that is concave on the hand mesh, which is even harder to spot and correct. I want to minimize the potential for this sort of thing happening, or work out better ways to deal with it when it does.

>>591880
Are you suggesting that being artistic is essential to a human?

>>591953
>Games like the Etrian Odyssey series and Pokemon also still make very good use of this due to 3DS hardware constraints.
Maybe, but not in the pic you posted. Afaik they specifically made the models for HD screens and then threw them in the 3DS games so that they can recycle them in the future. All of the main 3DS Pokémon games lag a lot because of it.