• Listen to a special audio message from Bill Roper to the Hive Workshop community (Bill is a former Vice President of Blizzard Entertainment, Producer, Designer, Musician, Voice Actor) 🔗Click here to hear his message!
  • Read Evilhog's interview with Gregory Alper, the original composer of the music for WarCraft: Orcs & Humans 🔗Click here to read the full interview.

~the fladdermasken chronicles~

Status
Not open for further replies.

fladdermasken

Off-Topic Moderator
Level 39
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
3,690
My old one is closed and burried beneath layers upon layers of forum matter, so I'll just publish a new one.

Going to work a bit more on the first post whenever I see fit.

The Archives
Battlefields.pngPlaymate.pngSHIT.pngThe Picture #3 Entry.pngWithering Heights.pngLighthouse.pngEye on the Price.png
The Unrefined
The Picture #4 WIP.pngWIP1.pngWIP2.png
 
Last edited:
IMO you need to broaden your style a lot. all of those pictures have the same underlying background idea; sweeping view with the sky sublimely 'special' (starry skies usually). It looks cool and all but I just can't appreciate most of the terrains because they're all so similar in that basic idea. You can see it in the wip2.png, the same exact underlying principle is already there - the far sky and the broad view.
Also I'd like to see you use less high res things. Sure, they're great stuff but in there I can't see a single default ground texture, hell, I can't even see a single default model (apart from the sky..maybe?). I mean, at the basic level I can appreciate the overall looks of any terrain but I do like to see good use of the things provided; comes from being an old timer I suppose. I personally do prefer the WC3 style to the current style overhaul of complete high res textures. For example, this is one of my favourites of olden days just because it uses the WC3 style and shows it to such a wonderful extent.
 
Level 36
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
4,404
IMO you need to broaden your style a lot. all of those pictures have the same underlying background idea; sweeping view with the sky sublimely 'special' (starry skies usually). It looks cool and all but I just can't appreciate most of the terrains because they're all so similar in that basic idea. You can see it in the wip2.png, the same exact underlying principle is already there - the far sky and the broad view.
Also I'd like to see you use less high res things. Sure, they're great stuff but in there I can't see a single default ground texture, hell, I can't even see a single default model (apart from the sky..maybe?). I mean, at the basic level I can appreciate the overall looks of any terrain but I do like to see good use of the things provided; comes from being an old timer I suppose. I personally do prefer the WC3 style to the current style overhaul of complete high res textures. For example, this is one of my favourites of olden days just because it uses the WC3 style and shows it to such a wonderful extent.

Basically, he should make less "special" skies and have less "broadened" views and use crappier models? Right, not that I entirely see the logic in that, but sure.

Now I do to some extent understand your feeling about the high res doodads, as I myself had the exact same feeling before. A kind of judgemental view upon the higher resolution doodads thinking "well... Anyone can make something good with so good doodads." And that true terraining skills shone through when the terrainer used the doodads provided in the UTM to make something look extraordinarily great, using crappy models to make something good, escentially.
- My view on this have somewhat changed over the years though.

Honestly, I don't know exactly why. It's probably mostly because I no longer feel that "competetive" feeling about terraining that I once did, that feeling of wanting to be better than others, and wanting every terrain I make to be better than the previous, I've probably stagnated and found a set of doodads that I like, which happen to be pretty much high res doodads, and then I make what I feel like. But oh well, who cares about this stuff? We're here to discuss fladders terrain :p

Well, I agree that his style seems to be... Ahh... Ongoing, if not in every single one of the terrains, then in many of them. Though, I disagree that it has to do with his doodads of choice or his way of making the fogs and background, I more think the true way to go is to variate the themes. To do different things, all from really bright sun-sets to pitch black nights, from grand alied ruins to lush jungle forests. Simply experiemnt more, try new stuff, hell new doodads for that matter, as long as you continue doing what you do best ;)
(terraining)

Yadda yadda yadda, good looking gathering of shit, have a napkin.
 
I said broaden his style not change it. If I recommended changing, then it'd be saying do no more broad views/skies of this style (by 'special' skies I mean that, looking at them, they're quite similar - almost exclusively the general colour of the terrain and often stars) and do, I don't know, underground extreme close up terrains. But since I meant broaden, I mean expand on that, tweak it. The only picture that I can see without that underlying principle is the Picture #3 entry, the basis of which (I assume) wasn't made by him, therefore all of his scratch-made terrains have that principle right there. Which is bothering me.
I didn't say that high-res terrains and models are for nubs and show no skill or anything, hell I use high res stuff all the time too. But I just can't see anything at all using even a single default texture in those terrains. I'd just like to see more use of default models because, well, it IS WC3 terraining and terrains using doodads of the WC3 style simply have a lot more character to me because they are more colourful and less 'realistic' looking in comparison to the washed out looks of the high res doodads. In my opinion.
What you're saying, doing different themes in the terrain is just, to me, using the same idea and changing what you're dressing it with. To create a truly original or great terrain, you have to change the underlying idea first of all.
 
Level 14
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
435
I do somewhat agree with Belg, I myself do enjoy using high-res doodads immensely, but sometimes you just need to make something different.

Not to say I dislike your style Fladdy, I've always loved it, you know that. However, Something that I haven't seen from you that I'd love to see you do is something on a smaller scale, something that doesn't use a broad expanse of land to appeal to the tastes. Maybe even create a terrain that completely exempts itself from a sky. As was done in your picture #3 entry, which by the way is one of my favorite terrains you've done. Like I said though, something that's small, something surprising, and most importantly different.

Keep the style though, it's fantastic as always.
 
Level 34
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
8,873
I have always held the belief that High-Res doodads suck and only the lowest scum use them. Now, see I can't admit I was wrong on principle, I'm sure you understand, but you've given me a dilemma. I suppose I'm going to have to hate you. Sorry.

PS. Don't tell anyone, but... nice terrains.
 
Last edited:

fladdermasken

Off-Topic Moderator
Level 39
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
3,690
Repetitive? Me? Repetitive? Me? Repetitive? Me? Repetitive? Me? Repetitive?

--

Well I'll be damned. Actually, I was starting to pick up on the pattern myself. It's not like I've had my brain set to "drone" or anything, more like exhausted the engines in trying to master that view-- what you're getting is the exhaust plume. Point stands though, I'd be happy to break this trend with some more radical ideas.

On the subject of high res models, I have to side with Keiji. It's not like I can't bear my own weight without them, I just work with models I like. And therefore, by extension, I don't mind working with standard textures if they don't look like complete and utter crap. I do shun mashing high and low res together though, I only really do it if a) I like the opposite equivalent better, and b) it blends with the rest of the scenery.

A and B. Not A or B.
tobyfat50 said:
The last one from "The Unrefined", what did you do to the foreground? The objects look a lot more... clear-cut than usual
I didn't do anything in particular. Must be the placement and
the contrast between the objects and sea
Gilles said:
Now, see I can't admit I was wrong on principle, I'm sure you understand, but you've given me a dilemma. I suppose I'm going to have to hate you. Sorry.
I'll just love and hug this dilemma crap straight out of your system :D
DeathChef said:
Where do you get your models and textures from?
All over the map really. Just scavenge every stinking square inch of all Warcraft III-oriented forums. Feel free to start with this post.
 
I totally agree with you on working with models that one likes - I mean, using ogre_'s models from refuge in ruins, mmmmmmmmmmh guuuurrrl. But what's helpful with the WC3 style is that (I find at least) it's easier to perform and/or even change the basic layout and stuff. Plus IMO there's not quite that need for a big space that you find in high res terrains (come on, all the good ones ARE in broad view) because they are so colourful and pwetty looking
 
Level 16
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
829
I didn't do anything in particular. Must be the placement and
Oh I see, it was obvious actually, but I did not exclude the fact that you could of used some new "Hocus Pocus" on it!

Repetitive. I agree with the others and I also don't. There are artists that made series of the same them, never changing it. I am not saying that that is what you are exactly doing but...~ you should try something else from time to time, "go extreme change".
I don't have to be specific on this ~ what the other above me said and, what you sayd yourself...!
Don't get me wrong, I love anything you do with terrain, radical ideas I am waiting for!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top