Wc3 models

[Chaosy]

Firstly, unsure where to post it.

Anyway, had a question for a few years regarding models in warcraft 3.

In my 'humble' opinion, the warcraft 3 models are complete garbage.
No, I do not mean the standard ones blizzard made in 2003. It was okay for its time.

I am talking about all the custom models that have been made after, especially after 2010~ where performance is less of an issue. I am not talking about a specific model at all, I honestly think 99% of all wc3 models I have seen are extremely bad. Even models that got a DC in past do not stand out to me compared to what some indie games offer.

I thought maybe it was some sort of engine limitation that somehow made HD models impossible, but then I remembered that WoW rips exist and work fine.


Maybe I have too high standards of a fan community, but when I look at other sections I do not get the same impression. A lot of the icons are very well made, but the models with the wc3 style genuinely look like a drunk 4 year old made the model and animations. I could go on for days on this, most models clip 10 times in the animations which gives me a low effort impression.

So I am not really complaining per say, as I can just not use them. Just curious if there is a reason behind this or I just do not understand art.

 

[San]

Making an icon is way more easier than making a model though.
#mehumbleonion

 

[Shar Dundred]

You know how old this game is, right?
Maybe you have simply outgrown WC3 and its graphics.

 

[Arowanna]

Firstly, unsure where to post it.

Anyway, had a question for a few years regarding models in warcraft 3.

In my 'humble' opinion, the warcraft 3 models are complete garbage.
No, I do not mean the standard ones blizzard made in 2003. It was okay for its time.

I am talking about all the custom models that have been made after, especially after 2010~ where performance is less of an issue. I am not talking about a specific model at all, I honestly think 99% of all wc3 models I have seen are extremely bad. Even models that got a DC in past do not stand out to me compared to what some indie games offer.

I thought maybe it was some sort of engine limitation that somehow made HD models impossible, but then I remembered that WoW rips exist and work fine.


Maybe I have too high standards of a fan community, but when I look at other sections I do not get the same impression. A lot of the icons are very well made, but the models with the wc3 style genuinely look like a drunk 4 year old made the model and animations. I could go on for days on this, most models clip 10 times in the animations which gives me a low effort impression.

So I am not really complaining per say, as I can just not use them. Just curious if there is a reason behind this or I just do not understand art.

From someone who've actually studied and worked with games over the years:
- It's because of the restrictions of WC3 in general; not tris-count (the complexity of the model) or the 512x512 pixels restrictions nor the lack of shaders. But modeling for WC3 is complete fucking cancer compared to just booting up Zbrush, doodle a bit, make a quick retopo and add some silly animations. Today we've to work with either archaic software or simply make do with fan-supported tools. I for one can't stand either of them.

If WC3 magically allowed *.FBX support, shaders and what not (i.e. opening up the game for everyone using modern tools), this would be so much easier for "modern artists". But as it is right now, we've to summon arcane knowledge, uncovered obscure secrets from the past and battle with the unknown. Most of us just don't have the patience for this anymore. Especially when this knowledge is complete garbage in the modern market.

Edit
On Icons and software restriction; in short, there are none. If you've your tablet and preferred software, you can produce icons for WC3 without any hindrance at all. Of course, you've to know how to paint, but to actually get them up and running in WC3 is a cakewalk in comparison to 3D models.

Not to mention that creating icons actually improves your skill as an artist, whilst using modern tools and software. And you don't have to waste countless of hours uncovering the obscure to do something that you already know how to do in modern tools, but you've to do differently for WC3.

 

[Chaosy]

You know how old this game is, right?

How is that relevant? I am talking about custom models that are made in, say 2015.
And there are amazing models, just very few of them. HybrisFactory - Terraining and Mapping Resources for example

@Arowanna
So software limitations basically?

That said, a few years back I tried to make a Maya project and then somehow convert it to mdx.

Save as fbx
Fbx > obj
obj > mdx

Which had mixed success if I recall.


edit: Odd Rotation

 

[Arowanna]

You can make your base model in Maya and slowly convert it to *.MDX yes. But I've no idea if it's possible to somehow transfer bones and anims from Maya as well. Again, I'm not going to study pointless arcane knowledge.

The "rotation problem" in your post stems from WC3 applying either Physics and Maya applying Mathematics, or the other way around. Sounds retarded, but that's really the basics of it. I'm not competent enough to fully explain how that shit works though.

But yes, "Because of limitations." would be my first argument. And not limitations in a good way either, limitations that doesn't serve any function for a "modern day artist".

And yes, there are some artists here that are willing to suffer the pain that is 3D modelling for WC3, and some of them also have a strong grasp on modern 3D stuff as well. Talavaj's stuff is quite amazing! He seems to be interested in Tech Art as well, something very rare within the business in general. Despite the fact that every company out there would prefer to only have Tech Artists over traditional 3D Artists, lol. Or at least more than they currently have.

 

[Idaero Ace]

I think it’s just lack of interest and motivation. If people can make decent 3d models, I’m pretty sure they won’t stay here. Happens on everywhere though. Just try to search stylized low poly models in sketchfab, there are not many of them, even most of them are not “low poly”. There is only small interest with old games.

While making icons, it’s much more generalized. The principal can be applied to other things. With 3d model, for warcraft, it’s kinda limited. And 3d modeling also require 2d skillz, which is making it pain in as.

The only purpose making Warcraft models is if they have project. For hobbies, it doesnt really worth making warcraft model.

Also, I see that most people are more interested with sculpting, highly detailed. Low poly is falling behind

 

[Arowanna]

Hand painted and low poly models still have a following, first thing that comes to mind are the "mega threads" at Polycount:
Show your hand painted stuff, pls!
LOWPOLY (sub 1000~ triangle models)

Usually targets the mobile market however.

 

[Chaosy]

Also, I see that most people are more interested with sculpting, highly detailed. Low poly is falling behind

Could be.

But why would you ever want a low poly model anyway.
In a world where you can run wc3 on your phone (in terms of specs), there is no need for low poly.

So to me it is obvious the low poly is 'falling behind' since the only reason to make low poly is if you are learning and cannot make better yet.

Runescape is a game that comes to mind. Originally low poly game released in 2001 which runs in the browser. Surprise, surprise they have upgraded their graphics over the years.

 

[Arowanna]

Main business reason would be: mobile games.

The second reason is the pure joy of making stylized things in general. Same thing goes for 2D pixel art. I.e. more about aesthetic choice than anything else.

 

[Idaero Ace]

I thought Warcraft engine has its limitations so it would be better to use low poly.
Also, making good higher poly is actually easier than making good really low poly

(by low poly, i mean warcraft level low poly, Lol)

 

[Sieben]

Isn't it just because custom models have to fit in the global aesthetics of the game, so they don't look out of place? HD models would be fine only if the whole game was HD.
Or did you mean that these models are so bad they don't even match the standard Warcraft III quality?

 

[Wareditor]

In my 'humble' opinion, your posts are complete garbage.

 

[Drake]

Nostalgia. And seeing how much you can push it while still maintaining somewhat of a Warcraft 3 aesthetic.

 

[Kyrbi0]

Hm... I feel like @Direfury might have something to add to this; his models are ostensibly made for Warcraft but are of a respectable level of polish. Also, he has developed artistic skills that do (seem to?) transfer to the Real World, despite Arowanna's comments.

In fact, I feel like there are several great modders who have gone on to work in the field. I guess the question to ask them would be "do you think your time modeling for Warcraft 3 helped or hindered your capabilities as a Real World artist?".

~~~

Chaosy, I really feel like you need to define your terms. What is it about the models that you find unappealing? The mesh, the texture, the animations, the SFX... Or is it really just the whole package? Because I feel like there are some really great examples of quality model-making out there, which may fail in one or two of those aspects, but be otherwise amazing.

@Gluma too might be someone to bring in; he basically does everything on his models & does a fan-freakin'-tastic job, IMHO. What do you think of his?

How is that relevant? I am talking about custom models that are made in, say 2015.

... It doesn't matter when the custom models were made. The game was made in ~2003, and the models are made for that game. So necessarily they will, even up to today, bright ol' 2018, continue to look like they were made in the early 2000's because that's what they are being made to fit*.



*I'm only talking about the custom models for which this is true (the kind of models I personally care about, seek out, and encourage others to make). There are plenty of people who are 'doing their own thing', making models that (generally) are more advanced than what Warcraft 3 features, and whatever. More power to 'em. But that's not the majority, the ones you seem to be talking about, i.e. the ones making models that are designed to fit into Warcraft.

 

[PROXY]

I see what you are talking about.

I'm not going into the matter of mesh-quality or texture-quality, as there are both absolutely fantastic models in the database which have a very high quality and still match the wc3-style as well as not so good stuff. There's no point talking about this.

I see your point about animations. The problem is: learning to animate takes a whole lot of fucking time and trial and error. To get better at it (just like everywhere else) you have to practise and practise and practise. If people are limited to tools like Mdlvis or Milkshape only, the whole process becomes way less flexibel as when you are able to work in 3ds-Max or other modern tools that are not made for wc3.

The learning curve is extremly high, to really create fluid and visually appealing animations. Heck, people that have been doing it for years still do not have the animation quality you see in some indie games --> because most of the times they do it as their hobby. And animating is pretty hard, because the human eye instantly gets distracted/annoyed when movement is not fluid or not natural.

Take a look at Tauer's models. It took him several years to get to that level of animation and he went to university and also created models for his jobs (I think, at least he spent a huge amount of time with it). Looking at his models now, I think they are of a real high quality standard that fits very very well into wc3.

The point is: It's hard. And fact is: most of our database has very good models with pretty cool custom animations or at least wc3 animations. Of course there are some which might have their problems - but see it this way: models with not so high animation quality will be the stepstones for further ones, where the quality might already please you

 

[Ether]

Warcraft III models are good. Especially if you give them new look (texture). You just don't like it because you are probably using the classic models we've seen for many many years. Hive models are good also, very classy and epic, like those of Tauer, Tarrasque/Jigrael, PROXY, Hayate, Direfury, Stefan.K, General Frank, and many others. They are making pretty awesome models that we call 'epic' and refreshing to use in Warcraft III. Those classic and vanilla in-game models, ah, they just need some redefined HD texture. Well, we have some awesome skins for them as well and give them great look.

 

[Kyrbi0]

On a somewhat different note, re: some of the greats mentioned above, I am personally of the opinion that as amazing as their stuff is, it often really edges into "not quite Warcraft-y" territory for me personally.

I'm aware that this whole argument is incredibly subjective (i.e. "what is & isn't Warcraft-y"), to a large degree. And obviously there are many that disagree with me; you can pull up any given custom model & find one person saying "FITS WARCRAFT PERFECTLY" and the very next poster saying "DOESN'T FIT WARCRAFT AT ALL". It's ridiculous.

Just about the only objective measurement is "polycount", and there most of the time I've heard modelers defending their work since it technically exists within the approved 'range'. Usually, though, it's floating around the top-end of the spectrum; up there with the Spellbreaker or the Warden or the Crypt Lord (i.e. relatively complicated, especially as compared to, say, the Footman or the Paladin or the Far Seer), and I feel like the top-end has become the 'new standard'.

Anyway, it's not much of a gripe, but we're talking about something related so I figured I'd toss it out there.

 

[Chaosy]

Chaosy, I really feel like you need to define your terms. What is it about the models that you find unappealing? The mesh, the texture, the animations, the SFX... Or is it really just the whole package? Because I feel like there are some really great examples of quality model-making out there, which may fail in one or two of those aspects, but be otherwise amazing.

Here is a generally good model, the most downloaded one on the hive. The Lich King

This is one which I genuinely like and would use in a map without problems.
But it has flaws. Many of them.

Clipping hair: Screenshot - 7f1b72b0c5befdafdcd4fc62c2230120 - Gyazo
Poorly done spikes: https://i.gyazo.com/90a93f1fb6e046d111c3122d78946620.png
Really lame hands: https://i.gyazo.com/89ff4bb2874040b7d358ca93983f4e2f.png
Floating armor: https://i.gyazo.com/47a00b19e7f9bdec12a51f08d54f784f.png

Spell animation has slight clipping, attack 1 has major clipping

This took me 1-2 minutes to find, would be quicker if I did not have to take pictures.
And this is from a good model, the list would be much longer for most other models.

... It doesn't matter when the custom models were made. The game was made in ~2003, and the models are made for that game. So necessarily they will, even up to today, bright ol' 2018, continue to look like they were made in the early 2000's because that's what they are being made to fit*.

Wrong.
Exhibit a: Skyrim

It should be noted that images do not really do a skyrim mod justice. The real difference is when you see updated water and light effects and such. Point is, the it often looks like a remaster or different game entirely when done well.

The mods for skyrim basically enabled remaster before the official remaster launched.

imgs

Warcraft III models are good. Especially if you give them new look (texture). You just don't like it because you are probably using the classic models we've seen for many many years. Hive models are good also, very classy and epic, like those of Tauer, Tarrasque/Jigrael, PROXY, Hayate, Direfury, Stefan.K, General Frank, and many others. They are making pretty awesome models that we call 'epic' and refreshing to use in Warcraft III. Those classic and vanilla in-game models, ah, they just need some redefined HD texture. Well, we have some awesome skins for them as well and give them great look.

No. A texture can cover up a bad model to some extent but it does not make the model better.
Coating a a rotten apple in sugar does not make the apple taste good.[/hidden]

 

[PROXY]

Here is a generally good model, the most downloaded one on the hive. The Lich King

This is one which I genuinely like and would use in a map without problems.
But it has flaws. Many of them.

Clipping hair: Screenshot - 7f1b72b0c5befdafdcd4fc62c2230120 - Gyazo
Poorly done spikes: https://i.gyazo.com/90a93f1fb6e046d111c3122d78946620.png
Really lame hands: https://i.gyazo.com/89ff4bb2874040b7d358ca93983f4e2f.png
Floating armor: https://i.gyazo.com/47a00b19e7f9bdec12a51f08d54f784f.png

Spell animation has slight clipping, attack 1 has major clipping

This took me 1-2 minutes to find, would be quicker if I did not have to take pictures.
And this is from a good model, the list would be much longer for most other models.

But these are no issues. Stuff like that is only visible when zooming up extremly close. And even then nobody would care or notice them.

Would you be surprised if I told you that the isssues you pointed out are existant in EVERY major triple A game?

Check out wow models for example. Theres clipping literally EVERYWHERE. Floating armor, and so on. Or any other game which has similar artstyle.

Avoiding that stuff is nearly impossible. And what the hell, what would a spike with more polygons do the model any good?

 

[Chaosy]

In the sense of an objectively good model, I think it does matter.

Maybe this is contest exclusive criteria, but IMO it should matter.

Especially in cinematics which is my main interest in wc3 modding.
Doing closeup shots in wc3 generally hurts my eyes.
I invite you to find me a WoW cinematic/cutscene with clipping or low poly parts.

 

[Drake]

When you see it.

Spoiler

 

[Arowanna]

If you're looking for clean models and you want to focus on theatrics, games in general is a poor choice. Game models are not built for movies, but functionality and optimization. Of course, they can still look good, but they'll usually only look good for their intended purpose.

There's a great deal of cheating in animated movies as well (look at BlizzCon, Diablo 3, where they explain the creation of cinematics, for example), but the models are built for that purpose alone, not to function in a game and in a movie at the same time (just look at how jarring Dragon Age: Origins cinematics are, for example).

These two subjects are vastly different and comparing them is not very productive, as they aim to achieve two completely different goals.

I understand that one might think that one could craft a model for both intended goals. But in general, this is just pouring time down the drain. I.e. a complete waste.

 

[Chaosy]

When you see it.

Spoiler

Interesting, never done the quest chain as my warr is 80.
Thanks for the laugh though

 

[Direfury]

We aren't making models for huge cinematic productions. We're making them to fit in a game with a laughably easy style to match. As someone who actually makes their own models, animations and all, it takes time. It takes effort. People that learn how to make models here either do so out of convenience, or to figure out the basics. They're not often looking to get better, they just need results. You can't hold them to some idiotic standard and expect that to do anything.

Besides that, I actually want to see more people learn and improve, maybe contribute their own resources to the Hive. If you want to see models of a certain quality put out, you're going to have to make them yourself.