Advertisement

Some crits and comments needed for starfield/nebula skybox test 56k beware

Started by July 31, 2006 02:25 PM
13 comments, last by mikiex 18 years, 5 months ago
I think they look basically perfect... really quite amazing. If only I had images like that to use in my space shooter.

PS: <gasp> another New Yorker on gamedev [grin]
There was a saying we had in college: Those who walk into the engineering building are never quite the same when they walk out.
Brutality mask put on, I'd say the nebula's are too bright. You should up the brightness of the rest of the space, or decrease the nebula strength. Another thing I noticed is that there's basically 2 or 3 star strength and size levels in your textures. This looks unnatural - in reality, stars vary widly in both brightness and distance.

Other than that, they look pretty good to me. :)
Create-ivity - a game development blog Mouseover for more information.
Advertisement
Yes Captain P is exactly right. I was thinking about that myself. The stars need to vary a lot more in brightness and size. But by no means am I calling myself an expert. Here is a scene I made for a new upcoming version of our game that you can reference as far as star variation. But otherwise I still think it looks awesome!




beteogames
thanks for the comments and the crits guys. totally right about the stars. ill post more at some point. right now we're prototyping in 2d so it'll be a (long) while.
Quote: Original post by Moe
Just out of curiosity, won't it look a little strange when mapped to the inside of a cube? I mean, the stars in the corners will appear a bit flatter/stretched because of the viewing angle, won't they?

EDIT - forgot to mention - they do look superb!


a skybox has perspective in the image that elimitates any distortion. It is easy enough to turn a flat image into a box including the distortion required for it to look correct.Each face has a 90 deg FOV

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement