I'm already doing this on a smaller scale, but you're welcome to piggy-back off of mine if you'd like to go big.

I've been really busy lately with an entirely DRM-waived LPC set with a unified palette (which is about up to ~105 colors and almost finalized). This means remaking assets like the snow and sand terrain, tweaking things so they fit stylistically together, ect. But it also means that the credits are down to Redshrike, Sharm, myself, and you for your work on the upholstry set. I'll likely add derivitives of Hyptosis' work as well later.

So-- easy to credit, flexible license that can be used for Steam projects, and the color palette reinforces stylistic compatability. The idea and preview sets have been received really well so far, and I think that might be a big thing that LPC has been lacking.

I'd love more of your submissions opened up, thank you!!

Yeah, I understand wanting to be more inclusive under CC-by-SA. If more artists do open their submission up to OGA-by, I'd be thrilled, but I'm going to keep to the waived version for the kit I'm working on. The 'oh, here's the download link' workaround has always seemed to be a very gray area, and I know a lot of people who are leery of touching it.

I'm going to be very busy anyway, just getting that palette fine-tuned, and adjusting Sharm's LPC items for it. I'm about 55-60% done now, and would be happy to show you my progress. I find it easiest to share WIPs and overviews via the OGA Discord channel; there's enough LPC material I don't think I could share a proper draft without releasing the kit.

Once it is released, I'll have it organized up and down, though. It should help quite a bit with your repackaging project, if you chose to pursue it.

It sounds like the goal here is usability over completeness, which I applaud. As for what gets included or not, my opinion is:

• If any tiles are present in more than one collection/atlas/submission, and both collections/atlasses/submissions are to be included in this curated set, only one copy of each tile should be included, omitting all duplicates.
• Any two tiles that are very similar but have no material stylistic difference (just a color correction, or pixel cleanup, or a fix to an animation frame) then these should be treated as "duplicates" and the more "correct" or "improved" version should be included and omit the other.
• Stylistic disagreements should be evaluated to see if they "fit" and if having them improves the set or not. The LPC styleguide should be the, uh.. guide for what fits or not. But it is just a guide. If the people participating in this project feel this set is made better by a particular inclusion despite that tile not adhering to the styleguide, it should still be included. When in doubt, consult your fellow project participants ... then decide what you (specifically bluecarrot16) feel is best regardless of the opinion of your peers; you are the resident expert and the leadership that assures cohesion of it all. You get ultimate veto power. OGA accepts everything, even if the "LPC" tag isn't really appropriate. The advantage to this project is curation. DON'T accept everything. If it doesn't make it better, it shouldn't make it in.
• What "fits" or not can also operate as a spectrum or prioritized list, too. Incorporate the "classic" LPC components first, working your way to the more stylisticly divergent assets later. Given enough time, absolutely every LPC asset will be reviewed and incorporated (or not), but until that fantastical day arrives, the set will always have the most widely-used and widely-recognized stuff in it first.
• I think including non-tileset assets should be considered. If there is another curated collection that handles some part of the LPC stuff (like castelonia's character generator) then those don't need to be included, or at the very least they don't need to be included yet. That stuff can be added last (if ever) since an alternative solution is in place for those parts. UI, Inventory items, Portraits, Non-character animations, Visual effects, et cetera all just seem like one more category each alongside Terrain, Buildings, Indoor decorations, Outdoor natural features (or however the rest of the tiles end up being organized)
• .tsx files should be included. Perhaps not as an absolute requirement, but anywhere they can be added, they'll be helpful. They don't hurt the people that won't use Tiled, and they sound like the perfect way to provide invaluable organizational and contextual information.
• editable source files are... meh. blend modes and the like are cool in .psd and .xcf files, but not really used much in a tile atlas context. I think the most valuable feature of those files are image layers. Tiled files support layers, correct? I say the most universal source file is a lossless flat image format (.png). the Tiled filetypes handle everything else IMHO. If someone prefers GIMP or Photoshop over Tiled, the tiles would already be available as individual .png's that can be quickly imported together as a stack of layers. Both Photoshop and GIMP have a tendency to change their file format, so for instance, opening an older .psd file is not guaranteed to look the same depending on what version of Photoshop is opening it. To my surprise, Tiled seems far more feature-stable to me.

TL;DR: I'm excited about this! :)

Feel free to disregard anything I've suggested. My opinion as a non-artist should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

This would be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO helpful. This would really simplify the use of LPC assets both from a technical and legal point of view. It will also avoid a lot of time consuming mix and match (many LPC repack have duplicated tiles, are not using efficiently space, etc).

@ElizaWy, that certainly makes sense. I think the two projects can certainly coexist and probably benefit from one another. Are you planning to organize the images as "objects" (like in the base assets) or as "atlases" (like in most of my submissions)?

Sure, I'm not managing either project but I would recommend against that. This is so common in open source to have multiple parallel projects, which of course is nice (FREEDOM_to do whatever you want) but It would be better if there would be one project managing this. From my experience so much collective time is wasted by having multiple independent project trying to achieve the same thing.
I also planned to do something like this but after reading your post I'll stop development of my version because I think @bluecarrot16 version goes much broader.

If possible it would be nice to have one reference project for LPC assets! Because if you have two projects, then which one should you use, etc etc. We go back to square one (as with repack and confusing license / attributions).

Hi!

As a game creator, I don't think this would be very valuable. Personally, I think the people that complain about licensing are either a bit lazy or reluctant to credit properly the artists. Recently, I came across several projects that are using LPC assets on itch.io with no credits at all. But if you are organized it is not that hard to keep track of the assets used. Dealing with licenses and credits is not something that can be avoided by game creators. For instance, even Minecraft has pages for credits on its website.

In addition, if someone starts using LPC assets, he will use a lot of assets and have a lot of artists to credit so even if few artists have no piece of art in the final product, I don't think it makes a big difference and it credits the entire LPC community. Finally, I don't think the format (atlases, individual assets, etc.) is really important for game creators because more often than not, the images will be preprocessed/ingested before being used in a game.

From an artist perspective, I can see the value of keeping track of each asset separately. It will be easier to extract just a piece of art from a pack, rework it and release an updated version. It will also allow other creatrs/artists that are not using all the LPC assets to easily take just a piece of art and adapt it to their project.

I don't want to discourage you but it looks like a lot of work, that you will probably do alone and may not be useful to many people (I think you are the only active artist working on LPC tiles with Baŝto who works on sci-fi tiles, the others are more working on characters and equipments). So make sure you want to do it and that it will be useful to you to not lose your time! :)

Sorry for being a killjoy, just giving my opinion, but you can ignore me! :p

@Samuncle - The thing is, the projects aren't parallel. LPC could use my branch, but I can't use a lot of theirs. It's not just the licensing, either; enforcing a strict palette enforces how the art is shaded, and LPC style differences being what they are, a lot just won't fit.

I'm thinking of calling my branch the Dame set, after the game I'm developing with it.

@BlueCarrot - I'll get you screenshots and demo images once I'm a little further on! :) Putting WIP art in an open forum or an imgur link always feels more permanent somehow. I have a few previews on twitter and patreon, but I want something good and PR-worthy first.

I started packing the assets into atlases, but honestly it makes it harder to navigate in Unity and more difficult to make changes to. I'll be doing tiny atlases (lamps, beds, ect) or object group .pngs instead at the moment. We'll see what's easiest.

@Pvigier - Licensing matters a lot when you can get sued for releasing your game on Steam, even with proper accreditation. Share-Alike is a requirement, not a suggestion.

@ElizaWy I never said the contrary, at least I don't mean to. Even when releasing on itch.io or any other platform without conforming to licenses you can get sued.