I think I did an in-depth comparison back in the day. The conlusion was there was very little chance these were derived from LoZ assets. They do indeed look very similar, but that is by design. If I recall correctly, the textures and overall shape of the features are not the same in a way that implies buch's were created as an inspiration, but did not use the LoZ tileset as a guide or base.
As you can see from the above overlay comparison, there are plenty of similarities, but all of them have significant design differences. The texture and asthetic decisions that Buch made just don't make sense if he derived this from Nintendo's IP, but they make perfect sense if you consider this set was inspired by (and intentionally designed to approximate) Legend of Zelda's look. The closest similarities are the fence posts, but even those have "wood grain" differences. Plus, Nintendo's fence posts are biased to the lower-left corner of the tile, where Buch's are center-of-tile. I had to shift the tiles over to get them to overlap properly.
Are we 100% sure these aren't derived from Nintendo IP? Well, about as sure as anything else on OGA. I'd use these in my own game and be confident I am not infringing upon any copyrighted material. :)
Did you use the original 3D model as a starting-point, as a base, or as a guide in any way when rendering the 32x32 pixel file? Did you use the original 3D model when rendering the single 1x1 pixel file? If so, Theseus must be credited as the original sailor.
In other words, if it was ever Theseus's ship, it is always Theseus's ship by copyright law. Even that 1x1 pixel black square is considered a derivative of Kutejnikov's model. Ridiculous? Of course, but you didn't ask if copyright laws make sense, only what it says about derivation. :)
Click the title of the art to open the submission page for that art. (clicking on the "play" button for music or sound effects will allow you to listen to a preview of the audio, but you will have to click the title to open the submission page. See screenshot below)
Once on the submission page (for example, here) scroll down below the preview to where it says File(s):
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.
Correct. This is an artifact of the way drupal+imagemagic handles animated previews with transparency. Currently, the only solution is to add a solid opaque background to the preview gifs. (no need to add this on the actual asset, just the preview files.)
That is caused by certain special characters. Specifically, fancy versions of regular punctuation. Some word processors and devices (especially iOS) like to change your normal keyboard version of hyphen, quote, or apostrophe to em dash, curved quotes, or angled apostrophe, respectively. This is why the problem only occurs when you copy text from some other rich text source, since typing it directly can't possibly result in characters that aren't on your keyboard... Unless you're typing on an iOS tablet or something; apple really likes to change stuff as you type. For some reason the site treats the non-keyboard characters as code format characters or control tokens.
In this particular case, the problem is the angled apostrophe in the conjunction I'min your fourth paragraph. At least based on the github text, that is.
I think I did an in-depth comparison back in the day. The conlusion was there was very little chance these were derived from LoZ assets. They do indeed look very similar, but that is by design. If I recall correctly, the textures and overall shape of the features are not the same in a way that implies buch's were created as an inspiration, but did not use the LoZ tileset as a guide or base.
As you can see from the above overlay comparison, there are plenty of similarities, but all of them have significant design differences. The texture and asthetic decisions that Buch made just don't make sense if he derived this from Nintendo's IP, but they make perfect sense if you consider this set was inspired by (and intentionally designed to approximate) Legend of Zelda's look. The closest similarities are the fence posts, but even those have "wood grain" differences. Plus, Nintendo's fence posts are biased to the lower-left corner of the tile, where Buch's are center-of-tile. I had to shift the tiles over to get them to overlap properly.
Are we 100% sure these aren't derived from Nintendo IP? Well, about as sure as anything else on OGA. I'd use these in my own game and be confident I am not infringing upon any copyrighted material. :)
It depends on how Theseus's ship was replaced.
Did you use the original 3D model as a starting-point, as a base, or as a guide in any way when rendering the 32x32 pixel file? Did you use the original 3D model when rendering the single 1x1 pixel file? If so, Theseus must be credited as the original sailor.
In other words, if it was ever Theseus's ship, it is always Theseus's ship by copyright law. Even that 1x1 pixel black square is considered a derivative of Kutejnikov's model. Ridiculous? Of course, but you didn't ask if copyright laws make sense, only what it says about derivation. :)
can you provide a link to the page you're looking at that does not have the "File(s)" section?
It sounds like the goal here is usability over completeness, which I applaud. As for what gets included or not, my opinion is:
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.
I like the new additonal previews
, but where are they? I can only download the "rated fun" file and not the fish or moon.Yeah this bug sucks. If anyone finds a way to fix it, let me know.
Correct. This is an artifact of the way drupal+imagemagic handles animated previews with transparency. Currently, the only solution is to add a solid opaque background to the preview gifs. (no need to add this on the actual asset, just the preview files.)
https://opengameart.org/forumtopic/bug-cannot-create-collection-with-spe...
That is caused by certain special characters. Specifically, fancy versions of regular punctuation. Some word processors and devices (especially iOS) like to change your normal keyboard version of hyphen, quote, or apostrophe to em dash, curved quotes, or angled apostrophe, respectively. This is why the problem only occurs when you copy text from some other rich text source, since typing it directly can't possibly result in characters that aren't on your keyboard... Unless you're typing on an iOS tablet or something; apple really likes to change stuff as you type. For some reason the site treats the non-keyboard characters as code format characters or control tokens.
In this particular case, the problem is the angled apostrophe in the conjunction I'm in your fourth paragraph. At least based on the github text, that is.
Pages