@johndh: Great additions to the list! (I'm actually fairly surprised those monsters don't exist in Nethack, though I think some of them are in SLASH'EM).
Also, I suppose that since it's an open project, anyone could make different versions/styles of the same creatures. I couldn't (and most certainly wouldn't) stop them. However, when I make the push for the art, I would nudge people into a similar art direction. The goal is to be unified, but if someone feels restricted by that, they should listen to their feelings and make something else. I'm sure it can be used by someone. I just probably wouldn't include it in the collection if it deviated too much.
Lastly, I think some of your questions would be answered by the General Design Document: http://ubuntuone.com/p/tnY/
This document contains my vision for the project, but like I said, it's all open, as it should be.
@Bart: Thanks for the input! Would OGA be willing to do a sprint, contest, or special event sometime in the future? For instance, at this phase of the project, if I dropped a large list of monsters, do you think a sprint/contest (similar to the recent TA sprint) would generate a large volume of concept art? Even with doubled (tripled+?) up concept art, do you think there'd probably be a wide array of monsters?
@Bart: Great, the OGA2 collections feature would be perfect for this! For now at least, I don't want to make a website for this project, since I don't know if it will take off, and I'm not convinced a new website would add anything that OGA can't do. Probably what I will do is create a wiki/CVS system (maybe Google Code) to keep track of it all.
I'll make sure it all gets submitted to OGA, with one page per monster, and once OGA2 is launched, I'll make sure that they all go in appropriate collections.
Bart, would you happen to know where a good place would be to find 3D artists who would be willing to contribute to a project like this? (eg. Given a piece of concept art, they could make a rigged, animated, textured low poly model). Blendswap or blendernation come to mind.
@Blarumyrran: Definitely agree that concept art needn't be high quality or consistent with other assets, as they will never be used in-game.
I also agree that everyone should post their own work, drawing from the resources created by the other people. You're absolutely right; no polls or feedback is needed for concept art. Once the model is actually created, a unified feel should be required (that's the whole point of the project), but a concept is, and always should be, totally open.
Here's a question for everybody: Do you think there's enough interest here to get this project going? If so, I'll start a repository for the art, which I (and other main contributors) can maintain. Once there's enough work on a monster to publish, someone can upload/update that piece on OGA.
Oh, and WTactics! Great project. I did a lot of work there building a quick and dirty CMS to keep track of the cards. I haven't been around on that project much lately... I got burnt out after a few months of stright coding when simultaneously my life got busy. But now that things have settled down, I really ought to work there some more. I'd definitely recommend the project to anyone who likes CCGs.
@RoboPaul: Doh! Sounds! Thanks a million; I can't believe I forgot that. And yes, the whole set of a monster's assets will be available in one large compressed file.
@Blarumyrran: Hurray! You are officially the first contributor to the Unified Bestiary! Hrm... what I'm thinking is what we'll probably need is a way for lots of people to provide feedback on each iteration of the concept art. I'll think about it some and figure out a system for that. Maybe we need a survey? Or an IRC channel? Or forums. Not sure. I could set up a forums system pretty quickly if that's the best way, in everyone's opinion.
As I promised, the General Design Document. http://ubuntuone.com/p/tnY/ It's still in a very early stage, so things might get changed around, added or deleted, but it's still good to have. Probably right now it simply needs expansion.
johndh, I absolutely agree with that sentiment. I think what we'd have to do before even thinking of modeling is a nice array of concept art.
Who all here can make a few concept pieces for assigned monsters? If I divvied out some of the creatures on the nethack list, would anybody be interested in sketching concepts? They don't have to be great (all the better if they are!) but if we get a general style going that might work. We'd probably revise each of the concepts through a few iterations to assure consistency.
Once we have enough concepts (one from each of the nethack monster "families"), we could take it to the next phase - modeling.
I'm all for starting immediately (no sense in standing around talking about it forever). Any takers?
@Robin: Agreed, there may be some overlap. One of the major components to OGA 2.0 (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) is grouping similar styles of art. However, this project is not about organizing the existing art so much as jumpstarting and pushing forward the creation of new, consistently designed art.
@Tartos: I have thought about an animation list. So far I think each model needs the following: Move, Jump, Attack(s), Die (plus, if we want to follow FLARE's animation list, add CritDie), Defend (Block, whatever you want to call it), Cringe (taking damage), Idle (Stance). Maybe also add in Use/Activate?
@hc: I like the idea of an open universe as well, though I think the idea of this project is to make things generic enough to apply everywhere. It would be easy to populate an open universe with a database like this, though.
As far as style is concerned, I think I would most likely try to keep it tightly regulated. Perhaps a General Design Document is in order? (I'll whip one of those up.) All submissions ought to follow those regulations. It would be a pity to have lots of nice, low-poly models and someone submits a great model they've spent lots of time on, but it has way to many polys to be used in the same game as the others.
Awesome! I'll add these to the unified bestiary list, if you're okay with that.
@johndh: Great additions to the list! (I'm actually fairly surprised those monsters don't exist in Nethack, though I think some of them are in SLASH'EM).
Also, I suppose that since it's an open project, anyone could make different versions/styles of the same creatures. I couldn't (and most certainly wouldn't) stop them. However, when I make the push for the art, I would nudge people into a similar art direction. The goal is to be unified, but if someone feels restricted by that, they should listen to their feelings and make something else. I'm sure it can be used by someone. I just probably wouldn't include it in the collection if it deviated too much.
Lastly, I think some of your questions would be answered by the General Design Document: http://ubuntuone.com/p/tnY/
This document contains my vision for the project, but like I said, it's all open, as it should be.
EDIT: Sorry, double post.
@Bart: Thanks for the input! Would OGA be willing to do a sprint, contest, or special event sometime in the future? For instance, at this phase of the project, if I dropped a large list of monsters, do you think a sprint/contest (similar to the recent TA sprint) would generate a large volume of concept art? Even with doubled (tripled+?) up concept art, do you think there'd probably be a wide array of monsters?
@Bart: Great, the OGA2 collections feature would be perfect for this! For now at least, I don't want to make a website for this project, since I don't know if it will take off, and I'm not convinced a new website would add anything that OGA can't do. Probably what I will do is create a wiki/CVS system (maybe Google Code) to keep track of it all.
I'll make sure it all gets submitted to OGA, with one page per monster, and once OGA2 is launched, I'll make sure that they all go in appropriate collections.
Bart, would you happen to know where a good place would be to find 3D artists who would be willing to contribute to a project like this? (eg. Given a piece of concept art, they could make a rigged, animated, textured low poly model). Blendswap or blendernation come to mind.
@Blarumyrran: Definitely agree that concept art needn't be high quality or consistent with other assets, as they will never be used in-game.
I also agree that everyone should post their own work, drawing from the resources created by the other people. You're absolutely right; no polls or feedback is needed for concept art. Once the model is actually created, a unified feel should be required (that's the whole point of the project), but a concept is, and always should be, totally open.
Here's a question for everybody: Do you think there's enough interest here to get this project going? If so, I'll start a repository for the art, which I (and other main contributors) can maintain. Once there's enough work on a monster to publish, someone can upload/update that piece on OGA.
Oh, and WTactics! Great project. I did a lot of work there building a quick and dirty CMS to keep track of the cards. I haven't been around on that project much lately... I got burnt out after a few months of stright coding when simultaneously my life got busy. But now that things have settled down, I really ought to work there some more. I'd definitely recommend the project to anyone who likes CCGs.
@RoboPaul: Doh! Sounds! Thanks a million; I can't believe I forgot that. And yes, the whole set of a monster's assets will be available in one large compressed file.
@Blarumyrran: Hurray! You are officially the first contributor to the Unified Bestiary! Hrm... what I'm thinking is what we'll probably need is a way for lots of people to provide feedback on each iteration of the concept art. I'll think about it some and figure out a system for that. Maybe we need a survey? Or an IRC channel? Or forums. Not sure. I could set up a forums system pretty quickly if that's the best way, in everyone's opinion.
As I promised, the General Design Document. http://ubuntuone.com/p/tnY/ It's still in a very early stage, so things might get changed around, added or deleted, but it's still good to have. Probably right now it simply needs expansion.
johndh, I absolutely agree with that sentiment. I think what we'd have to do before even thinking of modeling is a nice array of concept art.
Who all here can make a few concept pieces for assigned monsters? If I divvied out some of the creatures on the nethack list, would anybody be interested in sketching concepts? They don't have to be great (all the better if they are!) but if we get a general style going that might work. We'd probably revise each of the concepts through a few iterations to assure consistency.
Once we have enough concepts (one from each of the nethack monster "families"), we could take it to the next phase - modeling.
I'm all for starting immediately (no sense in standing around talking about it forever). Any takers?
@Robin: Agreed, there may be some overlap. One of the major components to OGA 2.0 (I believe, correct me if I'm wrong) is grouping similar styles of art. However, this project is not about organizing the existing art so much as jumpstarting and pushing forward the creation of new, consistently designed art.
@Tartos: I have thought about an animation list. So far I think each model needs the following: Move, Jump, Attack(s), Die (plus, if we want to follow FLARE's animation list, add CritDie), Defend (Block, whatever you want to call it), Cringe (taking damage), Idle (Stance). Maybe also add in Use/Activate?
@hc: I like the idea of an open universe as well, though I think the idea of this project is to make things generic enough to apply everywhere. It would be easy to populate an open universe with a database like this, though.
As far as style is concerned, I think I would most likely try to keep it tightly regulated. Perhaps a General Design Document is in order? (I'll whip one of those up.) All submissions ought to follow those regulations. It would be a pity to have lots of nice, low-poly models and someone submits a great model they've spent lots of time on, but it has way to many polys to be used in the same game as the others.
Pages