Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Grant

Remaster Update - First Art Preview

Recommended Posts

@EA_Jimtern posted a remaster update on the official C&C Subreddit.

This should hit some nostalgia notes...
 

Quote

Fellow Command & Conquer fans,

We are approaching the conclusion of our pre-production phase, having achieved several of our key milestones since our last Reddit post. During March we delivered our first playable campaign mission (GDI Mission 1), which included multiple samples of the remastered art running at 4k. This was accompanied by a more complete Visual Target image, which helps the dev team align around our goals for the artistic fidelity. We are now in the middle of getting Multiplayer up and running for the first time, along with dozens of art assets iterating towards their finalized look. Last week we showed many of these items to the Community Council, and continue to receive fantastic feedback via their contributions.

With that in mind, today we wanted to share a glimpse of the pre-production work with all of you here in the C&C community. And this is the first time anyone outside of EA or the Community Council has seen work from the Remaster. In this spirit, we felt it appropriate to start with one of the first assets you see in Command & Conquer - the classic Construction Yard.

Now, if you’ve been reading our previous posts, our primary goal with the visual approach is to maintain the authenticity of the original in-game asset. It’s worth calling out that if there’s a conflict between the in-game asset, cinematic asset, or UI portrait, we’re always going to side with the in-game asset. That being said, if there are opportunities to pull in details from the cinematic footage to enhance an asset, we’ll do our best to incorporate those details. A good example here would be the blue pattern / texturing on the Con Yard door (Inspired by the classic Con Yard unpacking cinematic).

As always, we are eager to hear your thoughts in the comments, and looking forward to sharing more details about the visual approach down the line.

Cheers,

Jim Vessella

Jimtern

 


image.png
 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they are not doing it in proper c&c aspect ratio... Are they doing it knowingly or it's just a mistake on the art team? AFAIK some of the community councils are on this site, can you shed a light on that? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kikematamitos said:

We want RA2 Remaster 

How about remaster for every C&C game.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me like there using the C&C3(SAGE) engine :'( 

 

SyS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 4:48 AM, ore_truck said:

How about remaster for every C&C game.

How about that your PC can run't it? that is why RA3 aren't popular and because change to much maybe RA2 is the best inversion for EA but people never support my survey.

Edited by Kikematamitos
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Kikematamitos said:

How about that your PC can run it? that is why RA3 aren't popular and because change to much maybe RA2 is the best inversion for EA but people never support my survey.

Yeah I dont like RA3 that much, but other C&C games before that are good. I prefer Generals and C&C1.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Spoiler

 

On 4/17/2019 at 11:37 PM, Grant said:

image.png
 

 

 

3-5 hrs in 3ds max...

Delete dirt effect from textures. Looks like shit. One of the things I hate in the most of modern games is dirt effect.

If you want make things more realistic, make battle visual effects (like explosions) more beautiful.

Edited by Ezer_2000
Censored.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/18/2019 at 8:39 AM, Milkey Wilkey said:

So they are not doing it in proper c&c aspect ratio... Are they doing it knowingly or it's just a mistake on the art team? AFAIK some of the community councils are on this site, can you shed a light on that? 

Not only that, but the shape of the ConYard itself is also inaccurate to the original image - both in-game and as shown in the FMV, and official renders. You can see in this strategy guide scan that the outer walls are not parallel but fan outwards to the front. Neither are they flat on top but slope quite a bit.

It seems that the artist used the raw sprite as reference without regard to the aspect ratio correction issue (I'm afraid that the team might not be even aware of this problem, possibly because they're using C&C95 as a reference), resulting in a different height-to-width ratio of the building. But the in-game sprite is still pretty unambiguous about the outer walls being non-parallel. No idea why this was changed. The result is as if someone had played C&C a long while ago and then created the remastered version of the ConYard from a vague memory of what it looked like in the original game.

There doesn't seem to be any reason for the developers of the remaster to not use as much original reference material as possible to maintain authenticity of the visuals. There's plenty of high-res renders out there, but Jim Vessella's post only mentions the FMV and the UI icons (presumably from the C&C95 release). Is the team even aware of these other sources?

I mean, aren't the sprites being done by the same team as StarCraft Remastered? The sprites in SCR are very close to their original counterparts.

Can these criticisms be in any way related to the remaster dev team?

Edited by MrFlibble
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This hits my nausea notes. It does not look like TD art at all, rather like something out of a sloppy C&C3 or Generals mod. And worse, it subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise. 

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/20/2019 at 12:32 PM, MrFlibble said:

I'm afraid that the team might not be even aware of this problem, possibly because they're using C&C95 as a reference

I told them several times, but the simple fact is, the game engine's cells are square...the actual cells would have to be 5x6 to really get around this issue 😕

As for the art, honestly, I think it looks great, though there have already been further internal comments on the design.

9 hours ago, cn2mc said:

This hits my nausea notes. It does not look like TD art at all, rather like something out of a sloppy C&C3 or Generals mod. And worse, it subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise. 

What the heck are you talking about? "subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise"? wtf. No. It's the C&C1 engine. How would art even imply this.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

5 hours ago, Nyerguds said:

What the heck are you talking about? "subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise"? wtf. No. It's the C&C1 engine. How would art even imply this.

Are you sure about the engine though? I've asked this question a bunch of times and nobody gave me a concrete answer. Even if they are using the C&C engine this still looks like a bad fan effort and nothing like TD art. It's like something out of a different game. For a remaster they should be using the original renders or the closest possible approximations thereof. This is just a bad 3D model with some careful texturing that looks like something out of a bad 3D game. Nothing I would care about in this remaster.

Edited by cn2mc
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, cn2mc said:

This hits my nausea notes. It does not look like TD art at all, rather like something out of a sloppy C&C3 or Generals mod. And worse, it subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise. 

 

 

I kinda like it, looks pretty good

 

No idea how big the tiles will be in the remaster, made a mock up with 2x the size of the original:

image.png

image.png

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't look as bad in the mockup, maybe it takes getting used to. But TD isn't really a glittery game and this has a lot of glitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, cn2mc said:

This hits my nausea notes. It does not look like TD art at all, rather like something out of a sloppy C&C3 or Generals mod. And worse, it subtly implies that this will be a different game engine-wise. 

Maybe not.... SC:BW remaster is a bunch of graphics printed over the top of the original game that is basically running underneath. This could be similar.

It's not a terrible rendition, but like the walls around the edge of main structure... the crane is quite different. It's meant to be pretty smooth, from what I can see in the cinematic. Makes me wonder why they chose to do it this way.

I actually don't hate it, though. But it makes you wonder why you'd both to make a "remaster" if you're going to partially re-imagine the designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AchromicWhite said:

Maybe not.... SC:BW remaster is a bunch of graphics printed over the top of the original game that is basically running underneath. This could be similar.

Yeah hopefully. If this turns out to be anything even close to Starcraft Remastered I'll be happy.

All these negative comments (here and other forums)... I hope it doesn't get canned by EA.

:(

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks amazing. I have no idea what you guys are talking about.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say; looking at that mock up, it's going to be hard to go back to playing C&C1 with the original graphics once we've played the remaster, haha.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, do you see these elements?

image.png.5917227afa19b9b5b025d43ae17f4af0.png.f336980f1cfccf1f6948fe05aa00f09a.png

Red markers - slotted screws for a hand screwdriver(!). Do you understand now? This is a fucking bulding which looks like a toy from assembly kit for kids.

Spoiler

s-l1600.thumb.jpg.4b36e21f80d87d9a4269dcfde38def21.jpg61Sy82cPk3L._SL1000_.thumb.jpg.023fe2862f437f19ca42ea549ccfac15.jpg

Did developers wanted to touch our childhood feelings with that? No! They're just used ready 3D models of screws. This is so easy as a drawing a line in Microsoft Paint. This is not "beautiful" "wonderful" or "amazing". Trash work, 0 of 10.

And blue markers - this is a Pop rivets (according to video below). Also for assembling with hand tools. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuJqCtSrad0

You know what? 3D models of pop rivets also distributed togeter with 3D modeling software, either you can easily download them in google.

I want to say, that art was made by zero inspired artist. Or maybe just he isn't good at building design? Anyway, EA, change your developer pls.

I can also tell more negative stuff about the floor which looks like a tin casting. Just becasue these borders are specific only for small-size tin (or aluminium) produtcs.

1614643106_image.png.5917227afa19b9b5b025d43ae17f4af0(1).png.c206ca3f418731ac8fcaeac862189498.png

This looks unrealistic, like a toy. Assuming the game has a powerful 3D engine and the fact the dirt on the crane is drawed in style or a real building. This art becaomes even illogical. 

Now,

8 hours ago, Ferret said:

It looks amazing. I have no idea what you guys are talking about.

On 4/22/2019 at 10:57 AM, Nyerguds said:

As for the art, honestly, I think it looks great, though

... and others who think this thing "looks amazing and great". You all, can you tell me why you like it?

I guess you think because:

  1. It's new thing. (New = better ? Go kill yourself)
  2. Just to make a "polite" look of yourself by "paying respect". You pay respect for what?
  3. You don't have enough experience to understand something like I described above.
  4. You want to play a ready remaster ASAP
  5. You don't care about quality. Low quiality is suitable for you. And you all still going to pay tonns of money to them for this. EA again will get shitloads of money for the work wich seems like trash. But you don't care. You will keep'em alive and hope that in next 10 yers they finally will make something worthy (with current tendency they won't).

You guys can really have honest and open mind, but I explained you why I don't like this art. Professional game developers must produce quality and enthertaining stuff, that's their work.

I know this is a fantastic game, and it is not about real world. But the key of success is not to make things look unrealistic and illogical this is not a game about magic.

Things like buildings must look realistic and reasonable, that's really the thing engaged me into C&C world many years ago.

I don't want this remaster to be another EA's fail. Not going to pay for BS.

 

I explained you why I don't like this art. Please, explain me now why you like this shit.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ezer_2000 said:

Look, do you see these elements?

I see them. It's called detailing. If you want all that smoothed away you might as well just upscale the 1995 graphics...

That said, some tweaks were already suggested internally; it makes little sense to have screw slits in those big ones.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, cn2mc said:

Are you sure about the engine though? I've asked this question a bunch of times and nobody gave me a concrete answer.

They said they have the C&C1 source code and are basing it on that:

Quote

Well, it means we’re aiming to re-use parts of the source code to try and keep the gameplay feel as close as possible to the original games. Again, our goal is to Remaster the original gameplay, not remake it. 

I've seen it more closely, but I'm behind an NDA, so this is the best you're gonna get until Jim gives the official word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ezer_2000 said:

... and others who think this thing "looks amazing and great". You all, can you tell me why you like it?

I know that some people here who said it looks good also participate in the cncnet discord where your same critiques were discussed. Most people think the screws need to be changed and the rivets need to be explained at the very least.

As for your complaint about the concrete slab... we can assume the MCV contains a bunch of sheet metal and a bunch of bags of concrete mix.  And if that's the case then the slab would be framed (for expansion joints) with sheet metal with a rolled rim for strength and metal stakes for anchoring the frame. (which you have outlined in pink). It even seems that the west side of the main building is framed in sheet metal with a rolled rim.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with EZER here.

I find it funny that no one has started arguing about the crane itself.
How would it function?
The shape goes zigzag, which is very unstable. And I know that the original is like that as well. But back then the graphics needed to be awkward to show some extra movement.
There are no pistons whatsoever to spot in the picture.
And the grip itself is very small. Too small for the building projects that the CY fulfils.

Look at these:
https://www.cat.com/en_GB/products/new/equipment/material-handlers.html
Which is what the crane is supposed to be, right?

Look at this toy:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71ShKjQ25eL._SL1200_.jpg
Ain't that a realistic and functional toy?
It 'Rivals' that of the picture if you ask me :D

And by the big spaghetti monster, I hope the fans of the air condition blows towards the outside.
Because that is what they are supposed to do when you work at a freaking construction site!!
Cooling the fresh made materials, or at least remove the bad (with metals toxic) air.

I don't like the bolts in the floor.
I am used to concrete though.
But slabs never have bolts unless they are elevated.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Honestly, once you look at how big it'll actually appear on the screen, you wont even be able to see those tiny details...

That said, it would be nice for it to look like a realistic building. The more "real warfare" feel of C&C1 is an aspect that I liked about the game. Though, obviously, some things (just the Nod stuff, really) is more cartoon like and reminds me of toys (obelisk, stealth tank, flame tank, recon bike). 

The con yard is kinda in the middle of the two, in that it's a little more real feeling as both a structure and a vehicle, but less so as it transforms.

I liked the merging of the original structure as in the SHP and the details in the FMV. I think the combo of both is pretty good. Funny you said that about it looking more like a toy, though. It was a bit of a gripe that I had with the feel of RA2. Just TOO cartoony looking... even the crane on the allied con yard and service depo cranes looks more like a toy. C&C1 always had a more realistic and gritty feel.

So I think your feedback is justified. But could be maybe written a bit nicer (don't have to attack the creator to attack the work). 

I'd rather it be more closer to the original than taking artistic licence to make it look realistic. Better to just update the quality, not the design.

Edited by AchromicWhite
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Zaccie94
      Similar to the Convert Operations expansion, Where the GDI & NOD emblems appear on structures like the con-yard & hand of NOD in convert ops. Make them appear especially to structures both factions share like the Power-plant, Refinery, Comm-center etc.. Just like in C&C3TW. Logos/Emblems were on "everything" which made it felt authentic to the factions. It'll benefit Online multiplayer making it easy for players to identify what faction that structure belongs to. This maybe a small detail but it could change the way the game feels & play in a positive true C&C way.
    • By 9LivesCatFood
      The past year a few of my old favorite games got their official servers shut down. No one plays those games online now. I know the C&C community will always find a way to play C&C online but do you think it woulda been good if these old C&C game servers shut down? Honestly I think so. Don't get me wrong it's nice to still be able to play these games online but I think it would have been "healthier" for the games to be shut down rather than be on life support until no one logs in anymore.
    • By Eisengeist
      I only got to play C&C Sole Survivor a little while before the servers went down and didn't get to try all its modes but it was pretty cool having every unit controlled by a player.   Plus some of the more elusive units made an appearance.   Isn't it the only game where you could play as a Viceroid, or at least the classic style Viceroid?  Hopefully it wouldn't be too big a project to build it into the remasters.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...