Juan J. Sánchez
Sponsor
Can someone explain this to me? At what angle is the floor? At what angle are buildings and walls? Jesus Christ.
3/4 (Top Down) Perspective
- Thread starter Juan J. Sánchez
- Start date
First of all, "3/4 perspective" is not a fix term regarding a 2D projection. It's more of a made-up term, used wrong 90% of the time either unintentionally, or because it's making the most sense to the person using it. The only area it's a technical term in is photography (where it refers to horizontal shifting), as far as I'm aware.
Assuming a tile size of 32x32, "3/4" (3 out of 4) would mean to have either a floor tile base size of 32x32px and a wall tile base size of 32x24, or vice versa. Technically, you could also enforce a square tile size and still make that the smaller tile size, in which case your wall tile base height would be 42,67 (which is obviously bullshit).
Note that 3/4 is sometimes used to describe RM's perspective. By all the definition you can get, that is bullshit, as it's really a 45° angle, meaning "1/2 perspective". As that is even more confusing, I urge you to not catch up on using that, and just say "my wall tiles have the same dimensions as my floor tiles"
Additionally, it's got nothing to do with angles. Remember you're projecting on a 2D surface, without any use of 3D or whatever. Anything happening is different tile dimensions. Yes, it could be converted to angles, but really, working with pixel sizes is way easier than with 67.5°
Assuming a tile size of 32x32, "3/4" (3 out of 4) would mean to have either a floor tile base size of 32x32px and a wall tile base size of 32x24, or vice versa. Technically, you could also enforce a square tile size and still make that the smaller tile size, in which case your wall tile base height would be 42,67 (which is obviously bullshit).
Note that 3/4 is sometimes used to describe RM's perspective. By all the definition you can get, that is bullshit, as it's really a 45° angle, meaning "1/2 perspective". As that is even more confusing, I urge you to not catch up on using that, and just say "my wall tiles have the same dimensions as my floor tiles"
Additionally, it's got nothing to do with angles. Remember you're projecting on a 2D surface, without any use of 3D or whatever. Anything happening is different tile dimensions. Yes, it could be converted to angles, but really, working with pixel sizes is way easier than with 67.5°
Juan J. Sánchez
Sponsor
Okay, this is my real problem. I'm using a 3D engine with a top camera to create 2D graphics. As you can see in the image below, the perspective is wrong. My buildings are at a 60° angle (which I think looks prettiest). Obviously, square tiles look weird. Basically, my real question is, if I'm using buildings at a 60° angle (which is isometric, I think), what should be the real size of my 256x256px floor tiles?
EDIT: I think I solved it. Floors should be halved vertically. That is, a 256x256px floor tile should in fact be 256x128px.
EDIT: I think I solved it. Floors should be halved vertically. That is, a 256x256px floor tile should in fact be 256x128px.
Just having 30° or 60° angles doesn't make something isometric ^^ Instead, the term refers to 3D parallel projection on a plane using only 0°, 30° and 60° lines for the axes, creating that unnatural, yet easily imagineable drawing style of "edge in front". Examples!
That sorted out, let me point out to your that your perspective will look rather strange when in motion. The reason is that the player will expect the avatar to move the same speed horizontally than vertically, and as that wouldn't be the case in your example (the vertical speed would be 0.5 times the horizontal speed), it would need to be compensated by something like Mode-7 or any similar way of displaying vanishing lines instead of parallel projection. In other words: It might work really well with an actual camera in a 3D environment ^^
Additionally, you chose a pretty hard-to-work-with aspect ratio of 2:1 for your tiles. I'd suggest 3:2 (aka actual 60° ) or 4:3, simply because of the familiarity to the eye regarding games. The 2:1 ratio is something I've seen in sidescrollers using tiles, but also pretty scarcely... if you're doing this, please make sure you and other people find it pleasing enough for the eye.
You could actually do some pretty easy rapid prototyping by just halving the movement distance vertically in RMwhichever.
That sorted out, let me point out to your that your perspective will look rather strange when in motion. The reason is that the player will expect the avatar to move the same speed horizontally than vertically, and as that wouldn't be the case in your example (the vertical speed would be 0.5 times the horizontal speed), it would need to be compensated by something like Mode-7 or any similar way of displaying vanishing lines instead of parallel projection. In other words: It might work really well with an actual camera in a 3D environment ^^
Additionally, you chose a pretty hard-to-work-with aspect ratio of 2:1 for your tiles. I'd suggest 3:2 (aka actual 60°
) or 4:3, simply because of the familiarity to the eye regarding games. The 2:1 ratio is something I've seen in sidescrollers using tiles, but also pretty scarcely... if you're doing this, please make sure you and other people find it pleasing enough for the eye.You could actually do some pretty easy rapid prototyping by just halving the movement distance vertically in RMwhichever.
Juan J. Sánchez
Sponsor
That is not a bad idea. I guess I could implement some new features into my movement system to adapt to this new environment. Anyhow, could you better explain to me the aspect ratios? What aspect ratio does an everyday 2D RPG use?
Well, and every day RPG uses 1:1, I suppse... RMVXP, for example, as it has 32x32 tiles ^^ Isometric tiles have a 2:1 aspect ratio (which doesn't exactly reflect the 30°/60°, but is easier to sprite for, especially in smaller graphic sizes.
I probably explained a bit poorly what I meant with the ratios... sorry for that ^^"
I probably explained a bit poorly what I meant with the ratios... sorry for that ^^"
Juan J. Sánchez
Sponsor
Finally, guys. I made my first map. I'm using the parallax mapping technique. I'm ripping sprites directly from Ragnarok Online, using a 3D editor, importing them to Adobe Fireworks, were I have four planes four each map: background, shadows, foreground, and lights. Then, I release two copies of each map: one as a parallax, and one as a fog. The parallax acts as a background, and the fog acts as a foreground. Finally, I use an invisible tile to map out passability. The perspective is a strange mixture of top down perspective and pseudo-isometric. Nonetheless, it's pleasant to the eyes, and that all that matters. I'm looking for some testers to tell me how they feel the environment. Does it please you? Does it make you dizzy?
http://www.mediafire.com/?kyki6fp8j5hs6ur
http://www.mediafire.com/?kyki6fp8j5hs6ur