I've been wondering, as a lone game developer,
or to say a part of team which has only got programmers and people who like to play games...
How do I manage the void created by lack of artists (sprites/tiles/animations) in such a situation???
What do you do in that case? and suppose I am a student, with no money to hire artists, is there a place where I can get these resources legally & free ?
For images there is also several sites like freespace pointed out for instance http://commons.wikimedia.org/ another great resource for getting artwork/images for your projects is to reach out to art schools or other locations that you know artists frequent and permit them to sign or get credit for any creation you use.
Recently I needed some free-as-in-speech sound samples, and found freesounds.org where all sound samples are under a CC license. Not quite sure where I would go for images/textures though.
Have you tried to attract a game playing artist to join your effort?
Lot's of people play games (even artists). The idea of collaborating on a game may be enough incentive, particulary if they get credit in the game, and samples for a portfolio.
For a hobbyist, the simplest answer is that you shouldn't worry about your game's art. You can get by fine with only programmer's art.
After you've created a working gameplay prototype, only then should you look for artists.
For an independent developer, you would need cash to hire artists. There's no getting around this. Just think of it this way: you get what you pay for.
Fun trivia: the most popular programmer's art is Kirby. The developers were using a pink fluffy sprite as placeholder's art until the the creator, Masahiro Sakurai, decided that the art fits the game and should stay.
Related
I was reading books of digital art, and in one of these books it is said that it is necessary to use images as a reference for drawing.
I found several stocks selling images, it is illegal if i use one of them without buying to use as a reference?
Example: I need to draw a body of a woman on some position, i look for a woman on the stock and draw something like that.
sry for bad english guys :x
hope someone help me
if you draw it by yourself it is legal, but if you downloaded it and used it voiding the copyright terms boy you can get yourself in trouble unless its for some local projects and your institute allows using stolen contents from net,
you can use stock images without removing watermarks and signatures but you should give credits to the creator for their hard work
also you can find a lot of free alternate resource in net,
I am new to android and game developing too.
I wanna try my luck in game development.
The only thing is struggling is Graphics and sounds.
I've played many games with awesome graphics like angry birds for example.
So, my question is how to design graphics like those and how do game developers get sounds for the games.
Can you suggest me any place for free sounds for commercial use
Thank you.
This is probably slightly off topic for stackoverflow (I think there's another board for game dev, not sure).
But that aside, my $0.02:
If you're doing game development and focused solely on the programming, then I would suggest finding a partner that can do some or all of the things you're not comfortable with doing yourself. Honestly, you could try making some graphics yourself in GIMP or Photoshop and using Audacity to make your own sound effects, but they probably won't be as polished as if you can find someone experienced with that to do it for you. You can also try to find free sounds/graphics on the internet, but if it's anything specialized you're trying to make, you probably won't find anything suited to what you're doing, at least not without much trepidation. Also, if you're really serious about making some games, and you want to get some assets of high quality, expect to pay a little money to get a graphic designer or sound engineer to make something nice for your project.
As far as where to find such a person. Well, this is where I get a little hazy, there's probably better places to look, but one which I'm aware of is this site:
http://www.moddb.com/jobs
You can post ads for people to work on various aspects of games, so you could find someone that specializes in the skills you're looking for. People on that site may do so for free, too.
Good luck!
I personally loathe background music on a website. My client has opposite feelings on the subject. I added music because the customer is always right, though I'd like to revisit the subject with them.
Almost everyone would agree that it is annoying and wastes precious bandwidth but are there any usability studies or a recommendation for someone esteemed in the profession that can provide a valid argument against background music?
Usability is not the only concern. Consider the following scenarios:
1 - Someone browses to the site while at work in a shared office, and now all of their co-workers think "Gee, he's wasting time".
2 - Someone browses to the site while in a room with a sleeping baby, and now they have to spend an hour getting him/her back to sleep.
3 - Someone browses to the site while they are listening to their own music, and now they hear a cacaphony of shrieks until one source is muted.
Also, consider that any benefit gained from the music on your website will be totally lost on anyone who has their speakers muted. So your audience can be divided between:
A - People who cannot hear the music
B - People who can hear it, but do not like it
C - People who can hear it, and do like it
I would not care to estimate the percentages associated with each of these groups, but keep in mind that category "B" is actively offended by your website. To take a line from the hippocratic oath, one rule of web design should be "do no harm".
Metrics. You'll never be able to convince a business person with an emotional answer.
If you investigate the situation empirically you'll be able to give them something irrefutable.
I would would try an experiment: (get google analytics)
have one site with the music as-is, measure the bounce rate,etc
have an identical site without music, measure the bounce rate,etc
Have the server randomly serve up the different pages for a couple weeks (until you get a significant data) and see what happens.
Maybe we're wrong (I hate music too). I hope your customer is wrong, but who knows.
You could also add a survey link and try to get people to answer that as well (but without an incentive that might not work)
Stats can be your friend here :)
I would also:
(calculate the size of the audio file(s)*the number of hits*months)/cost of GB per month
Then tell them how much money they are wasting.
Basically, it boils down to this:
Audio on websites is a bad idea. No one likes it.
Try to educate your client that it is a bad idea. (It's annoying, different levels of sound can cause problems, yadda yadda) Mention that most users don't take sites seriously if they use sound. It's a very '99 thing to do.
If you client does not budge, (politely) remind him/her that they are paying you for your expertise as an internet professional. You are the expert on the web, and they have hired you to give your expertise.
If they still won't budge, keep the sound and make sure they are happy. The bottom line is keeping the client happy.
Music also interferes with screen reader users. I'm a blind computer user and nothing annoys me more then having music start playing and drowned out my speech program that's trying to read the site. Nothing will make me close a website quicker then unwanted audio.
It took a bit but I found a site that talks about usability on web sites.
They have a video on the right hand side of this page:
http://www.ciaromano.com/evaluating/testing.php
It shows why audio ads are not a good idea on websites.
Hope this helps.
G-Man
Just make sure that there is a way to turn it off. It really depends on the type of Website, because multimedia-heavy sites (i.e. sites for Movies or Games) can benefit from it, but if I'm listening to some of my own music, I definitely want a way to turn it off.
Oh and please, no crappy MIDI-Files that people already hated in 1993 when they were novel.
This is a tough one -- and what's amazing is that at the moment, I have a client who's demanding the exact same thing.
Personally I don't know of any usability studies addressing this topic specifically, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence out there from users complaining about the intrusiveness or outright corniness of unrequested background music. * That said, clients still ask for it. Best you can do is try to explain the situation to them, try to gather a few good examples of people complaining about it from the Web at large, build a case, and hope the client goes for it.
In my case, she completely agrees that it's potentially annoying, understands it cuts against the grain of user expectations and politeness, but wants it anyway. So I'm building it. Whaddyagonnado.
* Indeed, you could probably use this thread as evidence! Good luck.
Consider taking a different path with the client.
Ask them what the purpose for the music is...
If it is to install a particular feeling or mood with the visitor of the site, consider taking them through all the points mentioned in answers here and discuss how that may violate the intended for the music.
Then you will be able to talk to the client about different ways to instill the same "ambience" to the website without resorting to music. This is really a design issue and not usability.
If the background music/sound was to convey some information, then it is a usability issue as people who for technological or biological reasons cannot hear the sound at the correct volume will miss out on that. Therefore the site is not as usable as it should be.
Unfortunately, as a service provider of sorts, all we can do is cringe and give the customer what they want - after documenting your disapproval both commented in the code and in writing to the client, of course.
Pardon me, but i have a different opinion about loading music in the website. With all due respect I have for the answer posters of this thread.
I see visits to e-commerce websites like going to a shopping complex. Where you have a cart, varieties of products, checkout counters and background music to make your stay as comfortable and interesting as possible.
There's a whole psychological reason as to what certain slow paced music can do to certain parts of the brain. Some studies even suggested that certain music play a role in motivating customers to purchase more items. Check this site
This can definitely be a plus point in a website. Of course it depends on what kind of website it is. However, a slow and non-vocal music shouldn't necessarily disrupt one's attention; rather it might have the opposite effect.
My justification is that when a potential customer visits a site, he is only using one of his senses while browsing through the pages. His eyes! I'm saying why not allow him (if he wants) to use his sense of hearing that would encourage him (not only through the means of displaying fancy texts, design and animations that looks nice to the eyes) but also to capture his attention through music (allowing him to be more in touch with the site).
Its obviously not possible to trigger his sense of smell and taste. But why limit it to only the eyes. Why not use the ears too!
Whether you choose to put music into your site or not, MichaelStum's post about having an option to turn off the music is highly essential.
Of course in the end its all about the amount of traffic that comes to your website. For this matter, #Cbrulak's idea of using Google Analytics would be a realistic approach for different individuals.
Despite all the advances in 3D graphic engines, it strikes me as odd that the same level of attention hasn't been given to audio. Modern games do real-time rendering of 3D scenes, yet we still get more-or-less pre-canned audio accompanying those scenes.
Imagine - if you will - a 3D engine that models not just the physical appearance of items, but also their audio properties. And from these models it can dynamically generate audio based on the materials that come into contact, their velocity, distance from your virtual ears, etcetera. Now, when you're crouching behind the sandbags with bullets flying over your head, each one will yield a unique and realistic sound.
The obvious application of such a technology would be gaming, but I'm sure there are many other possibilities.
Is such a technology being actively developed? Does anyone know of any projects that attempt to achieve this?
Thanks,
Kent
I once did some research toward improving OpenAL, and the problem with simulating 3D audio is that so many of the cues that your mind uses — the slightly different attenuation at various angles, the frequency difference between sounds in front of you and those behind you — are quite specific to your own head and are not quite the same for anyone else!
If you want, say, a pair of headphones to really make it sound like a creature is in the leaves ahead and in front of the character in a game, then you actually have to take that player into a studio, measure how their own particular ears and head change the amplitude and phase of the sound at different distances (amplitude and phase are different, and are both quite important to the way your brain processes sound direction), and then teach the game to attenuate and phase-shift the sounds for that particular player.
There do exist "standard heads" that have been mocked up with plastic and used to get generic frequency-response curves for the various directions around the head, but an average or standard will never sound quite right to most players.
Thus the current technology is basically to sell the player five cheap speakers, have them place them around their desk, and then the sounds — while not particularly well reproduced — actually do sound like they're coming from behind or beside the player because, well, they are coming from the speaker behind the player. :-)
But some games do bother to be careful to compute how sound would be muffled and attenuated through walls and doors (which can get difficult to simulate, because the ear receives the same sound at a few milliseconds different delay through various materials and reflective surfaces in the environment, all of which would have to be included if things were to sound realistic). They tend to keep their libraries under wraps, however, so public reference implementations like OpenAL tend to be pretty primitive.
Edit: here is a link to an online data set that I found at the time, that could be used as a starting point for creating a more realistic OpenAL sound field, from MIT:
http://sound.media.mit.edu/resources/KEMAR.html
Enjoy! :-)
Aureal did this back in 1998. I still have one of their cards, although I'd need Windows 98 to run it.
Imagine ray-tracing, but with audio. A game using the Aureal API would provide geometric environment information (e.g. a 3D map) and the audio card would ray-trace sound. It was exactly like hearing real things in the world around you. You could focus your eyes on the sound sources and attend to given sources in a noisy environment.
As I understand it, Creative destroyed Aureal by means of legal expenses in a series of patent infringement claims (which were all rejected).
In the public domain world, OpenAL exists - an audio version of OpenGL. I think development stopped a long time ago. They had a very simple 3D audio approach, no geometry - no better than EAX in software.
EAX 4.0 (and I think there is a later version?) finally - after a decade - I think have incoporated some of the geometric information ray-tracing approach Aureal used (Creative bought up their IP after they folded).
The Source (Half-Life 2) engine on the SoundBlaster X-Fi already does this.
It really is something to hear. You can definitely hear the difference between an echo against concrete vs wood vs glass, etc...
A little known side area is voip. While games are having actively developed software, you are likely to spent time talking to others while you are gaming as well.
Mumble ( http://mumble.sourceforge.net/ ) is software that uses plugins to determine who is ingame with you. It will then position its audio in a 360 degree area around you, so the left is to the left, behind you sounds like as such. This made a creepily realistic addition, and while trying it out it led to funny games of "marko, polo".
Audio took a massive back turn in vista, where hardware was not allowed to be used to accelerate it anymore. This killed EAX as it was in the XP days. Software wrappers are gradually getting built now.
Very interesting field indeed. So interesting, that I'm going to do my master's degree thesis on this subject. In particular, it's use in first person shooters.
My literature research so far has made it clear that this particular field has little theoretical background. Not a lot of research has been done in this field, and most theory is based on movie-audio theory.
As for practical applications, I haven't found any so far. Of course, there are plenty titles and packages which support real-time audio-effect processing and apply them depending on the general surroundings of the auditor. e.g.: auditor enters a hall, so a echo/reverb effect is applied on the sound samples. This is rather crude. An analogy for visuals would be to subtract 20% of the RGB-value of the entire image when someone turns off (or shoots ;) ) one of five lightbulbs in the room. It's a start, but not very realisic at all.
The best work I found was a (2007) PhD thesis by Mark Nicholas Grimshaw, University of Waikato , called The Accoustic Ecology of the First-Person Shooter
This huge pager proposes a theoretical setup for such an engine, as well as formulating a wealth of taxonomies and terms for analysing game-audio. Also he argues that the importance of audio for first person shooters is greatly overlooked, as audio is a powerful force for emergence into the game world.
Just think about it. Imagine playing a game on a monitor with no sound but picture perfect graphics. Next, imagine hearing game realisic (game) sounds all around you, while closing your eyes. The latter will give you a much greater sense of 'being there'.
So why haven't game developers dove into this full-hearted already? I think the answer to that is clear: it's much harder to sell. Improved images is easy to sell: you just give a picture or movie and it's easy to see how much prettier it is. It's even easily quantifyable (e.g. more pixels=better picture). For sound it's not so easy. Realism in sound is much more sub-conscious, and therefor harder to market.
The effects the real world has on sounds are subconsciously percieved. Most people never even notice most of them. Some of these effects cannot even conciously be heard. Still, they all play a part in the percieved realism of the sound. There is an easy experiment you can do yourself which illustrates this. Next time you're walking on the sidewalk, listen carefully to the background sounds of the enviroment: wind blowing through leaves, all the cars on distant roads, etc.. Then, listen to how this sound changes when you walk nearer or further from a wall, or when you walk under an overhanging balcony, or when you pass an open door even. Do it, listen carefully, and you'll notice a big difference in sound. Probably much bigger than you ever remembered.
In a game world, these type of changes aren't reflected. And even though you don't (yet) consciously miss them, your subconsciously do, and this will have a negative effect on your level of emergence.
So, how good does audio have to be in comparison to the image? More practical: which physical effects in the real world contribute the most to the percieved realism. Does this percieved realism depend on the sound and/or the situation? These are the questions I wish to answer with my research. After that, my idea is to design a practical framework for an audio engine which could variably apply some effects to some or all game audio, depending (dynamically) on the amount of available computing power. Yup, I'm setting the bar pretty high :)
I'll be starting per September 2009. If anyone's interested, I'm thinking about setting up a blog to share my progress and findings.
Janne Louw
(BSc Computer Sciences Universiteit Leiden, The Netherlands)
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm not a great fan of duplicating effort. I do find, however, that there are benefits to tracking agile iteration progress on both a physical card wall and an online "calculator" (Excel, some scrum tools) or an online card wall (e.g. Mingle).
I find that a physical card wall in the team space provides a visceral kind of connection to the status of the cards... and that moving a card physically when you finish something provides a level of satisfaction that can't be duplicated online. I can feel the card... and people can see me walk up to the wall to move something.
Online tools provide great capabilities to share remotely and to calculate progress (e.g. in Mingle, you can use the built-in tools to automatically calculate burn-ups or burn-downs from the real data, saving lots of administrative time in doing those things manually).
I'm curious if agile practitioners maintain two tracking media like I do, and how do you present the benefits of the physical wall to those who say "I can do it online... why would I want to do it on a card wall instead?".
I feel the same. There is something very psychologically satisfying in moving a physical card around on a wall. Thinking managerially, we like stats and we like them to be automated as much as possible.
Perhaps you can keep both? Use the physical wall as the main daily source of information your team work from. Then, assign one person (e.g. the scrum master) to take down the live status and put it into Mingle/Excel at the end of each day.
As long as there is good benefit for the users to have both, then you should find both keep happening alongside each other nicely. Find out what the motivators are for each tool. For example:
Physical wall:
Instant reaction
Quick visual
Physical satisfaction
Online records:
Really really useful statistics
People can be rewarded against the stats in there (e.g. points completed)
Hope this helps.
My team has struggled with this as well. Electronic data makes analysis and reporting very easy and enables associations of checkins with a backlog item, but its a lot easier to manage cards during the standup. Plus, it's a lot easier to get a "5000 foot view" of the project from looking at a large wall than a small monitor.
No matter what you do you're either either going to have some duplicate effort, or you're going to have a process with some pain points. The goal is to find that balance between the amount of duplicate effort and the value that it affords.
We're still working on finding that balance :) Here's what we do:
During planning, we throw everything into OneNote. Formatting is a bit of a pain, but we're getting better.
After planning, our ScrumMaster enters the data from OneNote into an Excel document for generating our burndown. He then exports this data into TFS, for associating checkins, and does a mail-merge to print each task on a label which is then affixed to a post-it and added to the wall.
During the standup we move the post-its around on the wall.
After the standup, the ScrumMaster updates the Excel doc, generates the burndown update, and sends it around to the team.
As a team member this is pretty low-friction, but it's pretty wasteful of the ScrumMaster's time.
I greatly prefer Cards on the wall for a few simple reasons:
Everyone know how to use them. No software training required.
Not subject to problems with network, someone's computer needing maintenance etc., even in a blackout, people can still update their cards. This may sound like a joke, but can be nice to have something to do when for whatever reason yu can not use your PC
Programmers can freely update the cards while they are booting up/compiling
Easy to see them all at a glance
Ideal for meeting if your in a scrum environment and having amini meeting aroudn a desk.
I like jotting a note on the card when it's moved with time and mover... for trakcing bugs/features.
Cross link your online and card wall.
Set up two way replication. Method is left as an exercise for the student.
Also handy to catch whiteboard content from discussions.
We use both, and I can't imagine doing it any other way. Part of it may be that we find our "online card wall" a little too clunky to easily maneuver, but we use the physical cards for getting a quick idea of what developers are working on, letting QA know which cards are ready for testing, and for QA to post what is ready for our weekly demos. The dev area, QA area, and ready to demo areas are three physically distinct places, with the ready to demo being most easily accessed. We also use the physical cards for final scoring.
Could we do all of this online? Yes, would it be quicker, and easier? No way!
We've abandoned using cards after the sprint planning session (they get added to Rally) because it doesn't make sense for us to track in multiple places. Our scrum master is accountable for making sure people enter their tasks appropriately and move them (that's what the daily standup is for). The 5000 foot view is much better in an online tool than a bunch of cards on a wall that can only be categorized two-dimensionally (or maybe three if you stack enough on top of each other).
We use both a card wall and ProjectCards. It's painful for me because I sync the two of them, but it's worth it to have the feedback for the team that is local.
We've bandied about the idea of getting a large touch screen, but I still would rather have physical cards. The other idea I've been toying around with is having a printer which will automatically print out an index card whenever a story is added to ProjectCards.
I was just wondering. How about a giant projector based touch wall. ;)
Best of both worlds. This might give some pointers.
http://johnnylee.net/projects/wii/
Theres something very good about a big wall everyone can always see. I think we need a way to print onto regular thick index cards but I've had no luck so it is duplicated effort at the moment.
Electronic Card Wall Using RFID, this allows you to use a physical wall, with data mastered in software of your choice. As you move cards around, software updates accordingly.
If you use JIRA. http://wallsync.net will keep your cards in sync for you...