RPG tiles (take 2)

This is an archive of a topic from NESdev BBS, taken in mid-October 2019 before a server upgrade.
View original topic
RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241132)
Earlier I decided to go back to some RPG tiles I was working on. I had made a post about it before, took a lot of the advice and tried to rework it, and this is my updated version.
Instead of just using a generic swatch of tiles, I decided to just copy the overworld layout of another game so I could try them out in a more practical application, without spending a bunch of time designing a new overworld just to see how the tiles look.
There are a couple bits I'm not fond of, but I want to hear your thoughts first.

Image

Image

Image

Image

The character in the top left is just a "blank" to be drawn over.
A couple of these are alternate or older versions that I doubt I would use, but thought I'd share them to see what people think.
Image
Image

Please give me any feedback, positive or critical. Let me know what you think looks odd or needs to be improved.
I'd like to make a game I could sell, so that's the bar I'm trying to reach.
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241152)
It looks amazing to me !!
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241155)
The trees and mountains are nice. The water and swamp are too contrasting, poking eyes too much. For swamp, replacing the black would be enough, for water it needs a less busy pattern, and more variance if you can afford the tiles.

The characters are ok, but plain. Compare to FF1 chars, for example.
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241158)
Love the backgrounds, cannot make that nice myself :lol:

As for the characters, good question. I like them in general ;)

Good work!
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241161)
I think the characters look great, specially considering the scale! The background is OK, but it looks somewhat more primitive... it has that repetitive look that is very characteristic of early RPG games, which may or may not be what you're going for. What really isn't working for me is the castle and the dungeon entrance... the perspective looks a little off and the omnipresent black outline clashes with the rest of the art. All in all, it looks pretty good.
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241167)
Fantastic stuff, gives a kind of "Dragon Warrior-esque" feel (and not just the map layout). Love the water! Any criticism I have mirrors that of tokumaru, re: dungeon entrance (while I think the castle looks fine, you might consider portcullis instead of a dark/black entryway. Just food for thought).
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241169)
Looks really good :beer:
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241180)
Fantastic stuff. Really digging the nostalgia hit. :)

I'm not enough of an artist to give useful critique that hasn't already been said by someone else, but here's what I could come up with:

Water's a bit contrast-y. Should look okay with composite artifacts or a more 'accurate' palette though.
I legitimately did not recognise that as a swamp. Looks more like a tar pit, evil 'corruption' or something from Riven.
The village (is that a village?) looks a bit... random. Each quadrant looks fine but they're just jumbled together. Only so much you can do in 16x16 pixels though.
Castle's style doesn't match the rest of the tiles. Lose the perspective, and maybe the outline too?
I thought the dungeon entrance was a stone monument or something until I read the other comments. Looks good, but maybe a bit confusing.

Characters, all I can find is that most of the side-on skirt animations look like they're wearing a bustle, and are missing the toes visible in the front-on versions. Middle column, second from the top looks better, but back view still doesn't show the heels like the side. Maybe try something more like the wizard/hooded guy on the left?
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241207)
tokumaru wrote:
the perspective looks a little off and the omnipresent black outline clashes with the rest of the art.

True; I don't have outlines elsewhere on the overworld map, but I do have outlines on the characters. That's why I was thinking it wouldn't clash too much in an actual game; they would pop a little and get the players' attention, but not directly conflict with the overall aesthetic.
Do you think I am putting too much faith in that though? Do you think with characters on the screen it will still look too contrasting?


Rahsennor wrote:
The village (is that a village?) looks a bit... random. Each quadrant looks fine but they're just jumbled together.

Noted.

Rahsennor wrote:
I legitimately did not recognise that as a swamp. Looks more like a tar pit, evil 'corruption' or something from Riven.

How about "poison marsh?"

Rahsennor wrote:
Characters, all I can find is that most of the side-on skirt animations look like they're wearing a bustle, and are missing the toes visible in the front-on versions. Middle column, second from the top looks better,

Really? I thought it looked too much like she was running around barefoot.
I'd like to hear what some more people think of that version.

Rahsennor wrote:
but back view still doesn't show the heels like the side. Maybe try something more like the wizard/hooded guy on the left?

Dang, you're right! I can do better!
Re: RPG tiles (take 2)
by on (#241214)
Marscaleb wrote:
How about "poison marsh?"

Maybe... if poison was black... but I don't think I've ever seen it depicted quite that way.

There's really just too much black in there. It's a very 'sticky' color/shade, very versatile but quickly takes over if you use a lot of it (in my limited experience at least).

Marscaleb wrote:
I thought it looked too much like she was running around barefoot.

I noticed that, thought it was intentional (and neat!). But otherwise the pixel/cartoon body proportions push the heel so far up to waist level that it looks like something else without anything to distinguish it from the body.

Plus fabric isn't normally that elastic; if it's being pulled up that high then the bottom should be moving too, or there should be some folds/pleats straightening out or something. Hard to show that in such a tiny number of pixels though.

Marscaleb wrote:
Dang, you're right! I can do better!

Hooray, I was helpful!