Cerez

Wow, that was fast! Yep, you've done a few things there that I have no idea how to do yet... My mew's head shape doesn't look too bad in comparison, though -- now that I've included the quarter view reference in the design. So I guess that's a good sign, then. Thanks for the help, @@AshuraDX. Hahaha, imagine doing that poly by poly! A little like one of those 5-year-long Lego projects.

Mewzilla!!!

No, feel free @@AshuraDX. This is just practice for me. I've only gotten started, but I am actually really enjoying modeling. I never thought I would. (It always seemed like a daunting task from a completely alien world.) I'm sure you can do a hundred times better. I'll be interested to see your take on it. Here is the reference sheet I've used: http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/319/d/7/reference_sheet_mew_by_deviantmel-d32x5fe.png But I want to try and get this little guy in game. It will be a good introduction to how the whole rigging thing works. Provided that it's possible to get a model in game that is rigged only to the head of the skeleton... I don't really need an oversized, giant Mew thomping around... Edit: Mew the Overlord, haha!

Yep, that's what I mean. I suppose these image planes are what I'm really looking for. Silo doesn't seem to have anything like that, but Blender does, then, so that's good. I plan to move up to Blender anyway, eventually, once I get in the hang of things with Silo. Until then I'll just have to fudge the quarter angles, I guess. Thanks.

I want to buy a computer without Microsoft Windows at a local store. I haven't been able to do this since I can remember. Where can I find one? Nowhere. All thanks to Microsoft. No matter what computer I buy, I will have to pay my taxes to Microsoft. (Why should I?! I don't want to!!!) This illustrates my counter argument perfectly. Just because they leave you a few options (like buying an Apple computer instead) doesn't mean that they are not controlling the market, your spending, and your usage, and your life. By dominating an aspect of our lives, they are taking away freedoms we've had before their arrival. That's what many-many corporations do. It's powerful business, sure, but not "good" business in any moral regard.

Perhaps I need to clarify what I really mean by "closed". Companies and corporations are required to keep certain secrets about their operations. This is something that the consumer usually has no interest in anyway, and that I would label "company/business privacy". Companies also have right to exclusively own a product they have created, naturally, as long as that product does not contain the open source work of others -- in which case they are usually obligated to contribute back to the community by publicly releasing the updated/changed source. This is done to ensure that progress can be made from everyone's work. Where I have a problem with a closed attitude ownership -- where a company keeps all its assets and products to itself -- is when their product(s) are affecting the lives of millions of people. When something becomes so widely adopted and relied on by so many people, I believe the community deserves the right to be in involved in the development of that product. If we are talking about a "free country" and "democracy", to use political terms, then democracy in this case would mean that people have a say and insight into the development of such products. Full control would not be in the hands of corporate management, with completely restricted access to anyone from the outside to see. Such enormous scale private projects should be required to become open source projects. Otherwise corporations are taking over our lives with exclusive control over their widely distributed products. Such power over the people should not be given into the hands of a few. What right do corporations have to control our lives and limit our options and resources? It's feudalism building all over again. I've taken this a step further in order to illustrate my point, but I hope this clarifies what I mean when I say "closed". In the case of Steam, as a company they are locking you into buying games only from them, and games that run only using their proprietary platform. It's a very similar business model to Apple's App Store. Then, with a large enough consumer base, they have control over distribution and can dictate terms, and determine what software is released and what is not. At least Valve actively queries their customers, and allows certain (controlled) community impact with features such as Steam Greenlight -- which is why they appear to be a little bit more open -- but the other companies we have mentioned above do far less, and keep all control and decision over their products' development to themselves.

I guess I could create a flat 3D plane/wall and texture it, and delete it when I'm done with the model. That would be a workaround, yes, but rather tedious to do every time... That's okay, I'm fine without a direct reference; I'm just curious whether there are any 3D modeling software out there that do support a reference image behind a quarter view of the model. By topological issues, I take it you mean how the joints are structured, the use of triangles, and my glorious octagon? Thanks for your support, @@Boothand.

Point taken. I've forgotten all about that! I've shaped the head and feet up a bit to match my quarter view reference closer. Question: Is there any modeling software out there that supports a viewport/reference image behind a quarter-view model display? Silo only supports it with the front, back, side, and top/bottom views... There is a "free view", but you can't put an image behind that...

I've followed the reference material as close as I could in that regard. The side profile and the front profile for the head combined equal to what you see here.

I'm not sure what a "paintover" is, but I wasn't planning on having the arms and legs move, that's why I intentionally ignored the joints and deformation factor this time. The only thing that will move, if it moves, is the head in relation to the body -- and maybe the tail if I see an opportunity. This model is designed to be small, just a little larger than a JKA character's head in size. The vertex count is only 750, so that should be fine. But thanks for the pro tip. Edit: Actually, I can only see one n-gon, and that's quite obviously on the back. It's the result of my inexperience with basic modeling tools, but I left it untouched instead of reworking it because it's not in a critical spot, and it gives the character an interesting trait, forming the back/spine... Are there any other n-gons I should know about? I know there are quite a few triangles, but I've allowed for them to happen due to my original intention with the model.

Actually, I do, LOL! Not simply because they are a corporation, but because they are completely closed, like the rest of the corporations we've mentioned above. I prefer DRM-free games, and GOG's service as far as downloadable games go. So MS-DOS is still private property, huh? These are things I find hard to understand. A whole universe was built on DOS, and it's been under copyright for long enough. The public has adopted it and used it to the maximum. It should belong to the public, not some old guy sitting in his office, not giving a care about the world anymore.

Finished! All that's left is to add the textures, now... To get it in game, I was thinking I could just rig the head to the JKA skeleton's head, and the body to its neck, and leave the rest empty? That way it will appear to float in the air, and I can keep the size true. It's psychic, and it hovers/flies, so it doesn't really need the movement animations. Any thoughts? Edit: Textures added.

I'll add behind-the-scenes information hoarding on their users, and a gradually degrading quality in their initially well designed products to that. Depends on which distribution, but yes, GNU/Linux can be difficult at times. I find that Fedora only needs an initial setup, and then it's solid as rock and perfect for work (no maintenance needed); and Ubuntu needs about as much setting up as Apple -- namely, very close to zero -- but it feels too much like Windows and Mac for my taste. Up until the latest two releases, Mac OS X was more stable than any Linux distro I've tried. It's a pity they have to destroy that for the sake of better commercial sales. Linux is solid and reliable -- more reliable than Windows -- but apps occasionally do crash in Linux. Fortunately they're generally well designed and fast loading, so that doesn't pose much of an issue. I've never lost any data so far. Linux has one major advantage over all closed platform, corporate OSs -- it's made and maintained by the community, which means no overwhelming private interest, minimal privacy issues, and software made to be used, as opposed to commercial software just made to sell. That is a big difference when it comes to having a computer you can use for an extended period of time, and keep on using.

I'll start this thread, seeing as there's recently an avid interest in how the products of these companies affect our lives -- and rightfully so. Feel free to chip in and discuss anything relating to these companies and their products. Your experiences with them, discovered new things, latest products, researches, etc. Just be respectful to everyone's preference and opinion. This is a parliament hearing about the NSA's recent access to the database of these companies -- who secretly collect information from their users, often to great detail:

Thanks for the compliment, @@Avidhal. A word of advice: basic modeling is not as daunting as it first seems. If you watch a few beginner's video tutorials of other people making stuff with the software you are using, you'll get the hang of it pretty quickly. (The good old "monkey see, monkey do" learning method.) Then it's just a matter of getting used to the process and letting your imagination take over. You have talent, I am sure of it. You just need to trust yourself. And the fact that you have taken the time to leave me this compliment shows that you actually love modeling. So go for it. Don't hold back. P.S. Mew is more balanced, mystical, and cuter. Mewtwo is artificial and unstable, haha! A chicken doing ballet with a baseball bat! That's actually quite creative. It's very-very low poly and kind of abstract. I like it. It would make an interesting real-life, modern statuette.

*sings* "Just, remember that you standing on a planet thats evolving And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour It's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so its reckoned A sun that is the source of all our power..." I love Eric's songs. Sooner or later we were bound to go down this road: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-UPB78o2W8 I take no responsibility for any language side effects caused by this video, hahaha! Edit: Hmm... it seems this performance is wrongly attributed to Monty Python. It's actually a George Carlin comedy routine, but it fits right in with the Pythons' masterful satire routines.

@@NumberWan, I can tell you it's not easy... You really have to know what you're doing, and have a whole software setup to do it. I heard it's much easier to rig and prepare models for other games than for JKA. But I'm about to embark on learning it... so wish me luck...

It's a little psychic cat-like creature that -- if I can get the JKA skeleton to work with it -- will float in the air and swing the lightsaber with its little psychic powers. It's just something that I thought would be relatively easy to make to learn the basics of the whole process of modeling and getting a model in-game...

I see, that makes sense now. I would think that they didn't need to update what was already working for JKO. It's great that they've introduced a new fighting system in JKA, but they probably should have left JKO's gameplay as it was. Once a game is released, the developers should not change its rules. It's not fair on the players. Thanks for the tip, @@Boothand! I do remember something about cameradamp. I'll play around with it and see if I can steady the camera little bit, so I can better follow what's going on on-screen.

Yeah, it's one of those lesser known modeling software. I like it because its user interface is minimal, easy to use, and highly customisable. It's not the most advanced 3D modeling software out there, but it support most formats and it gets the job done -- and for what I'm making so far it has been quite sufficient. It's a practical little thing. And it loads fast. All in all, worth having if you can get your hands on a copy for a cheaper price, I think even as a lightweight alternative to Maya (or some other software like that). I guess Daz Hexagon is lightweight and practical like that, too.

I've discovered something new. This is for people using Silo to model: If you are importing an external object/model in the OBJ format, you may have noticed that Silo doesn't seem to load the textures. This is just a small quirk. All you need to do is select the model, then under "Editors/Options" in the top menu select "Material Editor". Under "Texture" in the "Material Editor" window, point the path to your texture image. Voila! The textures are back and in their proper place. Also, your model will likely be much bigger than the working area, so you'll need to zoom out a lot first to be able to see it. I'm not sure how to fix that, other than to select the whole model and downsize it.

So, how has JKA or the 1.04 update of JKO compromised these mechanics? By introducing the katas? I'm not sure I'm following... You can still block and attack the same way in JKA, can't you? Personally, my big gripe with JK's lightsaber fighting simulation has always been with the hyper-active camera. It makes my head ache to watch. It would have nice to include some sort of a "spring" delay system, where the camera will still follow the character, but with a dampened motion response. This way the player could concentrate on how they're swinging their lightsaber instead of always trying to catch up with the latest image on screen.

Hahaha! Yeah, they introduced the share thingy later, and it's pretty stupid -- it just confuses things so that the URLs are a tiny bit shortened. It's best to forget about it. The stuff that you need is YouTube's URL (https://www.youtube.com/) followed by the "watch?v=" suffix and the video's identifier sequence of letters and numbers. The stuff after that, beginning with the "&" symbol is redundant.

Superb reference source, @@Barricade24! Let's keep it up-to-date. And thanks for not discriminating the series and the video games. Now we have a clear view of what has been created so far, and what hasn't been tackled yet. That's a priceless insight. Edit: Asajj Ventress, Luminara Unduli, Barriss Offee, Aurra Sing, and Riyo Chuchi are missing from The Clone Wars list, as well as senator Organa (Bail Organa), and Onaconda Farr.