Preserved Topic: Chess pieces (Page 1 of 1)

Yes, I've been quite busy lately... I've made some chess pieces for a computer game (well, actually it's for handhelds, but still) and I wanted to know if there are any glaringly obvious mistakes I've made. Any comments?

I think you should put a diagonal slit in the bishops' heads.

The rooks look a little aliased, especially in their lower left corners.

And I suggest trying spheres instead of points on the top of the pawns, maybe make their base a little thinner too.

Very nice.

Man you do some nice work

NICE MAHJQA!!

Looks good to me as I can't remmber what piece is what , just show how long I have not played chess .

Maybe some more distinction on the bishop's crosses. Other than that they are all excellent looking.

What is the board going to look like?

You might want to make the game skinable so you could do those really odd pieces, such as different themes. I would love to see you do some pixel works on some different themes. Like some has "starwars", "startrek", "dungeons & dragons" type looks.

show off.

I am glad you stick around these halls.



                                       

[This message has been edited by eyezaer (edited 07-02-2002).]

I like them! Good job, and I LOVE chess!

the right hand stem on the queen looks a little thick and the prongs(?) on top of the rook would be better centerd- they look to be too far right but who am i to critisize such excellent work?


~We're not here for long, we're here for fun~

I've got a little problem (I already expected this would happen...) The pieces need to be blended against both the black and the white parts of the playing field, and as you can see, this gives a lot of jaggies. I can't antialias them since the program doesn't support alpha blending (half-transparency) so I'm stuck with jaggies either way. Or does someone here know a way to get around that, without making seperate pieces for black and white fields?



Edit: Damn. I put the kings and the queens on the wrong fields.



[This message has been edited by mahjqa (edited 07-02-2002).]

Well to be honest, I'd look at changing the white to a deep red or off-dark colour. People are conditioned enough to know that black is black and anything else is "white".

I wonder about the program not supporting alpha blending though, is there no channel transparency support at all? Just absolutes on bitmaps?



[This message has been edited by DarkGarden (edited 07-02-2002).]

wouldn't seperate fields for black and white pieces cause more problems anyway since some pieces can move on black and white squares?


~We're not here for long, we're here for fun~

The poster has demanded we remove all his contributions, less he takes legal action.
We have done so.
Now Tyberius Prime expects him to start complaining that we removed his 'free speech' since this message will replace all of his posts, past and future.
Don't follow his example - seek real life help first.

DarkGarden; That indeed helped a bit. I think the program could support half-transparency, but I don't think adding several hours of programming are worth those 6 or 8 pixels that stand out.
Morph; Propably would, too.
InI; nope, that makes for horrible jaggies.

Great

Now the only thing I'd say is to drop the opacity of the highlit and shadowed edges of the red squares. The separation being that intense makes the blocks seem a bit too "separate" dig? And maybe tone down the texture just a bit. You could probably go for a bit of a "dark marble" look instead of the wood grain, keeping it subtle, and suit the structure of the pieces a bit more.

It's good work on the pieces.

Ok, without Anti-aliasing, either

A) you are going to have 'Jaggies'...if you don't want to go with the 'extra' pieces (on white, on black), then try to design the pieces with as straight a line as possible...that will cut down on jaggies.

B) or create your set on both black and white tiles...(i.e. all white pieces on black and white tiles, all black pieces on black and white tiles). Certainly, it is more work, but then, no ' jaggies'.

And it depends on how this is going to be 'programmed'...i.e. is the chessboard a separate graphic, or not? Is the chessboard made up of tiles (I suspect that it will be)? If so, then solution B) should work fine...though I don't know what the memory limitations are (that could possibly rule out option B).

DG makes a good point, as well, by changing the actual board colors...that also cuts down on 'jaggies' (very nice, BTW...the last chess set/board). Though it is more work, you might consider giving the horses a 'mane' that is more 'square-ish'...that would cut down immensely on 'jaggies'.



[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 07-02-2002).]

Where do you see these "jaggies"? Can't see
them.

cu
~Xdreamer.ch~

For example, check the back of the black horse on the white square. But hey, if you can't see them that's only a good thing.

forgotten my glasses *fg*

Now I can see it but it isn't very bad

cu
~Xdreamer.ch~

I still think the rooks need some work. Compare the lower left corners of the rooks with the lower left corners of the pawns. Notice how the pawns get black at the left edge, while the rooks don't get quite as dark. It makes them look flatter.

Well the work on the pieces is beyond what I'm up to making from scratch so I'll pass on the critique but I will say I like the red and black board very much. It's looking good I'd like to see what it looks like with the programming in place.

Nobody else has mentioned it, so I guess I will...
Rotate your board 90 degrees.
Black square always in near left corner.

mobrul

Thanks. That was exactly what I meant with

quote:

---

glaringly obvious mistakes

---

And queens on squares of their own color, so be sure to switch them around.

SOunds like making two copies of each piece, one on white, one on black would be the way to go

Koan 63, written on the wall of cell number 250:
Those who Believe
Can
Those who Try
Do
Those who Love
Live

Once again. There was one thing that I din't mention since I thought it didn't matter... the game's called 'suicide chess' and the goal is (unsurprisingly) to lose your pieces as fast as you can. You may ask:

"what the hell does that have to do with the chess pieces?"

Well, the guy I'm making them for said he'd like them to be more aggressive. Now I've been altering them a little (see below)



But I don't really have a clue how to make the remaining pieces evil/agressive, while keeping them recogniseable. I'm searched for pictures of the last Harry Potter movie, since it had a nicely menacing chess game... but that'd mean recreating every piece. (not to mention not being very original) Does anyone else here have some tips?

Yup. Evils in there, think gargoyle and gothic. Think American football. =D

Left to right (image above) :

=) The eyes of the horses drawn back to slits, black (red?) eyes, spike up the mayne (sp). Sharpen the ...nose... spike.
=) Next - The top requires a spire or something built up from the mid section - kill the rounded crownessness - you're loosing evil there.
=) Next Two : 3 (very sharp) lil spikes around the top ball and Giger style piping to complete the bottom. Threaded rod is evil too, make room in there for some?

=) Two Below the horses have pretty mean faces developing in the cutaway area now, make em frown and sharpen the lower spikes, so theyre less frilled colar, more something that would hurt if jammed in your ear.
=) Next door : Loose the balls up top, balls arent evil when used like that - could drop them to the floor like bath feet perhaps - an eye could be worked into the opening.
=) Final two - mebbe rethink those. You could beat them up, add rivets or something, they are a lil fat to be evil imo. WWII German helmets or fat tanks is about all I can think there.

Mebbe look at replacing frills, crowns n rounded stuff with sharp, angled intertwining shite. Everything should frown also. Goth wrought iron is not a bad idea and detail, as much as possible. Work with the brush tool on what you've got @ 1:1 (if youre not already), then go mad with the sharpen tool, mebbe even the filter faded back to suit, they is a tad blurrah mon.

Anyways luverly, nice work M. (nice rework too)

[This message has been edited by Weadah (edited 07-04-2002).]

Just a 'work in progress' image. Wead, the pieces start to look more and more like your stuff... I'm still working on a faceplate/armour for the horse.





[edit author=InI]just fixed the img link[/edit]

[This message has been edited by InI (edited 07-05-2002).]

Damn, that work in progress pic is really good

~Opium

mahjqa: Thats really got those working (great input from Weadah - if anyone knows how to make something spiky and sinister then its him ).

One thought - I like the glowing eyes. They work really well with the red on the black pieces and I see you've done something similar with the white knight. If it is possible I'd try and make that white more 'glowing' and use it on the white equivalent to the pieces that have the glowing red eyes.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

I really dig the rook, the knight and the bishop.

The King, Queen and pawns are nice work...but they don't look like kings, queens or pawns.
If I had to play chess with that board, I'd go nuts. It would not be a pleasant experience.

I like the king and queen from your last entry (the one with the 'fixed' board position) much better. I think that queen is perfect just as she is, and the king -- those 5 spires coming out the top would be a perfect place to implement Weadah's threaded rod idea.
Those pawns...I like the ones from up above, but make 'em skinnier, sharper.
Pawns are representative of the pikemen of old. I've always thought making pawns actually look like pikemen was a dumb idea...but I think they should bring about the idea a chaotic, sharp, pointy, bristling wall of spears.

Something else too, I'm not really hep to the red eye idea. Not enough to make me not want to play (the king, queen and pawn would make me not want to play), but enough to distract and annoy me while I was playing.

Good work...as usual.

mobrul

Yuppers, looking alot sharper in the shaded (solid) areas and edges now, good stuff.

Moving well in the direction... Also not sure about the red either, they look good on dark and are distracting heheh. The American football reference - thick padding under the skin, helmets/face gaurds, exagerated joints and 'staring down the opposition' (yah im big on frowns today =) might be worth a dabble.

Coming on very nicely man.

wow! those are very nice chess pieces, you should write a tutorial on how to do those.

I'm going to add a sig later

The pawns look sort of .. squat.

Maybe make them more narrow, coming to a wicked point (with a glint, maybe)?

BTW, in the latest image (07-04-2002 07:18 PM ), your kings and queens are reversed. King goes on the right for white, each queen goes on her own color.

Wow, those evil ones look great, but I scrolled down some more I was going to say there isnt enough room in the tiny pictures to add that kind of detail .. great job.

The antialiasing thing, you could make two images one for a dark baground and one for a bright one, that wouldnt add too much code, though the pieces will probably be moving/sliding about wont they.

Its for a hand held ? What type ? console or pc based ?
I was just thinking , making it (false)3D wouldnt be too hard. Then you could have more room, because the height of the pieces could be made higher. If the pieces where higher you could make wee dragons(knights) and other fantasy charactars, actually have an old bishop,king and queen etc.. But the res restrictions would probably make the pieces too small in the background if it was 3D.

You making it yourself ? what language

pretty good, i'm impressed
but shouldnt you use a neutral midway rgb value (equal for both white and black) instead of those?

be nice to the anti-aliasing, it will be nice to you
(and remember never to feed it after midnight)