EFileTahi-A Posted January 22, 2006 Posted January 22, 2006 (edited) Ok, I've finished the GDI+ replic of a graphic engine simulating the old Eye of The Beholder game! I will just kill the final bugs and add some wall variations to make it look nicier, before uploading the project. I'll upload the program today (22-01-2006). Note, the grapics were created by me using Cinema 4D, thus, THEY ARE legal. Screenshot http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v698/EFileTahi-A/EOB_Replic.jpg Edited January 22, 2006 by EFileTahi-A Quote
EFileTahi-A Posted January 22, 2006 Author Posted January 22, 2006 (edited) Previously I opened a thread on how to create an EOB engine and, some ppl stated that it would be better to use recent technology such as DirectX to develop an EOB like graphic engine because it would be simplier. Well I believe that using plain GDI+ to draw images is simplier then setting up a 3D environment and EOB Replica prooves this. I started this project Friday (two days ago) and I finished it sunday afternoon (including the raytraced graphics). So I guess it was simple to acomplish ;) Use the following keys to move around the dungeon: 8 = move forward 5 = move backwords 4 = step left 6 = step right 7 = turn 90º left 9 = turn 90º right NOTE: I renamed the archives from .rar to .zip since Xtreme .NET Talk does not support .RAR. If you have any trouble with it simply rename the archive's extinsions to .rar. Feel free to post your comments.Debug.part1.zipDebug.part2.zipDebug.part3.zip Edited January 22, 2006 by EFileTahi-A Quote
Leaders snarfblam Posted January 22, 2006 Leaders Posted January 22, 2006 I didn't play the game, but I'm gonna share my opinion of what I can see here and in the one RAR I downloaded. I certainly would have tried for a more compact approach, but regardless of filesize, it certainly looks good. If this is were to be distributed on CD the file size wouldn't be a problem. Over the internet, though, there are at least two simple thing you could do (maybe you were going to anyways): One thing would be to use a compressed image format: GIF or PNG. Also, reduce the amount of "wasted space" in your images (although GIF or PNG would minimize the impact of this "wasted space"). Crop only the used rectangle in the image, removing large regions that consist only of your transparency key. When you draw the image, draw it at a specified offset. This would be a relatively small effort to drastically reduce the physical size of your images, resulting in faster GDI+ rendering, and depending on format used, you may get drastically smaller files too. Quote [sIGPIC]e[/sIGPIC]
EFileTahi-A Posted January 22, 2006 Author Posted January 22, 2006 (edited) One thing would be to use a compressed image format: GIF or PNG. Also, reduce the amount of "wasted space" in your images (although GIF or PNG would minimize the impact of this "wasted space"). Crop only the used rectangle in the image, removing large regions that consist only of your transparency key. When you draw the image, draw it at a specified offset. This would be a relatively small effort to drastically reduce the physical size of your images, resulting in faster GDI+ rendering, and depending on format used, you may get drastically smaller files too. About file formats: I just used BMPs because I did not wanted to convert them one by one, yet I was not sure if MakeTransparent prop would work with such formats as it did not worked with Tif format. I work with images for too long. I know what's best for compression/Quality. But thanks for the tips :) About croping images: The BMPs are compressed. They are in BMP with "Run Length Enconde" which basicly discars all the "blue color" region (wasted space). For instance compare these two pictures: 001_BaseWall_y0_x1.bmp (182x600) size: 112Kb 001_BaseWall_y0_x2.bmp (900X600) size: 114kb I also used some cropped images to see if GDI+ would finish the loop faster but, it seems it had no effect on performance. If you try to convert the two above pictures for PNG (for example) they will differ only about 3kb in size from each other (like 86kb to 89kb)... Take also in consideration that the pictures are all in 8bit (256 colors). THIS is what really reduces the size. Without "Run Length Enconde" and color decrease they were originally about 1.5MB each one. Not even PNG could lower them bellow 200kb; About image scaling: I know that small images = better performance, but I made them big to see how good could GDI+ handle such sizes in performance matters that is. All in all thaks for the post Marble :) Edited January 23, 2006 by EFileTahi-A Quote
Leaders snarfblam Posted January 22, 2006 Leaders Posted January 22, 2006 My bad. On the whole, I guess I was wrong. I didn't check the BMP for compression, but you are right, the RLE compression is a big space saver. I will mention, though, that you cetainly could use a lower bit depth than 8 bpp. Specifically, using Photoshop, I saved an image as a 4 bpp GIF with no visible quality loss, reducing it from about 100 k to about 50 k. It is also worth mentioning that the GIF format has built in transparency, saving you an intermediate step (at run-time) of applying a transparency key. I was able to achieve similar results using a PNG. With Adobe Photoshop CS you could probably get even smaller files with a PNG than I did (despite common misconceptions, PNGs compress smaller than GIFs of comperable quality, but Adobe Photoshop versions prior to CS have substandard PNG compression). I know I tend to offer a lot of criticism, but I do so strictly for the purpose of being helpful and informative. Clearly you did put a reasonable amount of thought into filesize, and the end product already looks pretty good. I just wanted to give you some tips to help out. Quote [sIGPIC]e[/sIGPIC]
EFileTahi-A Posted January 23, 2006 Author Posted January 23, 2006 (edited) Hey marble, I thank you again for your post. And, I'm glad there are persons here like you who are willing to help. About image bit reduction: I wanted to convet the pictures to 6/5 bit (64/32 colors) but Paint Shop Pro cannot handle such color depth. In fact I don't know if this can be done in BMP format. On Amiga OS I could convert the pictures from 8 to 7,6,5,4,3,2 and 1 bit color depth using amiga standard format IFF/ILBM. Anyway, PNG and GIF does seem to support such bit color depth. Say, did you tryed the program? Edited January 23, 2006 by EFileTahi-A Quote
Cags Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 Well I downloaded it but unfortunately it crashed. Error on function: LoadMapImages() Message: cannot be less than zero Parameter name: length followed by Error on function DrawGraphics(Form frm) Message: Object reference not set to an instance of an object Quote Anybody looking for a graduate programmer (Midlands, England)?
EFileTahi-A Posted January 23, 2006 Author Posted January 23, 2006 It works perfectly... I tryed it in a few computers. Are you sure that all the graphics are in the graphics dir? Quote
Cags Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 I extracted the entire rar / zip. Quote Anybody looking for a graduate programmer (Midlands, England)?
Cags Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 This is a list of the files Graphics ==== 001_BaseWall_y0_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y0_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y1_x0.bmp 001_BaseWall_y1_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y1_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y2_x0.bmp 001_BaseWall_y2_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y2_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y2_x3.bmp 001_BaseWall_y2_x4.bmp 001_BaseWall_y3_x0.bmp 001_BaseWall_y3_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y3_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y3_x3.bmp 001_BaseWall_y3_x4.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x0.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x3.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x4.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x5.bmp 001_BaseWall_y4_x6.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x0.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x1.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x2.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x3.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x4.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x5.bmp 001_BaseWall_y5_x6.bmp 002_BaseWall_y0_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y0_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y1_x0.bmp 002_BaseWall_y1_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y1_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y2_x0.bmp 002_BaseWall_y2_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y2_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y2_x3.bmp 002_BaseWall_y2_x4.bmp 002_BaseWall_y3_x0.bmp 002_BaseWall_y3_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y3_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y3_x3.bmp 002_BaseWall_y3_x4.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x0.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x3.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x4.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x5.bmp 002_BaseWall_y4_x6.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x0.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x1.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x2.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x3.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x4.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x5.bmp 002_BaseWall_y5_x6.bmp 003_IronBars_y1_x0.bmp 003_IronBars_y1_x1.bmp 003_IronBars_y1_x2.bmp 003_IronBars_y2_x0.bmp 003_IronBars_y2_x2.bmp 003_IronBars_y2_x3.bmp 003_IronBars_y3_x0.bmp 003_IronBars_y3_x1.bmp 003_IronBars_y3_x2.bmp 003_IronBars_y3_x3.bmp 003_IronBars_y3_x4.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x0.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x1.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x2.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x3.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x4.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x5.bmp 003_IronBars_y4_x6.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x0.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x1.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x2.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x3.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x4.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x5.bmp 003_IronBars_y5_x6.bmp Graphics\FloorAndCelling_NS ==== FloorCelling_N_S_1.bmp FloorCelling_N_S_2.bmp FloorAndCelling_WE ==== FloorCelling_W_E_1.bmp FloorCelling_W_E_2.bmp Quote Anybody looking for a graduate programmer (Midlands, England)?
Cags Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 I just tried running it without extracting, which curiosly worked. Seems like quite a nice engine. I only ever played EoB for a very short time on the Amiga but it seems very similar (if 'slightly' better graphics) :). Quote Anybody looking for a graduate programmer (Midlands, England)?
EFileTahi-A Posted January 23, 2006 Author Posted January 23, 2006 Ahhh great. So it did worked. :) Thks Cags. Say cags, I'm gathering a party to create an EOB game. Already have a person (who recently managed to edit a book of his) to write me a story, game rules and game maps. Would you like to participate in such project? I'll describe the project details if you show any interest on this. Quote
Cags Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 I don't mind helping with testing or what not, but I don't think theres really much I could do to help with development. Quote Anybody looking for a graduate programmer (Midlands, England)?
EFileTahi-A Posted January 23, 2006 Author Posted January 23, 2006 I don't mind helping with testing or what not' date=' but I don't think theres really much I could do to help with development.[/quote'] Can you work with graphics? Can you create background environment sounds? Music / Sound FX? Quote
Denaes Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 Hmm... maybe I played EoB on the wrong system. The versions I played had much worse graphics than that screen shot up top. I'll see how the graphics are in play tonite :) Quote
Denaes Posted January 23, 2006 Posted January 23, 2006 (edited) I got a chance to run it. You're duplicating files in the different zip files. I had to overrwrite files that already existed. Not a problem, just that size of download(s) came up earlier. I'm windows 2000 2.2HGz laptop, 2gb ram, 80mb 7200rpm hard drive which is currently downloading a ton of huge files. I ran it compiled. The form came up fast, the loading of the maze took 5 seconds to download. Looks awesome. My only "gameplay" complaint is that since I'm on a laptop, I don't have a numpad. I expect this sort of thing to be handled by the arrows, mouse or user defined. Understood it's a display engine test. My advice here is first and foremost to loose the Eye of the Beholder schtick. It's a copywrite owned by Hasbro (through Wizards of the Coast) and thats a very large company. Maybe one of the larger companies to hold IP stake over video games, save movie tie-in games. Eye of the Beholder wasn't the first first-person dungeon crawl and wasn't the last. There are dozens if not hundreds of them all in very similar styles. Wizardry is by far more popular of the same style of game. And TSR (the company who owned the IP to this game origionally) had put out numerous other RPGs in the same style as well. Since you're using different RPG mechanics and a different storyline, you don't want something potentially lawsuit enducing on your software. As far as the game goes, I can't say enough that this dungeon is by far the best looking I've seen - including Wizardry 8 which is the newest and best looking first person RPG I've seen. But you'll need variety. Just in the dungeon itself. Looking at the same tiles will get old. This demo also evoked my hatred for this sort of game if done improperly. It's so easy to get lost if there is no variation in the tiles. Honestly I much prefer an overhead (top down) or isometric type of RPG for many of these reasons, though I'll continue to test and give ideas/advice on this project. Edited January 24, 2006 by Denaes Quote
EFileTahi-A Posted January 24, 2006 Author Posted January 24, 2006 Thank you for the post and for trying it out Denaes. My only "gameplay" complaint is that since I'm on a laptop, I don't have a numpad. I expect this sort of thing to be handled by the arrows, mouse or user defined. Understood it's a display engine test. I will add a new key config (Q,W,E,A,S,D) so that it can run properly on laptops. You're duplicating files in the different zip files. I had to overrwrite files that already existed. Not a problem, just that size of download(s) came up earlier. About the duplicating images, that's odd, because I unpack them with no problem, yet, by examining the archives there are no duplications. My advice here is first and foremost to loose the Eye of the Beholder schtick. It's a copywrite owned by Hasbro (through Wizards of the Coast) and thats a very large company. Maybe one of the larger companies to hold IP stake over video games, save movie tie-in games. I will follow your advice and remove the EOB label from the program, just in case ;). But you'll need variety. Just in the dungeon itself. Looking at the same tiles will get old. This demo also evoked my hatred for this sort of game if done improperly. It's so easy to get lost if there is no variation in the tiles. About wall variety, that is a must logicaly! Tons of walls variations will take place :). From cracked walls to dirty ones, from ornamented to simple ones etc... As far as the game goes, I can't say enough that this dungeon is by far the best looking I've seen - including Wizardry 8 which is the newest and best looking first person RPG I've seen. But remember that Wizardry 8 is realtime 3D. This one is Pre-rendered :) Quote
Denaes Posted January 24, 2006 Posted January 24, 2006 About the duplicating images' date=' that's odd, because I unpack them with no problem, yet, by examining the archives there are no duplications.[/quote'] Maybe it was just the way winRAR was unpacking the multiple files into the same directory. My bad. Sorry. About wall variety' date=' that is a must logicaly! Tons of walls variations will take place :). From cracked walls to dirty ones, from ornamented to simple ones etc...[/quote'] And floors :) campfires, wells, bones, roots, stone, bones, rags, blood... maybe some bones... But remember that Wizardry 8 is realtime 3D. This one is Pre-rendered :) Didn't know that, but it makes sense. You could actually see opponents that wern't directly in front of you. I havn't played it for a while... hmmm... I don't think I ever beat that game. wow, the only Wizardry game I beat was the one for the Nintendo... I feel like a failed gamer. :eek: Quote
EFileTahi-A Posted January 25, 2006 Author Posted January 25, 2006 Sorry Denaes, yesterday I was too tired to mess around with the program's code. I will post the new version today, yet, it will include the DirectX version too :), which is 90% complete. 100% when I get home :) Quote
Leaders Iceplug Posted January 28, 2006 Leaders Posted January 28, 2006 Are you considering uploading a ZIP file compression so that the masses (like me) can extract your files? Quote Iceplug, USN One of my coworkers thinks that I believe that drawing bullets is the most efficient way of drawing bullets. Whatever!!! :-(
EFileTahi-A Posted January 30, 2006 Author Posted January 30, 2006 Are you considering uploading a ZIP file compression so that the masses (like me) can extract your files? Yes, as a matter of fact I will consider that... BTW, do you actually know a place where I can upload my package do be available to anyone with a size limite bigger then 2MB? Because the new version have improved graphics and will be DirectX (meaning it will be bigger). Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.