Official Everybody Edits Forums

Atikyne

Formerly Kentiya

From: United States

Joined: 2015-02-16

Posts: 1,113

Website

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

The idea I've had for a while is that the smileys are flat, but they're in a 3D world where the blocks are basically cubes. Kind of like Paper Mario (though obviously with less depth to the world):

Years ago I was actually planning to make a "2.5D" client for EE with that concept but I never started it. I might throw together an image tomorrow to demonstrate the idea.

▼Hidden text

That reminds me of the coin graphic :

---

Kentiya / Atikyne — EE & EEU lead artist 2018-2020

Gosha

Member

From: Russia

Joined: 2015-03-15

Posts: 6,211

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

o yeah the magic coin
so it's 16x16x16

icepegasus

Member

Joined: 2015-08-21

Posts: 86

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

But technically smileys are 26x26 so would it be 26x26x26 or 26x26x16
(Smileys started at 16x16, then 16x26 and now 26x26)

---

Grilyon2

Member

From: Chile

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 374

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

Probably won't solve the question, but i'll say it anyways:
Some of the smileys hats have a circular base (Propeller hat, top hat, party hat from cake, cowboy and spy hat, etc) those hats are 16x?x?. logically applying real life sizes we get 16x?x16, but yep there is no hint that the hats are same size as in real life. This also happens to some decoratives (Umbrellas, dishes)

Minisaurus

Banned

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

Those are the shapes that I think that the smiley could have if it were 3D

-4. Sphere
-3. Flattened Sphere
-2. Cylinder with spherical caps
-1. Circle with Sperical caps
0. Circle (2.5D)
+1. Cylinder with flat caps
+2. Cylinder with sharp beveled flat caps
+3. Cylinder with beveled flat caps
+4. Cylinder with smooth beveled flat caps
(The - and + symbols are only to differentiate the numbers of each "root")

_
There mihgt be other shape types that would work, I just can´t think of any other shape type.
My favorite for the moment might be a Cylinder with smooth beveled flat caps. But in practice the best one might be the Cylinder with beveled flat caps as it might make lighting better and more accurate, so maybe a mix of both.
(The depth and size of the objects of the gif are only for explanation purposes)

_
I noticed that there is somewhat a connection/link/relation between all the shapes above:
(From the origin (circle) the shape can take two "opposite" paths)
Smooth Sphere - Circle - Smooth Cylinder
(Being the circle the origin)
(There is in-between shapes that are placed in the transition from the circle to the sphere/cylinder final smooth shape).

_

The eyes and mouth and all details go always outwards.
But some details are the exception and go inwards, for example the inside of the mouth when open or the eyes of a skull.
_

The shape depth of eyes, mouth and details is also subject to the same shape graph above, but it is most likely to be in the positive numbers rather than the negatives, I think those would look excellent with +4/+3 cylinder type.
The eyes and mouth would only be very sightly outwards from the smiley base.
(Or maybe those could be inwards, but I don´t like the idea of things being embedded in the base of the smiley, I dislike even more the idea of eyes and mouth being dark voids, so I think it is better for those details to be projected outward from the smiley).
Having those details painted in the very surface of the smiley might cause poor/low quality light details.
Some details would benefit from -4/-3, such as hair for example, giving the object more volume to play with while doing the graphics.
As mention in the main topic "The white and black borders does not seems to be solid objects, but rather a border-line, that follows the view perspective movement." so those are not "real" objects but outlines created by the camera view for the contours of the smiley and other kind of objects in the game.
_
I think that the 3D basic happy smiley might look like this:

▼Other perspective preview:

(It is an approximation, colors and shape would still require a lot of polishment and modifications)
The colors are directly placed in the smiley, I think that in-game the colors should be casted by the smiley interaction wih objects. (I could use the EEU actual shape, but I wanted to experiment with variations for this test).
_
Anyway, I still think that the best way to go for EE is with normal maps for 2D sprites, I think that would be better. but I haven´t considered yet the benefits from actually making EE with 3D graphics (Basically a 2.5D game).
_
P.S: I has been talking always about a 2.5D game, that uses 3D graphics but behave as a 2D game.
If we added a completely new EE3D game, that would be played using 3 Axis X,Y,Z (Uses 3D graphics and behave as a 3D game), then the smiley should be round, completely spherical, (it would be really weird to see a smiley "walking" backwards if it is looking always to the screen, that is why EE3D would use spherical smileys rather than 2D or 2.5D smileys).
The smiley would be seen like in mario 3D for example, we would be looking the smiley´s back.
This 3D smiley would be something completely new, the graphical style of the game would need to be completely reimagined once again.
I think that EE3D would be more organic and aiming for a more realistic look for smileys, but keeping the expressions cartoonish and stylized.

_

I really feel like people will misunderstand or get confused with all the text I write.
In resume, this is my guess of the game graphical trajectory:
- EE is 2D and will always be 2D.
- EEU is 2D and has the potential to be 2.5D (Dynamic lightings, particles, etc.)
- EE3D won´t exist and if it is somewhy created, it won´t be like EE or EEU in any way.

peace

Member

From: admin land

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 9,226

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

hwo about EE smileys they are pixelated how wpould thhey look like?

---

thanks hg for making this much better and ty for my avatar aswell

Minisaurus

Banned

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

I has been wondering how viable would be to have EE3D graphics and gameplay.
The smiley in a 3d world with 3d movement would not require the black&white outlines (Those would make it looks like if the smiley were floating above the ground).
The sphere should not be completely round, it should have character, style, look organic.
The graphics should not be extremely realistic, but should not either bee too cartoonish, should be in a mid-ground.
_
I was exceptic until I watched the Super Mario 3D World and Portal 2 games, I imagined the smiley being in that games, and it was fantastic to do so.
I think EE3D would be a really different experience to what we know about the EE franchise, something refreshing and interesting.
This is an example of the happy base smileys in such style. Impresively the smiley does not look monstrose as I expected, it looks somewhat cool, with more polishment and modifications it would be actually cute.
The smiley skin color is a single one (yellow), the lightings do the job to colorize the smiley in such way.

I don´t say it should be created right now, but I would actually love the idea if EE3D is created in a remote future.

N1KF

Wiki Mod

From: ဪဪဪဪဪ From: ဪဪဪဪဪ From: ဪဪဪဪဪ

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 11,128

Website

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

Thanks, I love it. Seeing the camera spin around that 3d smiley model is strangely adorable. Now I want it as a physical ball so I can roll it around help.

As I mentioned in your EEU with dynamic lighting topic I've wondered about lighting in EE, and I've theorized that base EE graphics would be much simpler without lighting. (The lighting gives more depth with the texture being secondary as you can't have much detail in an 16x16 sprite.) Your post confirms that single-color smileys would work well with dynamic lighting! Now I need to do the same for various blocks.

That said I feel like the outlines would be important for the smiley. I don't know if the black outlines are needed, but the weird bright outlines are one of the most unique parts of EE smileys and one of the few ways they're distinct from the old Facebook smileys. The outlines could even have a glow-in-the-dark effect to help players see in darker areas. To prevent the smiley from looking like it's floating with outlines, maybe the outline could be a small overlay, 1 or 2 pixels thick.

Do you think you could publish the 3d model? I would really like that, thanks.

peace

Member

From: admin land

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 9,226

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

hmm i was acdtualy curious about the actualy smiley wiht boarder in 3D lie you took EEU's one iwiht its boarder how ti would looklike ebcuase EE smimleys are pixelated wiht grey shades on the bboarder rtaher then fullly white

---

thanks hg for making this much better and ty for my avatar aswell

Minisaurus

Banned

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

It is wrong to think that all styles would work the same for all graphic mediums (2D pixels, 2D vectors, 3D graphics).
To make EE frachise work in each medium, the style need to be reshaped and reimagined for that new medium.
Each style is designed to take the most advantage as possible of the medium used.
_
So far, this is what I think the smiley styles of the EE franchise would looks like in a 3D medium:
(The gifs are approximations, those need polishment, adjustments and modifications to be completely reliable representations)

▼EE in 3D medium:

(The shading and colorize of the smiley is a mix of material-paint directly to the mesh and lighting effects).

The pixels would be simply be extruded to create pixel cubes.
The pixel white and black outlines are tricky for the EE style, in the gif those don´t have transparency, but in-game those would need to have some transparency.
In the previous posts I said that there would be EE smileys that would have extruded blocks for certain objects of the smiley, for example the dog snout would be actually extruded to outside the smiley, but for the characteristics of this particular style keeping all details material-painted on the surface of the smiley is also an option.

▼EEU in 3D medium:

https://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewt … 03#p785203

▼EE3D in 3D medium:

https://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewt … 54#p785254

_

▼How lighting and colorize for the smiley could work together:

All the mediums can do a pretty good job using only lightings to colorize the smiley, but it is not enough in the long run.
The smileys could have material-painted colors (or similar) on the mesh, and after so use dynamic lightings as post-process effect to give the game more attractiveness
That is actually a pretty accurate way of how colors work, first the object has its colors and color details, the lights job is to bring the object to life
Mixing colors and lightings to give a mid-ground of those two for the end resultant color of the smiley might be a good procedure.
_
Like keeping two colors for the yellow to red gradient, and then light effects gives it more details to the colors depending on the intensity of it and the light color.
(Below is the example of the colors the mesh would have material-painted (or similar procedure) on the smiley. No lighting effects influensing the smiley so far, no darkness, no lights).

The lightings would be added after so as Dynamic lightings.
(That or find a way to actually make the color details to be fully determined by lightings, something I am quite sceptic of, since that would give a bland result or extremely complex lightings, I might be wrong about that, but it is most likely to be the case)
So far, the more I learn about 3D graphics the more ways I find that would work to make any kind of graphics work for EE, there is no one or two ways to make EE colors and lights work together, but multiple ways to do so, and it is really exciting to know that there are those many many options there to make EE franchise get top tier game quality graphics.

P.S: If you want to play around with the .blend files of the graphics I have shown, send me a PM to my discord account, so I provide you the graphic files posted in this topic.
(The rule for the proper use of those files: Keep it EE related and give the graphics a good use (Good in the mean of as a contribution for the EE franchise).

bunglybongle

Guest

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

minisaurus

TaskManager

Formerly maxi123

From: i really should update this

Joined: 2015-03-01

Posts: 9,465

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

minisaurus

will you be the bungly to my bongle

---

signature by HG, profile picture by bluecloud, thank!!
previous signature by drstereos

bunglybongle

Guest

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

minisaurus

will you be the bungly to my bongle

i'll be the bungly to your bongle if you will be the task to my manager

rat

Formerly eleizibeth

Joined: 2017-06-29

Posts: 785

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

can I join

bunglybongle

Guest

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

can I join

god i need a gf yyes please

peace

Member

From: admin land

Joined: 2015-08-10

Posts: 9,226

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

hmm that @D > 3D ee smiley in first example is intresting

---

thanks hg for making this much better and ty for my avatar aswell

TaskManager

Formerly maxi123

From: i really should update this

Joined: 2015-03-01

Posts: 9,465

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

can I join

do you want to be the r to our at or the at to our r

---

signature by HG, profile picture by bluecloud, thank!!
previous signature by drstereos

rat

Formerly eleizibeth

Joined: 2017-06-29

Posts: 785

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

can I join

do you want to be the r to our at or the at to our r

i will be the r to your at

BuzzerBee

Forum Admin

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,575

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

can i be the stay to your on topic

hmm no nvm that is definitely not my best work

but anyway yeah stay on topic and whatnot

---

TaskManager

Formerly maxi123

From: i really should update this

Joined: 2015-03-01

Posts: 9,465

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

ontopic i think smiley THICCness is indeterminate because a third axis does not exist /thraed

can i be the stay to your on topic

hmm no nvm that is definitely not my best work

but anyway yeah stay on topic and whatnot

can you be the nazi to my mod

---

signature by HG, profile picture by bluecloud, thank!!
previous signature by drstereos

Minimania

Moderation Team

From: PbzvatFbba 13

Joined: 2015-02-22

Posts: 6,395

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

BobRV made this iirc

---

Click the image to see my graphics suggestions, or here to play EE: Project M!

Tomahawk

Forum Mod

From: UK

Joined: 2015-02-18

Posts: 2,851

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

Riddle me this:

A 2D smiley always faces in the direction normal to its coordinate frame - i.e. perpendicular to the x-y plane and parallel to a third axis. A 3D EE smiley therefore only makes sense if viewed within a 4-dimensional space, to provide it with a fourth axis to look along.

Let’s ask a similar question: how long would a 1D smiley be if it was 2D? Well, an observer (i.e. player) of 1D EE would exist in 2D space. A 2D smiley could no longer face “out of the screen” towards a 2D player, so a 2D player could not play 2D EE in the way that a 3D player plays 2D EE.

I propose that the question is meaningless, or at least cannot be answered in a way that preserves the dimensional characteristics of EE gameplay.

---

One bot to rule them all, one bot to find them. One bot to bring them all... and with this cliché blind them.

Minisaurus

Banned

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

Not sure what question you are trying to answer.
But for what is your riddle, it seems that you are trying to answer the question:
How would the smiley look if WE were 2D players?
And I agree with your answer and logic for that, the 2D player would see smileys as 1D smileys.
(In previous posts I was referring to convert EE to 3D (Or/And 2.5D perhaps) and then travel ourselves to it in a 3D (Or/And 2.5D perhaps) space)
_

Players in their respective dimensions:
A 3D player can manipulate:
1D smiley
2D smiley
3D smiley

A 2D player can manipulate:
1D smiley
2D smiley

A 1D player can maniupulate:
1D smiley

_

A 1D player can´t manipulate:
2D smiley
3D smiley
4D smiley and above.

A 2D player can´t manipulate:
3D smiley
4D smiley and above.

A 3D player can´t manipulate:
4D smiley and above.

_

Logic rules:
The player is trapped in its own dimension, can´t go to above or below dimensions himelf.
The player can only imagine his own dimension and dimensions below his own dimension. (I mean, you can try to imagine above dimensions to your own, but it is extremely complex and hard to do and might require a lot of knowledge and researching)
The player can only manipulate his own dimension and dimensions below his own dimension. (Manipulate in the sense of imagining it and virtually altering it when it is not in this own dimension)
The player can´t bring anything from other dimensions to his own dimension
The player can´t travel to any other dimension than in his own dimension.

_
A 1D player has his view is locked in 0D (It can only see an infinitely tiny "dot")
A 2D player has his view is locked in 1D.
A 3D player has his view is locked in 2D. (We are 3D creatures, living in a 3D world but our eyes can show us only two dimensions. The depth that we all think we can see is merely a trick that our brains have learned by combining both eyes view.)
We basically see in 2D, our brains calculates "depth" to the flat "image" we see in our brains.

This is the player perspective, but the objects they are seeing can only be in their own dimension or above their own dimension.

bunglybongle

Guest

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

ontopic i think smiley THICCness is indeterminate because a third axis does not exist /thraed

can i be the stay to your on topic

hmm no nvm that is definitely not my best work

but anyway yeah stay on topic and whatnot

can you be the nazi to my mod

if the sadness of a smiley is determined by it's thiccness, then i'm mega thicc.

god im sdo horny

N1KF

Wiki Mod

From: ဪဪဪဪဪ From: ဪဪဪဪဪ From: ဪဪဪဪဪ

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 11,128

Website

Re: How thin would be smileys by side view if those were 3D?

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/ … shot_3.png

BobRV made this iirc

The real horror is imagining how those tentacles move while climbing.