Masahiro Sakurai's latest Famitsu column has been released, and it happens to be his last for 2019. In the article, titled "Draw light, not objects." Sakurai discusses various graphical development techniques and thoughts. We've gone ahead and translated the article for you. Please note, this is a general summary of the column. It's a long one, so be sure to settle in.
Sakurai says, during development meetings, he talks about dozens of things to be checked for supervised projects, usually with dozens of people. There is often a need to repeat the explanations from the beginning, regardless of whether the staff is new or old. Recently, Sakurai thought about his daily life as a director. Occasionally, items he points out in these meetings are where staff get caught up in development. He adds that writing every single point is a bit much, but if he were to write about his thoughts in a column once in a while, it may help other developers.
This time Sakurai wants to talk about backgrounds – the background of the stage and more. There is terrain and the distant background. There is an element of “drawing light, not drawing objects.” There is a lot of work to be done to make a background work. To explain in the simplest terms, the terrain where the character fights and navigates is composed of polygons. By pasting a texture on it, and applying light, it looks like the real thing. Most modellers can do a good job of getting polygonal shapes and textures at the object level. Trees are trees, grasses are grass, rocks are rocks, buildings are buildings, and so on. The texture is beautiful with the photo material alone, but it is not enough. Even if it is correct as an object, it does not improve the landscape. It's not as simple as putting it under the same light source or applying the same perspective for every object and texture.
Sakurai adds that game consoles are, surprisingly, often not as powerful as developers would perhaps want them to be. Tricks and techniques are used to make games look as good as absolutely possible and move realistically while pushing the capability of the console.
Regardless of the work that you want to do until ray tracing, you can modify the design through material composition, diffused reflected light, highlights, contour lighting, drop shadows and self-shadows, bump map, fog and more. These functions are combined to a singular point. Artwork first checked by each artist tends to be closely related to the object. Sakurai feels Japanese people tend to be slightly insensitive to subtle changes in light and dark because their eyes are typically darker than westerners.
Sakurai says when drawing trees and forests, instead of sticking solely to designing the colours and shapes of the leaves correctly, try drawing light as it interacts with the leaves. It is important not to see a tree as a singular entity, but instead as a group of individuals. He adds that it may be easy to understand if you imagine a white spray from the direction of the light source. Try increasing the priority of those elements. Sakurai thinks it is good to review it in monochrome; to check if there is a correct sense of volume from a bird's-eye view. If individual objects are created correctly, there is no reason to create a solid background. If the tone is satisfied, it won't be necessary. The background of the game should be a combination of many pieces. You have to create the illusion that there is something that is not there.
Sakurai ends saying it's always important to remember that you're drawing light reflected on an object, not an object, and wishes good luck to all video game developers.
What are your thoughts on Sakurai's views on graphic development? Do you want to see his thoughts on other elements of game development in the future? Be sure to let us know in the comments!
[source twitter.com]
Comments 27
Is he really the “guy” to be considered as an authority for graphics in game development?
@diwdiws Probably not, but I'm sure he knows quite a bit about it nonetheless.
It sounds philosophical, but it is actually fully trivial if you think of it. Still interesting to think about. We don't see objects, all we see is light entering our eyes. In the case of video games, the objects or beings we see mostly don't even correspond to anything that exists physically (unless they are copies of real-world things). They are images sent to our brains via light. And the light is real. Light is the medium that connects the game to the player.
Even more trivial: anybody who ever dealt with graphics, or, really, anybody with working eyes, knows how dramatically light(ing) can change how the very same objects look.
@Galenmereth I translated the column myself. This is a summary of the column and not a direct translation. 日本に住んでいて、日本語が分かりますよ。I’ve gone ahead and added that this is an in-depth summary at the beginning of the article. This is absolutely 100% my own translated summary.
It just really feels like a bad style, constantly repeating how Sakurai does this, and this, and this...
While the style may fit more when reporting a casual chat or something, having read Famitsu issues, this was probably edited down and readable fine as-is, and summarising it like this just makes it harder to read.
Having sentences like "He adds that writing every single point is a bit much" just seems facetious in a summary, too.
There's also parts where it seems like remnants of a Japanese grammar were left behind, such as the 'until'(まで?) in "Regardless of the work that you want to do until ray tracing,".
日本語力とは別に翻訳力も大事、と言うことです。
I'm not sure I fully understood the article but it sounds like the whole "It doesn't matter if it IS right as long as it LOOKS right"
It reminds us of the old times when developers had to be very creative around low power consoles to communicate images through low res sprites. That was some powerful magic in the works
@bluesun Fair enough. I’ll rework it out of my initial summary and into a direct translation. I had initially worked this article out of my Twitter thread in which I posted a summary as I was translating live. Evidently it did not transfer well into an article. Apologies for the inconvenience.
@Bobb I think a lot of appeal of how a game looks comes down to how well the team manages to create the desired 'feel' of a game.
Going for blatant photorealism doesn't always work or just use generic shaders and implementing as is, doesn't always create the desired effect.
When you play games like RE2make or GTA V or Red dead redemption 2 you can see clearly that they went for a certain feel, something more cinematic/dramatic opposed to 100% realism.
Most of the times this works out a lot better than cookie cutter realism.
Paralax scrolling and rasterized backgrounds are a simple example of creating depth in early 2D games, all was rendered on a flat plane but the water and sky in sonic the hedgehog gives the level a sense of scope.
The youtube channel Gamehut, set up by an ex Traveler's Tale guy, goes in depth on how they managed to make Mickey Mania and Toy Story look so good in the Megadrive/genesis.
It's really interesting to watch and you learn there is a lot more to game development than just merely pumping out polygons and big open worlds.
@khululy I fully agree, and personally I love the old feel and learning how it works.
I'll have to check on that channel. Thank you for the tip!
@diwdiws He's talking about graphics effects at the service of gameplay. And yes as one of the few game designer who still direct AAA games he's fully competent for doing that.
It's actually amazing how lighting effects drastically change a game.
Look at the new RTX support coming to Minecraft. While Mojang updated some of the textures to support ray-tracing light bounces, just the simple application of the newest lighting techniques changes the look and feel of the game completely!
@glaemay is he? Is he really?
This is one of the few times I've heard a game dev executive talk about actual impressionist approaches to 3D graphics, instead of talking about "a higher level of surface detail."
However, seeing what happening to the art direction of Smash Bros. with Ultimate, I'm not sure I fully trust him to live up to this kind of talk. Not in every endeavor of his, at least.
@diwdiws Yes he absolutely is. Sakurai knows how to push a system to its limits. Go play Kirbys Adventure, its by far one of the highest quality NES games. Then you have Super Smash Brothers Brawl, a game that pushed the Wiis limits so hard that it wouldnt even run on older Wii models, so Nintendo had people send in their Wiis free of charge in order to upgrade them to be able to play the game. Sakurai knows his stuff.
@Pod qhats wrong with the art direction in Smash? Everything looks amazing. Heck every 3rd party character added looks 100x better than how their original companies have been portraying them. Go compare Ryu and Ken to their street fighter 5 models, or Banjo to his Nuts and Bolts model.
@patbacknitro18
I will not try to start a ruckus about this, but compared to how neatly planned out everything about the visuals ws in Smash 4, I think Ultimate moved quite far in the opposite direction, PARTICULARLY in terms of lighting. Their choice to go entirely with live light sources and traced shadows and self-shadows on characters just doesn't blend with the general design aesthetic, or with the idea of needing to see what's going on.
I'm not sold on certain character designs either. I've always rooted for Ridley to get in, but the design we are treated to is just awful. I'd be hard pressed to find a design in Ultimate of a returning fighter, that I like better than what they had in 4 as well.
I feel forced to consider Ultimate the worst looking game in the series. Mainly because it's the most inconsistent in its choices, creating quite a mess on screen, and I feel I'm having a harder time than ever actually playing the game because of this.
@Pod the design of ultimate is Litteraly an upgrade from Smash WiiU. Hell it reuses a ton of assets from WiiU. Also calling it the worst looking game in the series doesnt work well when you can compare the melee stages to their visually enhanced counterparts in Ultimate. Also what do you mean Ridley looks terrible, hes the best hes ever looked. If you mean he has an ugly design, then yes Sakurai perfectly nailed Ridley in every way. Ridley is a grotesque monstrosity, he isnt meant to look "Good" also you cant expect Ridley to look like he came from the same series as Animal Crossing. Sakurai perfectly nailed his look, as well as everyone else like K Rool and Simon.
@Sephazon @bluesun @Galenmereth I'm enjoying the discussion about the translation more than the article itself!
@patbacknitro18 I just want to butt into your conversation and point out a couple things. Art direction and preference is all subjective, meaning it can be different from person to person. Pod was very respectful and stated multiple times that "in his opinion" or that "he feels" something doesn't work. You can't refute his opinion by saying that your opinion on the art is fact, because it ain't. I'm glad you enjoy the art direction and I personally do too, but opinions are opinions, not fact.
Like I really dont like Ridley's design either for example, as much as I wanted him in. I also dont like Shulk or Zss in game model. But again, that's just how I feel.
@patbacknitro18
Well I just don't agree.
I think most assets borrowed from 4 are displayed in a WORSE fashion in Ultimate than they were previously, and I think Ridley is shown in quite possibly his most boring form yet. The Meta-Ridley alt is somewhat cool, though, I will say.
@Pod its Ridley at his most Ridley. You litteraly can not get anymore Ridley than how he looks. If so then i want to see what youd consider a good Ridley design. Because hes the closest youll get. I can understand your opinion of not liking him, but to claim its his most boring form yet when he is a straight up 3D model of his original design, yea no I honestly fail to see how he is anything less than Ridley.
@Pod Okay, I can respect you simply not liking the SSBU Design for Ridley but at the same time I fail to see how this is the worst version of him. Ridley in Smash Bros Ultimate is based off of the original design from Metroid 1 on the NES, I think that aspect alone makes him 100% Ridley and Sakurai absolutely nailed how that would look in modern times.
You also got to remember that Ridley had to be modified a lot to even be playable. If you took the giant Ridley from the Metroid games, well I think at this point you know how badly that would go. If you ask me; considering the limitations Sakurai had to work with, I think the development team did a fantastic job making him playable while also making it feel like you was playing as Ridley.
I also do not get your "Designs are worse in SSBU" argument. SSBU literally uses the models from SSB4 that were in that game. I know later on you brought up how "They are presented worse" but designs and how well something is presented are not the same thing.
@patbacknitro18
@NCChris
First up, Merry Christmas to both of you!
It is not my intention to ruin the good spirit around here.
You both asked about Ridley, so I will cover that in exess!
But first, let me outline what my main angle is:
The lighting conditions thrown about in SSBU show off both the colors and normal maps of many Smash4 assets, as well as the new ones, in unflattering ways.
Take for instance Bowser. He's now constantly a sickly swamp green/brown because of the lighting. And his normal maps with the scale bumps, those were designed to be subtle, and only appear on surfaces turned at an angle to the camera, and to only take highlight in white from the fresnel shader. Now they are visible on most of the character most of the time. This muddies up the readability, and reveals that the scales are all quite similar in size, which doesn't add anything interesting to the overall design.
When I then complain about the new designs in SSBU, it's because I generally consider these even worse. It's both, really.
So now.
Let's talk Ridley.
I really do think it's a boring design. And a bad one in terms of in-game usability. Firstly it has a nearly even thickness down along arms and legs, which makes poses harder to read on such a complex character.
Secondly, painting him only one color doesn't work that well when this color is so dark that the black notches and indentations on his exoskeleton don't stand out as functional, but start seeming like messy smudges.
And here, I gotta say; he looks almost nothing like his Metroid 1 design. Not the promo art, or the game sprite. Compared to other, later designs, Metroid 1 is not the one that clearly stands out as inspiration.
Having covered his shapes and colors, I've got still more issues, however. He's draped in a very messy and very glossy normal map, that highlights huge sections of the character all the way to a clear white. This creates a much higher contrast between those highlights and base color right next to it, than the contrast seen between the base color and the shadows indicating exo skeleton joints, undersides of body parts, and overlapping elements. In effect, this makes the character's poses and animations incredibly hard to read. This is an issue in a fast paced game where the camera often trucks quite far away.
I am aware that the designers need to consider playability But he could easily be playable without looking like a dark lavender bundle of timberwood, covered in tar and glass shards.
That's it for my holiday bile on this topic.
I do not claim to be an authority on this matter in any particular way. I just know what hurts my enjoyment with the game. And my Scroogey grinchiness should never take away from your fun.
Happy New Year celebrations when you all get there!
@Pod Okay, to be fair, I do agree on the part about Ridley being too bright in certain areas but for everything else, I just think he looks good. I don't have a problem with him being mostly 1 colour as purple is 1 of my favourite colours and as Pat said, he's supposed to be a form of a monstrosity because obviously he's designed to be very menacing.
And yeah, of course he's not going to look identical to his original appearance, the original was just a sprite while this is a full 3D Model made for HD Screens, of course there's going to be changes along the way, doesn't mean Sakurai is lying when he says Ridley was based off of his original appearance.
As for the "Poses hard to read"? I'm gonna be honest here, I have absolutely no idea what this means. If you're referring to how he looks when he does specific animations, I don't see the issue.
As for Bowser; This again falls down to personal preference but I actually think he looks better in this game. In Smash Bros 4 certain characters came off as too cartoony and Bowser was 1 of the biggest victims of this issue. By making him look this way, he looks a lot more menacing and villainous. He's an evil turtle that lives in a lava filled land, the whole cartoon look just didn't work for him.
@NCChris
I suppose we can agree to disagree on the whole cartoon aspect of 4's visuals. I primarily enjoyed how the expression was clearer and more harmonious, and the overall picture on screen was much easier to decipher. Meaning, I just had a much easier time telling where characters were positioned, and which animations they were currently running, so that I knew what other players were up to.
This is what I'm talking about with Ridley as well. It's always difficult to tell where he is, and what he's doing, because of how he looks in Ultimate.
@Pod "It's always difficult to tell where he is"
So, if we are on battlefield, a stage that has a full white backdrop complete with a sky, you'd still have trouble telling where he is?
I've played this game since release and I've always been able to tell where Ridley is and what move he is doing, even on 4-player matches.
In addition, if this was a genuine issue, wouldn't Ridley be on the top-tiers in competitive play? Being able to hide what moves you are doing due to your design would actually be a very powerful tool in Smash Bros Competitive. As things stand right now, Ridley is actually deemed as 1 of the low-mid tier characters.
Again, I can respect the opinion that you do not like Ridley's design but these reasons feel very far-fetched.
@NCChris
Very few levels have full white backdrops, and compared to 4, very few even have decently color coordinated backgrounds. Most have a somewhat dark-ish jumble of colors, as well as now casting shadows on the players.
Ridley being hard to see and hard to read also makes him difficult to play for the playing utilizing him. I'm not complaining about losing to him because of the issues I'm mentioning. I'm unsure whether any of this affects his overall viability compared to other characters, many of whom I'd say also suffer from the overall decisions in lighting and shading.
I may be a nitpicker in these regards, I never said I wasn't.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...