Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 10:42:04 UTC No. 857989

3d is the opposite of instant gratification, you only start enjoying results hours and hours later. Especially if you want go model for games, because you need to ensure everything is optimized so there are extra technical steps. With this mindser maybe it’s the best to not even bother. Just go play some game with creative tools instead.

If you still want to try it, download blender and go to grant abbitt yt channel’s beginner video series.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 10:44:46 UTC No. 857990

>>857989
But it wont be too difficult to get shitty ps1 level of graphics? Right?

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 10:54:09 UTC No. 857993

>>857990
ps1 level is gratifying because you can get away with less

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:31:40 UTC No. 858006

>>857990
>>857993

Minimalist graphics is much much faster and simpler for an artist to do because metaphorically speaking it's a lot less moving parts to assemble.
The caveat here is that it is only easy if you already know how to do art in the first place.
Know art as in you can take whatever media is handed to you and create the shapes you want, whether that is drawing/sculpting or modelling doesn't matter.

But if you have no artistic ability and can't create accurate shapes at will as you imagine them, minimalist graphics might even be less accessible to you
since you have to abstract shapes and simplify them ontop of conceptualize what they're supposed to represent.

If you can capture and hold the shape of a human/car/aircraft etc in your mind and represent it close to how it actually exist in the realworld
given unrestricted polygon count/clay or resolution canvas etc, it is very simple to chip away of the outline regardless if you're allowed
to use 1000, 100, 10 or 3 polygons to capture this and that curve of the surface.

But if you can only do the stick figure representation of that thing it will be an absolute enigma to you how to best capture that shape given a limited polycount.

>TLDR

It's best to learn how to actually do art before attempting to actually do art.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 15:49:12 UTC No. 858034

>>857986
>I am something of a game dev

Then you should at least be smart enough to code your game with placeholder art assets from other people before you start worrying about what things are really going to look like when it's done.

>>858006
>The caveat here is that it is only easy if you already know how to do art in the first place.

Every person who thinks all they need to do is learn blender's UI to start producing good results needs to hear this. It's easy to look the model in the OP and say 'wow, even I could make that piece of garbage!', but unless you have years of familiarity with artistic concepts, your results will lack the same sense of appeal and you will be left staring at it, not knowing why. Or worse, not even realising the lack of appeal in your own work.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 15:49:32 UTC No. 858035

>>857990
Still quite hard and will filter most, but the pipeline is slimmed down/simplified to a degree, to allow for the artist to make more in less time

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 15:55:24 UTC No. 858037

>>857986
>I am something of a game dev, but I want to do my own art and material for my games.
>Red pill me on modeling and tell me where I should start with?
I have more than 15 years of experience as an (3D) artist and I worked occasionally as an tutor and I am gonna redpill you in regards to your desire to do your own art.
Do you take game dev seriously?
If the answer is yes, then forget your desire to do your own art, it will kill your project(s) and your motivation. PERIOD.
You already have all your hands full with game dev and the chances of success are already lower than 10%.
The amount of time and effort you'd have to put in to learn art and get to aesthetical pleasing results stands in no relation to the investment.
A beginner who puts all his energy into becoming an artist needs at least 1 or 2 years (of constant training and working) to walk through the valley of suck and that is with an artistic talent and/or an talent for fast learning, half of them need more. And that is if they learn the right way - most people who are self-learning don't know what to do and learn and subsequently they need more time.
Its not the technical side of the skill that is taking so long, its the artistic side of it. Without the art skill you might be able to create something (bad), but you wont be able to even know what is good and what is bad and why your art sucks.
There is no substitute for art skills, no shortcuts and no way around learning it properly.
>But it wont be too difficult to get shitty ps1 level of graphics?
Yes, it will be, FOR YOU.
>>858006 listen to him.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 16:26:18 UTC No. 858039

>>858037
continued
Doing good minimalist art can be MORE difficult then doing complex art because every aspect of it needs to be perfect.
"Less is more" is one of the tenets I learned in Design School. Reducing a design to its bare minimum while retaining its essential nature is hard, so much so that I struggle with it after 15 years despite all my experience. That should tell you something. In my defence, I never liked to do minimalism, its not my style, I love the opposite maximalism, also photorealism.

Every noob think that retro art is easy and everyone of them is WRONG. It goes hand in hand with the Dunning Kruger effect they all have due to lack of experience.
Also every noob thinks they know better even when told otherwise, its as if they NEED to bash their head against the hard wall of reality and experience utter failure in order to learn that lesson.
Don't be that guy, consider learning from the mistakes of others and the experiences and knowledge of actual artists.
Focus on game dev if that is what you want to do, setting priorities is important to get to your goal or you fail from spreading yourself too thin.
Put some money on the side and find an artist who is not living in the first world and pay him/her to do art for you. That way it is affordable to you.
You can earn more money with the skills you have and exchange that for art, rather than doing it yourself and waste precious lifetime and sabotage your goal of game development.
I have seen it happening first hand many times, every single one of them failed.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 21:20:16 UTC No. 858083

>>858037
>You already have all your hands full with game dev and the chances of success are already lower than 10%.

Way lower than that.
Think how many wannabe game devs there are trying tone solo-dev a game.
Now think how many of them are also the primary artists for their game.
Now think how many of them actually complete and release their game.
Now think how many of those completed and released games are anything more than 5 minute browser games on itch.io

I can think of maybe 5 people who accomplished this feat in the last TWENTY YEARS.

1-man-army game development for anything worth actually making is virtually impossible. 99.99% of people will fail.

Anonymous at Sun, 24 Oct 2021 22:24:46 UTC No. 858104

>>858083
Right, but he doesn't have to be a single dev for the whole game. Doing a working prototype, showing it people and letting them play it and then proceed from there with real artists, hopefully some financial backup and some more devs is an possible way that seems plausible. That's why i pulled the 10% out of my head/hat - also I don't want to totally demotivate him either, except with his idea that he can do both developing and art - that truly is close to impossibility.

Anonymous at Thu, 4 Nov 2021 00:00:32 UTC No. 859992

>>857986
kitbashing

Anonymous at Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:58:50 UTC No. 861460

>>857986
Personally I recommend Wings 3D for modelling. I found it's extremely intuitive and you could figure it out without any manuals or tutorials and get decent results quickly after a bit of practice first. This is coming from a guy who got filtered by Blender pre-2.8.