Minimal Animation List

[Domarius]

Each level must be completed for ALL available characters (described here) before moving onto the next level.

 

Level 1

• Idle
  
• Walking
  
• Running
  
• Searching
  
• Draw weapon (combatants) (reverse for sheath weapon)
  
• Melee attack (combatants)
  
• Ranged attack (combatants)
  

Level 2

• pain animation
  
• blinded/confused
  
• protecting face (from archer)
  
• pick-up/open door (generic reaching out animation)
  

Level 3

• KO/Death animation (just collapse, blending into ragdoll)
  
• Startled
  
• Cower (non-combatants)
  

Level 4

• Alternate melee attacks
  
• Alternate pain animations
  
• A less athletic, more sissy run for non-combatants.
  
• Seperate anim for running without weapon (combatants)
  
• Seperate anim for searching without weapon (same for combatants and non-combatants)
  
• Sheath weapon
  
• Seperate anim for dying (different than KO - clutch chest, etc.)
  

[sparhawk]

Well, you can do the attack if you have spare time, but since we have no attack code that would make use of it, I wonder what point it would be at the moment. Is searching already done? Because I don't see it in the list. Or is it enough to have the head turning? And if you include combat already, then it probably would be better to have some bowdrawing animations and some item throwing instead.

A "Shake the fist" with and without sword would also be usefull.

[Domarius]

AFAIK, the AI can already search for you thanks to SZ's work, and the Haunts scratch you, so attacking must be already implemented too.

 

I'm not sure where fist shaking comes into it now, with our new features over T2 and T3. In our mod, when an AI can't get to you, it goes to a vantage point where it has a line of site of you. Then it can shoot you. And since we are going to allow melee guards also throw random objects at you, they will be doing that, so there is no point when they would shake their fist.

[sparhawk]

Going to a vantage poiint is only usefull if there actually is one. It would be also good to have such an animation (or a similar one) at the end of the search instead of the AI simply wandering off.

[Domarius]

When you shake your fist at someone, you're looking at them. So if he can see you to shake his fist at you, he should be throwing things instead.

And if he's given up searching, that means he can't see you. So shaking his fist wouldn't be appropriate there either. Punching the palm of his hand, or scratching his head, would probably be more appropriate for that.

 

But either way, that sort of animation doesn't strike me as crucial as the ones listed up there. I think it'd be down at the bottom of Spring's original list under "Colourful Gestures".

[sparhawk]

Don't know why you ask for opinions when you prioritize it anyway as you want it.

[Domarius]

I said I wanted opinions - which implies I want to discuss what priorities the anims should be in, not take orders.

 

Look at my wording - "doesn't strike me as..." and "I think...". Those are opinions. And this is a discussion, where opinions are expressed.

[sparhawk]

You asked for opinions. I gave you an opinion. You respond with that you stick to your original opinion anyway. Point is?

[New Horizon]

The point is, you guys are always shoving ant covered sticks up each others asses. Keep it to a minimum please.

 

@Dom -

 

In regards to the sword in hand and swordless animations:

 

My understanding was that the handling of weapons was going to be redone by an attachment point type of deal. As in T1, 2 and 3, the weapons are separate models that are attached to the AI's hand through a bone or some such process. That way, you don't need to make more than one running animation, the sword is either just applied to the joint..or not. The only thing you would need to be wary of is having the sword stab the AI...as can be seen in T3 when the AI are blinded. The anims would just need to take consideration for those types of movements....and this would cut your work load considerabley.

[Springheel]

Well, if you want the absolute bare minimum, you could remove 'dying' from the list (they could just go ragdoll) and you could cross off 'sheath weapon' and just reuse 'draw weapon' in reverse.

Draw weapon would probably have to be separated into draw (side) and draw (back), though. You'd also need an archer animation and a 'throw object' animation.

 

However, that might be just a tad more minimalist than I had been thinking.

 

I don't know enough about animation to know what a good workflow is, so let me see if I'm on the same page.

Seems like an animator could either create a full set of animations for -one- character, then after that work at applying the same animations to other characters. Or, they could get -all- characters working with basic animations and then work on additional ones after that.

 

If you're suggesting the latter, then the list you posted is definitely a good place to start. In fact, we already have all but the searching done for the elite guard (although some might have to be redone when the sword is detached).

 

After that first bare minimum set, these would be among the next most important:

 

* Startled

* Cower (non-combatants)

* KO/Death animation (blending into ragdoll)

 

These would be necessary to support features we planned on having:

 

* blinded/confused

* protecting face (from archer)

* pick-up/open door (generic reaching out animation)

 

Trouble is, it's very hard to weigh the value of certain animations. For example, I had included a 'generic conversation' one in the above list initially, but I suppose you could just have two AI standing facing each other.

 

As with everything else, you have to weigh both "Necessity" and "Ease of Creation". A 'reaching out' animation (for opening doors or picking things up off tables) probably isn't very necessary, but I suspect it's pretty easy.

[Domarius]

@Sparhawk - I'm discussing with you. I gave an argument why I don't like your opinion. You're free to provide a counter-argument to convince me. Anyone else can do the same if they agree with you.

 

@NewHorizon - We're trying to reason like mature adults. Seriously, "ant covered sticks" is a bit of an over-dramatisation. Calm down mate.

 

In regards to the sword in hand and swordless animations:

 

My understanding was that the handling of weapons was going to be redone by an attachment point type of deal. As in T1, 2 and 3, the weapons are separate models that are attached to the AI's hand through a bone or some such process. That way, you don't need to make more than one running animation, the sword is either just applied to the joint..or not. The only thing you would need to be wary of is having the sword stab the AI...as can be seen in T3 when the AI are blinded. The anims would just need to take consideration for those types of movements....and this would cut your work load considerabley.

What sucked about T2 and T3's anims, is that the run anim looked like the sword was made of balsa wood, there was no weight to it. The search anim in T2 looked dumb on servants who held their arm up with no sword in it.

 

If you look at my existing run anim and search anims, you'll see they're made for holding the sword, and it looks much better.

 

So our options at this point are;

• Do what I suggested - always drawing weapon before running or searching
  
• Allow this existing run and search anims to be used for both with sword and without sword
  
• Create seperate anims for running and searching without the sword
  

...they could get -all- characters working with basic animations and then work on additional ones after that.

Yes that's what I meant.

 

I went back and made some other revisions based on your contributions.

The reverse draw-sword... I would begrudgingly do to save time... but it will look exactly like someone doing something in reverse - notice how I added the sword wobble on the end of the draw sword anim to make it look like it's got weight - well seeing that in reverse would look just like pressing re-wind on the VCR.

 

As with everything else, you have to weigh both "Necessity" and "Ease of Creation". A 'reaching out' animation (for opening doors or picking things up off tables) probably isn't very necessary, but I suspect it's pretty easy.

Yeah. But only relatively easy - each one still takes at least an hour, to get it right, and then I have to import it, and then the coders have to do something with it. So nothing is really truly quick. We have to be qiute rigorous with what we choose to implement.

[Springheel]

But this is what sucked about T2 and T3's anims. The run anim looked like the sword was made of balsa wood, there was no weight to it. The search anim in T2 looked dumb on servants who held their arm up with no sword in it.

 

Well, this is where it gets tricky. You can't say on the one hand that we have to cut down to the absolute basics, but on the other hand complain that it won't look better than T2/3. Of course it would look better if the animations were made separately for weapons and nonweapons. It would look better if every character didn't run the same way at the same time, etc, etc. And if we have time for it, these are all worthy goals.

 

But you wanted to talk about the very minimal amount of animations, right?

 

I can't see where this would be actually used, ever. So I don't see the point in even bothering yet.

 

Well, AI won't be throwing things at the player constantly. They certainly might shake their fist angrily between objects. But I agree it's not a high priority animation.

[Domarius]

Alright - well I guess the T2 and T3 developers might've gone down the same path - aimed to make more specific animaitons but ran out of time. I've updated the list.

[Springheel]

I hope we'll have time to add lots more animations than just those above, but I agree we should do the basics first before moving on to other things.

 

(Don't forget to add the archery and throwing animations--AI already throw things and I'm sure we'll have archers)

[Domarius]

Okay, added melee attack and ranged attack. Not forgetting that Archers are going to pull out a dagger or something so they can be melee as well, as we discussed.

[Springheel]

They were going to have a melee weapon, yes, but I don't know if a new weapon type is the way to go when we're trying to cut back on things. No reason they can't just have a sword like everyone else. Again, it comes down to how much time we have.

[Domarius]

Well if swords are going to be an AF attatchement, it should only take the amount of time it takes for someone to model a dagger and import it. It would be weird for a guard to also be issued with a fully sized broadsword. But you might be right. Hm, archers aren't even in the model list yet.

[Springheel]

True, as long as the same attack animations work for swords and daggers. No reason they shouldn't, I guess.

 

Archers won't be separate models, they'll just be regular guard types. Pros and City Watch for sure should have the animation for bows, perhaps the elites as well (though they should have standard melee weapons). Don't know about Builders. If it's easy to apply to a townsfolk we could use them for hunter or even pagan characters.

[Domarius]

Ah, bring this discussion to the modelling thread.

[Domarius]

Okay, can we "officialise" this list somehow? Sticky, or advise me where to document it?