[Suggestion] Idle Animation

[Mish7913]

Everyone, I have an great IDEA, what if add Idle animation to the game? 

So ... right now exist only "straight" pose and it's helps to switch between "left" and"right" poses. But what if add idle animation too - If player didn't press any keys on the keyboard, then after 10 sec will start playing "idle-start" and "idle-end" animation.

I think it will add more life to the game.

[Alayan]

The concept of an idle animation was previously discussed when the list of animations for characters was established.

Sven thought it was not a good idea.

I'm against it honestly, while racing there are multiple ways to have things similar to an idle animation (take Kikis tail for example) and again blending could become a problem. And while racing there is the steering animation which is played almost constantly.

I don't think in a normal race situation an idle animation would add much visually.

Don't get me wrong I think having animations while the kart is just going straight are really good (and kinda important) but those are better done like Kikis tail.

An idle animation usually means the character moving really slowly and usually refers to the animation used when the character is standing still.

[lok_langtext]

" If player didn't press any keys on the keyboard, then after 10 sec "

[Sauss-Ente]

Actually, the graphics are too good in this game.

The lower the number of polygons is, the easier it becomes to improve the game in a, let's say, more consistent way. If one kart looks way too polished over the others, it doesn't feel right, does it? The issue has to do with work and that becomes easier if the graphics are more simple.

Fortuneatly Quake-Early-3D-style is acknowledged as it's own style, as Pixel-sytle is since decades. And Playstation-2-style as well, where Supertuxkart would fit in kind of.

Of course 2004 Moorhuhn Kart 2 looks more alive than Supertuxkart. But I wonder if graphics have priority for the developers of such a small free-and-open-source-project (regarding many topics on this board that ask for better graphics).
It just would be a fight that can't be won against corporations with 100 of paid 3D artists on that turf.

[Alayan]

Actually, the graphics are too good in this game.

The lower the number of polygons is, the easier it becomes to improve the game in a, let's say, more consistent way. If one kart looks way too polished over the others, it doesn't feel right, does it? The issue has to do with work and that becomes easier if the graphics are more simple.

Fortuneatly Quake-Early-3D-style is acknowledged as it's own style, as Pixel-sytle is since decades. And Playstation-2-style as well, where Supertuxkart would fit in kind of.

It's definitely easier to make the quality level consistent when the highest targeted quality is low, but low quality is low quality.

Having a vast amount of low quality content wouldn't be of much help to help promote the game. First impressions matter a lot, and if we aimed for bad quality graphics because it's easy, the vast vast majority of potential players, that might otherwise enjoy the game, wouldn't even give it a chance.

PS2 type graphics would be a disaster.

Of course 2004 Moorhuhn Kart 2 looks more alive than Supertuxkart. But I wonder if graphics have priority for the developers of such a small free-and-open-source-project (regarding many topics on this board that ask for better graphics).
It just would be a fight that can't be won against corporations with 100 of paid 3D artists on that turf.

Obviously, a higher quality target means that less people are able to make core contributions (although there are still many ways open), and we we have to remain realistic about what can be achieved. The main goal so far is to make quality much more consistent, by bringing tracks and karts to the quality level of the best ones that already exist. Not to do cutting-edge graphics that would require many experts both for the assets and for the graphics code.

But in the end, if you think that libre software is plainly unable to compete, that'd be an indictment of the model itself.

Rather than looking at ways to reduce quality to make it easier to generate content, there is more merit I think in looking for ways to promote the project and fund development.

[Sauss-Ente]

But in the end, if you think that libre software is plainly unable to compete, that'd be an indictment of the model itself.

Ah, not to be disrespectful to Libre Software in general! It can compete on many levels, but not on the graphics side, which is too work ressource intensive.

Modability. Portability. Longjevity of online services. Innovative gameplay mechanics. A certain unpolishedness which gives the game edges... up to crazy, wacky stuff. They can risk to please to a niche audience. They don't have to look for big numbers of players. They don't have to make a profit. Those are some strengths of Libre Software.

[Sam]

But in the end, if you think that libre software is plainly unable to compete, that'd be an indictment of the model itself.

Ah, not to be disrespectful to Libre Software in general! It can compete on many levels, but not on the graphics side, which is too work ressource intensive.

Modability. Portability. Longjevity of online services. Innovative gameplay mechanics. A certain unpolishedness which gives the game edges... up to crazy, wacky stuff. They can risk to please to a niche audience. They don't have to look for big numbers of players. They don't have to make a profit. Those are some strengths of Libre Software.

I respectfully disagree, ultimately it’s bound by the same forces as any other projects and not being commercially viable is often not sustainable. If we look at all free and open source projects that got very successful (such as Blender, Krita, Godot) they are run as quasi commercial projects with sponsoring, fundraising and so on. Otherwise our very talented devs will just leave for greener pasture.