Male base 1/Fem base 1 RPG starter and UMA Multipurpopse Avatar

Hello Will,

just for an info how I did it:
I changed all M_hair -> M_Hair so they are all the same. I did the same with F_Hair.

The faces also were not the same there was Fem Face etc.

I changed all to F_Face 1 Overlay PBR etc.

Now I can mix everything by just changing the number. It is very cool when doing an own Char Editor. I did not know the Slots are case sensitive...

 

Mecanim only rig for UMA
For using the FBX without needing to use UMA
Doesn’t have morphing capabilities and is good for anyone wanting to reuse their UMA models
Works with animations etc

http://willbgameart.com/uma-mecanim-only-rig/

 

F_Shirt 2 final:




Left to do: Finish rigging and Male refits

 

Very nice!!!

 

Mecanim only rig for UMA is currently Male only. Will be adding a fem version soon. They are close but slightly different.

 

F_Shirt refit 1 and 2 are complete. Will be doing 3 and 4 as well. Should be done tomorrow or the day after.

After that will be either the weapon pack or another face pack. I'm leaning towards the face pack.

RPG starter 2 should be completed in a couple weeks.

 

Face pack, definitely. There are lots of weapon models available and I have to say I don't really see the advantage in including weapons as UMA slots. As opposed to just placing the model in the character's hand. I'm probably missing something. ;-)

 

I may not have it quite right, but it seems possible that if you have the weapon as a slot, it can change size according to a sizing bone in the body, and thus always be the right size for the individual UMA. So if you have a sword slot, it will be the right size for an orc and also for a halfling, because it changes with the size of the character.

If you use an external weapon, it will either remain the same size regardless of the UMA attempting to use it, or it will have to have its size changed manually (eliminating use with characters whose size is customized during runtime) or programmatically.

I think a game can have room for both types of weapons. Basically, weapons believed to be owned by the character ought to be the right size, and thus should be UMA slots. Found weapons could be external to UMA, and some might not be usable due to incompatibility in user and weapon size.

 

I would much prefer a face pack to a weapon pack.

Couldn't any weapon if attached to the UMA change in size if added as a slot? A slot is just a mesh, easily made in UMA.

There are some really good ones on the asset store at reasonable prizes.

But so few faces for UMA.

 

I'm pretty sure that's how it would work. UMA doesn't care if it's a sword or a shirt.

Some weapons would look really odd if always the perfect scale for the wielder. A halfling-sized halberd would look pretty strange. I would think that weapons designed for smaller races would need to be constructed differently rather than just being perfectly scaled-down versions, as the smaller surface area at the point of impact would make the weapon a lot less effective. But that's getting way off-topic. ;-)

Yes. It would be pretty simple to just adjust the scale of the model when it's added to the character. I'm using both ORK Framework and Opsive's Third Person Controller in my game, so I've already got two different systems for placing a weapon in a character's hand. I realize that not everybody using UMA will be using the same tools, but this is a pretty common feature that is part of a number of other assets that are frequently used (ootii's Mount Points, Invector's Third Person Controller, Inventory Pro, etc).

That sounds distinctly like more time and effort than is justified by the end result to me. ;-) Anyway, I originally thought that Will meant that he'd do either a weapons pack or another face pack, but upon reading his post again, I think that he might just mean which one he does first. In which case I've already spent too much time explaining why I don't see much point in UMA weapons.

 

Another Hair pack would be great as well!

 

I agree with the face pack

 

Face pack better than weapons.
I agree weapons are not of any interest at all. I made a script to put them in the Hand. Then they can have their own collider etc.

But even better: Skin pack with saurian, fire people etc. Or totally new races.

 

Nice. I thought that might be the case for some devs.

New races will be in RPG starter 3.

 

UMA Mecanim Rig updated:

-Male and Female Mecanim only rig for UMA
-Rotates the rig in the file to proper orientation in Unity scene. Also adds a non-adjustment version for simpler rigs.
-Updated How to

http://willbgameart.com/uma-mecanim-only-rig/

 

It would just have kept things consistent design wise with the models, but your right there are several available atm.

I also like doing weapons sometimes

The orientation/rigging would also be correct and no need to fiddle with getting other weapons to fit and look correct etc..

 

Coming in RPG starter 3

 

Any chance you would consider making a male and female human child "race"? It is something I have been wanting to do myself but haven't yet. Might be useful to others as well. I can get to young teen with the female adult but not below that. Much easier to do the boys.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. Will add it to the list.

 

Mecanim files added to RPG starter 1.4.2 (willbgameart.com)

 

Shirtpack left to do:

F_Shirt 4 refit and modular textures/uvs

10 shirts total

 

UMA Shirt Pack added to RPG starter 2 Pre-order:

http://willbgameart.com/product/uma-rpg-starter-2-pre-order/

 

These look great. And the inevitable question comes up - I've already purchased most of the models in RPG Starter Pack 2, so I'm not really wanting to purchase it. Will you be adding these to the Unity Store?

 

Hey @Jaimi . Yep. Will be adding them in the next couple days. Been dealing with some hardware issues, so haven't had a chance yet.

 

UMA Face pack 2 Face 1 High poly:

 

IMHO by far the worst part of UMA are the faces. The skin especially looks really bad. If there is anything you can do to improve faces, that would be fantastic.

 

Try the first face pack. It has some lovely faces. It will be nice to have more!

 

Can you be more specific? I'm guessing you're talking about textures ...?

If you can, provide a list of the shortcomings you see.

 

Well, I need to jump in on the slack. I was on there last week. But basically, the faces just look bad. So much so, that even though I can randomly generate NPCs at will based on constraints, I generally put a helmet on them because while justin's armor sets look great, the faces just ruins it.

Now of course, I'm not looking for Black Desert Online fidelity. But when I look at the faces, say, on the MCS stuff, they look an order of magnitude better - including the hair. I am using all of JustinB's stuff, including his body refactors. I can generate custom players (and npcs), as well as using profiles that constrain random generation using UMA. JustinB's armor sets are fantastic. Really. Modern games do use some cloth on some pieces to add some variation, which I think is snazzy (and clearly outside of JustinB's scope), but like I said I am happy with the customization/armor looks. However, the minute I remove the helm, for example, for a patrol leader to give him some kind of heroic face, I look at him in-game and say "ugh, no way, you get a helmet".

This all being said, if you want to discuss privately, or on the slack, I have a ton of experience with UMA from a content user perspective (and you clearly have much more from the core perspective), so I could show you screenshots or provide you any input you need. Probably no need to spam in JustinB's thread about this stuff.

And I could also whine about some API methods you are probably removing (since they are deprecated in my 2.x version), because I do some weird stuff to make this all work without textures when headless .

 

UMA Shirt Pack is added and submitted (includes blends):

http://willbgameart.com/product/uma-shirt-pack/

 

As for myself, I'm not super experienced in any of this. @justb will have a better perspective, especially in relation to the use of the faces he's making for UMA.

I'm not sure if you're looking for more polys on the face (which MCS has) or better modeling of facial features (which is more subjective) or higher resolution textures (MCS uses 4096) or a different shader for skin (MCS uses the Volund shader for skin).

If the problem is the texture, you'll either need higher resolution sources, or possibly you need to increase the size of your character atlas so that you get better details on the face textures.

If the problem is the shader, you can explore using different shaders.

 

Are you using the DNA numbers? The faces were sculpted from high to low poly to fit custom Morphs in UMA. If your using only the default face the texture probably won't look right. Try using the numbers as your base before morphing it.

You may also want to look into adding an SSS Shader to your game. If you can get one working with UMA please share. I tried Fast fake skin shader, but it didn't work. I'm going to try again.

Your faces should look like the ones on the preview images in the store. You should be able to use the textures with the high poly base version as well.

As hopeful stated, MSC uses high res textures and models at level 0 plus SSS. UMA is more low poly 1024x2048 max (depending on your atlasing and material) and no SSS.

Hair is also low poly. I could have done alpha planes at 2-4k per hair at the time, but thought most mmos don't need 2-4k hair. Next Hair pack I'll be contemplating doing alpha planes or keeping it consistent with the current pack.

 

I'm doing a single-player game and I would love a more detailed hair pack. The hair just isn't quite up to the same level of visual quality as the rest of your UMA assets.

 

I'm not using the dna numbers you provided, but I am using your faces and body mesh/textures. I guess it is hard to say. I'm not saying the faces look atrocious. I'm just saying the skin, especially, just looks kind of monotone and just doesn't seem nearly as subtly textured. I assume this has something to do with the shader. Note: my expertise is as a developer, and I know next to nothing about the underpinnings of art, texturing, shaders, etc.

Here is a random female face I generated (note there is some spackling in her neck area, that seems to be from the underlying UI texture under her - she is rendered as a render texture - I've never bothered to figure this out).



This face is random DNA / skin color / hair / eyes / eye color, etc etc. She looks pretty good, but perhaps a bit too low poly. Compare this to a random screenshot off the MCS boards below, which in my opinion looks a bit washed out, but everything just looks smother, especially the skin and features. Holistically, at least in my opinion, it just looks better. Now some of this is high poly, some shader, etc, and these pics are apples to oranges as my post might be different, I'm running a render texture, etc. Also, although this screenshot doesn't demonstrate it, the hair in general looks much better in MCS.



And then just for comparison to see what is probably the pinnacle of this tech right now is Black Desert Online (which I've never played) (https://www.google.com/search?q=bla...hWCPiYKHaSFCyYQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=1_pnBiFDoUEx_M:)

 

@DirtyHippy - If you could get access to some higher resolution textures and normals, I think it would get you closer to what you're looking for. I'm not sure you need higher poly, but there IS the UMA higher poly set if you do. (It's still not as high poly as MCS, I believe.)

 

MCS are Daz style characters. If you want beautiful faces, then you should use those.

I prefer UMA because the faces are more realistic and work well in my gritty game.

So...they do not look bad. They look like real people. Real people do not look bad, at least most of them don't. You can make UMA characters actually look bad if you wish.

Not all of us wants a game that looks like the latest HBO movie. We prefer the British TV shows...a bit more real.

Oh, and with a little resizing, you can use any hair on the UMA, including MCS. But...you have to learn to turn them into UMAs.

MCS is a commercial product. You pay for it. UMA is open source. Free. In my mind, it is the better product. Fortunately, we have choices that fit our own styles.

 

Sorry this is not your clothing, JustB, but I didn't have a picture with the face close up. I will put up some of yours later. Yours are so much better.

I think this UMA is beautiful. Try using the skins on the asset store.

 

You know they spend a lot of time and money on those base meshes as well right? Especially for Black Desert. The dev who made that got paid a decent amount. If you'd like to pay me 50-60k salary to make UMA stuff, you'll see some top grad stuff I'm currently doing this AAA quality models for 3 studios. (Black Desert's artists/designers are pretty great and I love what the did with their game.) The SSS is very apparent in that screenshot.

A base mesh like DAZ with some cool armor would cost 2000 dollars (or more) from an outsourcing studio with rigging. Some studios charge 10k with animations. Luckily, MCS got the license from DAZ to use it. I on the other hand (for asset store items) focus on quantity and decent quality to get more things done since a RPG/MMO game needs a lot of stuff. I've done Custom UMA base meshes (realistic) for 2 studios. I posted one of them previously showing what UMA can do. I've contemplated doing a base like that on the store, but everything is fit for the current base.

The MCS model is high poly. Simple as that. It also has no skin pores. Just smooth. Thus the polygon shading looks smoother where as UMA relies on Normal maps for most of it's smoothing. It's also limited DNA wise what you can do, so normal maps are used to fill in some detail as well. You can see how many polygons the MCS screenshot has in the ear. Normally that would be mostly flat with normal map on most mid/lower poly game models

The only real way to resolve that issue and make it more like "Black Desert" and other titles is to make a new base mesh and get the proper shaders working in UMA, with the proper textures. I'm still contemplating adding new heads as meshes, but it requires more time then just using morphs (weighting etc).

As Teila stated as well, most of the face are just made to look less perfect as well. Not specifically for an Asian MMO, but more like Skyrim or something like that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsurface_scattering

Usually, textures would have not much red in them. The red in skin comes from Blood under the skin and would be covered by the SSS shader.

This image would be SSS and Gloss (to make it reflective)
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DlYgDBzZH...s1600/FixedMonteCarloSubsurfaceScattering.png

 

My comments have nothing to do with how pretty something is. I can generate random avatars, based on custom constraints, races, genders, everything with a push of a button using an extensive system I have written on top of the API at run-time. I've generated billions of physically attractive and unattractive avatars when messing around. I use all of JustinB's work - his body refactors, his faces and skins, hair and facial hair, and several of his armor sets, all of which can be generated randomly and synced over the network for npcs at run-time, or for players they can equip anything they want ad-hoc like typical aRPG/MMO scenarios and have full customization available of their avatar at creation time. I love all of it - he is as essential to UMA to me as the core team.

What i am saying is that given a face with the same structure simply looks better in these other systems. I have stated many times that I love UMA, for any number of reasons. What I am saying is that faces is where you notice a distinct difference when playing any modern game. The faces look _better_ - frankly much better - not necessarily more physically attractive (the same goes for the hair to be honest).

There is nothing wrong with this. No one expects an open source, free implementation like UMA to look like a AAA implementation, nor JustinB to provide such work for 35$ an asset. And I love JustinB's work. I would pay much more for this same work honestly - I don't really understand why he prices it like he does. This is in _no way_ an indictment of either of these parties. I make extensive use of UMA in a real game using real use cases, and I am simply noting what I see as the biggest visual weakness of UMA. Constructive criticism if you will, and simply seeking some input on mitigation, especially given I have zero capability as an artist. If this is possible, but just expensive, then great. That's all I want to hear.

Here is an npc I just created in my editor (with most of the UI turned off), using JustinB's stuff + some random weapons, which in my opinion looks great.

 

@DirtyHippy - Another option to consider, possibly, is the use of a tessellating shader to add more polys to the figures. (Provided, of course, those things are working with skinned meshes.)

 

@justb - Have you tested your body retexture with the High Poly slots for UMA that are on the asset store?

 

I agree that low poly is the way to go, from elsewhere I have seen hair with 30k+ and it is just insane. If you choose to go for higherpoly please also consider including a low poly version if it is not too much work.

 

Try Fernando's Athena version. It is nice and looks great in-game. There is a male counterpart as well. Sorry if I was too strong, but I really am tired of people saying UMA's look bad without trying to do something about it first. Maybe that doesn't apply to you, but when people say that MCS is better, I have to wonder why they don't just use that.

Also, with image effects, a lot of the issues go away.

Powertools will help you LOD your characters.

This probably should all go in the UMA thread actually.

 

Not as expensive as MCS. And the clothes are better.

 

Gorgeous! I would love to see a picture someday with that used on one of you custom characters...just to admire.

 

"Justb" Username. My real name is "Will": http://willbgameart.com/

It's somewhat expensive since it takes time and I do work for other studios and freelance. It should be upgraded to SSS capability at the least. I'm going to look into it. However; there are UMA dev who can code which I can't and it might be better for them to try to get a shader working in UMA and then sharing that so we can set it up. I can still try with a few of the shaders on the store.

TBH Unity should have this as default since it's a staple in most recent games. Like UE4.

Use the morphs as well if your using the face pack textures. That's what they are made for.

 

No I haven't, but the UVs should be the same, so the textures should probably work. There might be some smoothing on them.

 

He meant upgrading the bases etc. He's fine with purchasing more expensive packs.

 

Ahh, okay. Need to finish my coffee. lol

 

Sorry, justb, that's my bad. My comment was simply along the lines of - "so it is possible, but pretty expensive". Clearly this edgy case kind of stuff has little ROI for someone like you on the asset store (beyond private contracts), and I agree with the earlier poster that lower poly is the way to go to satisfy the broadest reach of users.

I wasn't trying to stir up a hornets nest. Just an observation for potential improvement in the future.