Many other models are found searching for "unity" / "unreal" ( https://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=unityhttps://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=unreal ) and they seem to use general formats (e.g. Blender sources and exported FBX; in theory they could be exported to other engines too). But they do not use "unity" / "unreal" tags, they are just found by searching "unity" / "unreal" terms. So this is consistent with your decision, I appreciate that.
I was testing possible solutions (something that would be satisfactory to OGA, and also allow *anyone* to submit models that can be easily found as "this works with Castle Game Engine"):
1. I tested OGA searching for "castle game engine", but the results are unsure:
- Searching for "castle game engine" using the form on the main page, https://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=castle+game+engine , yields 4 models with "castle game engine" in the description. It is almost what I was looking for, but it doesn't find the 5th model with "castle game engine" in the description. Can you shed a light why it's omitted from the search results?
- So searching for "castle game engine" from the main page returns 4 models, and then if you press again "search" on the resulting page you get > 500 models :)
- Looks like there are 2 search algorithms, and I'm not sure is this something to rely on in the future. Esp. since clicking "search" from simple seach results (4) changes the results to "advanced" (> 500).
Can you comment which search results for "castle game engine" are to be relied-on in the future?
2. For clarity: if the asset includes a version exported to the castle-anim-frames format (in addition to Blender source), then tag castle-anim-frames is OK? Or even something like "blender, castle-anim-frames"?
If tags like x3d, castle-anim-frames, spine are OK -- then it is some solution.
Thank you for the answer! Let me explain my reasons in more detail:
The idea is that others (not only me) can upload a work tagged "castle game engine". So changing my profile name to "Castle Game Engine", or using my collection for this, is not a viable solution.
Using format names for this, like "x3d", is not comfortable. Castle Game Engine supports X3D, castle-anim-frames, Spine JSON and a number of other formats (see the list of formats supported by view3dscene, https://castle-engine.io/view3dscene.php#section_features ). One of these formats (castle-anim-frames) is specific to Castle Game Engine. All others are generally useful... but there are a number of Castle Game Engine extensions to X3D (for example to add bump mapping and shadows), our most adviced format. So, tagging a model "x3d" is both less specific than we need (it doesn't clarify "Does it use Castle Game Engine Blender->X3D exporter? Does it use Castle Game Engine X3D extensions?") and more specific than we need (other model formats are supported by CGE too, not only x3d).
Thus the idea of "castle game engine" tag, with a precise meaning "This model was tested with Castle Game Engine (in particular, with view3dscene, our model viewer). Thus it will work cool in CGE applications right away.".
The point I'm making is that "castle game engine" tag *could* be useful for people to search for. I planned indeed to place a link from main CGE website to https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?field_art_tags_tid=castle%20... , i.e. a persistent link to all models tagged with "castle game engine".
Do you think this changes the position on "castle game engine" tag?:)
Can I ask why the tag "castle game engine" was just deleted?
Explanation: I'm the author of open-source Castle Game Engine ( https://castle-engine.io/ ). We wanted to have an ability to mark in opengameart models as "compatible with Castle Game Engine" (exported to one of our supported formats, like X3D (see https://castle-engine.io/creating_data_export.php ). And we thought about using "castle game engine" tag for it. The point is that everyone should be able to upload and mark models with this tag.
This way users of opengameart would be able to find models compatible with Castle Game Engine, and we could even link to them by a stable link https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?field_art_tags_tid=castle%20... (we already had 5 models there). So, the tag would be useful for both people who submit models and download models.
Can you restore the tag existence, or just not remove it again?
Or can you propose other approach for us to do this? We thought using a tag like "castle game engine" would be cool with everyone:)
The sidebar on OpenGameArt tells that license is public domain (CC0).
But inside the zip archive, there's a file LICENSE.TXT, that says that a special license granted by "Software Atelier Kamber" applies to this work. It seems permissive (says "Assets are free for use in commercial and personal projects"), but it's not public domain. For example the LICENSE.TXT says "Do NOT include assets for direct download from any website, game or any other project." -- this is in contrast to public domain.
The license is also somewhat unclear to me -- does the above sentence allow placing these images inside a public GitHub repository, along with the rest of game data? The assets would be then directly downloadable.
I have used your model for my Ph.D. Thesis "Compositing shaders in X3D" --- it is publicly available on http://castle-engine.sourceforge.net/compositing_shaders.php . 6 screenshots from your model (demonstrating shadow maps and bump mapping in my engine) are inside Chapter 1 "Overview", of course with link back to this OGA page. These are one of the best screenshots from my paper :) The version of your model in Blender and X3D is downloadable as part of demo models of my game engine (inside compositing_shaders/shinto_shrine/ subdirectory).
I preserved the geometry and texture mapping (actually, Blender Wavefront OBJ importer did :) ). It's split into two Blender objects (main part and leaves), so you can simply hide/remove leaves object if you want a leafless version.
Note: if you want to render from Blender, you'll probably want to set Alpha=0 on leaves material to make them honor texture transparent regions for leaves. Currently it is set to =1, to make VRML exporter behave Ok.
@withthelove @MedicineStorm If this solution (using "[cge]" in title) is OK with OGA administrators, then cool. Thank you.
Is this OK? Using tag "castle-game-engine" is not OK, but placing an (effective) tag in the title, using "[cge]", is OK?
OK, I understand this decision. I do understand and respect that it's not something directed at Castle Game Engine, it's a general rule.
I see some models using "unity" tags, https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?field_art_tags_tid=unity . But (at least some of them, though not all) indeed provide models in *.unitypackage format.
Many other models are found searching for "unity" / "unreal" ( https://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=unity https://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=unreal ) and they seem to use general formats (e.g. Blender sources and exported FBX; in theory they could be exported to other engines too). But they do not use "unity" / "unreal" tags, they are just found by searching "unity" / "unreal" terms. So this is consistent with your decision, I appreciate that.
I was testing possible solutions (something that would be satisfactory to OGA, and also allow *anyone* to submit models that can be easily found as "this works with Castle Game Engine"):
1. I tested OGA searching for "castle game engine", but the results are unsure:
- Searching for "castle game engine" using the form on the main page, https://opengameart.org/art-search?keys=castle+game+engine , yields 4 models with "castle game engine" in the description. It is almost what I was looking for, but it doesn't find the 5th model with "castle game engine" in the description. Can you shed a light why it's omitted from the search results?
- It is a little weird that searching for "castle game engine" using the "advanced search" behaves differently, it finds > 500 assets that (I think) use of the words castle, game or engine in their title or description: https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?keys=castle+game+engine&titl...
- So searching for "castle game engine" from the main page returns 4 models, and then if you press again "search" on the resulting page you get > 500 models :)
- Looks like there are 2 search algorithms, and I'm not sure is this something to rely on in the future. Esp. since clicking "search" from simple seach results (4) changes the results to "advanced" (> 500).
Can you comment which search results for "castle game engine" are to be relied-on in the future?
2. For clarity: if the asset includes a version exported to the castle-anim-frames format (in addition to Blender source), then tag castle-anim-frames is OK? Or even something like "blender, castle-anim-frames"?
If tags like x3d, castle-anim-frames, spine are OK -- then it is some solution.
Although I already see that one model uses "spine" tag while in fact it only contains "fbx" ( https://opengameart.org/content/2d-raptor-running-fbx-animation ), but that's just a problem with this particular model.
Thank you for the answers!
Thank you for the answer! Let me explain my reasons in more detail:
The idea is that others (not only me) can upload a work tagged "castle game engine". So changing my profile name to "Castle Game Engine", or using my collection for this, is not a viable solution.
Two such models were already uploaded ( https://opengameart.org/content/low-poly-paintings , https://opengameart.org/content/low-poly-books ) not by me, in addition to 3 models by me. Other people in CGE community responded today with enthusiasm and promise to upload more :)
Using format names for this, like "x3d", is not comfortable. Castle Game Engine supports X3D, castle-anim-frames, Spine JSON and a number of other formats (see the list of formats supported by view3dscene, https://castle-engine.io/view3dscene.php#section_features ). One of these formats (castle-anim-frames) is specific to Castle Game Engine. All others are generally useful... but there are a number of Castle Game Engine extensions to X3D (for example to add bump mapping and shadows), our most adviced format. So, tagging a model "x3d" is both less specific than we need (it doesn't clarify "Does it use Castle Game Engine Blender->X3D exporter? Does it use Castle Game Engine X3D extensions?") and more specific than we need (other model formats are supported by CGE too, not only x3d).
Thus the idea of "castle game engine" tag, with a precise meaning "This model was tested with Castle Game Engine (in particular, with view3dscene, our model viewer). Thus it will work cool in CGE applications right away.".
The point I'm making is that "castle game engine" tag *could* be useful for people to search for. I planned indeed to place a link from main CGE website to https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?field_art_tags_tid=castle%20... , i.e. a persistent link to all models tagged with "castle game engine".
Do you think this changes the position on "castle game engine" tag?:)
Hi,
Can I ask why the tag "castle game engine" was just deleted?
Explanation: I'm the author of open-source Castle Game Engine ( https://castle-engine.io/ ). We wanted to have an ability to mark in opengameart models as "compatible with Castle Game Engine" (exported to one of our supported formats, like X3D (see https://castle-engine.io/creating_data_export.php ). And we thought about using "castle game engine" tag for it. The point is that everyone should be able to upload and mark models with this tag.
This way users of opengameart would be able to find models compatible with Castle Game Engine, and we could even link to them by a stable link https://opengameart.org/art-search-advanced?field_art_tags_tid=castle%20... (we already had 5 models there). So, the tag would be useful for both people who submit models and download models.
Can you restore the tag existence, or just not remove it again?
Or can you propose other approach for us to do this? We thought using a tag like "castle game engine" would be cool with everyone:)
Thank you!
Can you clarify the license of these images?
The sidebar on OpenGameArt tells that license is public domain (CC0).
But inside the zip archive, there's a file LICENSE.TXT, that says that a special license granted by "Software Atelier Kamber" applies to this work. It seems permissive (says "Assets are free for use in commercial and personal projects"), but it's not public domain. For example the LICENSE.TXT says "Do NOT include assets for direct download from any website, game or any other project." -- this is in contrast to public domain.
The license is also somewhat unclear to me -- does the above sentence allow placing these images inside a public GitHub repository, along with the rest of game data? The assets would be then directly downloadable.
Thank you in advance for claryfing this:)
Thanks for sharing this cool music! We use your music in our game "Dragon Squash", https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.sourceforge.castleengi... . You're credited of course on the game's website. Thank you again!
These look really great :)
If anyone is interested, I'm attaching a tileable version of the wizardtower image. Feel free to use on the same terms as original images, CC0. I use it for my demo of Castle Game Engine ( http://castle-engine.sourceforge.net/ ) to show a simple 2D game using Spine on an infnite 2D background. The xcf (GIMP) version is on http://svn.code.sf.net/p/castle-engine/code/trunk/castle_game_engine/exa... .
Thousand thanks for this model :)
I have used your model for my Ph.D. Thesis "Compositing shaders in X3D" --- it is publicly available on http://castle-engine.sourceforge.net/compositing_shaders.php . 6 screenshots from your model (demonstrating shadow maps and bump mapping in my engine) are inside Chapter 1 "Overview", of course with link back to this OGA page. These are one of the best screenshots from my paper :) The version of your model in Blender and X3D is downloadable as part of demo models of my game engine (inside compositing_shaders/shinto_shrine/ subdirectory).
Once again, thank you for making this :)
For my own purposes, I needed the tree model to be in Blender (and exportable easily to VRML 97). So I made it, and here it is:
Blender version: https://vrmlengine.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/vrmlengine/trunk/demo_mod...
VRML 97 version: https://vrmlengine.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/vrmlengine/trunk/demo_mod...
I preserved the geometry and texture mapping (actually, Blender Wavefront OBJ importer did :) ). It's split into two Blender objects (main part and leaves), so you can simply hide/remove leaves object if you want a leafless version.
Note: if you want to render from Blender, you'll probably want to set Alpha=0 on leaves material to make them honor texture transparent regions for leaves. Currently it is set to =1, to make VRML exporter behave Ok.
oaktree.wrl is the above Blender model exported to VRML 97 by my script (very slightly modified version of Blender's "VRML 97 Export" script) from http://vrmlengine.sourceforge.net/blender_stuff.php
Feel free to use these versions, licensed of course on the same terms as original model (GNU GPL 2.0, GNU GPL 3.0, CC-BY-SA 3.0).
The material files referenced by models/*.obj files are missing.
For my own purpose, I made them myself by hand :), here they are so others can use:
oak5.mtl:
________________________________
[code]
newmtl oakstamm2
Ns 96
Ka 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Kd 0.800000 0.800000 0.800000
Ks 0.500000 0.500000 0.500000
map_Kd oakbark.jpg
#or map_Kd oakbark_burnt.jpg
[/code]
________________________________
oak1_Scene.mtl:
________________________________
newmtl oakstamm
Ns 96
Ka 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Kd 0.800000 0.800000 0.800000
Ks 0.500000 0.500000 0.500000
map_Kd oakbark.jpg
#or map_Kd oakbark_burnt.jpg
newmtl oakblaetter
Ns 96
Ka 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Kd 0.800000 0.800000 0.800000
Ks 0.500000 0.500000 0.500000
map_Kd oakleaf_fall.tga
#or map_Kd oakleaf_light.tga
#or map_Kd oakleaf_dark.tga
________________________________
Given Ns, Ka, Kd, Ks colors are pretty dumb default material. Given map_Kd use appropriate textures on appropriate parts.