|
Post by Falgor on Nov 23, 2018 2:01:29 GMT
Just so I give my opinion properly, I'm all for daiset 's idea of Djinn being represented by animals carrying stones in Project Flint. I think an otter would make for a perfect Mercury one! Especially since they're known to carry stones as tools (ofc it won't necessarily be the case for other animals and it's not really a problem, but it's a nice little bonus). I feel like since they're "just" carrying stones though, we'd need a good reason to not just take it from them and justify it by saying the power of the stones need some kind of vessel to express themselves and small animals are perfect for that. It also avoids taking actual monsters we could need as enemies.
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Nov 23, 2018 16:06:57 GMT
I like a variation - using classic mythological creatures for each one (using classic associations whenever possible), but incorporating that orb/stone of energy representing their element or aspect.
|
|
|
Post by firedjinn on Nov 23, 2018 17:19:11 GMT
I like eternaldream's idea of the djinn being embodiments of the stones, and I think that would really cool to merge what WitchRolina said above about using classical mythological creatures and incorporating the stones into their appearances. Maybe I'll draw something for it later. :)
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Nov 28, 2018 0:08:49 GMT
Okay, so getting this discussion back up and started...
I want to point something out. The idea of djinn is that they are elemental spirits. For the djinn in particular, they are designed to basically be non-descript creatures. We don't have to do that, nor should we do that. After all, elemental spirits have a long history in fantasy - Games like the Mana Series use spirits in their magic system, they appear regularly in fantasy novels, and they date back to ancient mythologies even. We stay closest to the idea of djinn if we keep these as actual elemental spirits - adopting a visual look similar to the Mana series - as opposed to doing what's popular on discord right now.
What's popular on discord right now is the idea of elemental animals. Wind birds, earth hedgehogs, water otters.
Water. Otters. Literally Oshawatt from pokemon.
In fact, the ONLY option I've seen that doesn't fit? The salamander itself. An amphibian under Mars. You can see consistent patterns with what types of pokemon/animals are being proposed, with that one exception standing there like Jenna's theme being nice and likable and having no place with the rest of the music in TLA.
I like the idea of keeping elemental spirits as being elemental spirits - and I am going to fight against this idea of using what amounts to straight up pokemon analogues as our elemental spirit analogues with everything I have. Some things work for design, but some things sabotage it - and I firmly believe that this is one of those directions that will be sabotaging things.
|
|
|
Post by Taz on Nov 28, 2018 3:19:50 GMT
Copy-pasting something I put in the Discord:
If the priority here is "unique and original," the best we've got thus far is animals with symbiotic glowing rocks. Otherwise, if we want to be "derivative, but only of Golden Sun," that means our Djinn would look like colored amorphous blobs vaguely in the shape of something attributed to that element.
|
|
|
Post by zeldafan30 on Nov 28, 2018 8:53:41 GMT
it's like... almost 4:00 AM and I should be asleep, but I wanted to weigh in a bit. I've seen a lot of recent talk about how this idea for Djinn could seem a little bit too, for lack of a better term, "pokemon-ish." Now, I completely understand that concern as the ideas brought up so far CAN be interpreted as just some derivative creature from pokemon. So, yeah, I think that our Djinn looking too much like a pokemon design is 100% possible... IF we aren't careful with how these creatures are designed. Perhaps if we make them too much like an animal, it could be a problem. Though thinking about it now, I realized that we could draw an inspiration from the spirits of light from Twilight Princess. I'll use Faron as an example
Now, this could still be seen as too pokemon-ish just for the animalistic traits the design has or could just be seen as something we swiped from a zelda game, but perhaps we could something along the lines of this? Personally, though I can see why one would see it as a pokemon, it's a bit of a long shot for me. But, I'm just one person. 'Course, if we DID use this kind of inspiration that'd mean that the "animal" part of the Djinn sealed into the stone it's in (assuming we are having these Djinn come from stones loaded with psynergy power) and have that form take on more of an... aetherial(is that the right word?) appearance and perhaps make the color scheme a bit more monochromatic. Maybe even bring in a little design based on what element they are aligned too? Matter fact... There isn't anything saying that these Djinn don't come stones. The actual orb shaped part could literally be the spirit but it only takes on its animal form when it is presenting itself, much like the light spirits in Twilight Princess. And of course, not ALL of them have to be animals, some can be based on other creatures that have some tie-in with a certain element. Well regardless, my point is that just because there's a possibility the design for our Djinn could be pokemon-ish doesn't mean the idea of making them more animal-like than other spirits from fantasy elements should be scrapped. This idea houses a substantial amount of potential, but we have to tread carefully. The line of "this looks like a pokemon" can be crossed very easily using this kind of design. Also, just a side note, we gotta keep in mind that IF we end up doing this, it should make sense what animals we would use based on what kind of culture (or cultures) this world is based on. Most cultures have animals that have opposing elemental affinity, so it's important that we understand what kind of culture we would be dealing with before making a final design. But, I'm only one person. This is just what I think.
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Nov 28, 2018 12:30:53 GMT
Taz : WE ARE NOT UNIQUE AND ORIGINAL. That is literally not the goal of this project. We are specifically derivative - making changes enough to not get sued. Any other "changes" we've made are merely us trying to create structural guidelines, a framework for us to imitate Golden Sun the best we can. And Golden Sun uses Elemental Spirits - a concept that is literally hundreds of years old. And have you guys seen the list of proposed elemental animals yet? There's one of them on there that very clearly doesn't fit with the others in its group. Guess which one it is? That's right, the salamander. Everything else is based on nature, while the Salamander is ONLY there because people saw the ACTUAL ELEMENTAL SPIRIT in the proposal and went "hurr durr is an animal" and threw actual mythology out. God damn, I don't think I have ever opposed an idea like this before. Nothing, not even the set of aspects we're using - the worst one, in my opinion - has gotten me this upset. The worst part is, I'm willing to bet yet again that I'm just going to be bulled over and out-voted here. I think this is really, really bad design. It doesn't matter how much you "like" it, I think it's a super bad call. It takes the original idea, a good one, and corrupts it into something that just... it's too far from the original goals of this project.
|
|
|
Post by Anggel on Nov 28, 2018 19:56:39 GMT
Just to point it up, I'm gonna put my thoughts here on what a elemental spirit should be. First, I agree with Rolina that we should focus on an approach that shouldn't be just an animal + element, just more original thought. Also, although I just even proposed an electric eel in discord when a list of proposals popped up, I just thought the trend was going to go in animal direction too so that's why I did that pitch. But later on, when Rolina spoke of about this, I couldn't stop thinking on Pokemon or Rivals of Aether when I saw the list and Rolina pointed up that. Thinking on just animals + elements is not the best approach now because im a little afraid of being mistaken by Pokemons/Rivals of Aether. Trying to deconstruct the concept of what was a djinn I thought of 3 things: For reference: - Djinns are mostly abstract creatures that represent their element with certain features:
Venus | Spikes, and spiky tail representing earth. This is just a thought of me, but, actually, it's face represents a mammal. | Mercury | The tail is a crab pincer representing that is conveniently too a fish tail. Part of the mouth represent a crustacean. | Mars | The tail has the shape of flame, has horns trying to represent a dragon. | Jupiter | Has wings to represent birds and it's head has the shape of a feather. |
To support this analogy:
- Djinns share a thing between them: same kind of eyes and black mouth line.
- Djinns in DD are different but follows the same approach. Some are big, some are holding a thing... lots of variations representing its power or a concept.
Looking now in other videogames, the analogy of a elemental spirit is taken differently, but in some cases follows the same approach as the Golden Sun saga. These are some game I've played that have elementals but with different approaches:
Kopins from Luminous Arc saga
These are elementals found in Luminous Arc saga. Elements in Luminous Arc 1 are Fire, Water, Wind, Earth, Light, Darkness and Lightning/Thunder. In Luminous Arc 2 all elements persist, but there's no Lightning/Thunder. I've never played Luminous Arc 3. In my gameplays of each, I recall I only saw Kopins of 4 base elements, no Dark and Light Kopins. But looking in the wiki, i found those exists too.
Kopins are by far the most simple design I'll post here. They are abstract chibi blobs, seems alike on each other and has a representative trait that speak of their element alignment (their hat). Follows the 2 first approaches I described on the djinns. The third one, though I saw one art of a Earth Kopin with alternate hat of Luminous Arc 2, it doesn't show in the game. They seem the same all the time.
Guardian Spirits from Avalon Code
Avalon Code deals with elementals in the shape of bookmarks. Those bookmarks resemble humanoids creatures with traits of each element. From left to right: Ur (Lightning), Rempo (Fire), Mieli (Forest), Neaki (Ice). Those four have in common along with the humanoid trait, that they have also cuff and chains: Ur in the head, Rempo in the arms, Mieli in the foot, Neaki in the neck. Since they are unique in the game, they doesn't have alternate forms.
This is a design that explores the more the concept of the nymphs/fairies.
Mana Spirits from Mana Series
These are the elementals of the Mana Series. From left to right: Salamander (fire), Undine (water), Gnome (earth), Jinn (wind), Dryad (wood), Luna (moon), Wisp (light), Shade (darkness) taken from Children of Mana. The elemental system in Mana Series follows the approach of: Fire vs Water, Earth vs Wind, Wood vs Luna, Light vs Dark.
Some insight of these elementals is that:
- They are different from each other (though Salamander and Undine which are opposite are serpent-like, and Gnome and Jinn have the same body pattern) but those are always based on mythical creature, that's the main theme.
- Every element represent their element with both abstract and physical metaphors of fantasy creatures.
Spirit | Abstract metaphor | Physical metaphor | Salamander | Fire, flames. | Lizard, dragon, salamander. | Undine | Water. | Mermaid, trident. | Gnome | Stone | Gnome. | Jinn | Wind, smoke | Genie. | Dryad | Wood | Tree, fruits, dryad. | Luna | Moon | Fairy. | Wisp | Light | Will-o-wisp. | Shade | Darkness | Devil, bat, evil eye. |
- In the series they are changing in design a little throughout the saga, due to redesigning for newer games, but concept is the same.
With these three examples in mind, and Golden Sun djinns, my idea to aboard our version of Djinn is the following: - Decide the main theme for the elementals (abstract creature, animals, fantasy creatures, original creature, humanoid, nymph/fairy, some fancy combo...)
- Decide if we should aim of making 16 elementals or 4 elemental for the pure element alignment, and other 4 for the pure fundament.
- Decide how we symbolize the element/aspect in their designs
- Decide if given a theme, they share a thing in their design (eyes, some crystal, some symbol...)
- Decide if we should aim like DD of making variations and mutations of those main elementals by its name or unique.
In my case my pitch following this schema: - Abstract creature, fantasy creature, nymph/fairy or some combo of those (we avoid being mistaken with Pokemon/Rivals of Aether).
- 4 pure elementals, 4 pure fundaments (easiness for the artist team, though it's more interesting seeing all the 16 to be honest).
- By the base form on the pure spirits, by the base concept of the fundament on the fundaments spirits.
- They share a glyph/symbol/sigil on different part of their bodies that symbolize their element/fundament or a crystal shard embedded in their bodies.
- No mutations for easiness in the artist team, only if the story by any chance needs it.
That's all, I hope all of this could help.
|
|
|
Post by zeldafan30 on Nov 28, 2018 21:55:37 GMT
WitchRolina Taz if I may. Yes, Project Flint's main source of inspiration is from Golden Sun. We are taking game design and mechanics, ost, and some aspects of visual design in order to have the Golden Sun "feel." I'm sure you are already aware. So yes, we are derivative... however we still have our own sense of uniqueness and originality. Project Flint is a combination made of two halves: the first being a sort of imitation of golden sun, and the other half is inspiration, where we put in our own ideas or add on to what's already there. But when it comes to inspiration, there are some things where we have to stray a little further from our source material than we would like too. Right now, it looks like Djinn is one of these things. Let me start with this: While I admit I am no expert on creature design, mythology, or anything else relating to this matter, I understand your concern. Golden Sun used elemental spirits instead of literal animals for Djinn, and since this idea is pitching that Djinn are (or at least look like) animals, it's going against the design philosophy of Golden Sun. I'll also admit... I agree with you, it is. Straight up, this is something Golden Sun DID NOT do... Yet I still support it, and here is why: Just because it's different right now doesn't mean we can't make this function. We have this idea out in the open now, so we have to think about how can we use it, and where we can take it. Is it possible where we can have the spirit design in other fantasies and mythologies and somehow combine it with our more animal-like concept? Can we see if combining an elemental spirit AND and elemental animal into one complete package is a possibility? (kinda explained that in my post I put at 4:00 AM) I don't see why it's impossible. Besides, don't some cultures and mythologies see animals as elemental spirits? Though we'd need to hit up the worldbuilding first so we can actually decide what kind of culture(s) we would have, but who's to say we can't have something like that? Nobody said we needed to have one or the other. Is it too outlandish to not push if we can have the best of both worlds? That way, we can still say we are derivative because GS was our inspiration, but still have our own unique twist, which is what Project Flint is all about. At the end of the day though, this is just an idea. One that hasn't even set in stone yet. We don't HAVE to do this if we think it won't fit, or if it becomes way too controversial to the point where I just have to come in and say yes or no (not saying that will happen, but I hope to God it doesn't). Yeah, I liked this idea because the concept art was adorable, I admit, but now I'm thinking about this again and I see an interesting direction we can take it. That direction is a gamble, but I think it's one we can win. If we don't, then we don't. Oh well. And lastly, for WitchRolina, regardless of everything I said, I know at the end of the day that this is something you don't like. I'm 100% sure that won't change, and it shouldn't change either. You aren't wrong for thinking the way you are, nor am I trying or want to accuse you of being wrong. You are open to express how you feel about this or anything at all; "Speak your mind on everything and anything." This is just my response on how I feel we can take this, as it is a slight contrast to your feelings about it. So, if anything I just said up there seems like it is any ridicule towards you or your line of thinking, know that it is the exact opposite, and I thank you for speaking your piece on not only this but for everything else as well. I think for this, we can push the boundaries on what we can make different a little further, and it'll be a benefit overall, but if you disagree, I won't make any further argument. That's just the way it is.
|
|
|
Post by Falgor on Nov 29, 2018 7:56:50 GMT
Alright, taking Anggel 's really well made schema, and everyone's inputs on the matter, here's a V2 of my initial vision of our Djinn: Main theme: Animals. I'd go with a more minimalistic approach to zeldafan30 's idea to make them ethereal like Zelda Twilight Princess' Spirits of Light. I think it would greatly reduce the comparisons to Pokémon already (Note: I doubt we can avoid comparisons to absolutely everything so I didn't bother too much with that). ;) Number of elemental designs: [ I feel like we don't have many choices there: Basically it's 4 (one design for each pure element, not taking fundaments into account), or we go full 36 because we'll need 36 Djinn for class purposes. Anything in between would probably feel weird (The only other possibility is repeating three designs for each element 3 times...?). With my idea, I logically need to go with 36, because if they're animals it would be weird to pick the same animal for each individual Djinn of a said element.
I'll admit it, THIS is what I consider the weak point of my idea, because coming up with 9 animals thematically fitting Mars is hard (of course it's Mars again. Still working on it, I lack 3 more after [Lizard, Scorpion, Fox, Firefox, Fennec, Snake]). The other elements are not a problem at all. Note that it would give the Artists something to actually work on while we're talking of other topics.]
Edit: According to WitchRolina, the number of designs is not a hard concern and as such, I feel like 16 Djinn would work better. Since I have at least 4 of each it's simply a matter of picking the ones people prefer I guess. Symbolizing the element they belong to: The color of their stone (Yellow/Red/Light Purple/Blue) is shared with them. Sharing something in their designs: Like shown in daiset 's original concept art, they carry a stone and their powers come from it (emphasized by a string of energy between the stone and the animal). They could also easily share the same kind of eyes. However I feel like a symbol would be a bit too much for a minimalistic approach. Now you can all say that my idea is bad/not appropriate if you feel so, I won't get angry for that. =P
|
|
|
Post by Taz on Nov 29, 2018 8:24:49 GMT
I very much appreciate Anggel's post above (also, coincidentally I've been listening to Mamizou's theme a lot today), as it gives us a clear roadmap for how Golden Sun created its Djinn, and therefore how we might want to go about creating our own. If I may momentarily steal their format, here is what I believe to be the ideal schema to follow:
[*] Some abstract/original creature [*] 4 Elementals [*] IMO the Djinn themselves should be the symbols of our elements [*] If we don't want to do the glowing-rock approach, which is by far the easiest and most convenient (it piggybacks off the original material, after all), then another possibility is that we base them off of Minor Arcana Tarot--Mercurian Djinn would be associated with Cups, Venusian Djinn Coins, Martian Djinn Batons, and finally Jovian Djinn with Swords. This would actually give us an extremely convenient reason for why there's 9 specifically of each element, as they would each represent ranks 2-10, but that would come at the cost of not being perfectly future-proof as the Djinn that can keep to this theme become quite finite, which may bother some among us. I'll reiterate: the glowing-rock approach is by far the easiest and most convenient. [*] Permutations should remain extremely simple and able to be accomplished through iteration, if any are even to exist at all.
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Nov 29, 2018 23:44:23 GMT
Falgor : I will make a statement on this - as a designer, I'm pretty sure we don't need 36 unique designs, nor do we have to use all 16 aspects for djinn if we go that route. I don't remember who it was, but they had a really good suggestion - make it so that there's a story/worldbuilding reason that our djinn can only make an initial bond to those of like-aspect, and you allow us to have 16 djinn designs (one for each aspect), but only 4 that get used. The rest are around, you can see them, interact with them, but you can't form bonds or pacts or whatever we'll call it with them. They'll exist as flavor to the world. If facing an elemental in combat doesn't guarantee they join, we could even incorporate all 16 as enemies to face. That can easily be done by removing the joinable djinn from the random titles entirely. You can face them on the world map still, but you'll see them flying around or something like Flint and Echo were. So yeah, don't worry about the numbers too much. We can make things happen, we just have to make the right spin for it. Beit 4 (1 of each element), 8 (4 elemental, 4 fundamental), 16 (1 for each aspect), or 36 (one for each individual djinn), we can figure out the implementation pretty easily. ![:;):](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by Falgor on Nov 30, 2018 4:48:21 GMT
Falgor : I will make a statement on this - as a designer, I'm pretty sure we don't need 36 unique designs, nor do we have to use all 16 aspects for djinn if we go that route. I don't remember who it was, but they had a really good suggestion - make it so that there's a story/worldbuilding reason that our djinn can only make an initial bond to those of like-aspect, and you allow us to have 16 djinn designs (one for each aspect), but only 4 that get used. The rest are around, you can see them, interact with them, but you can't form bonds or pacts or whatever we'll call it with them. They'll exist as flavor to the world. If facing an elemental in combat doesn't guarantee they join, we could even incorporate all 16 as enemies to face. That can easily be done by removing the joinable djinn from the random titles entirely. You can face them on the world map still, but you'll see them flying around or something like Flint and Echo were. So yeah, don't worry about the numbers too much. We can make things happen, we just have to make the right spin for it. Beit 4 (1 of each element), 8 (4 elemental, 4 fundamental), 16 (1 for each aspect), or 36 (one for each individual djinn), we can figure out the implementation pretty easily. ![:;):](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) Alright, I have no reason not to trust you, and it would indeed make things a lot more simple so that's good news. 16 is, I feel, a much more sane number to work with. =) And the idea of "teasing" possible others only as flavor in Flint is neat as well. I'm gonna update my previous post a bit then.
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Nov 30, 2018 12:43:48 GMT
Yeah, a few different numbers have been thrown around. We can make any and all of them work, so really it's more an issue of managing the workload of the artists and programmers. We want to reuse assets when we can, so regardless of how many djinn there are in the world, odds are we're only using 4 designs for the characters. That's kind of the beauty of that suggestion - it lets us have an expanded lore and worldbuilding, without worrying too much about the impact on the game.
Personally, I'd not go more than 16. One for each aspect, no matter if we go with elemental spirits or elemental animals, is the most I'd say is a good idea. It's enough to keep managable in any kind of bestiary we decide to do and provide a nice variety for the world. Any less can work so long as they follow some manner of internalize logic. More is where things start getting tricky, and when you have to start working hard to justify things.
|
|
|
Post by WitchRolina on Dec 11, 2018 3:05:55 GMT
Okay, figure it's best to get conversation started back up on this since we have our official 16 aspects. Even if we wind up re-ordering them later on, we won't be changing what they are - so it's safe to start seriously considering stuff here IMO. Anggel has some good points, so let's start there - by answering the questions they postulated. Once we know what direction to go, we can start the actual design process. Personally, I believe we should use fantasy/mythological creatures classically associated with the element/aspect or a close facsimile thereof. Ideally, these creatures should be classically neutral, neither typecast as ally or enemy if it can be helped. I personally like the idea of having one per aspect - so four creatures that function as elementals per element. However, this is mostly a worldbuilding idea - the way it'd work in the games is that only those who share an innate aspect with the adept they first bond with will be in. The others will have examples in the world, and maybe you might challenge a few or something, but they won't be able to join the party. They'd exist for flavor, and possible sequels. It should be somewhat implicit - if we're using classical mythology, then something like a Dryad would be little plant person, a sylph would be a wind fairy, and imp would reflect the darkness implied in miasma, etc. Like many others, I like the elemental orb that the salamander has in the pitch. I don't think it should be a stone - rather, I think it'd be cool if it's the raw essense of an aspect concentrated to the point of crystallization. It gives us an out, too! If summoning uses those orbs to fuel the summon, then recovery mode would be the elementals reforming the orbs. Maybe that's why they're elementals in the first place - these sixteen creatures would be the only types of creatures in the world who could form them. I don't think we should have obvious physical variations the way DD did it. Instead, we should do something GS didn't do here - have designs that can be widely expressive and emotive. Something that we can express personality with without doing a full physical redesign. How they hold their orb, how they interact with the environment, and how they interact with others could all be ways to show how they're different on an individual level. For instance, using the salamander example: - A playful salamander clings to its orb and uses it like a bouncy-ball, hopping from place to place and having the party chase it down and "tag" it.
- A competitive salamander tucks the orb under its arm and goes all football/rugby player with it, using it like a throwing weapon as it uses "sport" like attacks to make the party prove their worth.
- A particularly lazy salamander lays down backwards across its orb, relaxing and enjoying the sun. It can't be bothered to join the party... until they manage to bother it enough - blocking sunlight, generally getting in its way, constantly talking to it, etc. Laziness is an artform, after all - and sometimes it's less effort to join them than to just ignore them.
All three would have the same exact design, but would be expressive in their own ways, without the need for completely different designs. Since the start of this pitch, this is what I've thought was the best way to go for our djinn.
|
|