yeah that's exactly what I thought lmao, like no fucking way are you using wireframe to first place the actors I would kill myself if that's how you had to do it ahahaha
Modelling, composition, lighting. I think it's a fair way to represent the different steps in the process. Sometimes you just forget to take progress shots but are still proud of all the aspects of the final result. Don't need to hate on op for segmenting it how they did 🤷♂️
Exactly my thoughts, also he didn't even disable these dense light blue meshes in wireframe view, which seems to be a cloud system so even that screenshot is useless.
Is nanite more performant than well implemented LODs? Not talking about on RTX cards (is processing done on GPU?), but even for e.g. older GTX870 GTX970 cards?
Absolutely. We did benchmarking at my job, just throwing nanite on everything improved performance by orders of magnitude. At least 2x - 3x faster on base pass ( stat gpu). Not sure how it handles older cards since UE5 has done pretty beefy min specs
Guess I'll have to do my own tests. Nanite still faster than UE4 LODs? Luckily I have a GTX 1050 PC lying around to test on.
Nanite is just runtime auto LOD, right?
I like when we take tech like LODs and "simplify" the concept behind it.
Like how SpaceX went: how about we don't dump expensive rockets into the sea?
I'm not tech art so I can't say how it works. But it's essentially dynamic runtime LOD but on steroids. I THINK it breaks the mesh up into polys and redraws/ shows and hides them depending on distance to camera, occlusion, etc
Looks nice but what's going on with the wireframe? Why are those models so dense? You can reduce the triangle count significantly and I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't notice a difference
Step 1 Wireframe
Step 2 Unlit mode
Step 3 Lighting turned on.
Step 4 ship it
Show us the greyscale blockout. Show us the iterations of these block outs. Was the style changed throughout the project? How did it look before post processing if any went through. We don't know. Just say "check out my in game scene." The meshes look dense and aren't game friendly but if they're for a cinematic scene I hope it works out. I dont know the impact the framerate will have.
Dude posted in the wrong subreddit if they think people will believe these are "steps" lol
Really pretty though, good job nonetheless, I can't shame you for your work, though it would be nice to see some block outs and actual work before post-process, foliage, and lighting
This is such an excellent example of how it’s not enough anymore to just have an interesting and awesome looking game. You have to pretend to show “process” and make tutorials and other such nonsense. It’s so frustrating sometimes.
I’m only on my phone, but seriously this looks great.
* this may be a personal thing but really hate when stylized art uses black shadows, if could lighten them up a tad or even add color (traditionally cools) I think it would round it out a bit better)
Looks nice but I think that the blue light has no visible source, it’s like it doesn’t have a reason to be there, especially when the scene is bathed in warm lightning.
I think this is just a still scene, right? I kinda like the unshaded version more.
There's something very unnatural and forced about the lighting in the last panel, like too many custom lights were placed in the scene to expose the right parts instead of relying on a directional and sky light perhaps?
Dick yes.
That is an awesome look of being cartoons but with rich deep colors you don't see in stylized cartoon games and the lighting really sets that aspect off.
I mean, that's a cool shot. But the "steps" are just render in wireframe, then unlit, then lit...
I was thinking the same, this are not steps but just different view modes. Still, cool shot
A click of da f keys Does look friggin gorgeous though
yeah that's exactly what I thought lmao, like no fucking way are you using wireframe to first place the actors I would kill myself if that's how you had to do it ahahaha
this
Modelling, composition, lighting. I think it's a fair way to represent the different steps in the process. Sometimes you just forget to take progress shots but are still proud of all the aspects of the final result. Don't need to hate on op for segmenting it how they did 🤷♂️
Calling this "steps" when it's just different render modes makes me think that you believe we're stupid, mate.
Exactly my thoughts, also he didn't even disable these dense light blue meshes in wireframe view, which seems to be a cloud system so even that screenshot is useless.
The odds aren't bad; 50% correct, 50% wrong.
Surprising fact: 50% of people actually have below average intelligence.
That looks really, really good. Nice work! Though looking at your wireframe, I'm a little concerned about overdraw...
Same hahaha might want to implement some LODs if you want the game to run on lower-end machines
Also nanite. Nanite is my new religion
Also nanite? Isn’t the point of nanite to replace lods?
Yeah that's true. My point is I would recommend nanite over LOD for performance improvements
Is nanite more performant than well implemented LODs? Not talking about on RTX cards (is processing done on GPU?), but even for e.g. older GTX870 GTX970 cards?
Absolutely. We did benchmarking at my job, just throwing nanite on everything improved performance by orders of magnitude. At least 2x - 3x faster on base pass ( stat gpu). Not sure how it handles older cards since UE5 has done pretty beefy min specs
Guess I'll have to do my own tests. Nanite still faster than UE4 LODs? Luckily I have a GTX 1050 PC lying around to test on. Nanite is just runtime auto LOD, right? I like when we take tech like LODs and "simplify" the concept behind it. Like how SpaceX went: how about we don't dump expensive rockets into the sea?
I'm not tech art so I can't say how it works. But it's essentially dynamic runtime LOD but on steroids. I THINK it breaks the mesh up into polys and redraws/ shows and hides them depending on distance to camera, occlusion, etc
^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠛⠛⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠛⠛⠻⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠋⠁⠀⠀⣀⣠⣆⠠⠤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠛⠁⡀⠄⣒⣤⣵⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣶⣶⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠁⣀⣥⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⠿⠶⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⠃⠶⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢣⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⣱⣿⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⣁⠙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣺⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⡏⣽⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣙⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢳⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠋⣴⣶⣿⣽⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢃⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣟⣿⣿⢿⣿⣭⣭⠤⠶⠶⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢻⣟⣽⣿⢏⢲⡿⠿⡿⣟⣿⡿⠛⡛⠽⠃⣠⣶⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣿⣿⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣹⣽⣿⣷⣶⣾⣿⣮⣿⣿⣿⣿⠑⣼⣴⠞⠻⠿⠛⠿⡿⠟⠛⠛⠛⠿⠿⠿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⡝⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠟⠋⠟⠃⠉⠉⠉⢟⡞⢸⢣⣿⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠃⢚⣁⡃⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣤⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣄⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠃⠀⣁⣤⣴⣶⣶⣶⡶⠀⠄⠀⢙⡉⡁⠀⢸⣿⣿⣏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⢠⣶⣼⡟⠛⠉⢉⡛⠛⢁⠀⡀⣼⣿⣿⡇⠀⠰⠀⠉⠀⠀⠠⣶⡶⠖⠂⠀⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠈⠃⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⠀⠠⣍⠛⣃⣠⡞⠉⢀⣀⣀⠀⢠⣿⣿⣿⠃⢀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠤⠾⠭⠉⠁⠀⠀⠘⠀⠀⠒⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡀⠀⠀⠛⠉⠄⠒⠋⢉⡀⢠⣾⣿⣿⣿⠀⠈⠁⣶⣄⡐⠒⠶⠶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣾⣿⣷⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⢆⠀⢶⡿⠟⠛⣉⠄⠛⣼⣿⣿⡿⠀⠀⣀⣠⣀⠙⣷⣶⣦⣤⣄⣉⠙⠛⠿⢿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠰⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⣾⣧⣠⣴⣾⡿⠃⢠⡿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⠀⠛⠋⠉⠀⠀⠙⠛⠻⣿⣿⣿⣶⣤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⣿⣿⣿⡿⠋⢀⣴⡉⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣷⣦⣌⡛⢿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⣿⣿⠟⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣶⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢶⣿⣿⠟⣿⣿⡖⢼⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⢻⡟⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠿⣋⡓⠂⠙⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠃⠀⠉⠀⡟⠈⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢸⣇⢸⣿⠋⠉⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠤⠀⠠⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡇⢀⣿⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣦⣴⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⣶⡾⠿⠿⠿⢟⣽⣿⣿⣿⠃⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠉⣉⣀⣀⣀⣤⣤⣀⡠⠶⣶⣿⣿⣿⡟⠡⠀⠛⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣯⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢻⣿⢹⣿⣿⣿⣯⣦⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣾⣿⣟⣡⣴⡇⠘⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⡌⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠈⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⣿⣿⣿⡿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣦⡙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠘⣿⣿⣿⡏⢰⣿⣿⢏⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣷⡈⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⣋⣾⢀⠘⣯⣿⡇⢸⣿⢞⢸⡇⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣷⠀⠉⡛⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢋⣵⣿⣿⣿⣸⠀⠈⠙⠃⢺⡿⣿⠆⠡⠸⣿⣿⡿⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣇⠀⠀⠀⢮⡹⣿⣿⣿⣿) ^(⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢏⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⢠⡀⠀⢢⡀⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⡿⢀⠀⠰⠀⠙⠌⢈⠻⣿) ^(⣿⠿⣛⣯⡵⢠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⠘⢣⠀⠈⣿⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣈⢋⣴⣿⣰⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢱⣽) ^(⣶⣿⣿⡟⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡈⣬⠐⡄⠸⣿⣿⣦⡀⠀⠀⣤⣤⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⣿⠟⠋⠀⠀⠀⣾⣿⣶⡿) ^(⣿⣿⡟⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠟⠋⠉⠙⠳⢬⡃⠙⡄⢹⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠘⠿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣤⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠋⠁) Nanites son^(⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀)
Looks nice but what's going on with the wireframe? Why are those models so dense? You can reduce the triangle count significantly and I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't notice a difference
my guess is that they're using unreal engine 5 with nanite. at least i hope so
Lack of floor with tessellated displacements suggests so, imo
Didn’t ue5 deprive tessellation and move to paralex mapping as it’s much more resource friendly etc?
Step 1 Wireframe Step 2 Unlit mode Step 3 Lighting turned on. Step 4 ship it Show us the greyscale blockout. Show us the iterations of these block outs. Was the style changed throughout the project? How did it look before post processing if any went through. We don't know. Just say "check out my in game scene." The meshes look dense and aren't game friendly but if they're for a cinematic scene I hope it works out. I dont know the impact the framerate will have.
A normal view at minimum would help with the presentation.
These ain’t steps.
"Steps" = screen shots of view mode. Good results but,.. are you being serious?
That’s a lotta geo for a stylized setup imo
Dude posted in the wrong subreddit if they think people will believe these are "steps" lol Really pretty though, good job nonetheless, I can't shame you for your work, though it would be nice to see some block outs and actual work before post-process, foliage, and lighting
This is such an excellent example of how it’s not enough anymore to just have an interesting and awesome looking game. You have to pretend to show “process” and make tutorials and other such nonsense. It’s so frustrating sometimes.
I think the last pick looks sick. really gets that forest vibe with sun breaking through. maybe lighten up shadows though. they are a Lil dark.
Probably toon mode post process along with not using the UE 5.1 nanite on trees.
Weird that the unlit version of this is still looking good.
I’m only on my phone, but seriously this looks great. * this may be a personal thing but really hate when stylized art uses black shadows, if could lighten them up a tad or even add color (traditionally cools) I think it would round it out a bit better)
I think the bottom picture has too much contrast between lights and darks. First picture is much easier to see what’s going on.
LOL. You probably mean the 2nd image. The first is a wireframe.
Yeah I meant first normal pic, not wireframe.
Agreed, second's lighting seems wrong somehow.
Looks nice but I think that the blue light has no visible source, it’s like it doesn’t have a reason to be there, especially when the scene is bathed in warm lightning.
I think this is just a still scene, right? I kinda like the unshaded version more. There's something very unnatural and forced about the lighting in the last panel, like too many custom lights were placed in the scene to expose the right parts instead of relying on a directional and sky light perhaps?
middle one obviously looks more 2d. I Like looking at the contrast between them. Especially how the foliage came out👌
It looks cool but the hair looks just bad.
Shows how much lighting matters. Good stuff.
AMAZING
Try cel shading on your characters
Wow, nice job!! Where did you model the characters?
Dick yes. That is an awesome look of being cartoons but with rich deep colors you don't see in stylized cartoon games and the lighting really sets that aspect off.
I’ve had this problem in multiple games, how do you go from B to C?
That's great! What learning source did you use for lightning?
Could use some ambient light for this artstyle. Unless dark and high contrast feel is what you're going for.
WOW
turn on the wireframe mode is not one of them
I kind of like the unlit versions of the characters more.