Aseprite 1.3; Mixing Pixels and HD

Yesterday, the beta version of Aseprite 1.3 dropped for Steam users. I use Aseprite to make pixelart animations…

…and Pyxel edit to make the tiles. Pyxel Edit lets you edit a tilemap with your tiles in it that gets live-updated as you work on the tiles, allowing you to very quickly make a very functional tileset.

Now you’ll note that not everything on the screen is my tileset. I like to dedicate layers to characters and objects so I can preview how the whole thing will look together.

Well, Aseprite 1.3 added tile features. And…

… they don’t hold a candle to Pyxel Edit’s. They’re a very good start. And I like these tiles better mostly because I made them with the lessons learned from making a tileset in Pyxel. But you can’t easily flip tiles. Rearranging your tile palette changes the tile map because the tile map stores the tile indices and doesn’t change them when you monkey with your palette. Oh, and you can’t export your tileset.

I’ll repeat that. You can’t export your tileset.

You have to build the image you want to be your tileset and export that.

That’s not 100% a deal breaker. Some people would rather export an image because it is more convenient to them to have the tileset arranged a specific way.

On the other hand, Aseprite’s general pixel art tools are, for the most part, way better, and the two programs do not gracefully copy and past art to one another. There’s a huge amount of convenience in saying, “You know what, I’m tired of working on the tiles right now, I’m going to tweak that tree.

I also added a third character to the mix and discovered that Wren was too short. When compared to “normal” people in the game, she will look like a child in a bikini. Wren is not entirely human, and canonically characters do assume she’s younger than she his because of her unusual height, but it was too far. So, I fixed that.

At the end of the day I don’t know whether I’m going to stick with my current, split workflow, or switch to an all-Aseprite workflow. The pros and cons of each workflow are dancing on a razor’s edge.

High Definition

So, let’s do a quick mockup on how the game might look if we use pixel art for the world, but a high definition interface:

If I’m going to put conversation on the bottom of the screen, I might want to consider pushing the world design so that the action happens higher up. The top of the screen certainly is more spacious, and a more reasonable place to put interface. If I move dialogue up there, I’ll have to change the visual metaphor for the character graphics, maybe stick the face in a box. But overall, I don’t hate the look.

I was planning on making combat menus radial, bursting out of the player when the time comes to menu, but in my mockup test, it felt right to have buttons materialize under a character’s stat bar. But I’m not decided.

I need to try it out, see what works. At this point, the next step is to give Wren a walking animation and get gameplay up and running.

I’m sad that you can arrange a palette in uneven rows in Pyxel, but not in Aseprite. Ah well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s