Which do you prefer?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 авг 2024
- here are some animations I made.
Guys it's not the earthmover stop saying that. to set the record straight I made this a year ago before that came out. so if anything Ultrakill actually copied me. how 'bout that?
commission me: www.fiverr.com...
get my other stuff I made: olepatrick.gum...
patreon (there's not much on there but everyone has one): / olepatrick
You guys seem to love ultrakill for some reason. Well it just so happens that I am working on a V1 model right now so watch out for that in the next while.
edit: it doesn't even look like the earth machine guy.
Well said
smart words
Today, the best robot design ever
@@olepatrick1053 I just realized your PFP is quack from peep and the big wide world
i wanna kiss you
i feel like with mechanical models like this, its all about feeling the weight in each step. In your animation, the center floats above everything. If I had to pick, I'd pick 2 but I recommend moving that center a bit more!
Yea agreed. Now that i look at it as a video it is really floaty.
@@olepatrick1053 to add some inertia? That way it probably will look more massive.
I think good references for that are robots from game Horizon Zero Dawn. In the game is a one really big robot like a giraffe on which you climb like a tower to scan a area.
@@olepatrick1053 at the same time said floatyness can be used to enhance such weight I believe as the comment above me says the bot he's referring to the tall neck is quite good a this everything below its radar dish head feels heavy weighty but it would make sense the top be highly stabilized and floaty similar to how chickens keep there head almost entirely separated movement wise from there bod, giving some more weight and destabilized moving nature to the main body and arms would work for the heavy feeling but the bucket and (can only assume maybe large camera? or control suite?) cctv looking head piece could be nearly completely stable and still give it that weighty feel especially emphasizing the neck movements as it actively keeps the top stable
Edit: (all this is highly dependent on the style of mechanized form you're going for tho if you're wanting industrial sudo realism heavy weight and obvious functions of pieces go for that but if you want like some other zero dawn bots the more animal like nature to a mechanical being then floaty movement and more centerism around the legs can pull that off I belive either way amazing work sorry I'm a nerd lol)
@@olepatrick1053imo the floaty is good- its literally a walking platform, if anything it should be moving the least- otherwise everyone on it will get thrown about
I agree with @@newtybot- lean into the floaty!(punintended) Make other parts look floaty sometimes, too, and jolt others, to make it look intentional
v1 and the earthmover set aside their differences and got freaky
DESTROY
THIS WILL HURT
YOU CAN'T ESCAPE
BE GONE
Thats what I said
I like 2 a little more because it seems more grounded, but also a little more 'organic' in nature in a sense. I adore this thing so much
i'm getting the exact opposite, imo
1 is the classic four-legged trotting gait of literally any and every horse/dog/cat
2 is pacing, which... is still a natural gait for four-legged critters, but usually only when they're trying to match the pace of something at low speeds...
and there's an element of tripedal locomotion on 2 as well, but it leads to the movement being wobbly and unbalanced.
sure, it could be made of an ultra-lightweight material to get around a very high center of gravity... but then it doesn't convey the sturdiness i'd expect from a robot with this kind of frame.
1
@@Sihgilanu2 is how elephants walk. They moves 2 legs on one side at a time instead of one leg on each side.
*War without reason plays in the distance*
“A weapon to surpass Metal Gear”
"...Metal Gear?"
@@NODNS_n_M.ORD11630like the game.
…I think
@@NODNS_n_M.ORD11630 "box?"
*me pointing a banana like a gun*
1 makes it feel like a robot. 2 makes it feel more human. Depends on which you want to lean more into.
@@Codename_WonderPVnot an earthmover
2nd looks zesty ngl
I get that 2 has more organic movement but the way 1 uses it’s legs to stabilize itself is more realistic for anything quadrupedal. Plus, I see railings and ladders on it leading me to believe it’s supposed to have people riding it, and it wouldn’t be so pleasant for it to be rocking back and forth so much.
2 has some personality to it that I think makes the machine and your animation pretty unique together. Like a large animal casually strolling.
The rule of cool is often more important than trying to seem realistic, in my opinion.
@@DarthBlam couldn’t agree more. I’m gonna start saying “rule of cool” now
@@olepatrick1053 when the trench is bleeded for resources by urbanshade
@@Wheee7245 what does this mean?
@@olepatrick1053 it looks like the roblox pressure trenchbleeders
1 feels the most realistic, and it lets you get a good look at each individual leg, which lets you appreciate the detail more
1 seems more robotic, while 2 seems more natural, but gives off a slower feeling vibe for some reason. I think 1 with a very slight counterbalance sway (not as noticable as 2's, maybe about 1/4-1/3 of the sway from 2) would probably look best, but it is entirely dependant on what you plan to make with this animation and the vibe you need from it. Really cool animation btw!
i like 1 more, and i think in either of these the body seems way too stable for a seemingly massive mech. i'd recommend trying to make every step feel like it has muuuch more weight to it, with more shaking and such perhaps. really cool model and animation :)
Yea the weight is what im struggling with. I dont want to move the body that much because its supposed to be a stable platform.
@@olepatrick1053 you could have the arms absorb more of the impact from the steps, for example have them pulled down a little at the shoulder joint
@@olepatrick1053@olepatrick1053 pacific rim 1 had a neat way of selling weight. Well, actually several.
Most shots were both from a pov that could be experienced by a human, and affected by what happened in the scene. Camera shake and what not.
Another thing was to really slow down the motion when the subjects were fighting forces like gravity and (not a force) inertia
Personal thought time: have you considered having a longer uhh, leg up(?) Time and a relatively shorter leg down time? As if the legs are being pulled up and then assisted by gravity to get them down again
@@olepatrick1053 perhaps give each step a warm-up and cool down before the next leg or pair of legs take its step?
I prefer the 1st version.
I can relate that the 2nd version is also good because its shift of the center of mass gives it a kind of natural and "graceful" feeling, but I pretty much love how the 1st version gives a smooth, "artificial" feeling. It is eerie how such a big thing moves without swinging its body around and I LOVE eerie.
And lastly, this is what I think of the design:
Absolutely Gorgeous. MAGNIFICENT. Human hands are an icing on the cake.
Ah, I cannot praise and appreciate its eerie beauty enough...
2, and the machine looks amazing
I think 2 definitely works better for the more organic looking walk style- if that’s what you’re going for with this project
Ultrakill earthmover reference
They don‘t even look similar. People just see the 4 legs and go crazy. smh my head😔…
@@olepatrick1053 Bro...
1. Smh stands for shaking my head.
So you are saying "shaking my head my head"
2. Maybe it's not exactly looks like earthmover but you can see the resemblance like they are both kind of freaky builded robots that got stretched neck and legs plus strangely located arms so yeah...
Nice work anyway 👍
@@firestabber9332
1. when I said "smh my head" it was actually ""BAIT"". So when you pointed out that it made no sense you ""took the ""BAIT"" ". that means you're the one who looks stupid not the person who did the stupid thing (me).
2. I still don't see the resemblance. the earth mover is like a city or something on legs. and it has like a WW2 vibe going on.
thanks though.
@@olepatrick1053 earb movr,,,,,
😑
one thing i do like in particular is how the front legs have a different stride to the back legs on the second version, picturing this thing leaving four massive footprints as opposed to two is a lot more menacing
I... I absolutely love this, this is going to inspire at least a week worth of drawings, but imma make ones that are more fucked up and asymmetrical, 2 all the way, but everyone already said why lol, a bit more bounce and sag on the arms or fingers would go a long way, as well as more subtle little part movements throughout it, loose wires swaying would also add to it
to inspire is the goal of an artist.
Also I think a junky asymmetrical design would go hard on something tall and wobbly.
I'm glad you got that vibe (i assume) and I think something messed up and asymmetrical would definitely communicate that more. a lot of people here were giving me feedback to make it look more stable and machine like but that wasnt what I was going for.
good luck on your drawings!
@@olepatrick1053 thanks, in the time it took you to reply I already sketched out like 4 little things based on it , tiny little doodle sketches. I really need to get a computer that can run a 3d software, I can't wait to start doing stuff like this, I'd love to design something like that, then draw and render graffiti and stuff into it, make it look real worn down. Another one of my favorite techniques to add some more junky details is long thick cable bundles with random broken or sagging wires hanging in the bundle. It's just, like aaaahhh I can't describe how awesome I found this lmao
@@damprat141 ooh yea. Adding graffiti and 2d art onto 3d models would be so cool. I hope you can get a better pc soon. Getting into blender was one of the best decisions I ever made.
Ideally the rigidity and leg pattern of the 1st, but with a lot more emphasis on each step. Those joints in the middle seem like they're either built to absorb the shock or to extend the legs to stabilize the platform. Making the movements less fluid and more direct and abrupt would make the machine look like an unstoppable force of immeasurable mass
This is kind of what I imagine a construction Jaeger would look like in the Pacific Rim universe, sort of like a barebones Jaeger that stands near buildings being constructed and provides easy resources, transport, demolition, heavy load lifting, etc.
Its like the earthmover from ultrakill btw amazing work congrats🎉
-> beeg four legged weird machine creature
-> "is da earthmoovin Bengameen?"
i mean... i get it, but this one is cooler. It's like... Daniel, not Benjamin.
@@mrShift_0044 to much ultrakill in my mind
@@Rocky0208 same, but like... this is defenetely is AT LEAST a Daniel, it's just too cool...
@@mrShift_0044TXO-300 Earth runner
Pressure is what it's like
I like how 2 has an almost sassy feeling hipsway going on, it's a little bit funny and makes it feel a bit more livelike aswell. But if you're going for a more rigid mechanical vibe with what you want, then 1 is probably better.
I like v1 more but I like the vertical sway of the central part that v2 has. It really makes the limb at top feel like its actively stabilizing.
I feel like 1 is more like how that machine would move, but 2 is more foreboding.
I think animation 1 is better, this thing appears to be pretty large, so maintaining stability and balance is key
1, it just doesn't make sense to have the entire robot stand on two legs on the same side. you can find some great tutorials on how to animate animals with 4 legs, it may be different from a robot with 4 legs but i doubt it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ also, great model! it's very detailed, hope to see it fully rendered someday!
The second one feels more smoother, and even its giant robot. Like second option its more giant-like movements. So i'll choose this
If the top of the machine needs to be stable or hold people or a camera, then 1 involves less swaying and will be more friendly to them. Also if it needs to have strong balance, 1 has a wider stance.
If it needs to go through crowded or tight spaces, 2 takes up less space. Also if it often does sideways motion, 2 lets it use its weight to turn more.
bro is acting like he'll actually make this thing
@@matthiass._. all the other bits of advice that I see are about 'organic vibes' or personal opinions, there was a need for feedback from a lens of engineering. Also yes I guess they are actually making this, but probably not in real life.
If it its a giant robot I think 1 is the way to go, the second walk animaton looks really cool too but it feels like a little bit cartoonish for a big size.
But if it is like medium or small robot the second looks very great.
my nerd take on this thing as it seems to be building-sized is:
1) i think the sort of diagonal gait pattern in the first (left front and right back and then left back and right front) is better for load-bearing, and is what sauropods are currently modeled as doing to the best of my knowledge. more specifically, there've been some general simulations put into that territory, plus trackways that suggest it that were reported in 2022. this seems to be because they'd just have their CoG too displaced from the load-bearing feet mid-stride.
2) however, i think gait 2's overall pace is better for similar reasons. it's slower, somewhat weightier, and puts the segments of the legs at less of an angle when they're on the ground. the components of the legs would be most efficient at supporting the weight of the body when oriented mostly vertically, so minimizing the travel of the leg in its load-bearing phase as much as possible while maintaining a useable stride length would be advantageous. it also seems to kinda communicate a sort of elastic effect, as if it's exploiting its momentum to keep itself walking more than gait 1, but that's just me going off of vibes i guess, but this is something that many living animals do, even those that don't really "walk" per se.
tl;dr i think the pace and stride length of 2 with the diagonal step pattern of 1 would be best as far as my i-didn't-quite-finish-that-engineering-degree-but-i-got-close-enough-to-make-it-your-problem proclivities are concerned.
edit: i forgot that YT comment markdown hates hyphens as punctuation and turns them into strikethroughs, fixed.
I totally agree with your first point. but I had spent a while on the foot animations and they were slightly longer than half the stride so I wasn't able to have it keep 3 feet on the ground at once and it looked all messed up. someone suggested I do each half at the same time and that inspired me to make animation 2. It only needed 2 feet on the ground at once so I could keep the feet animation.
I really like you point of the legs being most efficient when they are oriented mostly vertically. I took this into account when placing the pistons (I might have done it wrong and actually made it worse but I don't really remember) the robot but that was a year ago and I forgot. so when I animated I didn't really think about that. thanks for reminding me. I didn't even think about travel distance on load bearing legs.
I'll keep that in mind when I reanimate this eventually. but I got bored and the barrage of earth mover comments inspired to kick my V1 project into top gear and I am working on that rn.
1 looks more mechanical, gives a sort of brutalist vibe.
2 looks more organic, feels almost alive, like it has a personality. Id go with 2, but 1 is also very good
I’d say 1, because especially with large industrial machines, you want as little unwanted motion as possible. The walk cycle is much smoother, whereas 2 sways a lot, which might make it difficult for operators or crew, and cargo might roll around. Stability is key, so I think the heavier walk style is best
Another point to add is that with 2, there’s a lot more that can go wrong with the timings, and more points of potential failure. The hips can crash into each other, so in the event of a malfunction or piston bursting, 2 is more dangerous. 1 is more robust and has less risk of leg collisions in the event of a timing mishap
I kinda like the narrow stance of 2, it feels like the factory balance settings have been replaced by something the machine isn't designed for, yet it runs better this way. Like an optimization process has been cooking for years trying to squeeze more efficiency out of an old model.
However, 2 has a lot of sway to it, and while the sway itself looks great, this is a quadruped, there's no need to sway. If you watch horses or elephats walk, you can see the shoulders and hips roll, and the centerline will pitch and heave (even surge back and forth occasionally), but it rarely sways. Sway in a quadrupedal walk is usually a sign of sickness or tiredness, or sometimes playfulness.
As for that floatiness, you can also see in elephants and rhinos and such that they'll try to maximize the time each foot is planted, usually having three feet firmly planted while the fourth travels, only lifting a second foot just before that first one plants down. Each foot is planted for nearly three steps. This mech however, basically always has two feet in the air, and just barely gets those feet down before lifting the other two. It's really obvious in 1 that it doesn't have good footing twice every walk cycle, yet the body stays rock steady with almost no heaving during that moment. This tells us that those legs aren't carrying all the weight that the rest of the animation is saying is there, so the body must be floating. It's the difference between how you walk in a pool and how you walk carrying a heavy box. Try it!
I don't know if you can do this, but try making a little animation of just the ground contact points. The center of pressure (the average point of the contact areas times how much weight each area is carrying) should stay roughly below the center of mass, and any difference will be a force that causes sway/surge. You could get really specific on the numbers, but even just imagining this should help you sell the weight of something.
Also, those spikes on the bottom of the feet look like a tripping hazard. Might need a skid plate or something.
This is super cool though! I quite like the complex movements on the hip joints. There's several floating axels in there, just finding all the degrees of freedom is fun.
Y'know, I've just seen some ambling elephants, and 2 makes a bit more sense now. The timing is still a bit jilted, with both legs on one side nearly taking a step at the same time. I can kinda see where the sway came from though, animals usually are stepping fast enough to avoid that here.
Interestingly, elephants can't move faster than an amble, because they can't deal with the impact of having all four legs in the air. They need to keep some feet planted at all times.
Honestly, they both look good, and I like how they got hands.
I like one because the legs are more spaced out for better balance, but 2 feels that right kind of machine slow, some combination of the 2 would look nice in my opinion.
That's my thoughts exactly!
I feel like first one feels like proper walking industrial equipment, while second one is sorta animalistic one.
This itches my brain in a really nice way.
I think 1 but maybe add almost a slight bounce to the whole thing when it takes a step. it feels to stable right now.
I'm gonna go with 2. something about the way it sways makes it feel a bit more realistic
Its like if the thr 1000 earthmover from ultrakill mixed with an oil rig! Amazing
Earthmoover IS inspired by oil rigs and construction sites though...
@@mrShift_0044tbh I don't see it
I like 2 more. Something about it feels less stiff and more natural.
Great design too man!
2 feels a lot more realistic for a walking machine, and you should definitely try and model the impact from the footfalls reverberating back up the legs
Tbh 1 might be more accurage since 2 has the legs be more centered which could make it fall over easily while number 1 is like earthmover built to be sturdy
I appreciate your thoughts but if I hear one more earth mover reference I'm gonna get an aneurism.
@@olepatrick1053benjamin blast
I like the heavier feel of 2 but I feel the leg movements of 1 make more sense than 2’s
i.... i think i am in love
personaly, 1. 2 is cool and organic, but i like 1 more
I especially like the arms
Most media portrays giant mechs as having a certainty strength, or brutality
But I'm a big fan of how this guy looks like he couldn't be less chill
I like 1, 2 because from a technical gut feeling standpoint, it be insufficient longterm, or if the bot gotta withstand large variable vector loads, it just fall over more likely
Edit: A good note to addon though is that 2 feels more graicful and somehow in my opinion and it makes it seem more feminine or of some degree female on how it sways in rythm.
number 2 feels a lot more fitting since its rugged and it fits a machine more unlike the first wich is more animalistic in nature.
eh i dont think you will see this but they look good ngl :)
2 feels like it has significantly more weight to it, and also the feet look like they're actually reacting to lifting off the ground.
the First option looks better, the second option seems too elegant for a robot that looks like that.
2 conveys the weight of an enormous robot more, but I wouldn't let the back legs cross like that. If you accidentally mistime and brush your feet together while walking it's of little consequence. If it does it's catastrophic
I prefer 1 because it's platform is more purosely stable and balanced than 2, keeping a leg on the ground on both sides makes it look like a actual machine that holds people on it unlike 2 that lifts a whole side up making it shaky and poorly stay stable incase of any moving weights
1 is a lot better, because it keeps the center of mass even in the direction you are moving, at least in my opinion
I dunno, 1 feels more carnal or beastial-like perhaps a centaur. 2 gives off a more "human" or straight bipedal feel, despite having two sets of legs; it moves them same-sided'ly which makes it seem more like a humanoid than 1. Depends really what impression you're trying to give at that point. (1) Something possibly eldritch and possibly foreign to the human mind or (2) Something seemingly more sentient and sophisticated.
1 had a better walk pattern, but like... I LOVED the organic sway of 2, if you could make 1 sway more then I would say that would be best imo 👁🗨
2 lowkey slaying fr
1. Feels clanky and tight, but still harsh in its robotic movement, it’s like a patrolling bot.
2. Omg the vibe of organism it gives chill down my spines, it seems like a monster that would be able to make me pee my pants
If the machine is going to be quite large, I would suggest making the movements heavier, and give it more weight. However, if it’s a small machine, I prefer number 1
_This was the only way it could have ended..._
_This was the only way it _*_should_*_ have ended..._
2 definitely gives it that feeling of weight, like it is truly a massive machine
THE UNENLIGHTENED MASSES
I’m thinking 1 is the move. 2’s legs are a bit too narrow in the middle and could lead to stability issues if it’s going too fast. 1 is good for going to a location and preforming tasks then going to a different location at a decent pace. 2 would have the a ability to be a little faster but the concern would be the center of gravity not being supported if it experienced something like a crash or strong wind or anything with a decent amount of force that could hit the top bit.
Beautiful and brilliant work, the second walk animation felt the most 'organic'
1 seems a lot more stable for a machine, 2 feels more like a living creature.
1 is more realistic and robotic.
2, if a little unbalanced in its sway, has some personality to it.
the one that is less woobly cause if this is meant to be a construction thing then it wouldnt make sense for everyone at the top to be vomiting just from its basic function wich is moving
It’s neat because I could see this being used for everyday construction use.
Animation 2 feels more weighty and heavy, the machine feels more realistically bulky
You need, _need_ to use the Thunderbirds Sidewinder/Crablogger theme for these things. It crossfades between silly and EPIC.
This looks like something that you’d get recommended and it’s be from 11 years ago
I feel like 2 mechanically makes no sense and if you made a robot walk like that it would fall over. While 1 looks like an actual heavy machine. If you have 4 legs for extra stability why use them in pairs?!?
1 i think seems more viable/stable but 2 seems more dynamic/organic
Btw, i really like this, it is so cool to see genuine mechanical designs for art like this
This contraption feels big, like really big. If it were to be put into a game i feel as though it would be a earth moving machine like its antennas to heaven.
1 seems more in tune with how the rest of the design is talking
Like how it slightly sways whilst keeping a more squared footing
Whilst 2 gives it a more monorail feel, like if it was to be knocked that it would be taken aback more and seem weaker
And the more mechanical nature just screams some sort of scavenger or construction beast
So it having that more v-shaped walk just doesn't seem like it would help sell that idea, but instead contradict and add another idea unexpectedly
But I love the design so far, keep at it
And be Kool if it's part of a game that you can ride it in
2 feels more weighty and unnatural, which is what you want in a robot of this size.
"from the moment i understood the weakness of my flesh... It disgusted me."
I really enjoy the weighty sway of the second animation I'd move the torso up and down some more, not a whole lot but just enough just to make it more grounded and realistic. Other than that themodel looks stellar, great work man
I am love with the design holy crap
1 feels more realistic, although it is not as *organic* as 2, it seems more viable
2 feels more life like, and possibly more realistic due to robotics companies mimicking animal movements for smoother movements but who knows.
either way amazing work bro ❤
1 looks more mechanical, 2 looks more organic. So 1 fits a giant machine better IMO. 2 would fit a Giraffe or something.
1 is better if you want it to be more of a less human robot, 2 is better if you want it to have more emotion
Hm.. not an expert in this, but i feel like 1st would fit better if the design is intended to be a more industrial-standard vehicle kind of machine.
The 2nd's wobble feels more like a experimental design that isn't like regular machines.
I guess if you're intending for the 1st one, it brings to mind the STRIDER from AC6. Very consistent and solid movement pattern and stance.
Definitely 2. It looks a lot more natural and feels more human. Oh, and by the way, this is absolutely amazing. I've never seen an animation quite like this one, so you deserve a round of applause! 👏👏👏👏
1 for stability, 2 will sustain massive pressure defects over time
I'd say number 2, it feels more robotic and feels harder when it takes a step.
Really well done, although as many people said, it does kinda remind of the earthmover
2.
It makes it more realistic. Like you can feel the weight.
Pressure and ultrakill fans whenever they see big things:
I like the upper portion of number 2 with its more mechanics, but I prefer the walk cycle of number 1. probably not the answer you were looking for but that's my two cents
I don’t even care about which one is better THIS MODEL AND ANIMATION IS BETTER THAN A MASTERPEICE HOLY FRI-
If anything, these look more like the Trenchbleeders from Pressure more than the Earthmover.
Bruh I just googled that a trench bleeder looks like a knockoff earth mover made in roblox.
But trenchbleeder has more of a early 2000s CG sci-fi vibe where everything is very blocky and beveled but also it has a more realistic style with the neck like a power line tower. But the earth mover is more world war 2 or like almost dieselpunk or something with all the steam pipes and screws and spotlights. The robot guy I made is in the same style as modern construction vehicles and that's closer to world war 2/ dieselpunk only for the presence of tubes and stuff.
So I would say that the earthmover is more like mine than the trench bleeder, but I don't think either look that much like mine apart from the 4 legs and presence of a neck.
2 for aesthetics if for a render. 1 if for a game because of the increased space between the legs.
I like the 2, its like it feels more alive and the design is so damn good, keep cooking
probably 2, makes it feel more weighty. love the design!
Number two is more realistic in the sense that most robots nowadays use that as a way of moving around
And now imagine this man making animations for THR-1000 "earthmover".
This is really cool, but I feel like every time he takes a step he should bounce just the tiniest bit and slow for half a second, because I feel that will really show weight, since of how big this thing is
Holy hell how did you manage to make something _this_ mechanically complex
_And_ make it move this smooth with all parts neatly interacting with each other
2
First thing I thought was it looked like them zoids models but with all the armor removed leaving all the internals exposed, legit cool. Also regarding preference definitely the 1st one. Just feels more stable.
2 si better because it is more balanced, but honestly both are too fluid in motion, I think the movement of a robot like this should be way clunkier