BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I've heard a view times that some people think there is no such thing as talent. Would you agree?
I would at least agree that everything is learnable (maybe except if you have a certain handicap, but sometimes even this can be overcome). I also believe that the biggest reason some people learn things faster than others is that they have a bigger interest in this particular area. Yet I still believe that the natural skill level at the start of the learning process differs from person to person. With all that said, I come to the conclusion that talent has to exists, it just doesn't matter as much as some people may think.
 

Mr. Detective

NATO Special Operative
Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
882
Reaction score
350
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
I disagree. Talent exists. Some people are naturally better at certain things than others. Some are exceptionally naturally gifted. I can train all my life in something and still can't beat someone else with natural talent or higher potential.

We all have different kind of intelligence. Gordon Ramsay is intelligent in a different way than David Beckham is. And unfortunately, some of us are just simply average at best, or straight up incompetent. It's like natural beauty, I guess. Blame the goddess of luck.
 

Drakkonis

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Messages
132
Reaction score
95
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMZ
I would say talent's weight heavily depends on the activity in question. For mental exercises, such as programming, how one thinks heavily influences your potential talent. Anyone can LEARN programming with enough time and effort, but compared to someone with talent in that area, it's like the difference between a typing champion and someone who still does the two-finger peck while staring at the keyboard at all times. I don't have a lot of talent for programming, but I do think along programming lines, so figuring it out is easier for me than the average person, and said person is amazed by the things I can do with a keyboard. But compared to someone with REAL talent, I'm the keyboard-pecker.
 

Restart

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
668
Reaction score
560
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
The easiest example is Ramanujan. A poor kid living in British occupied India around the beginning of the 1900s. Basically no formal training in math whatsoever. Self-taught by pestering college students until, at the age of 11, they ran out math they could teach him, at which point he started reading journals and treatises from the library

When he was 26 he sent a letter with a bunch of his independent research to G. H. Hardy, a mathematician at Cambridge. Some of Ramanujan's work had already been discovered by other people, some of it was new and interesting, and some of it was so advanced that Hardy said "these results must be true, because if they were not true, no one would have the imagination to invent them."

Ramanujan moved to England, met with a bunch of mathematicians, got a phd in math without ever taking a college course, wrote mathematical papers for a couple years and - in what is perhaps the greatest intellectual loss of the 20th century - died at the age of 32.

Almost a hundred years after his death, people are still pulling new math out of the comments in the notes he left behind - and the the discovery of Ramanujan's lost notebook in 1976 was earthshattering for mathematicians. He's generally agreed to be the greatest mathematician of all time, and that's despite having died at such a young age and lacking a formal education.
 

ATT_Turan

Forewarner of the Black Wind
Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
910
Reaction score
480
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I have to say that I've never heard anyone say there's no such thing as talent...but if someone did say that, I could only respond with thinking they mean something other than what they're saying, or they're just quite ignorant.

I've worked as a teacher for years, and I think it's absolutely irrefutable that some people have an innate talent for certain subjects or activities. Students studying the same material from the same teacher for the same amount of time will learn at different rates. I have no clue how anyone could not "believe" in that.
 

BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I disagree. Talent exists. Some people are naturally better at certain things than others. Some are exceptionally naturally gifted. I can train all my life in something and still can't beat someone else with natural talent or higher potential.

We all have different kind of intelligence. Gordon Ramsay is intelligent in a different way than David Beckham is. And unfortunately, some of us are just simply average at best, or straight up incompetent. It's like natural beauty, I guess. Blame the goddess of luck.

I am pretty sure even those girls and guys who are or at least seem to be gifted still train themselves and also get even better over time. That is may be also why other people never reach their level no matter how much work they put in.
But how to determine if someone is (exceptionally) natural gifted? I really don't know. You never know how long someone you think is gifted trained her- or himself before sharing her/his work with the public for the first time.
The easiest example is Ramanujan. A poor kid living in British occupied India around the beginning of the 1900s. Basically no formal training in math whatsoever. Self-taught by pestering college students until, at the age of 11, they ran out math they could teach him, at which point he started reading journals and treatises from the library

When he was 26 he sent a letter with a bunch of his independent research to G. H. Hardy, a mathematician at Cambridge. Some of Ramanujan's work had already been discovered by other people, some of it was new and interesting, and some of it was so advanced that Hardy said "these results must be true, because if they were not true, no one would have the imagination to invent them."

Ramanujan moved to England, met with a bunch of mathematicians, got a phd in math without ever taking a college course, wrote mathematical papers for a couple years and - in what is perhaps the greatest intellectual loss of the 20th century - died at the age of 32.

Almost a hundred years after his death, people are still pulling new math out of the comments in the notes he left behind - and the the discovery of Ramanujan's lost notebook in 1976 was earthshattering for mathematicians. He's generally agreed to be the greatest mathematician of all time, and that's despite having died at such a young age and lacking a formal education.
I believe that is an example of interest and training, more than it is an example of talent. Am I wrong here?

@Everyone: I believe talent exists, but I think (deep) interest in a particular field matters more than talent does.
 

Drakkonis

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Messages
132
Reaction score
95
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMZ
I am pretty sure even those girls and guys who are or at least seem to be gifted still train themselves and also get even better over time. That is may be also why other people never reach their level no matter how much work they put in.
But how to determine if someone is (exceptionally) natural gifted? I really don't know. You never know how long someone you think is gifted trained her- or himself before sharing her/his work with the public for the first time.

I believe that is an example of interest and training, more than it is an example of talent. Am I wrong here?

@Everyone: I believe talent exists, but I think (deep) interest in a particular field matters more than talent does.
Really depends on what you want to measure. Ability in a field? Sure, interest and training could get you there same as talent does. But talent would affect how quickly you're able to pick it up and improve. As ATT_Turan said, it's possible to have two people start at the exact same point with the exact same resources available... but they won't both get to the end at the same time, and probably not in the same condition. For the math example, someone can have a great interest in math, but if they have zero talent, any mathematical skill comes from fighting tooth and nail every step of the way. A kid, with no talent, spends hours poring over a book, repeatedly working stuff out to make sure they understand what they're reading. Same kid, WITH talent? Could barely glance at the book and pick up everything they need from it.

I have talent in math. Not mathematician level, but I'd gotten in trouble for not showing my work when I did the work in my head even through early high school. My wife has NO talent for math, went through the same school I did, and finds it much easier to ask me even basic multiplication rather than work it out. She struggled with math so hard for so long that she gave up and actively avoids it where possible. Her struggles with math actually made her hate doing it.
 

Restart

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2019
Messages
668
Reaction score
560
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I am pretty sure even those girls and guys who are or at least seem to be gifted still train themselves and also get even better over time. That is may be also why other people never reach their level no matter how much work they put in.
But how to determine if someone is (exceptionally) natural gifted? I really don't know. You never know how long someone you think is gifted trained her- or himself before sharing her/his work with the public for the first time.

I believe that is an example of interest and training, more than it is an example of talent. Am I wrong here?
Ramanujan had essentially no formal training, and (due to working on math part time) spent considerably less time with his informal training than full-time academic mathematicians get, even before mentioning that mathematicians can have careers that last far longer than Ramanujan's total lifespan.

There are a LOT of mathematicians who are intensely interested in their field, and trying to understand Ramanujan's work is one of the most fascinating parts of mathematics. Despite that, even with 50 years to work on the subject, with top mathematicians expending considerable effort based on Ramanujan's own results, the math from one year of work found in Ramanujan's lost notebook was still novel.

Interest only matters insofar as it inspires effort; the fact is, Ramanujan simply didn't live long enough for practice and effort to be the only factors at play. If you've met a PhD mathematician, they're all very interested in math, it's the type of field most people only really go into for the love of it, rather than for practical or financial reasons - it isn't easy, can't be used in everyday life, and doesn't pay well. Even if Ramanujan had hypothetically worked on mathematics for 16 hours a day since he was in kindergarten, every typical eight-hour-a-day punch clock academic mathematician would have the same level of practice (and presumably mastery) before the end of their careers.

Now, if you're saying it's possible to have an unnaturally large amount of 'interest' which means that you inherently get more results with less effort, then you're just using a different word for 'talent'.

Of course, saying it's 'interest' is popular as a way of making it easier to blame people for their failure; if it's a lack of motivation that causes it, then anyone who is worse than the best (or worse than you are personally) is lazy and has poor moral character.

This is clearly nonsense if you take it seriously ('Little Jimmy just doesn't care about math enough! He's already eleven and he's still having trouble with algebra instead of mastering all college-level mathematics'), but it's an easy way for people who are legitimately talented to humblebrag (and, to some extent, a way to 'punch down' at people in disliked demographics; once you say that 'interest' is the most important factor, you can shuffle other things under the rug, and start saying the only reason 'those people' don't do well is because they just don't want to).

It's very much tied in with the health and wealth gospel / law of attraction / 'good things happen because you wanted them to happen, and if they didn't happen you didn't want it hard enough' mental quagmire.
 
Last edited:

BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Okay I start to understand that interest or hard work alone does not get you anywhere as each field may require different skills and if you don't have them it is harder for you to learn anything in those fields. You gave me clear examples where natural skills matter.


Maths & Programming often require good logical thinking. If somebody cannot think logical maths and programming are definetely fields she or he would have a hard time.

I guess Art, Music, Story Telling on the other hand require great imagination, fantasy and creativity. If you lack in those skills you will also have a hard time.


I absolutely do agree that people learn things in different speed. And I admit that talent and natural skills do exist. I still am of the opinion that they are not everything you'll need. Interest definitely also speeds up the learning process. I also think people get even more interested in things they are good at. If you are good at something, you want to continue doing this particular thing. Now I might contradict my own opinion, but it seems even if you are interested in something and you'll try it out and you don't get good results and you maybe even start to hate it, you might not learn it in a hundred years.


@Restart Okay then I maybe have used interested as synonym for talent. Sorry for that. I didn't mean to humblebrag on anyone or say that some people keep being average in a particular field just because they don't want to learn it. I simply thought there is more than just talent. I thought it is a combination of talent, interest and hard work that gets you where you are or want to be. For exampIe am bad at art, I still think I have improved in art over time, but I have a lack in imagination, so I cannot improve as much as I want to. I'm also not confident enough to share any art of mine. Now I have officially admitted I have a little interest in art, but lack of talent and it does not really concern me. I'm not a little bit jealous on people who can draw like crazy and also have the patience to put hours and hours of work into a single piece of art. I have other things I am good at and it is a blessing that different people are talented in different fields.
I admit the way you decribed him Ramanujan was especially talented in math, but I can also see that he started learing math out of interest and thus found out about his talent, cause why would you start to learn something and keep learning it, if you are not interested, especially if you had no contact or formal training in that field beforehand?
So what I have learned from this discussion is basically nothing (I am still of the same opinion, that talent alone is not enough):
- Talent may create interest. Interest makes you put more effort into something. Because of your talent you don't actually need to put that much effort into it, in order to get good results fast. Yet talented people still put a lot of effort in what they are doing and in what they love to do.
- On the other hand interest can make you discover your talent. You get good results and start to put more effort into it and because you are talented a tiny bit of that effort is already enough for you to learn it faster.
 
Last edited:

ShadowDragon

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
3,825
Reaction score
1,450
First Language
Dutch
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I can learn alot, but not everything is stored, but people CAN learn things,
but that doesn't make them talented.

what some people do from easy learning in 1 year, would take me for
around 4 years or longers, but I agree with Mr, Detective that has a point,
that everyone have some natural gifted talents.

but everyone can learn, but not anyone is "good" in certain things.
if you aim for the thing you like and have intrest in to learn it, it's really
possible they can learn it.

but everyone is different, some are better than others, even if htey have
the same thing learned.
 

Inksword

Villager
Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
21
Reaction score
26
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMZ
I was just watching something the other day that talks a little bit about this. It's more about luck vs hard work as opposed to talent vs hard work, but I think it's a similar premise and a really good watch either way!

 

BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
@ShadowDragon I guess I have a good example for people who learned the same thing, but are different:

MogHunter did some incredible visual stuff with his plugins, I could never do.

Yanfly wrote a whole library of plugins containing a lot of essential improvements over the base engine. I guess I would be able to do that as well, but I have a lack in experience with RPGs to find out what is missing. I also don't need to do that as Yanfly already did it.

I basically only wrote a shop plugin as my biggest contribution to the community, because I needed it myself and at that time a lot of people where discussing limited stock and ways to event it. Currently my interest rather is in algorithms, which most of them, I won't need in RPG Maker. Yet I still need someone to explain me what a certain algorithm does in simple way in order to understand it, instead of the scientific and mathematical way an algorithm is usually described. A lot of algorithms take inspiration from nature/biology. I think biology is very interesting and if someone starts describing the algorithm by explaining it's biological origin I sometimes can figure out how to code it without knowing it's scientific representation. Well sometimes I still have to know the exact mathematical formulas used.

All people I've mentioned above have learned Javascript and we all use it in different ways. Nobody can do everything and that's good.

@Inksword I've now watched the video and it is very interesting. I addition to the factor of luck, which definitely plays a role in success, it acknowlegdes that you need skill/talent in addition to hard work and of course luck in order to achieve something. This is similar to my opinion that talent/skill alone isn't enough. You still need to work hard. Others just need to work harder to achieve the same, even they don't have to achieve the same.
 
Last edited:

ShadowDragon

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
3,825
Reaction score
1,450
First Language
Dutch
Primarily Uses
RMMV
TSR_MoveEvent use some compelx eventing when "pushing" an event,
and yes, push event, pickup and throw (included in that as well) already
exist by moghunter and chaucer, but their coding is all different, hardest
understandable for me is chaucers, but some coding in TSR with % and *
combined gives me questionmarks as well.

there is so many things I dont know yet or if they are good to the community,
I tried to make a save plugin in the way I wanted, but never could when
TSR made one, it's complex, but does exactly the things I wanted to set up
my scene beautyfully.

what is lacking to RPG is something that they discuss I think, and people
make it, harder part is to make compability to them.

I made a friend level system, called now Universal Level System as windows
are created, so it can be used for friendship, relations, guilds/factions etc.

does a friendship already exist? yes they do, but they all require "actors"
in the actor database, mine does not, still I lack js to make a "split" function
which I wanted to add for my expierence for those, it's now static choice.

but it's independend outside $DataActors, what if you have people that
arent an actor, yes, they can use it, but some tons of features, I need
it rather easy to use, not some features I need, not a whole bunch.

there are so many plugins, some in 2015-2017 still works, but not always
with others, restruct them and make it better for compability is a nice way.

but a shop plugin is something I cannot probably can, some have 6 plugins
to achieve a specific mechanic, like your shop plugin, it can be replaced
4 others plugin because your shop has those function. less plugins for
1 thing is better for compability than a bunch and 1 isn't.

if you are good in js and want unique plugins that are exist and can replace
a couple plugins, why not, if you check the js requests, there are many looking
for something, some create them, other extend it for publicy use, or sell them.

1 function can be done in 8-12 different ways, each unique to their coding.
but some coding is something I dont understand fully, but I try to learn and
add them before I forgot or save it for later use.

take a look at chaucer 3D plugin or mv3D, or hudell with the editor ingame
to makes maps, those are something I could never achieve, even if I would
learn years for it.

if they learn js, they understand it better so they can create things like those
and can find it in the code and extend it. but combine js with css is also something
else, it's possible, same as HIME did with the exp table, to excel file to read it.

I can modify plugins better than making them, but what I make is also for the
community, even if it's not that usefull for them, but it is for my game as well
for learning curve :)
 

BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Just a question that has not really something to do with the threats topic, but do I seem stubborn? If I'm actually very stubborn and don't acknowledge your opinions as much as I should, then I really have to work on that.

@ShadowDragon Yes, different plugin creators do create the same plugins even they don't have to and they do it in different ways. That is also a good thing as some of them might come in handy for certain people and others have a better time with the one of a different creator. I only spoke for myself, that I don't need to do what Yanfly already did. I didn't even know that there are 4 plugins that could replace my shop plugin and vice versa. All I knew, was that HIME had a shop plugin, yet I still wrote mine, because HIMEs implementation was not exactly what I wanted. So even I sometimes write something, that already exists.
 

SigmaSuccour

Dogmatic
Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
143
Reaction score
573
First Language
Urdu, English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
On the topic of Ramanujan, there's a movie about him:

The Man Who Knew Infinity


The guy knew all the right answers, without knowing the steps that lead to them.
And so to prove those answers, he had to learn those steps. Which complicated things... and slowed him down.



My thoughts on skill vs talent?
If your idea is that a 'skill' is expertise you have that you worked hard for, whereas 'talent' is expertise you have that you didn't work hard for.

Then that suggests one of two things:
1. talent is either random.
2. Or talent is expertise you obtain, through means other than hard-work.

So I ask you...
Is memorizing, and reading, and hard work, the only path to knowledge and ability?
If yes, then that's a limit you pushed on yourself.

There are much faster ways to reach knowledge and ability. And the life of Ramanujan is evidence of that.
It will do us all better, if we work towards figuring those faster routes. (A method that can be duplicated) Instead of pushing it onto something 'random'.
 

Drakkonis

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Messages
132
Reaction score
95
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMZ
Just a question that has not really something to do with the threats topic, but do I seem stubborn? If I'm actually very stubborn and don't acknowledge your opinions as much as I should, then I really have to work on that.

@ShadowDragon Yes, different plugin creators do create the same plugins even they don't have to and they do it in different ways. That is also a good thing as some of them might come in handy for certain people and others have a better time with the one of a different creator. I only spoke for myself, that I don't need to do what Yanfly already did. I didn't even know that there are 4 plugins that could replace my shop plugin and vice versa. All I knew, was that HIME had a shop plugin, yet I still wrote mine, because HIMEs implementation was not exactly what I wanted. So even I sometimes write something, that already exists.
I've actually come across a few discussions regarding people wanting options OTHER than Yanfly or VisuStella. Their plugins are so capable, so powerful, and so customizable that they're practically required. And because of that, most people don't bother with making their own if one of theirs will do the same thing. But with most of their stuff except cores being paywalled, some people want alternatives. Some people want alternatives BECAUSE it seems like their plugins are the only way to go. Some because while one of them can do a lot of things, they don't NEED most of the things so the rest of the code is at best, dead weight, and at worst, changing stuff they don't want changed.

I myself am working on a plugin that Yanfly or VS's ItemCore can already do. But where their plugin can do so much, mine is a more narrow focus. Because of that, mine will be more optimized for what it does, because it's only supposed to do what I'm focusing it on, so I don't need any other frills. To do the same thing in ItemCore, you'd have to use it a certain way. So if someone wants to do what my plugin does but doesn't already have/use their ItemCore, all they need is to use mine. (That and mine implements one aspect VERY differently that gives devs more control.)

Strictly speaking, I don't need to write my plugin, because they have one that can already do it. It's free, too. But that didn't stop me. I wrote it because I wanted to. I wanted to give the community an option other than ItemCore if they want what mine does. (I also didn't find out ItemCore could do what mine was aiming to do until I got stuck on something about halfway through and was googling for a solution.) And in doing so, I greatly expanded my knowledge of both MZ's scripts and Javascript itself. So even if nobody uses it and everyone says ItemCore does it better, it's still time well spent. And it gives me a great respect for Yanfly and VisuStella because some of the things were a pain in the rear to figure out, and their plugins use those features a LOT. I KNOW how much effort can go into some of their plugins, having done something similar on a much smaller scale.

TL;DR - Just because something exists, that doesn't mean you can't try to make one too. It's a good learning experience.
 
Last edited:

BurningOrca

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 14, 2019
Messages
229
Reaction score
201
First Language
German
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Okay I have to admit I was wrong, not everything is learnable. The example given to me with the wife that had zero talent for math by @Drakkonis is prove enough. As talent exists, also it's opposite exists.. If a person has zero talent or understanding for a certain topic, e.g. math, this person might really never learn it no matter how much effort the person puts in.

So I ask you...
Is memorizing, and reading, and hard work, the only path to knowledge and ability?
If yes, then that's a limit you pushed on yourself.
No, but it is one way that shouldn't be neglected just because there are faster ways. You cannot possibly know everything right from the start, so you have to read books or watch videos or ask other people about the topic and memorize what you've learned from the books/videos and other people. If you do pratical exercises like drawing or composing, you have to pratice or try things out. And yes, having talent helps a lot.

The easiest example is Ramanujan. A poor kid living in British occupied India around the beginning of the 1900s. Basically no formal training in math whatsoever. Self-taught by pestering college students until, at the age of 11, they ran out math they could teach him, at which point he started reading journals and treatises from the library
Now I am quoting this again, because this paragraph was why I thought it is more an example of interest and hard work, then talent, even I was wrong. This is an example of the combination of everything. He got interested in math, had a natural talent in math, but first learned from college students and later read journals and treatises. The later is (hard) work. Don't tell me it isn't work. Because of his talent he has reached a level others could dream of in way shorter time, but he still did work for it. So @SigmaSuccour, work is definitely not the only path to knowlegde and ability, but a necessary one, that cannot be neglected entirely.

I've now changed my opinion. Interest and dedication are not more relevant than talent on the path to success, but at least equally relevant. Same goes for luck.

And one final thing I want to say is: I personally bet that the chance a person has exactly zero talent in everything and also the chance that a person is talented in absolutely everything is positive, but next to zero.
 

Tamina

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2019
Messages
114
Reaction score
48
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I believe it's possible to break down most if not all skills in a methodological way. That includes art, creative writing, math, programming, logic etc.

And this methodological way can be used to teach people new skills. Therefore I think skills like art, math, logic can all be learned and improved with methodological trainings.

However, everyone will learn things at a different rate and requires different teaching method. This is difference between talent, which is more like a trait. This is why teachers notice students learn the same thing at a different rate.

Take math for example, Ive changed high schools and teachers several times in my life when I was a teenager, and I've certainly noticed certain teaching methods are easier to understood than another. As a result I had varying degrees of math test results depends on the math subject and teachers.

Same can be said for art, I wasn't particularly artistic in school but eventually I learned it through methodological means. Different people learn art differently, some very talented artist that I've seen seem to understand art inherently without needing much training, and they likely produce art result faster because they never need to go through the analytical thinking process of "getting" it. But ultimately different methods accomplishes the same thing.

I also believe people will unconsciously have interested in certain skills that they have talents for for a reason. Everyone has 24 hours a day, if you need 10k hours of practice to master a skill with talent, then someone without talent likely needs 50k hours of practice or more. It's likely too much work to see a good result so most people just give up on a skill that they failed to learn fast enough.
 

Latest Threads

Latest Profile Posts

I've been working on something on and off for a few years now, and I've been reluctant to share any details on the project before I had anything playable because I did not want to generate hype only for the project to go back on hiatus. That being said I believe what I'm working on is very unique and pushes the boundaries of what RPG Maker projects can be. Bold claims, I know but just wait.
Happy Mother's Day to all the moms :)
Create Anime Art w/ AI, Tall Sprites with Aurora, Customize Variable Display | RPG Maker News #34

[My favorite slow moving track I've made so far]
dd_airport2.jpgdd_combat.jpg
dd_town.jpg
I did an experiment to try to solve the art style problem between RTP and 3D models.
But, it feels this grimdark world is going to end even faster. :kaoswt2:

Forum statistics

Threads
111,193
Messages
1,059,170
Members
144,440
Latest member
Kono
Top