The character must move.
The pitch must convince.
The existing game does not meet the requested visual standard. It is retained as an interaction prototype. The next milestone is one convincing Elisio-and-Zoe passing drill; final character models and approved soccer motions are still missing.
Elisio’s movement test: see the actual result.
Production draft — not approved for a lesson. The character is animated, but the output adds a foot movement near the ball, then walks left rather than right. The camera also reframes. It does not meet the planned motion brief. No qualified coaching review is recorded.
Silent video. Original generation retained without a corrective edit.
Visual review: the face, kit and overall art style remain recognizable, and the boots stay in the sampled frames. The extra foot action, wrong travel direction and camera reframing fail the brief. This is visual review, not a measurement of natural gait or coaching approval.
Output: 5.04 seconds · 1280 × 720 · 24 fps · silent H.264 MP4 · separate captions. Reviewed across the sequence at six frames per second. No retry was made.
Silent action description
Elisio makes an extra foot movement near the stationary ball, turns, walks toward screen left and settles facing the camera. The framing changes during the shot. This is not a technical soccer demonstration.
Purpose: establish identity continuity, natural weight shifts, planted feet and a stable camera. This is a movement test, not a soccer-technique lesson or an interactive character.
Starting reference: approved clean Elisio. Requested: one continuous shot, five seconds, 16:9 MP4, silent; a separate caption describes the actual output. The reference has an eye-level camera, so this test keeps that framing. The future gameplay keyframe must establish the elevated sideline camera before animation.
Exact motion prompt
Locked camera. The boy takes two small relaxed steps toward screen right and settles into a balanced standing pose. His feet plant firmly on the grass and his arms swing gently. His entire body and both boots remain in frame. The ball rests beside its starting position throughout. Continuous five-second shot with stable lighting.
Budget: 0 additional credits. Native Runway account: Max, Unlimited selected; Gen-4.5 is explicitly listed as included. The interface states that generations in this mode do not use credits. The existing pilot remains 96 / 96. This does not establish zero-credit access for other models or the connector.
A real rig check, before a game character.
The new browser tool opens a self-contained GLB on the device, reports its skeleton and animation clips, plays selected clips, crossfades motions and supports direction controls. A mechanical test asset verified actual skin deformation. That test asset is not Elisio and is not published as character artwork.
The tool cannot create a 3D model from an image. It never grants visual or coaching approval. Final Elisio and Zoe files are not loaded because they have not been created.
Keep the approved character.
Preserve Elisio’s face, eyes, hair, complexion, proportions and unbranded kit. Teodoro/Teo and Elisio remain Italian; Leo retains his tanned complexion. Coach Maya, Zoe, Malik, Amélie and Pip remain part of the cast. Every child can lead, learn, receive support and make mistakes.
Required art review: front, side and action views; face, hair, fabric, fingers, boots and silhouette. A primitive model, flat pose swap or sliding sprite does not meet the final character standard.
Build one drill, then expand.
| Stage | Deliverable | Current state |
|---|---|---|
| Character production | Original Elisio and Zoe models matching approved references, skinned skeletons, textures and motion clips. | Missing. No local 3D authoring application or relevant modelling connector was found. |
| Free tool path | Author and rig in Blender; export self-contained GLB for the existing Three.js browser game. | Practical proposed route. Blender is not installed and finished models have not been produced. |
| Pitch | Higher left-to-right broadcast view, natural grass, fine supported goal mesh and convincing shadows. Use accurate Toronto/BMO references where visible. | Visual rebuild pending. Rejected sky/roof artwork will not be reused as final art. |
| Responsive drill | Find space → controlled ground pass → receive → share the next turn. Natural walk/turn/stop transitions and synchronized foot/ball contact. | Controls and game rules exist; final animated delivery does not. |
| Mobile companion | Watch/Pause/Replay, captions, one step at a time, pause-and-try prompt and optional gameplay. | Guide controls work with draft illustration. Replace it with reviewed final media. |
| Instructional release | Exact-asset visual review, official coaching-source check, qualified coaching review and device tests. | Pending. No technical animation is approved for teaching. |
Proposed transfer target: 5 MB per first character, textures at or below 2048 px, measured 30 fps on representative tablets. These are engineering targets, not measured performance claims.
Asset specification · Official browser loader documentation · Animation system · Blender glTF export documentation
Keep the learning fair.
Soccer, mathematics and language have separate progression. Reading or mathematics difficulties never prevent soccer participation. Offer demonstration, captions, spoken guidance, visual steps, supportive retries and adult-observed physical practice. Screen achievements do not establish physical skill mastery.
The current game uses demonstration progress stored in the browser, visible to people who share that browser. Secure family accounts and privacy controls are unfinished. No new curriculum-alignment or official-endorsement claim is made here.
Rejected passing draft and coaching gate
The earlier Runway passing draft contains extra sole-like contacts and multiple touches. It does not show a single controlled inside-foot pass. It remains rejected for instruction; no qualified coaching approval is recorded.
Check support-foot position, contact surface, timing, balance, follow-through and reception against the relevant official guidance, then obtain qualified review of the exact asset before instructional release. These are proposed platform release checks, not official certification requirements.