EvaUnit02 on 15/9/2008 at 14:54
No more mute protagonists, thanks. It worked for HL1, but it definitely didn't in HL2. The more interaction that a game has when NPCs, the lower the "suspension of disbelief". In other words, there's less immersion.
More "men of few words" please, like Sgt. Nathan Hale from Resistance. These fellas are FAR more believable than the Gordon Freemans of the world.
Sulphur on 15/9/2008 at 16:36
Quote Posted by Shadowcat
Well that sounds like the clipping is working perfectly.
You could still refer to those things as clipping problems, but the clipping itself isn't actually actually what you want to be improved :)
I get what you're saying. :) My beef was indeed with the clipping issues in games; my bad on the nomenclature there.
Quote:
It's a collision detection issue at face value, but there are bunch of other factors as well. Once the character collides with something like that, how does it react? What should the animation system do if the animation it wants to use will result in such a collision, and what kind of additional technology must be introduced to handle that? If someone's foot goes through their ass when they kneel, is it animation or modelling that's at fault? If you don't have the technology to make it look perfect every time, then is it better to apply your animations to a collection of cookie-cutter models with different textures, or should you vary your models at the risk of introducing a few clipping problems in some cases? Or should you provide every distinct model with a customised set of animations? And if the latter, how do you deal with subsequent changes to the animation sequences?
Good point. I see how that can make the task exponentially difficult given the number of models and sets of animations you have in a game. Never really thought about the logistics of going and manually fine tuning each model by hand for every animation/level state just for a bunch of (admittedly minor) clipping issues.
Quote:
I agree that it looks naff when solid objects intersect, mind, but it usually seems to me that improving these little issues implies some pretty significant additional tech. It
would be nice to think that the likes of the Unreal Engine would by now offer the facilities to easily prevent such occurrences, and that large studios would have the resources to make it happen for their game.
At least with the modern prevalence of physics in games, corpses and other falling objects don't usually fall through the walls these days, so it's not like there's been no progress in these areas :)
Yeah, also those good ol' times when you're walking into a dark corner in a level and suddenly find yourself falling into the sky are almost gone. That was actually pretty entertaining at points. :D
Speaking of progress, I think one way to eliminate a lot of those issues from canned, keyframed animation is procedural animation systems like Euphoria.
I think Crysis had something similar in it, wasn't the tech where models automatically aligned their walk/stance according to level elevation procedural? It looks like we're getting there. I guess it's just that, in this case, you've got to learn to walk before you can kneel.* :D
*This pun sponsored by late nights and way too much coffee. Kindly excuse me while I go and decaffeinate my brain.
Angel Dust on 16/9/2008 at 00:57
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
No more mute protagonists, thanks. It worked for HL1, but it definitely didn't in HL2. The more interaction that a game has when NPCs, the lower the "suspension of disbelief". In other words, there's less immersion.
In your opinion. I can see where you are coming from but the fact is I found HL2 and it's Episodes to be easily some of the most immersive gaming I've ever experienced. Maybe that's because I don't talk much in real life though :p
Shadowcat on 16/9/2008 at 02:51
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Yeah, also those good ol' times when you're walking into a dark corner in a level and suddenly find yourself falling into the sky are almost gone.
Ha. True, it's been a while since I've seen that one.
Quote:
That was actually pretty entertaining at points. :D
Indeed :)
Quote:
Speaking of progress, I think one way to eliminate a lot of those issues from canned, keyframed animation is procedural animation systems like Euphoria.
Agreed. That's 'significant new technology', of course, but it's long over-due as a common feature, in big-budget games at the least. (Personally I've been wanting it for more than a decade, but I can still count on one hand the number of game-based implementations of the idea that I've seen).
polytourist97 on 16/9/2008 at 04:48
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
No more mute protagonists, thanks.
I'd rather have a mute protagonist to one that chirps off phrases I would never even think to use at times I would never think to use them (GTA3 vs GTA:SA).
The same goes for dialogue. To me it's a worse immersion breaker to have all the options be things I wouldn't think to say, than to have no options at all. Stalker had a lot of that. It was probably one of the few things I didn't like about the game.
Angel Dust on 16/9/2008 at 05:27
What I dislike is games that have vague options. You think your character is going to say one thing when in actualilty they say another. Also the dialog option that goes on too long and goes down a path you wouldn't have chosen. That's fine in a game where you have no choice at all in dialog scenes but a bit infuritating in a game where you dialog is part of the gameplay. Faranheit was particularly bad at this
Thirith on 16/9/2008 at 06:15
Quote Posted by polytourist97
I'd rather have a mute protagonist to one that chirps off phrases I would never even think to use at times I would never think to use them (GTA3 vs GTA:SA).
The same goes for dialogue. To me it's a worse immersion breaker to have all the options be things I wouldn't think to say, than to have no options at all. Stalker had a lot of that. It was probably one of the few things I didn't like about the game.
To me these are two very different things, and both are valid devices in games. In
GTA: San Andreas I didn't play myself, I played a fairly clearly defined character (I never got the hate for him, but that's just personal taste, I guess). In the
Half-Life games I played a cypher into which I could project whatever I wanted. For me, both of these are absolutely okay if done well. I enjoyed playing Garrett, for instance, even though I never felt that I *was* Garrett (in terms of character), nor did I have to be.
Just like any storytelling device (which these are), I don't see the point in putting up any restrictions. If it serves the story, do it, whether that means having a silent protagonist or one that talks constantly. As long as it's done well.
RavynousHunter on 16/9/2008 at 10:33
My own personal peeve with (older) FPS's is the whole thing where you can't shoot through a 2-foot wide opening in some random railing. I realize this was a limitation placed to reduce the poly count to acceptable levels, it's just annoying.
Another thing that bugs the shit out of me is the "magic auto-track bullet" feature in CoD4 online; I can be sprinting from A to B, only having to go a few meters, then I get gunned down by the time I'm behind a brick wall. And in the (extremely annoying) "DeathCam," it actually shows me going behind the wall, then doing a backflip and landing face-first on the ground.
I also have a love/hate relationship with ragdoll physics' interaction with the world when it causes people to hang by their extremities from a grating, railing, dumpster, etc. It looks funny, sure; but it still looks kinda bad, ya know?
june gloom on 18/9/2008 at 01:23
Quote Posted by The_Raven
If I recall correctly, the enemies would flinch in Half-Life 1; however, for some inexplicable reason, Half-Life 2 had nothing of the sort.
They
do flinch, although I've only ever seen Combine do it. The Combine AI aren't the brightest bulbs in the box- when they're taking hits they don't make much of an effort to move to cover- they keep shooting at you. I prefer to think that's part of their training rather than any failing in AI.
