SvennoJ said:
Mazty said:
kain_kusanagi said:
I do understand it I'm just not using it as a scientific term. I'm using it in it's common usage. And I did watch the Nvidia video as well as the live PS4 Quantic Dreams presentation. And I've played LA Noir.
They all fail to simulate the human face in a photorealistic manner. LA Noir is too cartoony to be creepy, but the ld man and the Nvidia demo try their hardest to not be creepy and fail.
|
Not being perfect =/= uncanny valley.
If you are repulsed by the Nvidia or Quantic Dreams demo, I think you'll find yourself in a vast minority, showing the demos are coming out of the valley rather than being at the base of it as with Beowulf and LA Noir.
|
Guess I'm part of that minority too then, since the nvidia gifs at the first page are creepy to me too. Especially the middle one when he smiles or something. I didn't have that with LA Noir as they still look very cartoony.
One of the characters in Heavy Rain was getting near creepy too when trying to smile, one of the female characters where the teeth wouldn't move right with the facial expressions.
I guess as long as the animation is more realistic then the rendering then it's fine (LA Noir), but when the rendering looks more realistic then the animation it becomes creepy.
|
Go watch the actual video - movement has a lot more to do with the uncanny valley than graphics alone; you couldn't be more wrong as it's known that movement is much more indicitive of ending up in the valley so for something like LA Noir where the movement is realistic but eveything else isn't, that will end up in the valley more than the same animations on a more believably rendered head.
