By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The Uncanny Valley - A future problem for gaming?

Heavy Rain is actually a 2 year old tech demo. The game itself will not have the characters, settings or level of detail as the tech demo.


ah yes but the guys who made the tech demo just brought a game into the production cycle. So it will be interesting to see what they can do with the technology. as you said this is two years old.
The second half of this generation will be beyond awesome. With all the technology and development tools they build for the first round of games the second iteration will be great.



Around the Network
Viper1 said:
Heavy Rain is actually a 2 year old tech demo. The game itself will not have the characters, settings or level of detail as the tech demo.

The first real instance of Uncanny Valley seen in video games came about in sports titles just a few years ago (2005 I think). The players would animate very well, skin texture was decent but the eyes were dead. The didn't move, blink, etc... It gave the appearance of playing a bunch of zombies.

We're still another graphical generation away before it becomes a valid problem.

You're right. It's almost certain that the actual game will have a higher level of detail then the two year old tech demo.

"Quantic Dream highlighted, that the technology demo is just a sample of things achievable in a limited amount of time, and that during the making of the prototype, they still were in the middle of research and development efforts."



 

makingmusic476 said:
Did you guys see the original tech demo for Heavy Rain? Talk about uncanny valley material. Ugh.

That was one awesome tech demo.



Vaio - "Bury me at Milanello"      R.I.P AC Milan

In the 60's, people took acid to make the world weird.
Now the world is weird  and people take Prozac  to make it normal.

If laughing is the best medicine and marijuana makes you laugh

Is marijuana the best medicine?

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."

“If any creator has not played Mario, then they’re probably not a good creator. That’s something I can say with 100 percent confidence. Mario is, for game creators, the development bible.

Kyros said:

ah yes but the guys who made the tech demo just brought a game into the production cycle. So it will be interesting to see what they can do with the technology.

I'm not sure I fully understand what you're saying.

The devs of the demo are Quantic Dream, have been working Heavy Rain for the past 2 years.



 

The devs of the demo are Quantic Dream, have been working Heavy Rain for the past 2 years.


I think I remember a news letter recently that stated that Heavy Rain just entered the production cycle and that the things they did until know were preproduction. But who knows. Probably arbitrary distinctions anyway.



Around the Network
Alby_da_Wolf said:
makingmusic476 said:
sinha said:
makingmusic476 said:
Did you guys see the original tech demo for Heavy Rain? Talk about uncanny valley material. Ugh.
The animations make the entire thing very awkward and down right freaky, imo. The eyes don't help either.

Eyes? I think the eyes look fine. The freaky part is the entire mouth area, it just doesn't move right when she talks.


Yeah, the facial animations were the main problem. The eyes stick out a bit to me at least.


I found disturbing both eyes and mouth, eyes looked as those of a down girl that had badly executed plastic surgery, the mouth looked catatonic.

OTOH I found body motion quite well done, she moved really like a very shy and clumsy amateur actress at an audition.


Lips and mouth was to flat inside. Anyway, so many wrongs about it and still soo good! the future will be scarry!



I'm of the opinion that more graphical capabilities shouldn't necessarily be used for attempted photo-realism.

People's faces, mouths especially when talking, never look right anyway.

I still want to see stylized graphics in most of my games, not have them all look "real."  Games should have a style.  Valkyrie Chronicles really impresses me, for instance.  CoD, not so much...



Well it can and cant happen. It depends on the people creating the game. Have you ever seen a movie that was just unbelievable and you couldnt connect to it at all? While other movies you loved and connected to it the most?

The real question is whether you liked your cartoon childhood movies more than your real life movies as a teenager. Which do you remember? Which would you prefer? Nintendo is old school remebering the younger times, normally but not always associated with the better simpler times. While PS360 is focused on the here and now wanting it all demand associated thinking.

The choice is between reality or what could or should be.

It is a philosophical question for us all to answer individually, what is more important for me, as a gamer, a brother/sister, friend, mother/father, American, European, Japanese, or just as a human what really matters the most?



"Like you know"

We've been in the uncanny valley for a while already, and will continue to be for a long time.

It doesn't have to apply to every game, though. Some developers have gotten around it, while others have fallen into the trap. I think the most important part to it -- more important by far than the character models themselves -- is the quality of facial animation. Back on the PS2, for instance: God of War 2, otherwise a graphical powerhouse, had atrocious facial animation. Look at Kratos' wife 7 minutes into this video:

 

 

 

She looks like a corpse whose face is being grotesquely stretched around by some invisible puppeteer. This is textbook uncanny valley, and it didn't take near-photorealistic character models for it to happen. On the other hand, here's a scene from FF7: Crisis Core on the PSP, with similar-quality character models but much better facial animation. The creepiness completely disappears.

 

 

 

The uncanny valley is going to remain a potential problem for as long as CG animation is done using the methods we've got today. But it's always going to be avoidable by dev teams with the talent and willpower to do it.



makingmusic476 said:
Rath said:
windbane said:
 

Games will just do what movies do. It's not a big deal. I understand the concept, I'm just one that doesn't think it's a real issue. If you've ever seen a CG human face that is perfectly symmetrical, I think it's easy to see the unrealness of it. Generally people look more attractive the more symmetric they are, but no one is perfectly symmetrical, so when you see a fake image of perfection you can tell something isn't quite right. The solution is rather simple, though, so that's not really an issue. I think most of the time that this term comes up is when something is supposed to look realistic but doesn't, and that's just a matter of improving everything...this near-perfetion-but-not isn't a problem, imo.


Movies use real actors. Games don't realistically have that option.

Also the symmetrical face is just one example and an easy to solve one. In many cases it quite simply isn't that simple to improve it past the point of the uncanny valley. Eyes are a huge one, they are hugely important in human interactions and are incredibaly hard to make convincing to a human. Another major one is facial expressions.

 

Edit: What animated movies have extremely realistic graphics? Enough to say that they have definately passed the uncanny valley?

Edit2: Heavenly Sword graphics are not that realistic. The characters in it are so clearly non-human that the uncanny valley wouldn't apply.


Beowulf. 80% of my time watching that movie I was convinced the characters were real.


It's funny, the issue of the Uncanny Valley is most acute right now in motion capture--becuase they can get movement so close to real human movement, the Uncanny Valley is the biggest problem there in a way that it's only beginning to touch in video games.

A good example is Beowolf. The eyes are all wrong there. As is tongue movement. They're able to get really close to human expression, but are enough off it freaks most people out. I saw a whole symposium with Robert Zemeckis about MoCap. The things they're trying to do to get eyes right is astounding, but it still isn't quite there. Still, they were much more usccessful with Beowolf than with, say, The Polar Express. MoCap is at a place where they're almost over the Uncanny Valley.

Video games, however, aren't. Considering movement in 3-D space is only an issue in creating a computer animated or MoCap movie, not in consumng such a thing, whereas in video games it has to be done to, you know, play the game, the Uncanny Valley is a huge issue in games, and nearly everything this generation is mired in it. It's like the video of the first 13 minutes of MGS4--it looks breathtaking and real until you see the soldiers faces. Then they're just slightly...off. Or the wa Nico moves in GTAIV. Again, just...off. That video for Heavy Rain is the perfect example. She looks awful. Like 800 times worse than if she didn't look as likelike as she did. Ugh.



My consoles and the fates they suffered:

Atari 7800 (Sold), Intellivision (Thrown out), Gameboy (Lost), Super Nintendo (Stolen), Super Nintendo (2nd copy) (Thrown out by mother), Nintendo 64 (Still own), Super Nintendo (3rd copy) (Still own), Wii (Sold)

A more detailed history appears on my profile.