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

Forums - Sony - ND Dev: No ANIMATOR can REPRODUCE What we've Done (Uncharted 2)!

The Ghost of RubangB on 24 October 2009
CGI-Quality said:
WereKitten said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
CGI-Quality said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
It's already possible. It's just too expensive. So they found a shortcut. Big deal. Sounds like every other pretty game out there.

Really? Most "pretty games" aren't even in the same league as Uncharted 2 when referencing animations, which is what their point was.

They raised the bar with procedural shortcuts.  That's awesome.  But it can definitely be reproduced with animation alone.  It would just take tons of time and money and patience and probably cost too much money to be worth it.  Procedural generation and animation is the future.  Believe.

And a cow can jump to the moon. It's not impossible, only very unlikely. So unlikely that I can say that you won't see that in your lifetime because the expected time for such even to happen is extremely big when compared to the age of the universe, and you would be right in saying it is for all practical purposes impossible.

Same here: if it takes ten thousand men-years to animate manually a character to the same effect, then it won't happen in any videogame and it is by all practical purposes impossible. Making it possible in practice won't change the life of anybody, but is a big deal for a developer who works on animations and is interviewed about his work.

Why so hasty to dismiss the hard work of talented people?

A question that should be addressed to many people, as this seems to happen often.

I'm not dismissing their hard work.  I'm dismissing their boasting.

I even called that type of animation "awesome" and "the future" in my posts, and wasn't being sarcastic at all.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

Around the Network
WereKitten on 24 October 2009
The Ghost of RubangB said:

I'm not dismissing their hard work.  I'm dismissing their boasting.

I even called that type of animation "awesome" and "the future" in my posts, and wasn't being sarcastic at all.

What boasting?

As for the actual content: the same not being doable by manually animating an explosively increasing number of models is a fact. So that's not boasting as in making wild, subjective claims.

As for the form: he's being interviewed by Digital Foundry - a videogame tech blog. So he's not boasting as in pushing a tech feature matrix over other aspects of the game or trying to be confrontational against the art of animation.

Your words: "Big deal. Sounds like every other pretty game out there"

In this context it is a big deal, and it's not like every other pretty game out there. It's a nice accomplishment, and he's right to be proud of it.

 



"All you need in life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." - Mark Twain

"..." - Gordon Freeman

Alic0004 on 24 October 2009

Rubang, do you really have the technical knowledge to make a judgment on whether the procedural animations specifically created for Uncharted 2 could be perfectly replicated by an animator working with more traditional techniques?

If you assume infinite time and infinite hardware specs, I can see that, but it seems a bit arbitrary, since no game can take forever, not to mention the fact that the article seems to be pretty clearly referring to current generation hardware. (The interview the article quotes is titled "Behind the Scenes: Mastering the Cell Processor.")



 

The Ghost of RubangB on 24 October 2009

Oh it's a tech blog? I take it back then. That's totally the perfect time and place for this kind of talk. Good day folks.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

damndl0ser on 24 October 2009
coolbeans said:
aragod said:

That Turn 10 remark deserves a slap, they aren't boosting themselves to the heavens, they are just trying to EXPLAIN their technology to ordinary folk.

I suggest you read through more of their remarks on here before spouting this.

I got into this thread a bit late and I was thinking the same thing before you had posted.  If you had put Turn 10's name in here, there would have been atleast 3 or 4 people saying they wouldn't purchase the game just because of their "cockyness".  SIGH.......

 

I for one can care less if they are cocky or not, if anything they should be cockier.  The game certainly deserves as much praise and sales as it can get (the games wonderful).  I just think that the hypocrits on here should think about their attitudes when it comes to other devs.  Because the same bs you spew can and will be turned against you at a later date when "your" devs start talking smack.



"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow."

Quote by- The Imortal John Wayne, the original BADASS!

 

 

 

Around the Network
Feylic on 24 October 2009
damndl0ser said:
coolbeans said:
aragod said:

That Turn 10 remark deserves a slap, they aren't boosting themselves to the heavens, they are just trying to EXPLAIN their technology to ordinary folk.

I suggest you read through more of their remarks on here before spouting this.

I got into this thread a bit late and I was thinking the same thing before you had posted.  If you had put Turn 10's name in here, there would have been atleast 3 or 4 people saying they wouldn't purchase the game just because of their "cockyness".  SIGH.......

 

I for one can care less if they are cocky or not, if anything they should be cockier.  The game certainly deserves as much praise and sales as it can get (the games wonderful).  I just think that the hypocrits on here should think about their attitudes when it comes to other devs.  Because the same bs you spew can and will be turned against you at a later date when "your" devs start talking smack.

Thing is, Naughty Dog isn't talking smack, so nothing to worry about.



Staude on 24 October 2009
WereKitten said:

@OP

You missed the point, that is not about the quality but about the technique.

He's not saying that their animations will never be beaten by other games.

He's saying that they are procedurally mixing and blending partial animations in such quantity and variety that an animator (as in an artist manually creating them) could never produce the sheer quantity of combinations.

lol exacly. The whole op is just a is interpritation XD

 

don't use caps, darth when you get the point wrong :p



Check out my game about moles ^

aragod on 24 October 2009
coolbeans said:
aragod said:

That Turn 10 remark deserves a slap, they aren't boosting themselves to the heavens, they are just trying to EXPLAIN their technology to ordinary folk.

I suggest you read through more of their remarks on here before spouting this.

I think I should've pointed out, that I ment Naughty Dog, talking about their technology. Turn 10 was there because someone in like 5th reply put Turn 10 selfboosting-insecure-bigmouthed developer in the same light as the very honest-humble-talented Naughty Dog. I wanted to /slap that person.



MY HYPE LIST: 1) Gran Turismo 5; 2) Civilization V; 3) Starcraft II; 4) The Last Guardian; 5) Metal Gear Solid: Rising