The move to Eurogamer has been long and fraught and the behind-the-scenes dev team who've put up with tons of my most anal of requests really deserve a lot of credit. The streaming HD stuff took a long while to get right. We're adopting a quality first approach - we use the same amount of bandwidth as YouTube HD, but just one minute of HD footage takes an hour to encode on a 3.33GHz i7. But I honestly think it's the best streaming video for gameplay online right now.
Yes, we've got a great Crackdown feature in the works, and the imminent debut of ODST at E3 gives us a reason to cover the Halo 3 engine in depth. We can only really go retro if we have something new and interesting to hang a feature off of (eg a sequel, hence the Uncharted feature).
Going forward, all new 360 exclusives will be covered.
The idea is to update the site daily. This is not easy when the 'big' stuff we do takes days and sometimes weeks to complete. However, today's update shows inFamous' cityscape from the highest point in the game world you can access.
And is everything in the distance always a blurry mess?
Nice view and game looks like it might be fun.
But ick, the city is a bit of blurry mess with some nasty (to me) pop in when you're descending.
Is there a lot of pop in like that in the normal course of the game? And is everything in the distance always a blurry mess?
Regards,
SB
Big projects in the works include the Uncharted 1 analysis (mostly done - FPS analysis is proving troublesome owing to static lighting)
I think it's just exaggerated depth of field, like in this pic:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/50mmnikkor/tonimattsharp_DOF.jpg
They might be doing that for cinematic reasons, to obscure low detail in the distance, to create a sense of vertigo, etc...
Well, in the latest ListenUp podcast John Davison I think mentioned that the engine Sucker Punch used for this game is a regular game engine not really optimised for the PS3. They put this into contrast with the next Sly Cooper game, which apparently will feature an engine optimised for PS3 hardware. So I'm guessing (haven't looked at it yet) the DF analysis will expose some of this, and it also explains how the game is mostly rated positive for gameplay aspects and art, and not necessarily for any technical achievements (which is almost a trademark for PS3 exclusives ).
Lots of collision detection.I'm really interested in the technical break down of how they did the moving levels especially.
Sorry if I sound dense, but is there a reason static lighting would interfere with an analysis? Doesn't the equipment you use capture the frame rate regardless of lighting conditions?
Yeah, can imagine so. Also the spontaneous shift of the terrain and how it's affecting everything around and on yourself, I'm really surprised that they weren't using any physics for all those.Lots of collision detection.
DOF do not want!
Bah, DOF is awesome when done well. I especially like how it was used in Gears of War 2. Where what you are looking at always comes into focus while the surrounds at different distances from that point you are focused on blurs. Sorta like real life.
DOF do not want!
But more seriously, I thought Crackdown handled it in a better way with that atmospheric haze approximation.
I popped in Crackdown the other day, I think they just have an aggresive LOD system (Renderware engine).
http://media.teamxbox.com/games/ss/1324/1178772080.jpg
It's an atmospheric approximation that changes according to the lighting and thus time of day. If you care to sit around for 20 minutes, you can see it change, so it's not part of LOD; it's much clearer at night time than during the day. There's a pretty good source for that anyway.