Gears of war behind the scenes

Hahaha oops! Sorry about that!

 

i do particle stuff.60 fps is another world.physics or not.

 

Realskywolf:

Maybe this an unfair/stupid comparison (stationary fire, vs. fire on moving characters), but the fire in this demo looked much better than the fire in the Killzone2 demo. I thought those flames in KZ2 looked like blobs of orange Jell-o that swished around. Haven't played Res4 so can't compare that, but I thought fire in GoW was pretty well done compared to what I've seen (which granted, ain't much).

 

60 fps is always nice and all, but I'm just wondering about the "cries out" for part. Again, I don't see that as something of that level of certainty.

The only reason we really notice the smoothness difference at 60 fps is because 3d motion in games is inherently discrete in nature... i.e., rather than exuding the feeling that you're moving from point a to b, it really shows that you're popping in discrete steps -- and these steps are better hidden at higher framerate. When you watch a movie (which is only 12 fps), there is the continuity in the motion within the image plus the fact that our brains are naturally adept at piecing together the ways that people and animals and plants will move (and so our brains do smooth things out for us).

In theory, if we were capable of *true* motion blur (i.e. temporal antialiasing), as opposed to the feedback crap that people normally do, things could still look reasonably smooth at 20 fps, but it's not a very realistic goal... besides which, motion blur alone will not do the job. It also requires very high production value on the animation side.

 

Excellent post, Monkey.

 

I'm really not trying to flame you here kold but the flames in KZ looked way better than the flames in GOW. I think the flames in KZ is one of the many reasons that people say that the video is not possible. Again not flaming and I don't want to get this to get off-topic I just couldn't help but to respond to what you said.

Honestly to me the fire is one of the worst things in GOW. I think this is mainly because the game just isn't finished, so I expect the fire in the finish game to look much much better.

 

The majority of movies (excluding IMAX, 65 & 70mm, and other special cases where they have been known to shoot at a higher number) have always been shot a 24 FPS, not 12. US TV video has always been ~30FPS (NTSC standard.)

 

No worries mckmas8808. I was just specifically thinking of the soldiers that caught fire after the flamethrower is launched--IMHO those particular ones just looked kind of fake. In light of your post, I just went to watch the KZ demo again to compare, and ok, fair 'nuff--I probably overstated the case quite a bit--the other flames and explosions in the KZ demo are incredible, and I'll concede, the flame effects are significantly superior to the ones in GoW. (The smoke effects together with the flame are particularly awesome as missiles and whatnot are flying around). I still think the guys on fire looked off (really this is kind of a nitpick, and like the flames in GoW can probably be fixed too), but otherwise, the flame effects are generally much much better in KZ. Anyway, thanks for making me rewatch the demo, I kind of forgot how mindblowingly good it is. So, uh no need for a flame war...

 

That fire did have a kind of 'metallic' sheen to it.

 

RE4 fire looks really good and when you use flame grenades on zombies, they burn reallistically too. The burning flames in the KZ2 demo doesn't look very realistic at all. It looks like a giant candle flame engulfing a full sized human being. When was the last time you saw a candle flame the size of a person?

KZ on PS2 is the same thing. The flames are too big and are out of scale. Look at the pic below. It looks like someone did a video capture of a real flame and pasted it into the game environment. Look at how big the individual flamelets are with respect to the rest of the scale. It's like rendering a small puddle of water with big gigantic waves

 

in movies , it's impossible to have a large traveling without poping syndrom passed a certain speed of relative movement.

It's just poping +blurry (and heart sickness).
i understand all what you'r saying,but like some say here ,60 fps get you better into the world and opens deeper and wider expressivity.

Games can do 60fps ,it's a strengh of this media (over movies)
Dev SHOULD use it and design with it in mind.

 

Back in the day, Voodoo 4/5 came out and it had some nifty new features: anti-aliasing, depth of field blurring, and motion blur.

Has anybody actually seen their motion blur in action? I'm sure it's nowhere near the type of motion blur you get from film, but would something like this be worth using?