Medal of Honor: Airborne Dev Q&A and some screenshots

Titanio

Legend
I couldn't find my old thread on this (?) so a new one will have to do. Seems some of the online press is able to start covering this game now:

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/medalofhonorairborne/news.html?sid=6144103

GS: How much variety will there be in the missions, and how will the game break down in terms of playtime?

PG: In each mission there will be encounters in the air (airdrop) and on land. Most missions cover an enormous area (measured in miles), although you will not cover every square inch of the operation area. We are still playing around with mission objectives--the current thinking is, going into a drop, the player will have intelligence and a mission, but the specifics of that mission only reveal themselves as you move about the world. For example, discovering a German communications center will fill in a subobjective in your log book and mission screen.

So to that extent, missions will be dynamic--the player will have good intel going in, but will only get the full dimension of the mission as they engage and recon. The encounters will be varied to suit the Airborne subject matter.

GS: What can you tell us about the "jump," and how it will affect your experience in the game?

PG: We're going for as seamless an experience as possible, from the airfield briefing to the plane, to the jump itself. As a player, you control everything a soldier would control--the actual exit from the plane, and the drop from that point forward. From the air, you will likely be able to see every objective in the operation, but the extent to which you can reach them will depend upon your exit point and the altitude of the jump.

Apart from that, it is entirely up to the player to read the battlefield beneath him. He can go for a tower for sniping opportunities, steer after his squad to rally quickly on the ground, land in the heart of his primary objective for a direct (and usually extremely difficult) assault, land on rooftops, crash through windows, in alleys, on top of walls, and on and on. The entire space is playable.

Sounds like there's some nice potential there! The AI will be crucial in this one..
 
These images are obviously not screenshots. Some of them do seem to use ingame assets as well, but they're placed over painted backgrounds...
 
Laa-Yosh said:
These images are obviously not screenshots. Some of them do seem to use ingame assets as well, but they're placed over painted backgrounds...

I also thought they looked weird somehow. Specially that image with the planes.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
These images are obviously not screenshots. Some of them do seem to use ingame assets as well, but they're placed over painted backgrounds...

The last one is clearly artwork. The first possibly/probably. The other two are harder to tell, I think. The one with the planes I think was labelled in the GameInformer article as running off the engine.
 
Titanio said:
The last one is clearly artwork. The first possibly/probably. The other two are harder to tell, I think. The one with the planes I think was labelled in the GameInformer article as running off the engine.

Hmm funny..I see that one as obviously fake/artist impression (but what do I know..)
 
3roxor said:
Hmm funny..I see that one as obviously fake/artist impression (but what do I know..)

Well to my eyes I'd agree..I'm just relating what I remember from the GameInformer article. I might be remembering wrong, though ;)
 
i think the first 3 pictures are completely in engine. i was just looking at crysis screen shots and they have a painted feel aswell. so perhaps this is a trend in graphics. that the best techniques availiable now give that look.

after all if the any of the first three were concept art work, why would that have two styles of artwork for their concepts?

i'm wondering why it's so difficult to get naturalistic tones? what is it about the tones in reality that's hard to capture?
 
Danalys said:
i think the first 3 pictures are completely in engine. i was just looking at crysis screen shots and they have a painted feel aswell. so perhaps this is a trend in graphics. that the best techniques availiable now give that look.

after all if the any of the first three were concept art work, why would that have two styles of artwork for their concepts?

i'm wondering why it's so difficult to get naturalistic tones? what is it about the tones in reality that's hard to capture?

MGS4 sometimes has that art work look to it too. I guess next-gen games in screenshots will look like art work.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
Sorry mckmas but there are some very obvious differences between the abilities of both realtime and offline rendering, and what a simple paintbrush can do. Nextgen games may get more stylized, but Halo3, even Halo4 won't ever look like this:

http://www.goodbrush.com/cm/albums/commercial_projects/bungie/DervishAndChief.jpg
http://www.goodbrush.com/cm/displayimage.php?album=32&pos=2

Art of Craig Mullins

Honestly I can't say that it won't look that good. And those are really good drawings.
 
Why on Earth can't you understand that simple freehand painting is so far more powerful as a tool to create imagery that no computer can ever catch up to it?
Yes you can do a lot of different post-processing, but you can't manually paint 60 frames per second for a game, thus you'll never have the ability to set the exact color that you want for each and every pixel. And games are even more constrained than movies and CGI because of their interactive nature.

Nevertheless, your beliefs have never been shaken by reality before, so why do I think that it would happen in this case?...
 
Laa-Yosh said:
Why on Earth can't you understand that simple freehand painting is so far more powerful as a tool to create imagery that no computer can ever catch up to it?
Yes you can do a lot of different post-processing, but you can't manually paint 60 frames per second for a game, thus you'll never have the ability to set the exact color that you want for each and every pixel. And games are even more constrained than movies and CGI because of their interactive nature.

Nevertheless, your beliefs have never been shaken by reality before, so why do I think that it would happen in this case?...

Calm down man good god. I'm not talking about from a pixel to pixel basis like you are. I was talking about the overall feeling when seeing the visuals of the game. I would bet anybody $100 that Halo 3 looks as good as those paintings (relatively speaking). I read the comments that the people gave to that guy. I bet when the game is released people will be just as happy about the graphics due to them being in the same league.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
Why on Earth can't you understand that simple freehand painting is so far more powerful as a tool to create imagery that no computer can ever catch up to it?
Yes you can do a lot of different post-processing, but you can't manually paint 60 frames per second for a game, thus you'll never have the ability to set the exact color that you want for each and every pixel. And games are even more constrained than movies and CGI because of their interactive nature.

Nevertheless, your beliefs have never been shaken by reality before, so why do I think that it would happen in this case?...

That's quite a response to a guy who just said "Honestly I can't say that it won't look that good. And those are really good drawings."

I would have to agree with him. Calm down!
 
Back
Top