Soul Calibur II Programmer Interview (Translated by me)
- Thread starter Fast Fourier
- Start date
DeathKnight
Regular
There's no reason to go HDTV unless you go all the way... ie: actually getting a quality HDTV that's worth the money you paid for it. I've read some reviews on a few 27" tube HDTV's and it was mentioned many times that the picture quality just wasn't that great.
I've done quite a bit of research and my eyes are set on that 27" JVC
I'll upgrade to a nice HDTV a year or so before HDTV becomes standard (2005-2006).
I've done quite a bit of research and my eyes are set on that 27" JVC
I'll upgrade to a nice HDTV a year or so before HDTV becomes standard (2005-2006).I agree with DeathKnight, HDTV is the future of image quality for TV's for the next years. Although as of now, it would be IMO useless to buy one now, as not much actually uses the 1080i out there as of yet.
I plan to get a 50inch Toshiba Projection this summer for 1000, cheap as hell. 3 S-video and 2 component inputs, amazing.
I plan to get a 50inch Toshiba Projection this summer for 1000, cheap as hell. 3 S-video and 2 component inputs, amazing.
Fast Fourier
Newcomer
Namco's Hiroyuki Kobota, Programmer for Soul Calibur II Project Darkside
"The work started with the arcade version..."
Q: Even while still producing the arcade version, you knew that there would be 3 versions simultaneously release on home consoles, correct? Just how was the staff allocated to handle this feat?
Well as our producer has said to us, you've got your work on the OS level (or the people who make the libraries), and you have the people who work on the game portion, so we tried to split it up like that. We started using this system about when we started developing the arcade version.
Up until now, every single staff member had nearly monolithic tasks to do single-handedly, but we realized maybe doing it that way was an antiquated method. Even before we were talking about home versions, we started talking about dividing the work up.
Q: So even before the home ports were decided, what sort of reasons did you have to do this?
Well how we used to do it when you have everyone using the same hardware, you have the possibility of the same code being produced in different places. Someone would do it one way, yet while in another place someone would do it another way, things like that. When you think of the big picture, it's wasteful. As the project gets larger and larger, we stressed working efficiently more and more.
It also helps in terms of a knowledge base too. Especially as hardware gets more and more advanced, it would also be wasteful for every programmer to spend time learning how to paint a single polygon to the screen, so I think it's very important to gather and disperse knowledge in a skilled manner.
Q: Considering the overall amount of work involved in making the graphics engine, do you think getting that done was accomplished in a quick amount of time?
Well because the design of the graphics engine has a direct impact on the design of the game, and because you have to know how what the designers envisioned will actually display to the screen, the graphics engine took precedence, and within halfway into the console port project, you could say it was virtually finalized.
You have to push it hard until you can stop and say "this is how it will look". When we unveiled the game in January, there was more finalized with the graphics engine than you would probably imagine."
"The work started with the arcade version..."
Q: Even while still producing the arcade version, you knew that there would be 3 versions simultaneously release on home consoles, correct? Just how was the staff allocated to handle this feat?
Well as our producer has said to us, you've got your work on the OS level (or the people who make the libraries), and you have the people who work on the game portion, so we tried to split it up like that. We started using this system about when we started developing the arcade version.
Up until now, every single staff member had nearly monolithic tasks to do single-handedly, but we realized maybe doing it that way was an antiquated method. Even before we were talking about home versions, we started talking about dividing the work up.
Q: So even before the home ports were decided, what sort of reasons did you have to do this?
Well how we used to do it when you have everyone using the same hardware, you have the possibility of the same code being produced in different places. Someone would do it one way, yet while in another place someone would do it another way, things like that. When you think of the big picture, it's wasteful. As the project gets larger and larger, we stressed working efficiently more and more.
It also helps in terms of a knowledge base too. Especially as hardware gets more and more advanced, it would also be wasteful for every programmer to spend time learning how to paint a single polygon to the screen, so I think it's very important to gather and disperse knowledge in a skilled manner.
Q: Considering the overall amount of work involved in making the graphics engine, do you think getting that done was accomplished in a quick amount of time?
Well because the design of the graphics engine has a direct impact on the design of the game, and because you have to know how what the designers envisioned will actually display to the screen, the graphics engine took precedence, and within halfway into the console port project, you could say it was virtually finalized.
You have to push it hard until you can stop and say "this is how it will look". When we unveiled the game in January, there was more finalized with the graphics engine than you would probably imagine."
Fast Fourier
Newcomer
Increasing Efficincy With Tools...
Q: Maybe we could hear about what tools you have used that impacted development?
For 3D modeling we use Maya. For animation we use Softimage, and textures are made with Photoshop. And depending on the designer there are also those who use things like "Painter".
For 2D image compression we use OPTPiX iMageStudio.
Q: How much more efficient is it when you use tools like these?
OPTPiX iMageStudio was recommended to us by a certain staff member and we have been using it since around when we started developing Soul Calibur 1. Of course it's been optimized for various platforms, so as long as the original image file is created properly you can make textures very rapidly. And they look quite nice on the screen, too. So we are doing fine in that regard.
Q: Personally I have thought that Soul Calibur's look and colors are very pretty, is there some concrete reason that makes it look that pretty and separates it from the pack?
We tend to concentrate on graphics in our games, and this game as well is made with extravagant graphics. The biggest difference is probably the how we are using textures.
Q: Do you mean amount of textures or the texture color depth?
The designers are using as much as they need. Well, even saying that there are speed limits, but probably the main thing is that we are letting them create as much as they want to the maximum extent they have the power and space to do so.
We also pay close attention to detail with lighting and so on, and so I think those small details also build up piece by piece to make it appear so nice.
Q: Even when making the arcade version, you surely made a lot of effort put into making certain stages work but now since in the home versions you're including new stages and stuff, did you have to cutback in any places?
In a way, but in any game when you add on new features you have to cut back somewhere and so we have done tuning to make it work. However, when it comes to things like textures or polygon counts, we have made no sacrifices whatsoever.
Q: Sorry for keep wanting to talk about textures, but since nowadays you use both high resolution and low resolution textures, have there been any abnormal difficulty regarding this? Well for example on PS2, you can't use S3TC textures, but you can on the other two machines. If you go and do that, and pass the texture that has been created to the individual hardware, and sort of like an operating system you hand it to the library, so the basic difference is that when passing to the PS2 you use a primary color texture, but GC and Xbox S3TC.
Yeah, well for example the exporter should know how to make a texture that matches the according hardware and create an appropriate format. When you talk about a Maya scene, a PS2 scene, a GC scene, an Xbox scene, if you want to be accurate they are totally different. Basically in iMageStudio a designer is already using optimized data. Now that's on top of Maya. So because of things like that exporter, it's not like the graphics engine is changing formats of the data on the fly. It's like we are doing that in advance now.
Q: So after the tools have comleted that stage, looking at the respective console's data that has been created would all look the same.
Basically, yes.
Q: But they're still different from the textures that have been created at design time? For example if we're using Xbox it's D4 compatible, so the resolution might be different.
Yeah, but basically, for example if you turn mip-mapping on, the needed texture for the appropriate resolution is chosen for us almost automatically. Sometimes if you don't let the hardware handle some of that stuff for you you'll suddenly have more than a boatload of stuff to do (laughs)
To be blunt, for example with D4 the size of the television isn't really going to change, so the amount one would see inside a single doesn't change either. You know even if you increase the overall resolution, without changing the textures the look will be pretty much the same. Mainly you just eliminate jaggies. You do become able to see smaller details concerning the textures, but that's the biggest one.
We originally made it with the goal of looking pretty on a 29 inch monitor, so even changing to D4 won't be that much different.
Q: Is there anything you'd like to say to the readers of this article?
I'd like to just say that most of what I do you probably would never be able to tell at first glance. Doing what everyone takes for granted is my job, because if the player feels completely comfortable, then it is a success. So for people like me that is the most satisfying thing - doing well everything that you probably don't realize is there. If you actually buy all 3 versions, and look long and hard, you'll see very minor differences. You rock if you can figure out what all of them are. Thanks a lot
Thanks
Q: Maybe we could hear about what tools you have used that impacted development?
For 3D modeling we use Maya. For animation we use Softimage, and textures are made with Photoshop. And depending on the designer there are also those who use things like "Painter".
For 2D image compression we use OPTPiX iMageStudio.
Q: How much more efficient is it when you use tools like these?
OPTPiX iMageStudio was recommended to us by a certain staff member and we have been using it since around when we started developing Soul Calibur 1. Of course it's been optimized for various platforms, so as long as the original image file is created properly you can make textures very rapidly. And they look quite nice on the screen, too. So we are doing fine in that regard.
Q: Personally I have thought that Soul Calibur's look and colors are very pretty, is there some concrete reason that makes it look that pretty and separates it from the pack?
We tend to concentrate on graphics in our games, and this game as well is made with extravagant graphics. The biggest difference is probably the how we are using textures.
Q: Do you mean amount of textures or the texture color depth?
The designers are using as much as they need. Well, even saying that there are speed limits, but probably the main thing is that we are letting them create as much as they want to the maximum extent they have the power and space to do so.
We also pay close attention to detail with lighting and so on, and so I think those small details also build up piece by piece to make it appear so nice.
Q: Even when making the arcade version, you surely made a lot of effort put into making certain stages work but now since in the home versions you're including new stages and stuff, did you have to cutback in any places?
In a way, but in any game when you add on new features you have to cut back somewhere and so we have done tuning to make it work. However, when it comes to things like textures or polygon counts, we have made no sacrifices whatsoever.
Q: Sorry for keep wanting to talk about textures, but since nowadays you use both high resolution and low resolution textures, have there been any abnormal difficulty regarding this? Well for example on PS2, you can't use S3TC textures, but you can on the other two machines. If you go and do that, and pass the texture that has been created to the individual hardware, and sort of like an operating system you hand it to the library, so the basic difference is that when passing to the PS2 you use a primary color texture, but GC and Xbox S3TC.
Yeah, well for example the exporter should know how to make a texture that matches the according hardware and create an appropriate format. When you talk about a Maya scene, a PS2 scene, a GC scene, an Xbox scene, if you want to be accurate they are totally different. Basically in iMageStudio a designer is already using optimized data. Now that's on top of Maya. So because of things like that exporter, it's not like the graphics engine is changing formats of the data on the fly. It's like we are doing that in advance now.
Q: So after the tools have comleted that stage, looking at the respective console's data that has been created would all look the same.
Basically, yes.
Q: But they're still different from the textures that have been created at design time? For example if we're using Xbox it's D4 compatible, so the resolution might be different.
Yeah, but basically, for example if you turn mip-mapping on, the needed texture for the appropriate resolution is chosen for us almost automatically. Sometimes if you don't let the hardware handle some of that stuff for you you'll suddenly have more than a boatload of stuff to do (laughs)
To be blunt, for example with D4 the size of the television isn't really going to change, so the amount one would see inside a single doesn't change either. You know even if you increase the overall resolution, without changing the textures the look will be pretty much the same. Mainly you just eliminate jaggies. You do become able to see smaller details concerning the textures, but that's the biggest one.
We originally made it with the goal of looking pretty on a 29 inch monitor, so even changing to D4 won't be that much different.
Q: Is there anything you'd like to say to the readers of this article?
I'd like to just say that most of what I do you probably would never be able to tell at first glance. Doing what everyone takes for granted is my job, because if the player feels completely comfortable, then it is a success. So for people like me that is the most satisfying thing - doing well everything that you probably don't realize is there. If you actually buy all 3 versions, and look long and hard, you'll see very minor differences. You rock if you can figure out what all of them are. Thanks a lot
Thanks
Teasy said:
now that i think of it, i can think of some people who'd love to do that if it means getting rid of him.... er....
Similar threads
