Is she talking to someone? Those eyes are dire if so, and that seems quite a bizarre mistake to let through, as locking eye vectors on a target isn't new or complex.
The technology of Alan Wake *spawn
- Thread starter nightshade
- Start date
yes she's taking to Alan.
Just aim constraining the eyes isn't enough IMHO, actually it should be divided between the eyes and the head and override the mocap head movement when necessary. And where you're aiming at matters too... look in the eyes of the other character, or at some arbitrary target can make a lot of difference, especially if the other character is not in the frame.
I've previously linked a nice youtube video somewhere, let me look it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q3sLLJUT0c
I've previously linked a nice youtube video somewhere, let me look it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q3sLLJUT0c
Sure it's far from ideal, but infinitely preferable to a china-doll's icy glaze! Has this model got independent eye meshes or are these eyes decals applied to a single-piece head mesh?
Can't tell because of the low res but it seems to be a separate mesh. There's usually a rather large hollow around the inner corners of the eyes and it looks like it's there on the woman's face.
Then again HL2 was praised for its facial animation and it had decals... probably because of Z-fighting with thin eyelids and eyeballs. Makes sense to LOD them whenever possible. But it shouldn't have any effect on gazes; you could just aim constrain the coordinate system for the eye decal projections instead of eyeball meshes.
Then again HL2 was praised for its facial animation and it had decals... probably because of Z-fighting with thin eyelids and eyeballs. Makes sense to LOD them whenever possible. But it shouldn't have any effect on gazes; you could just aim constrain the coordinate system for the eye decal projections instead of eyeball meshes.
True enough. Any ideas why the eyes are this way in AW? Some last minute bug or change that they'll fix with the patch?
IK is kinda resource hungry as far as I know, and proper rigs and procedural animation take human resources too. Art and engine development also have to work together very closely to implement features like this. So it's at least in part a question of the budget.
And it's not something trivial either, just because I've stumbled upon these videos does not guarantee that every other game developer and 3D artist does so, too. We've just discussed how almost every other game fails to get it right too... including character oriented titles like Heavy Rain at times.
We also haven't seen all of Alan Wake to judge all the animations, we don't even have a clue about the amount they have in the game.
And it's not something trivial either, just because I've stumbled upon these videos does not guarantee that every other game developer and 3D artist does so, too. We've just discussed how almost every other game fails to get it right too... including character oriented titles like Heavy Rain at times.
We also haven't seen all of Alan Wake to judge all the animations, we don't even have a clue about the amount they have in the game.
Indeed, I was thinking what reference standards are there. My argument was very theoretical based on a nice, convenient paper idea on what is needed to direct eyes! It caught me unawares that a character these days could stare into space instead of who they are talking to, but it may be a common compromise for all I know!
Kameradschaft
Regular
I have a question to all the guys that know about 360 development/programming and its pros and cons as a hardware here...I'm really curious to know if there is an excuse for this game to run at such a low resolution and not even run at a steady 30fps with v-sync on? is the post-processing effects that taxing? or is it the lighting? the game also has low resolution textures and really bad looking shadowing...and all that in a game with linear areas.
Am I missing something? when I see other recent games (which are multiplatform) like Battlefield: BC2, Lost Planet 2 and Red Dead Redemption for example running at 720p with a lot of stuff on screen at the same time at better frame-rates with equally impressive vistas I can't stop thinking that AW technically is such a disappointment and just a bad/dumbed down port of the PC version...I just find it hard to believe that after 5 years of development and especially after working exclusively on the 360's hardware for 2-3 years Remedy came up with that flawed and unpolished engine.
Am I missing something? when I see other recent games (which are multiplatform) like Battlefield: BC2, Lost Planet 2 and Red Dead Redemption for example running at 720p with a lot of stuff on screen at the same time at better frame-rates with equally impressive vistas I can't stop thinking that AW technically is such a disappointment and just a bad/dumbed down port of the PC version...I just find it hard to believe that after 5 years of development and especially after working exclusively on the 360's hardware for 2-3 years Remedy came up with that flawed and unpolished engine.
Billy Idol
Legend
Some stuff could look really good! I like the atmosphere created in night in the forest...all the swaying trees and stuff - looked good.
But I think (as already mentioned by someone here in this forum) that we have to factor in that Remedy is a rather small dev team.
When finishing a game, I typically look at the credits...and I really wondered because in the case of AW the credits were really short! So this could maybe an explanation...
A team of 50 dev can be considered a medium sized team instead of small...its less than many big budget games for sure though.
Umm it is more about hitting 360 perfomance and capabilities limit. Their game vision was set around PC platform and obviously that wouldn't translate well to console hardware. But they decided to skip as little as possible by dropping resolution. As I see it AW is doing far more technically in graphics department and realtime stuff that is..
Are we sure that we are right in assuming its a case of hardware limitation rather than programing limitation ?
Imo its more due to the later, cause I see many rough areas apart from the resolution to consider it a technical one.
Imo its more due to the later, cause I see many rough areas apart from the resolution to consider it a technical one.
Kameradschaft
Regular
That's what I'm saying, if the game run at 720p at it's current state or at 540p but with a higher frame-rate, better textures and some object motion-blur for example I'd be more positive about the engine and I could understand sacrificing the res or the texture resolution but now the game just looks so rushed and unpolished in many areas besides the great-looking effects and the beautiful lighting that's hard to accept that the low-res, the tearing and the mediocre textures are there because of a hardware limitation.
Heh...I had the exact same thoughts when I read the DF interview 
I'm seeing dithering in Alan Wake's hair, but I'm not sure if it's from shadows projected onto his head. Any time there are showed on his neck or face, they are considerably dithered. Also seeing dithering in some dithering in foliage. There is a part where you're in Alan Wake's house, and there is a vase full of sun flowers in one of the rooms. If you rotate the camera near them, it looks dithered like the snow foliage in Bad Company 2 on the 360. A2C without AA? Same with the green plant by the window in the same room. Wish I had a capture card. When it's dark, it's hard to tell if the outdoor foliage has the same problem.
Edit:
Foliage on trees doesn't seem to have the same dithering.
Edit:
Foliage on trees doesn't seem to have the same dithering.
Last edited by a moderator:
While i think AW looks quite good i have couple of compliments about some things.It kinda hurts seeing how stiff and blocky lip syncing is,i dont know is it because of UC2 and now RDR but it seems very unnatural and un polished.Textures are quite low res(as it seems to me) and details in world like chairs,radio,cars...look look very low in poly count which kinda remind me of last gen,so those details in world put it down quite a bit IMO.But i do like volumetric fog,draw distance and lightning,its on of the finest that i have seen on consoles...
Anyway,i have a feeling that such a long dev time and totally changing direction of the game hurt the tech it self as it kinda feels out dated.I think it might be duo to the game firstly being open world game to show of PC power,but then linear exclusive for 360...maybe thats why textures are not as good as some other linear hi profile games and low poly count on alot of details in the game.
Anyway,i have a feeling that such a long dev time and totally changing direction of the game hurt the tech it self as it kinda feels out dated.I think it might be duo to the game firstly being open world game to show of PC power,but then linear exclusive for 360...maybe thats why textures are not as good as some other linear hi profile games and low poly count on alot of details in the game.
The game uses A2C for transparencies....and leaves the job of reducing artifacting to MSAA.
This is what you wanna show right ? And you are also not wrong when you say that the shadows are dithered.
Seems that some transparencies have MSAA applied and others do not. I have to add, I really like the look of this game, despite some obvious flaws.
