Uncharted : Drake's Fortune*

[patsu]

I´m not sure about that, from what I´ve seen the blending isn´t anything special.

See it on the big screen to understand the impact (The facial expressions and the complex and varied postures) ;-)

To produce the same scope/variety, the canned animation approach will require exponentially more work. The 3500 animations are basic movements that can be combined/blended on the fly to generate new stances and postures.

If the transition is rough (e.g. momentum-related issues), they should be able to improve it further based on the existing result.

 

[Neb]

I´m not sure about that, from what I´ve seen the blending isn´t anything special or maybe it´s the speed of the animations that makes the blending look worse than what it is?

That is interesting, it seems to me IMO that the animations are to fast (some) which may be why it seems unrealistic. Still the blendings in an animation is good but the transition is less.

 

[Obakan]

They are gameplay. There are no cutscenes that look like this. All the cutscenes (that we've seen) are story mode people talking or doing Hollywood style whatnots.

Exactly (refering to the bold text) that´s why you cant know if it´s a cut-scene or not, we have not seen them all and therefore one should not exclude that it may be a cut-scene, allthough I hope it is not.

As for a HUD, there's never been a gameplay HUD in this game. We've seen a recent addition in gameplay footage of a gun icon and ammo, but in most gameplay footage it's been absent. Whether it's switch on and offable, I don't know, but you can't rely on a HUD in this day and age to tell you when something's gameplay or not!

And that´s why you cant exclude that it may be a cut-scene.
I should add that Nebula never claimed that it was a cut-scene, he saw it as a possibility and can one blame him? No, because he is right (it might be a cut-scene), there´s no ammo icon and the camera-view is set right infront of the character which is not normal.
One can always ignore the possibilites but honestly I think that´s what one should not do.

That is interesting, it seems to me IMO that the animations are to fast (some) which may be why it seems unrealistic. Still the blendings in an animation is good but the transition is less.

Indeed.

 

[Neb]

Exactly (refering to the bold text) that´s why you cant know if it´s a cut-scene or not, we hav not seen them all therefore one should not exclude that it maybe be a cut-scene only animation, allthough I hope it is not.

I was thinking of games where you see cut-scenes but also small non-playable bits. For example you go through a door and it goes to non playable mode and the character looks around and sees something strange in the dark *drums and scary moment!* and then the control returns to player.

 

[Obakan]

I was thinking of games where you see cut-scenes but also small non-playable bits. For example you go through a door and it goes to non playable mode and the character looks around and sees something strange in the dark *drums and scary moment!* and then the control returns to player.

Indeed, that may be a possibility (i think that´s the same thing as cut-scene, because when one looses the controll of the player, the camer view is set to a special position and therefore graphical tricks etc. can be added). That´s why I think it´s wrong of others to claim that it´s in-game when they actually have no clue.

 

[patsu]

Hmm... so what if it's all in-game ?

 

[Scott_Arm]

The best place to see it was a magazine article that showed about 8 different cover positions. Still, natural motion isn't about things you can detect, but things that are imperceptible on a conscious level. If you can see the animations, chances are they're not subtle enough to do their job. Thus the run cycle might be blending loads of animations, but the overall effect if you're looking is that he's just running. Perhaps some people aren't sensitive to this? Could be that some people see the motion as natural, whereas other see it as 'samey'?

To me, the animation is definitely good, but not natural and still somewhat "samey." It definitely doesn't look real to me, but I appreciate some of the subtleties they have added with the animation blending. Blending is definitely the way things should be going. At the same time, the overall impression I get is not a huge departure from what I've had playing other games. It's definitely better, but I wouldn't say I've been "blown away." I'm all for the improvements they've made, and hope more developers follow suit, but I'm not going to shit in my pants about it.

I'm more impressed by animation that's reactionary to physics.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Hmm... so what if it's all in-game ?

If it's all in-game I think they'll all say it's great.

 

[deepbrown]

Indeed, that may be a possibility (i think that´s the same thing as cut-scene, because when one looses the controll of the player, the camer view is set to a special position and therefore graphical tricks etc. can be added). That´s why I think it´s wrong of others to claim that it´s in-game when they actually have no clue.

But we have a clue...because we've seen it in gameplay. UH. Seriosuly we should all just give up...because it's just annoying. "Animation isn't great"..."Well that's not ingame"..."so prove it"....it's not for us to prove, it's for you to discover.

You can see Drake flinch from an explosion in the 1up special, you can also see him ducking from bullets in quite early gameplay footage from gamer's day I believe. Plus you can see Drake runnning towards the camera in the CVG exclusive videos (spoilers beware)

Furthermore, you can see the improvements of the animation in recent videos...so watching old footage and saying "oh it isn't impressive is irrelevant" - for example Drake used to float up ledges, they've now made it look like he climbs up them, with a longer animation depending on how high the climb is.

 

[patsu]

If it's all in-game I think they'll all say it's great.

In my view, the most powerful idea behind the multi-layer animation system is NaughtyDog's attention to details. As long as they retain this trait, the technique will continue to improve and differentiate with each revision -- even if there are short falls in the first implementation. People will generally pick out (other) things they don't like. So I'm not sure if they will all say "great" if the blending is all in-game.

Whether the idea turns out well depends ultimately on whether the control feels responsiveness, and whether the animation looks natural enough (and has weight). It is somewhat irrelevant if it's 80% in-game or 20% cutscene or vice versa. I am sure ND will make the best decision to ensure a quality experience whatever their project constraints are.

So far from the trailers, it looks like what we have seen are predominantly in-game. We'll get to play it soon anyway.

I'm more impressed by animation that's reactionary to physics.

Not sure if it's in Uncharted. As it stands, it already has tons of things going.
e.g, common object physics, very nice water, solid fireball, blended animation, swaying/moving plants, animals, wet/damp effects on clothes, wrinkles, facial expressions, mouth animation, eyeball movement, muscle emulation, a rather lively story and cutscenes as opposed to stiff ones, etc.). Again, we will know for sure in a matter of days/weeks.

 

[Kittonwy]

NeoGAF vibes confirmed....

There are games that most likely are on par or maybe even better but that is for another thread not located in B3D. The thing is transition between animations is different between cut-scenes (real-time) and in-game play IMO.

It is interesting seeing Drake duck to avoid the bullets in the gif (cut-scene or ingame?) and yet he does not do it on other videos when those have clear gameplay... what is up?

That stuff is real-time.

If you watch the 1UP Show gameplay footage where they were talking about the game, you can see that Drake does instinctively duck while running when he's being shot at.

 

[Kittonwy]

Well, I haven't been "blown away" by any of the animations. The blending is definitely the way things should be going, and I appreciate the attention to detail having him look around and flinch or duck as bullets pass or explosions go off.

I'll pass judgement when I actually play the game, which probably won't be for a long time. 3500 animations is a lot, but some of them may be so subtle that you wouldn't notice them.

There was a physics demo for some Lucasarts Indiana Jones project that showed characters reacting to physics, and I found that far more interesting than what's been shown of this game.

That was a tech demo, there wasn't even a real game there, Uncharted is an actual game with animations tempered by the gameplay focus of having a character moving and acting which feels responsive to the player, one is a concept while the other is a practical application of great animations.

 

[Scott_Arm]

That was a tech demo, there wasn't even a real game there, Uncharted is an actual game with animations tempered by the gameplay focus of having a character moving and acting which feels responsive to the player, one is a concept while the other is a practical application of great animations.

I understand the difference. I just mean that if the type of interactions shown in that tech demo were implemented in a game, that would "blow me away." What's seen in Uncharted is definitely an improvement, and well done, but it doesn't do anything to sell me on the game. Just a matter of preference.

 

[Lycan]

I find some of the comments to be odd given that what stand most is the animations IMO. is facial expressions, postures, dodging, rolling etc are amazing. I was even more impressed by the way his punch landed than by the superb modeling of his arm !

 

[_phil_]

Of course it's full in game.People who don't think so haven't yet understood what the uncharted animation system is.
It's a fully proceduraly (and contextual) blending of multiple layers of animation.

This allow the legs to run while the chest turns right and the arms reload while the head looks at incomming bullets and eventually dodge it.

All of that are independant layers of animation.

The hard part is to make all that layers blend alltogether in believable way .
It's very hard to make it perfect ,but ND has done an incredible job yet.What they do here with the animation system is even more complex and ambitious than the one of assassin'creed ,this is why AC achieves a globally a more consistant overall look (less uncanny).

 

[deepbrown]

Of course it's full in game.People who don't think so haven't yet understood what the uncharted animation system is.
It's a fully proceduraly (and contextual) blending of multiple layers of animation.

This allow the legs to run while the chest turns right and the arms reload while the head looks at incomming bullets and eventually dodge it.

All of that are independant layers of animation.

The hard part is to make all that layers blend alltogether in believable way .
It's very hard to make it perfect ,but ND has done an incredible job yet.What they do here with the animation system is even more complex and ambitious than the one of assassin'creed ,this is why AC achieves a globally a more consistant overall look (less uncanny).

I suppose, but I do find Altair's movments quite disjointed when he's climbing...

 

[deepbrown]

I understand the difference. I just mean that if the type of interactions shown in that tech demo were implemented in a game, that would "blow me away." What's seen in Uncharted is definitely an improvement, and well done, but it doesn't do anything to sell me on the game. Just a matter of preference.

What about Heavenly Sword...the whole impact and success of it's combat was based on it's animation mixed in with it's physics system (from Havok)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Exactly (refering to the bold text) that´s why you cant know if it´s a cut-scene or not, we have not seen them all and therefore one should not exclude that it may be a cut-scene, allthough I hope it is not.

And that´s why you cant exclude that it may be a cut-scene.

Do you not remember the first E3 showings? For ages, we saw real gameplay with real people without a hub. Furthermore why would the game want a 2 minute cut-scene of Drake running around, shooting, fighting, taking cover, just like the game but without the player being in control??

If you're going to take the presence of HUD as the indicating mark of whether something in game or not (and BTW did you not look at my linked GT vid that shows some of this animation in effect, and with your HUD, so you can see some of this animation in effect in the confidence its gameplay?) over context, then your being overly cautious IMO! What's being shown in those clips matches previous gameplay stuff we've seen that is clearly gameplay, so why would anyone doubt it?

Anyway, there's no point arguing this now. In not too many days the demo will be out and people can see for themselves!

 

[slider]

Just saw the Gamer TV special. Was quite interesting. The story certainly seems engaging.

Amy and Evan seem like two confident individuals (in a good way).

They also covered the AI system. I've never seen games demoed like that before. Was quite interesting. Basically they showed where enemies vision was focused and where they could hear things from... I'll stop there because I'm not explaining it very well.

I'll keep my eye out for an online vid and post that instead.

 

[Scott_Arm]

What about Heavenly Sword...the whole impact and success of it's combat was based on it's animation mixed in with it's physics system (from Havok)

I don't own a PS3 and haven't played Heavenly Sword, so I can't make any comments on that one.