The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Killzone'.
Found this: [URL]http://crazyhamzters.com/extras/video/killzoneconfirm.wmv[/URL]
Listen carefully to what's being said.
I'm saying nothing, but I am crossing my fingers.
The full interview can be found here: [URL]http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748475/vids_1.html[/URL]
Listen carefully to what's being said.
I'm saying nothing, but I am crossing my fingers.
The full interview can be found here: [URL]http://media.ps3.ign.com/media/748/748475/vids_1.html[/URL]
Page:
Kinematics is the physics of moving objects and current gen consoles will be able to do that no problem to the same sort of standard as Half-Life 2 using the havok engine or similar.
When you're talking about animation and getting actors to move to a variable specific point in real-time you're talking inverse kinematics blended with animation.
Inverse kinematics works by finding the final point you want to go to then recusively moving each joint towards it in turn to the extent of it's physical constraints. But to avoind this looing extremely robotic frame by frame it needs to be blended with a preconfigured animation and then you need to layer different animations for different things.
When you're talking about animation and getting actors to move to a variable specific point in real-time you're talking inverse kinematics blended with animation.
Inverse kinematics works by finding the final point you want to go to then recusively moving each joint towards it in turn to the extent of it's physical constraints. But to avoind this looing extremely robotic frame by frame it needs to be blended with a preconfigured animation and then you need to layer different animations for different things.
I did hear something about this generation games including proper kinematics, although perhaps that was the tech demo where the entire console was used for a single explosion or something like that.
Maybe next generation.
I think that this generation will be about swinging the controller as a virtual sword handle, but I would say that! ;-)
Maybe next generation.
I think that this generation will be about swinging the controller as a virtual sword handle, but I would say that! ;-)
I think Bonus is right, that's probably NOT actual Gameplay.
On the other hand, the PS2 opened up several new doors that we couldn't even imagine when we all had PS1s. The in game animations etc. were SO much more impressive. Let's have a look at MGS1 and then MGS2. MGS1 was, pretty much, move and hide. With some shooting and strangling in there as well. There wasn't much in the way of in game animations. Now look at MGS2, where Snake has different animations for walking, sneaking up on enemies, tapping on walls and the rest of it. Raiden';s hair and Snake's bandana also waved around acording to the PHYSICS Konami had created in the game.
The PS2 has also started to introduce much more interactive environments. Very few are fully destructable, but that's because the PS2 doesn't have the power to handle all the extra info.
But look at the PS3, it has SO much more power, it is surely fully possible for them to create fully destructable environments, and we'll be seeing much more fluent in-game animations. With a new console, MGS4 could be to MGS3 what MGS2 was to the original; a MASSIVE step forward.
While I think Bonus is probably right, I don't think it's impossible to make gameplay like that and I reckon we WILL see gameplay like that, if not at launch, than a few years into the era of the next-gen consoles.
On the other hand, the PS2 opened up several new doors that we couldn't even imagine when we all had PS1s. The in game animations etc. were SO much more impressive. Let's have a look at MGS1 and then MGS2. MGS1 was, pretty much, move and hide. With some shooting and strangling in there as well. There wasn't much in the way of in game animations. Now look at MGS2, where Snake has different animations for walking, sneaking up on enemies, tapping on walls and the rest of it. Raiden';s hair and Snake's bandana also waved around acording to the PHYSICS Konami had created in the game.
The PS2 has also started to introduce much more interactive environments. Very few are fully destructable, but that's because the PS2 doesn't have the power to handle all the extra info.
But look at the PS3, it has SO much more power, it is surely fully possible for them to create fully destructable environments, and we'll be seeing much more fluent in-game animations. With a new console, MGS4 could be to MGS3 what MGS2 was to the original; a MASSIVE step forward.
While I think Bonus is probably right, I don't think it's impossible to make gameplay like that and I reckon we WILL see gameplay like that, if not at launch, than a few years into the era of the next-gen consoles.
I heard some poop about it taking 10 years to make the game to that standard.
Certain things will for the most part look like they are. The vehicles etc probably will. What you'll lose is most of the fine details. Even in the MGS4 video you still see flat billboards and room for improvement, so some things might even begin to look better.
The major thing which will have to be different is the animation of both Snake and the characters from Killzone.
As soon as you are out of the cut-scene you're going to have animations which follow a cause and effect system based on user input. You're going to have a limited number of actions you can carry out and things wont be so tightly integrated in a final game. Ther emight not be any reason for the actual graphics and lighting to be any different, but it wont be possible for the animation to be the way it is in those videos.
You'll have to start to see repeated sequences etc. etc. once the charcters become interactive and they'll have to be done in a way which doesn't just feel like you're controlling a character on rails. Examples are just daft things like the players feet and how assured they look on them.
To get that done in a real-time interactive game you're going in for a world of pain with Inverse Kinematics and blended animations.
For Icarus's sake, it's going to need lots and lots of power and I'm not entirely sure that the next-gen systems are going to have that sort of power especially not this early in the development of multi-threaded engines.
The major thing which will have to be different is the animation of both Snake and the characters from Killzone.
As soon as you are out of the cut-scene you're going to have animations which follow a cause and effect system based on user input. You're going to have a limited number of actions you can carry out and things wont be so tightly integrated in a final game. Ther emight not be any reason for the actual graphics and lighting to be any different, but it wont be possible for the animation to be the way it is in those videos.
You'll have to start to see repeated sequences etc. etc. once the charcters become interactive and they'll have to be done in a way which doesn't just feel like you're controlling a character on rails. Examples are just daft things like the players feet and how assured they look on them.
To get that done in a real-time interactive game you're going in for a world of pain with Inverse Kinematics and blended animations.
For Icarus's sake, it's going to need lots and lots of power and I'm not entirely sure that the next-gen systems are going to have that sort of power especially not this early in the development of multi-threaded engines.
This is what I saw... [URL]http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143916&did=1[/URL]
I just watched the trailer. It's quite obviously not actual gameplay, but still mighty impressive.
I wouldn't be surprised if the actual game (MGS4) does look like that. Why? MGS games are basically a series of set-pieces, and - good as they have been - they're not exactly taxing.
If the demo at TGS could be interacted with, then you're practically three-quarters of the way there, aren't you?
What we need to remember is that the PS3 (and the 360 before anyone accuses me of bias) are supposed to be - hopefully - making things possible which haven't been up to now. It could just be possible that games will be this good when we're playing them.
I just watched the trailer. It's quite obviously not actual gameplay, but still mighty impressive.
I wouldn't be surprised if the actual game (MGS4) does look like that. Why? MGS games are basically a series of set-pieces, and - good as they have been - they're not exactly taxing.
If the demo at TGS could be interacted with, then you're practically three-quarters of the way there, aren't you?
What we need to remember is that the PS3 (and the 360 before anyone accuses me of bias) are supposed to be - hopefully - making things possible which haven't been up to now. It could just be possible that games will be this good when we're playing them.
Bonus wrote:
> Exactly the same as the MGS video, scripted and made to look really
> nice but no way will the final game look or play anything like that
> video.
I did, away down there in my first post in this thread and it was questioned so I explained ;-).
> Exactly the same as the MGS video, scripted and made to look really
> nice but no way will the final game look or play anything like that
> video.
I did, away down there in my first post in this thread and it was questioned so I explained ;-).
It's all very well showing off your know how, but you could have easily ct that down to: it was scripted.
Maybe real-time in the context I'm using it should be looked at as objects being transformed to world and then camera space at a rate of say 60 fps. That way when they move the camera around it is still doing the same number of calculations in the renderer so that's easy to do.
The actual content of the video itself isn't interactive in any way other than the fact that they can pause the scripts controlling the pre-written animation at any time and move the camera around.
The actual content of the video itself isn't interactive in any way other than the fact that they can pause the scripts controlling the pre-written animation at any time and move the camera around.
Exactly, it's being rendered real-time, but it's not running any realtime physics calculations at all which makes simple things which are overlooked such as momentum calculations, collision calculations, level of detail, game logic, AI and all similar things non-existant in the demo. It also allows the developers to animate the models in a non-game like way.
The animations you saw there would be difficult to emulate into a control system. Just stupid things like the way the characters put their hands out to their other team members would need a phenominal amount of inverse kinematics to get it to look that good in a game situation when another model falls over and their arm isn't necessarily at an exact point. But in a cut-scene you can animate the actor to fall over and have an arm at a specified point and have another actors fingers and had reach exactly to where it is without having to calculate the positions against joint restrictions in real-time.
This is just a tech-demo and any final game will look and play nothing like that because there are no gameplay mechanics involved there whatsoever.
It just shows what the PS3 might be able to do with real-time cut-scenes (which I've never said isn't impressive) and not what gameplay is going to look like.
The animations you saw there would be difficult to emulate into a control system. Just stupid things like the way the characters put their hands out to their other team members would need a phenominal amount of inverse kinematics to get it to look that good in a game situation when another model falls over and their arm isn't necessarily at an exact point. But in a cut-scene you can animate the actor to fall over and have an arm at a specified point and have another actors fingers and had reach exactly to where it is without having to calculate the positions against joint restrictions in real-time.
This is just a tech-demo and any final game will look and play nothing like that because there are no gameplay mechanics involved there whatsoever.
It just shows what the PS3 might be able to do with real-time cut-scenes (which I've never said isn't impressive) and not what gameplay is going to look like.
Page: