Heavy Rain Dev Calls L.A. Noire's MotionScan Tech a "Dead End"
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
I am now going to carry a copy of the Orange Box around with me wherever I go, just in case I run into the nob so I can slap him with it. That quote isn't even subjective, considering the amount of people that have said it works for them when done right.DustyDrB said:
The funniest thing is, I don't actually disagree with him about the LA Noire tech (facial textures look fairly poor, and the bodies do look separate to a certain extent), but he comes across as such an arrogant little cock that I'd happily ignore all those things to spite him.
In the end, technology is just a means to an end.
Just because you have super-awesome state of the art tech, doesn't automatically mean that your game becomes any better for it.
Look at Valve, they've been doing convincing facial-animation (animation in general, actually) since 2004 (and mostly done by hand, if I'm not mistaken).
Who cares if your tech is better than Rockstar's, it's the end result that counts.
Just because you have super-awesome state of the art tech, doesn't automatically mean that your game becomes any better for it.
Look at Valve, they've been doing convincing facial-animation (animation in general, actually) since 2004 (and mostly done by hand, if I'm not mistaken).
Who cares if your tech is better than Rockstar's, it's the end result that counts.
He really should wait until he can demo his own tech before shitting on someone else's. He may be right, and the facial capture certainly sounds like it might be on the expensive side, but saying "I can do it better and cheaper" without backing it up makes him look like one hell of a pretentious git.
Put up or shut up, Cage.
Seriously, what's with developers talking smack about other developers? Is the games industry run by a bunch of fucking toddlers going "WAAAAAAAH MY WATTLE'S BIGGER THAN YOUR WATTLE!"
Seriously, what's with developers talking smack about other developers? Is the games industry run by a bunch of fucking toddlers going "WAAAAAAAH MY WATTLE'S BIGGER THAN YOUR WATTLE!"
Who cares? It looks awesome and is an actual game. This guy just knows how to make a pretty crappy movie.
He is seriously reminding me more and more of later years George Lucas.
Convinced of the brilliance of his own work, apparently unable to take advice from anyone, obsessed with tech and while admittedly full of good ideas, completly unable to tell a story that´s actually worth something.
Convinced of the brilliance of his own work, apparently unable to take advice from anyone, obsessed with tech and while admittedly full of good ideas, completly unable to tell a story that´s actually worth something.
) and I haven't seen what new technology this guy is talking about.
This is the equivalent to a school child saying his toy is better than the other kid's. Both of these are relative dead ends because there will be better versions to come, the idea is that you develop the idea with these games being baby steps.
Honestly, that guy wasted his breath. He has said almost nothing that we all didn't already know.
Honestly, that guy wasted his breath. He has said almost nothing that we all didn't already know.
Stop twisting Gage's words. He's not shit talking, but bringing up a real concern. It's just a shame he's a professional and not entitled to the privilege to make simple comments that we all enjoy.
It's true, if you look at L.A. Noire's MotionScan technology, the actors are confined to a small sphere of stationary cameras and have to sit stiffly without actual real life interactions. That's not natural, and limits the acting and animation potential.
Compare that to say Jame's Cameron's Avatar or Resident Evil 5 where cameras were attached to the actor's heads and shooting their faces and had them actually move around and interact. That makes a load of difference.
Still this great motion capture technology still can't hold if your characters aren't believable. Naughty Dog, VALVe, and Pixar animate mostly by hand. No motion capture just, looking at references and moving sliders! And look where that has taken them.
It's true, if you look at L.A. Noire's MotionScan technology, the actors are confined to a small sphere of stationary cameras and have to sit stiffly without actual real life interactions. That's not natural, and limits the acting and animation potential.
Compare that to say Jame's Cameron's Avatar or Resident Evil 5 where cameras were attached to the actor's heads and shooting their faces and had them actually move around and interact. That makes a load of difference.
Still this great motion capture technology still can't hold if your characters aren't believable. Naughty Dog, VALVe, and Pixar animate mostly by hand. No motion capture just, looking at references and moving sliders! And look where that has taken them.
And all this coming from the guy who gave us this [http://burnallzombies.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/heavy-rain-video-game-01.jpg?w=150]?
And he's saying this [http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/115/1152732/la-noire-20110228111545520-000.jpg] is a dead end?
No, go on, Mr. Cage. I'd love to hear more. Just pardon the stifling of my uproaring laughter.
And he's saying this [http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/115/1152732/la-noire-20110228111545520-000.jpg] is a dead end?
No, go on, Mr. Cage. I'd love to hear more. Just pardon the stifling of my uproaring laughter.
I love how any topic that even mentions Quantic Dream immediately turns into a rant thread about how much Heavy Rain sucked.
David Cage is a dick, sure (although, having read his personal blog archives, I think he might actually be suffering from some severe mental ailments), but what did he say here that was false? Rockstar's mocap tech is good, and the game it made looks good (both of which he freely admits), but it IS incredibly expensive and it ISN'T versatile.
Yeah, pots and kettles and all, but still, this is bordering on ad hominem attacks.
David Cage is a dick, sure (although, having read his personal blog archives, I think he might actually be suffering from some severe mental ailments), but what did he say here that was false? Rockstar's mocap tech is good, and the game it made looks good (both of which he freely admits), but it IS incredibly expensive and it ISN'T versatile.
Yeah, pots and kettles and all, but still, this is bordering on ad hominem attacks.
Oooooooooooohhhhhh, buuuuurn.
This is great, some good ole fashioned competition!
Put your money where your mouth is, Quantic Dream! Show us what you got!
All that said, Cage does have a point. What Rockstar is doing is capturing the body and face separately, and that's a pretty big hurdle when animation for anything, especially for video games. The facial technology looks absolutely astounding, but when you look past that it doesn't seem to really excel in other places (textures are kind of flat, mainly on the face, and the eyes of course are off.)
However, it's a pretty bold claim to make with this guy. At first I didn't mind his pretentiousness because, well, sometimes you need to be pretentious to move forward. Nowadays, though, it is starting to backfire against his favor as some people have pointed out (I don't think I need to restate what they've been saying, just read this thread).
This is great, some good ole fashioned competition!
Put your money where your mouth is, Quantic Dream! Show us what you got!
All that said, Cage does have a point. What Rockstar is doing is capturing the body and face separately, and that's a pretty big hurdle when animation for anything, especially for video games. The facial technology looks absolutely astounding, but when you look past that it doesn't seem to really excel in other places (textures are kind of flat, mainly on the face, and the eyes of course are off.)
However, it's a pretty bold claim to make with this guy. At first I didn't mind his pretentiousness because, well, sometimes you need to be pretentious to move forward. Nowadays, though, it is starting to backfire against his favor as some people have pointed out (I don't think I need to restate what they've been saying, just read this thread).
Actually if they are trying to emulate movies it makes sense to capture the face and body separately.
The way you act to a camera changes according to how close that camera is; when the camera is in tight focus a lot of the actor's tools are taken away from him. Body language is no longer part of the performance, and you have to compensate for that - your taught to compensate for that. So if a camera in game is up close to a character's face, it makes sense to put the actor in the same situation so that they can adapt their performance for that situation.
So it makes sense for facial expressions to be filmed in that way, since the majority of the time a player sees the face of a character up close they are unlikely to see the characters body language.
That said, I've not seen the system in action yet - for all I know its a path strait into the Uncanny Valley.
The way you act to a camera changes according to how close that camera is; when the camera is in tight focus a lot of the actor's tools are taken away from him. Body language is no longer part of the performance, and you have to compensate for that - your taught to compensate for that. So if a camera in game is up close to a character's face, it makes sense to put the actor in the same situation so that they can adapt their performance for that situation.
So it makes sense for facial expressions to be filmed in that way, since the majority of the time a player sees the face of a character up close they are unlikely to see the characters body language.
That said, I've not seen the system in action yet - for all I know its a path strait into the Uncanny Valley.