-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Uncharted 2 world premiere at Spike VGAs
- Thread starter mcdonnell
- Start date
SolidSnakex
Member
epmode said:
http://www.ripten.com/2008/01/16/riptens-uncharted-interview-tease-the-machine-is-a-beast/
So they could run the cutscenes without recording them, but do you think the trade off of having load times just so you can say "Hey those are completely real time!" would be worth it?
I don't follow. The cutscenes and gameplay look almost indistinguishable...and for ND to now say that that Uncharted 2 trailer is real-time, we can expect the very same graphics (just about) in the gameplay.epmode said:
Their whole method is to make the cutscenes indistinguishable from the gameplay, even if they improve the shadows slightly, so Uncharted 2 will look like that trailer. OK?
There we go, that's the interview we want. Rich is a leg end.SolidSnakex said:
Dead Man Typing
Member
deepbrown said:
But they activate all sorts of extra effects that the PS3 couldn't do in real time with a stable frame-rate (enhanced lighting higher level of detail on all objects) and record the best possible looking version of the engine. Not the same graphical quality as the gameplay, or if the cutscene was real time a la RE4(Gamecube/Wii) or MGS4(almost all cutscenes, a few are movies).
Developers have been using tricks to get better looking cutscenes and passing them off as a measurement of the game's graphical prowess for a long time now. When the game engine isn't worried about player inputs or processing complex AI, it has a lot more power to make a game look nicer. RE4 is a perfect example of this, the Leon character model you play with in game is around ~5000 polygons, while the cutscene model is ~7000 polygons. But the cutscenes are being generated in real time, as noted by character costume changes when playing through a second time.
At the start of this generation the pre-rendered in engine idea started to gather momentum and quite a few games use it now. Gears of War was the most disappointing to find out that it faked quite a few of it's most impressive cutscenes bu doing an ingenine pre-render using in game assets. It's a cheat in my opinion and one that doesn't matter in the slightest, but it still irritates me for reasons I can't explain.
If Bungie had pre-rendered Halo 2's cutscenes we wouldn't have been subjected to all that texture pop-in.
EDIT: I'm too tired to be typing right now, that post is a mess. But I think people will get what I'm trying to say. Maybe... I'll retype it tomorrow.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
deepbrown said:
In Uncharted 1 lighting was tweaked a bit too.
http://www.ripten.com/2008/01/17/ri...iew-part-1-background-and-character-creation/
SolidSnakex
Member
epmode said:
If you're going to do most of the cutscenes a certain way you might as well do all of them like that. I'm surprised more devs don't use this technique. It helps the game in the long run because it eliminates or greatly reduces load times while still keeping a visual consistency with the gameplay.
Hmm, I'm sure they could have pulled off most of the cutscenes in realtime, but the framerate would have been inferior. That's really the main issue, I think. Uncharted had plenty of tearing and slowdown throughout and I think the extra effects during the cutscenes would have pushed things over the edge.SolidSnakex said:
Eh, I think the loading there was more a result of their inability to handle any sort of real data streaming. They seemed to be approaching things in a more old school fashion (like the Source engine) by simply loading most of the data needed for a scene into memory. I don't recall ever seeing any texture pop-in, which would also support that theory.
I don't believe that ND was covering up load screens with the cutscenes in Uncharted at all nor do I believe videos would have solved the loading issues with MGS4.
This argument seems, pointless, can't people just be happy that we are getting a sequel to a really good game. Yes that cutscene looks really nice, and I honestly don't see any reason why what we saw can't be real time. MGS4 proved that the PS3 is a workhorse, "loading.. loading... loading" aside. I think we are going to be floored by this game when it comes out. The veritable hate-on that erupts on GAF when trailers comes out for new games is flat out ulcer inducing at times. Its as though some people on here want nothing more than to throw a game under the bus now just so they can say I told you so later
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
It can't be the same thing as they actually run those in real time on their devkits, and record them into a video. I suppose noone can provide a solid proof of this, other than going by what they say, but is it that big of deal when their cutscenes really didn't look that much better than the gameplay graphics at all? A bit better lighting and shadows (still very clearly realtime engine stuff), and that was it basically. Few short cutscenes in the first game were indeed done fully realtime btw. You can tell because your changed character skin doesn't go back to default in them. The reason why the scene like a bridge etc was still a video is that despite it could have been using the assets that have been already loaded, you still have to start loading animation data, voice tracks, and then back to music and whatnot when the game starts. It's still significant memory management I'd think, and not worth it even if it just takes a few seconds of loading to go into the animation and back from it (the way they had it it was literally split second)epmode said:
Not sure what you mean, from what I can tell, his character model looks about the same as in the first game.Fizzle said:
I'm pretty sure that was at least part of the reason, although stable framerate is a reason as well. Even if it cut down black screen fade loading down from a 3-4 seconds to 1 second (and there has to be *something* that has to be loaded extra for a cutscene to play no matter how much streaming there is) I think anyone who's practical, and not just a tech-head show-off, would decide it's worth it.dark10x said:
polyh3dron
Banned
I tried to get my friend to get Bioshock because of the recent deal on it and he didn't want to because the game had no multiplayer.No45 said:
Fersis said:
Agreed, on the overall she did fall into the classic damsel in distress archetype until more or less the end of the game. I never felt compelled to put a bullet into her like I constantly did with Ashley in RE4.
And slightly off topic, the voice of Nathan Drake voicing the Prince in PoP is a thumbs up in my book
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
Ethereal said:
SHUT UP LEON!!
*goes back in trash can*
blindrocket
Member
Who cares if the cutscenes aren't being rendered in real-time? It gets rid of load times AND it isn't a noticeable jump in quality. If we were going from PS2 level graphics to perfectly rendered CGI cutscenes then THAT would be a bad thing. But it's all kept in scope of the engine and it's a smooth transition that doesn't make you think, "hmm... that looks WAY better than what I was just playing."
Uncharted's cutscenes weren't really pre-rendered to cover load times, mainly because you could skip them right at the beginning and start playing immediately, with some texture loading to be seen (I think you'd see it even if you watched the whole cutscene though). In fact, I believe the only or at least the main reason they did it was shadow quality. They couldn't have high-res smooth shadows and given that there are lots of close-ups, picture quality in the characters would have been crap with lots of flickery shadows. Now, since they were gonna pre-render them, why not use somewhat better lighting... so they did that too.
I'll take this real-time claim with a grain of salt. I'd believe Richard Diamant, he knows what he's talking about. I just don't know if this site a) asked the question correctly, b) interpreted his answer correctly, c) or actually asked him the question (conspiracy mode but it's likely they did ask him, I think he posts at b3d for example, not sure about here, so it isn't too hard to get a hold of him).
Oh and btw, I'm not sure exactly what the problem is with high-res shadows, if it's just lack of memory or if there are alternate solutions that give equal results but require more processing power which isn't available. Still, if they could have rendered it in real-time with those shadows in the first game, they would. I actually hope they're doing it this time. It would be a good sign for future games.
I'll take this real-time claim with a grain of salt. I'd believe Richard Diamant, he knows what he's talking about. I just don't know if this site a) asked the question correctly, b) interpreted his answer correctly, c) or actually asked him the question (conspiracy mode but it's likely they did ask him, I think he posts at b3d for example, not sure about here, so it isn't too hard to get a hold of him).
Oh and btw, I'm not sure exactly what the problem is with high-res shadows, if it's just lack of memory or if there are alternate solutions that give equal results but require more processing power which isn't available. Still, if they could have rendered it in real-time with those shadows in the first game, they would. I actually hope they're doing it this time. It would be a good sign for future games.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
To be fair, the game itself had some of the most impressively stable and high res shadows I've seen in any game period. Keep in mind, that while the load times are indeed not there for gameplay even if you skip the cutscene, that is precisely because they didn't have to store any extra assets for the cutscene in the memory, so they could dedicate all the memory to the level streaming all the time.FirewalkR said:
Lord Error said:
I was gonna talk about that hypothesis too but I wondered if the cutscenes really had that many assets that it could break the level streaming. They have the specific animations, all pre-calculated I presume, and possibly some more geometry around. Perhaps it had to do with this too, and that was the reason I said shadows were "the only or at least the main reason".
Still, I (edit: think I) clearly remember seeing the cutscenes a short while before the game was released and the shadows were really really bad in the close-ups. I think it was kind of a last minute decision to go fmv. And if it was, it was the right decision.
As for in-game, shadows are very very good of course.
Edit: "I clearly remember" but for the life of me I can't find a version of a cutscene with low-res shadows. Oh well.
Dizzle24 said:I know its just the teaser trailer... but couldn't ND give the poor guy some new clothes? Or at least a jacket. :lol :lol
Also, poor Nathan, bleeding like that.
He's like Indy with the leather coat, hat, and whip. Except his is jeans and that same shirt, always half-tucked.
webcivilian
Member
Dizzle24 said:I know its just the teaser trailer... but couldn't ND give the poor guy some new clothes? Or at least a jacket. :lol :lol
Also, poor Nathan, bleeding like that.
Loudninja said:
Exactly its snowing and its cold. He needs a jacket.
Edit: Added the quotes.
FirewalkR said:I was gonna talk about that hypothesis too but I wondered if the cutscenes really had that many assets that it could break the level streaming. They have the specific animations, all pre-calculated I presume, and possibly some more geometry around. Perhaps it had to do with this too, and that was the reason I said shadows were "the only or at least the main reason".
Still, I (edit: think I) clearly remember seeing the cutscenes a short while before the game was released and the shadows were really really bad in the close-ups. I think it was kind of a last minute decision to go fmv. And if it was, it was the right decision.
As for in-game, shadows are very very good of course.
Edit: "I clearly remember" but for the life of me I can't find a version of a cutscene with low-res shadows. Oh well.
The scene in the U-boat where Drake finds the dead captain has some pretty shitty shadows on the chart on the wall. This video isn't great quality but you at about 1:05 you can see. I'm no tech guy but that stood out to me considering how close up it is. I can't recall anything else glaringly obvious (and the underground sections near the beginnning are still jawdropping).
Kingsora
Would rather have no penis than have to show his to a medical professional
Well Jak is coming to the PSP, so no worriesAAK said:
RIP
I guess it was too daunting to make a sequel to the greatest adventure games previous gen.
http://www.n4g.com/psp/NewsCom-239934.aspx?CT=1
Right, Deep??
AndresON777
shooting blanks
andycapps said:He's like Indy with the leather coat, hat, and whip. Except his is jeans and that same shirt, always half-tucked.
Man I was watching kingdom of the crystal skull and I was like man, you know what nate needs in uncharted? A fucking whip! prolly wouldnt wear a hat cos of the nice hair but he needs a whip!
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
For people that have played the game I think the only thing that should matter is:
When the cut scenes are playing the game looks phenomenal when they aren't the game
looks just as incredible. You guys need to stop worrying.
When the cut scenes are playing the game looks phenomenal when they aren't the game
looks just as incredible. You guys need to stop worrying.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
So, it's just like the first game.
Which means it's just as indicative as how the gameplay will look.
Awesome-fucking-wowsome.
Which means it's just as indicative as how the gameplay will look.
Awesome-fucking-wowsome.
Menaged said:
You will love Sly. And if you get a pang for more, jump to Sly 3. Sly 3 is a like a remake of Sly 2 in which they fix the issues. But 1 is the classic original.
The Darkness was pretty good, I liked the story a lot and the "weapons".
And Jak is a great franchise, better than Ratchet in some respects.
overthehill99
Member
This makes no sense. R@D no longer makes PSP games. I will not allow any other dev team to handle this game, so it won't happen.Kingsora said:Well Jak is coming to the PSP, so no worries
http://www.n4g.com/psp/NewsCom-239934.aspx?CT=1
Right, Deep??
