New Source *Stuff*

[^Ben]

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/12/09/source_film_effects/1.html

 

[$kelet0r]

just saw that 10 minutes ago - sounds great
gritty realism ftw

hold on though- we're the No. 1 hl2 fansite in the freakin' world
why do we always get our news from other sites

 

[StAtiC]

Great article, but he keeps saying "Valve are... Valve are..." it should be "Valve IS...". Valve is not plural. ValveS is plural. Things like that easily piss me off.

 

[iMMuNiTy]

No comment.

*drools*

 

[ríomhaire]

Great article, but he keeps saying "Valve are... Valve are..." it should be "Valve IS...". Valve is not plural. ValveS is plural. Things like that easily piss me off.

I thought either was acceptable when refering to a group.

 

[StAtiC]

I thought either was acceptable when refering to a group.

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you? You say "my family is going to the house".

Anyway, I thought the thing about depth of view was interesting.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

This could help out a lot of mods when doing trailers for their games Pretty interesting what VALVe will be doing to the Source engine, ability to always update it means more kickass stuff for us the gamers

 

[Laivasse]

Great article, but he keeps saying "Valve are... Valve are..." it should be "Valve IS...". Valve is not plural. ValveS is plural. Things like that easily piss me off.

OT: I've seen this discussed before. It boils down to a British/American english difference. It's very common in British english (that is to say, correct english ) to treat a singular word as if it is a plural if it refers to a group. People in the US apparently do it far less, but I dunno why. So there's nothing wrong with the guy's grammar.

 

[Eejit]

That looks pretty damn cool.

 

[jerkasaur]

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you? You say "my family is going to the house".

what house?
btw the "stuff" looks cool...

 

[Blackghost905]

That looks awsome

 

[Beerdude26]

Dude parts of that movie really seemed like it was real!
And I ****ing loved the part where the guy fires a rifle grenade, looks so life like.

Reminds me of wanting to make a DoD:S machinima D:

 

[Vegeta897]

Holy shit dude, this is awesome. *Downloading full movie*

 

[Beerdude26]

Holy shit dude, this is awesome. *Downloading full movie*

Dont! Your mind won't be able to stand the awesome!

 

[Link]

ARGHHHH. Look, new technologies are great. Really, I love them, but if you are aiming for immersion, try to make it look like I am in the scene itself and not in the scene, but looking through a camcorder. HDR? Great, except that if I sit in a pitch black room with it on, I get HDR from the game and my eyes at the same time. And don't even get me started on motion blur. You read that explanation of motion blur and its causes on the linked site? Great, thats totally correct. That is exactly how motion blur works. On a camera. However, my eyes are not cameras, they do not see in frames. Yes yes, I know that people are going to insist that they do, but they do not in fact take "frames", and although the effect is similar, it is not the same. Look at you monitor. Looks like a normal picture right? Now film it with any camcorder, and play it back. See the lines and distortions? Thats because our eyes do not work the same way as a camera. The point is this: if they are planning to have ferraris drive past at 120 mph, 2 meters or less from my body in games, then fine, chuck in the motion blur, its great, because the damn thing would blur in my eyes as well, so I won't see the effect. But nothing else is going to move fast enough to cause blur in real life, so don't replicate it in the game.

This is in dnager of going down the same road as lense flare did 7 years ago. Yes its pretty, yes its clever, but no, its not what a person sees, its what a camera sees.

Like I say, new tech is good, lets just not try and do life through a lense. I prefer life through the eye.

 

[Computer5k]

ARGHHHH. Look, new technologies are great. Really, I love them, but if you are aiming for immersion, try to make it look like I am in the scene itself and not in the scene, but looking through a camcorder. HDR? Great, except that if I sit in a pitch black room with it on, I get HDR from the game and my eyes at the same time. And don't even get me started on motion blur. You read that explanation of motion blur and its causes on the linked site? Great, thats totally correct. That is exactly how motion blur works. On a camera. However, my eyes are not cameras, they do not see in frames. Yes yes, I know that people are going to insist that they do, but they do not in fact take "frames", and although the effect is similar, it is not the same. Look at you monitor. Looks like a normal picture right? Now film it with any camcorder, and play it back. See the lines and distortions? Thats because our eyes do not work the same way as a camera. The point is this: if they are planning to have ferraris drive past at 120 mph, 2 meters or less from my body in games, then fine, chuck in the motion blur, its great, because the damn thing would blur in my eyes as well, so I won't see the effect. But nothing else is going to move fast enough to cause blur in real life, so don't replicate it in the game.

This is in dnager of going down the same road as lense flare did 7 years ago. Yes its pretty, yes its clever, but no, its not what a person sees, its what a camera sees.

Like I say, new tech is good, lets just not try and do life through a lense. I prefer life through the eye.

Watch the videos. Motion blur only appears on fast-moving obhects, otherwise it is barely noticeable.

 

[Argyll]

Looks bloody amazing. It's not 'realistic' as much as it is 'cinematic,' which definitely isn't a bad thing.

 

[CommandoSR]

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you? You say "my family is going to the house".

Anyway, I thought the thing about depth of view was interesting.

I do it this way:

Valve is: When referring to Valve as whole single entity rather than group of people.
Valve are: When referring to a particular group inside Valve.

 

[hool10]

Aww who cares about is and were. I speak American and thats all I care about.......j/k English. This is really amazing. I think the color correction and film grain should remain with movies only. Anything else like regular gameplay would look bad. I can't wait for tonight's Valve news. :bounce:

 

[JeSuisAbraham]

Valve are expected to introduce these effects in the next Steam update. After a number of "broken promises" recently, Valve decided not to give a specific date for this update, no doubt to avoid the rapid criticism should they miss that date by even a single day. Having said that, we can reveal that Half-Life 2: Aftermath is now set for a Q1 2006 release, aiming at February.

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/12/09/source_film_effects/7.html

 

[aeroripper]

But nothing else is going to move fast enough to cause blur in real life, so don't replicate it in the game.

Every wave your hand in front of your face? Ever seen a ceiling fan? Ever see tires move really fast? Motion blur happens all the time in real life.

But as far as applying it to things like people running just so it looks "cool" juts makes it look worse.

 

[Solver]

I am very impressed by the technology. I am though not very impressed by what it can do to immersion.

Such effects are good in a game like FEAR or Quake 4 - games that have sometimes over the top frantic action, and games that should really look like action movies. It would be bad, though, for HL3 - in Half-Life, you're supposed to feel that you are IN there, not that you're watching an interactive action movie. HL2 did it just right - I was completely immersed in the game world. However, HDR, motion blur and such can very easily detract from the immersion, IMO.

 

[Sickmind]

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you? You say "my family is going to the house".

Family is a single defined group. When you say family, everyone has one and knows that one group in their mind. Same way you could say "My class is going on a field trip".

 

[Dan]

ARGHHHH. Look, new technologies are great. Really, I love them, but if you are aiming for immersion, try to make it look like I am in the scene itself and not in the scene, but looking through a camcorder. HDR? Great, except that if I sit in a pitch black room with it on, I get HDR from the game and my eyes at the same time. And don't even get me started on motion blur. You read that explanation of motion blur and its causes on the linked site? Great, thats totally correct. That is exactly how motion blur works. On a camera. However, my eyes are not cameras, they do not see in frames. Yes yes, I know that people are going to insist that they do, but they do not in fact take "frames", and although the effect is similar, it is not the same. Look at you monitor. Looks like a normal picture right? Now film it with any camcorder, and play it back. See the lines and distortions? Thats because our eyes do not work the same way as a camera. The point is this: if they are planning to have ferraris drive past at 120 mph, 2 meters or less from my body in games, then fine, chuck in the motion blur, its great, because the damn thing would blur in my eyes as well, so I won't see the effect. But nothing else is going to move fast enough to cause blur in real life, so don't replicate it in the game.

This is in dnager of going down the same road as lense flare did 7 years ago. Yes its pretty, yes its clever, but no, its not what a person sees, its what a camera sees.

Like I say, new tech is good, lets just not try and do life through a lense. I prefer life through the eye.

Well essentially motion blur is like capturing the events over a small period of time rather than an instant. There are no perfect instants in real life. Because the frame will be displayed on your screen for 1/30th of a second or whatever your frame rate it is, it is only fitting that that frame should so the events of that period of time rather than just a single instant within that time period. If anything it is more accurate than perfect frames.

 

[Defpotec22]

i agree with link. all this is nice if you wana make pretty screen shots or movies, but i don't want this to become a standrad part of the game that i have no say in. shell shock is enough with motion blurr. seeing snipers across the map is hard enough w/o depth of field

 

[Teta_Bonita]

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you? You say "my family is going to the house".

NIEN!! YOU ARE INCORRECT!
Group nouns (such as team, class, family, Valve) can be either singular or plural, depending on the sentance. For example, both of the following sentances are correct:
The team is arguing with the coach. (the noun "team" is acting as a unit)
The team are arguing amongst themselves. (team is reffering to indaviduals acting sperately)

/grammar nazi :E
*ahem* anyway.....
Like I said in the other thread I think that even though this looks cool, Valve is wasting their time. They should be focusing on After-math, TF2, HL3, CSS player models and all the other things they promised us (errr, they promised us, right? ). I'd rather have HL3 come out a few months earlier than this, dammit!

 

[StAtiC]

I am very impressed by the technology. I am though not very impressed by what it can do to immersion.

Such effects are good in a game like FEAR or Quake 4 - games that have sometimes over the top frantic action, and games that should really look like action movies. It would be bad, though, for HL3 - in Half-Life, you're supposed to feel that you are IN there, not that you're watching an interactive action movie. HL2 did it just right - I was completely immersed in the game world. However, HDR, motion blur and such can very easily detract from the immersion, IMO.

How might I ask would HDR and the other technologies detract from immersion? If the effects are used excessively I can understand, but how else?

 

[Vegeta897]

Every wave your hand in front of your face? Ever seen a ceiling fan? Ever see tires move really fast? Motion blur happens all the time in real life.

But as far as applying it to things like people running just so it looks "cool" juts makes it look worse.

Umm, your eyes don't blur stuff that happens on a monitor dude. If say a car was to pass across your screen and the we only see it in one frame, we will just see an image of the car flash on screen, with no indication of it's direction or anything. This is becase monitors work in frames, REGARDLESS to what our eyes do. Now, with the motion blur, it actually looks like it does in real life, and the one frame of the car we see will be blurred, and we can tell which way it's travelling and that it's even travelling at all, instead of without the blur.
So... Your and Link's explanations are false. Motion blur adds realism. The eye doesn't apply motion blur by itself to things on a monitor. Thankyou.

Also, Link's argument on HDR doesn't make sense either. His eyes don't adjust to the darkness in the monitor It's not like things would start appearing if you looked at a room with a certain light level, which is why the game does it for you, to emulate real life. I think you should do more experimenting because your logic doesn't make any sense You seem to not understand that a monitor is much different than things in real life.

 

[Ennui]

What are you all arguing about? Any half-wit could see that the new technology is NOT intended to make the game feel or look or act more realistic, but rather to increase the intensity and make the experience more cinematic.

DOD:S has never been all about realism. A healthy dose of it is good, but fun > realism.

 

[Vegeta897]

What are you all arguing about? Any half-wit could see that the new technology is NOT intended to make the game feel or look or act more realistic, but rather to increase the intensity and make the experience more cinematic.

DOD:S has never been all about realism. A healthy dose of it is good, but fun > realism.

We weren't arguing about whether it looks realistic or cinematic or not, I was telling Link here that your eyes don't put motion blur and HDR to things you see on a monitor. He thinks that these technologies are useless because our eyes already do it for us

 

[Varsity]

You don't say "my family are going to the house" do you?

Yes, I do. It's a UK English/US English thing.

 

[CommandoSR]

We weren't arguing about whether it looks realistic or cinematic or not, I was telling Link here that your eyes don't put motion blur and HDR to things you see on a monitor. He thinks that these technologies are useless because our eyes already do it for us

"True" HDR would require adjusting the monitor's brightness on the fly rather than just blooming overbright pixels on the screen. This way you eyes would be actually reacting to the light change. However, a monitor can't be set so bright it nearly blinds you unless you switch off all lights in the room or prevent sunlight entering the room. Another problem is that current monitors provide very limited or no option at all to seperately brighten portions of the screen.

 

[CyberPitz]

The ending is, and will always be the best. The whole music, and the guy camping..then the shovel to the back. Wewt

 

[swiss]

Im downloading the movie now; but I thought the screenshots did look good.
It makes the game look more real and gritty (at the moment I think all dod maps apart from argentan, look too clean and lack atmosphere).

We didnt complain about HDR when valve brought that out; so I think we should leave it to them and Im sure we will be pleased.

 

[OCybrManO]

We didnt complain about HDR when valve brought that out

We? You and I? Sure... but there were some other people that did bitch about implimenting HDR into DoD:S.

 

[MiccyNarc]

NIEN!! YOU ARE INCORRECT!

NEIN! YOU DON'T KNOW GERMAN SPELLING!

 

[Teta_Bonita]

NEIN! YOU DON'T KNOW GERMAN SPELLING!

9! I DON'T CARE! :E
At least I know English grammar.

 

[Ennui]

I think this stuff looks great, nice to deviate from the trend of pure realism and go for a more cinematic, atmospheric effect.

 

[Dekstar]

It's rocking is what it is. But we all know that's not how DoD games are played out

 

[Bleeder]

Bottom line is.....the effects will most likely be optional, so why would anyone in their right mind complain about them adding something that you dont HAVE to have enabled.