Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Matrix Is Unreal

fxguide.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 237 posts

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#31

Post by KennyBlanken »

dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

The model for Keanu looks spot on.

Carrie Anne Moss, who on-camera looks stunning for her age....looks like she aged at least twenty years and her head was stretched, almost like they got the aspect ratio settings wrong. She's almost unrecognizable.

When they're in the car and the camera pans back to "IO" in the back seat, I felt like I was watching Who Framed Neo Rabbit.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#33

Post by Koshkin »

l33tman wrote: post #23
dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

I'm a game dev and I spent a lot of time trying to merge the physics system with the player character (PC) control. You basically have the options of letting the player controls try to physically manipulate the PC by inserting forces, or skipping physics entirely for the PC and implement something separate ad hoc. I spent a lot of time on both and read a lot about the issue, and most end up skipping physics on the PC…

I used to be a game dev, and the goal always was to create an illusion; physics and whatnot was actually used primarily in order to save the effort, and I, too, thought that quality suffered and things would come out less fun that way.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#34

Post by zokier »

I think the demo could have been more effective if the non-realtime elements were indicated more clearly; as-is people got confused what was realtime and what was just pre-recorded. I suppose that was kinda the point, but without any sort of reveal the effect gets lost. I don't know if the console demo had the option to switch to "nanite view" at any point, or just in the "gameplay" section, if it does then I guess that would help with the situation.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#35

Post by egypturnash »

dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

I feel like you could probably realistically represent "people don't just walk into walls" by having invisible walls around everything, at a sensible offset, and do some other tweaking - if I guide a character down a corridor at a weird angle, they should just sort of casually turn to mostly align with the direction of the corridor. There are probably many, many special cases that need to be exceptions to this and figuring out the Right Thing to do in each of them may be an insanely complex task.

I seem to recall the game "Bound", where you guided a low-poly ballerina through fairly abstract levels, had a really nice solution to "people don't bash into walls": if you tried to guide your character into a wall, she'd just start doing some stretches against it, which feels pretty accurate given how I tend to behave when I'm attending dance classes regularly. :)

Other characters might do different things; a mopey teen might slouch against the wall, a gun-haver might press against it and peer to the side, looking for cover, etc.

Obvious reasons not to do this start with "oh great, one more thing to add to the character state machine and debug" and "oh great, a few more animations to fit into the budget". Maybe also "it stops feeling like you're controlling the character". Someone whose day job is video games probably has at least a dozen more reasons, possibly even stories from when they tried it and abandoned it.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#36

Post by tejohnso »

dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

> the human walks against an object, and she does this standard video game 0 mph duck-walk

Is that really part of what uncanny valley represents now? I feel like we're moving the goal posts. Fifteen years ago the characters really could be uncanny and disturbing. I don't get that anymore. I feel like it's very close to real, but not real. However, it's in no way off-putting or weirdly creepy.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#37

Post by e12e »

sosborn wrote: post #24
ardit33 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The city feel is perfect though. It is just the interactions/movements of some of the characters. Also the acceleration of people and cars feels still too artificial. It is not the looks, but the physics that are still full on the uncanny valley. I think as graphics get more and more realistic looks wise, game designers need to slow down the game, and make it feel more real. One of my favorite car chases is from the…

Spot on about the physics. For me, the thing that really gives it away in the white room is Keanu's hair. The way it moves it just off. Super impressive demo though.

Also body language. Especially Keanu's right hand/arm.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#39

Post by i_like_apis »

dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

Watching the demo I thought the biggest part of the uncanny valley aspect of the characters was the lack of spine flexion. Every character walks like they're having lumbar spine spasms.

Aside from the motion though they look incredible.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#40

Post by forrestthewoods »

gentleman11 wrote: post #9
dash2 wrote: post #5

Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley. Objects are often absolutely beautiful and realistic, but interactions between objects are ridiculous. Some of this is probably just "not enough processing power", but it is also due to where the rendering bumps up against the primitive controls. For example, you have a very realistic human. But then the human walks against an object, and she does this standard v…

A lot of newer, fancier cg in movies and games is deep in the uncanny valley for me. I can’t watch/play for more than 15 minutes without realizing I’m in a game that doesn’t look right, it’s distracting. I suppose the tech can’t get across the valley without first passing through it

> A lot of newer, fancier cg in movies and games is deep in the uncanny valley for me.

There's a lot of uncanny CGI in modern movies. There's also a lot of CGI that is so perfectly realistic you have no idea it isn't real. This is usually more environmental and less characters.

If the tech gets past the uncanny valley then you'll never know. This is basically true by definition. :)

Post reply on HN