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

51–60 of 237 posts

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#51

Post by throw_m239339 »

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…

> Meh, these guys are still stuck in the uncanny valley.

Still impressive technically and visually. Let's not forget that these things are running in realtime, they aren't a video. the whole "uncanny valley" thing is exaggerated. in the next 5 years you won't be able to tell the difference. In fact, you're brain will be constantly asking itself whether what you see is real or a 3D model. And I bet it did if you played the demo. That's a serious leap forward.

Now most videogames will still featured heavily stylized/cartoonish models, because some people are afraid of models being too realistic.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#53

Post by derac »

throwawaysea wrote: post #12

I know there are companies using virtual models to showcase clothing. Is replacing actors and actresses next? In some ways I don’t mind it, and decentralizing away from celebrity culture may even be a societal good. But I feel like some experiences are better off organic. Is there any point to appreciating - as an example - ballet performed by a virtual dancer with unrealistic athleticism? Will sports matter? Should…

Virtual celebrities are treated the same as real ones, branding is highly valuable. Check out vtubers.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#54

Post by nwienert »

Arubis wrote: post #26

This writeup is unsubtle in being a puff piece. The demoed tech is very impressive! Individual stills taken from the video are pretty convincing. The motion version definitely still exhibits uncanny valley, though—lights that are too hard on flesh, tightness and sharpness where there should be softness. That I have to resort to hand-wavey descriptors is cool; they’re getting close! But crossing uncanny valley is HARD…

I’d argue the opposite - it’s been clear since the early aughts we’d get there. What’s impressive about this demo is specifically the leap it makes towards that. I wouldn’t have expected real-time graphics on consoles to be this close for another generation.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#55

Post by treeman79 »

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…

Boston robot people seem to have thatfigured out

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#56

Post by majani »

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 problem in animations is quick responsiveness vs slow realism. If someone made a game with super realistic animations, it would probably be a niche exploration type game like what Team Ico used to do.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#57

Post by edflsafoiewq »

rightbyte wrote: post #19
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…

> Part of the problem here is that real humans don't bash into walls. So how do you realistically represent that, when in fact it's just Johnny pressing forward on his controller? You could animate that as hugging the wall, leaning against it or something, instead of a 0mph walk.

Isn't that what Super Mario 64 does? At acute angles you hug the wall and shuffle along it, and at right angles, you push against the wall.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#58

Post by quitit »

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…

As you say the uncanny valley really shows through when the physics doesn't look right. For me the worst uncanny valley offenders were the agents, e.g the ones that leap forward through the air but their suit doesn't so much as flutter. The slow motion effect seems to be used here to cover for the lack of animation. In terms of effects the fire and explosion effects had obvious clipping as objects pass through them where a realistic, but more taxing, effect would utilise particles.

At this stage I feel like the engine is very good and sure processing power is still a factor, but I feel like the biggest factor is cost/time. Small details that make something look natural are sure to go when there is budget or deadline.

Re: The Matrix Is Unreal

#60

Post by samstave »

beebeepka wrote: post #44

I spent 30 minutes watching YouTube footage with my wife yesterday. It is absolutely incredible. I suspect they used this technology to make the movie, or parts of it. Why else would this be made?

Please link to some of the vids you recommend?
Post reply on HN