Tous les commentaires

Alrighty then... I'll circle some details that prove it's not CGI.
I'm not saying it's all totally in-engine, as it could easily have been touched up ala Halo 2's cutscenes..... but it's definitely not CGI.

Lack of AF: http://img270.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled0...
Extreme clipping and no shadows, along with a right-angle shadow: http://img420.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled3...
The seam in the wall and no shadows in sight: http://img420.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled3...
More clipping and seam: http://img249.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled2...

If you watch the video (now that you know what to look for) it's very easy to tell it's not CGI.

Ugh.... the lack of an "edit" button kinda sucks....

That third link should be: http://img414.imageshack.us/my.php?image=untitled8...

Wrong. Have you ever even dabbled in 3d modelling and rendering? Clipping can easily happen if you don't put the correct constraints on. AF is an after-effect that doesn't always have to be enabled. and you can have geometry and rendering glitches in CGI. Its just that most of the time they are all gone by the time they get to the public domain. Unless they are intentional...Real-time means rendered on the target hardware (the xbox 360) with the ingame engine. It HAS to have an engine around it otherwise it just won't work. You can't just throw geometry at the graphics card without telling it how to render it.
Btw, anything can be rendered in realtime if your computer is powerful enough. But when you are talking about game trailers/demos in real-time it HAS to be on the target hardware otherwise they are just bullshitting.Yep. Movies do it all the time. Its called compositing. Like, say, in Star Wars Episode 3 when Obi Wan was fighting Anakin over the lava pit.
They were from real shots from green-screen,
the lava had all kinds of effects on it,
the energy collector that snapped off was CG,
the valley was a miniture,
and the background was a painting.

But it all looked like they were part of the same thing. Compositing.


I like how the image has been removed, but you can still see some of it in the news pic. :)

Touched up? wtf? ALL of Halo 2's cutscenes were rendered in real-time on the xbox. People have actually PROVED this without doubt by modding the files and then playing the cutscenes. What are you trying to say?

True, I jumped the gun a bit there, my bad...

Actually yes.... I "dabble" in 3d modeling all the time.
Yes, clipping can happen without the correct constraints, but only a completely idiotic developer can miss something that obvious....... and considering these guys have a few games (that were descent) under their belt (and they might have made the CGI commercials, I'm not sure) it's obvious they atleast have some idea of what they're doing.When you play Halo 2, it looks very nice........ but it's really easy to tell that the lighting is better in the cutscenes than during gameplay.

CGI is generaly pre-rendered but something doesnt have to be CGI to be pre-rendered. Pre-rendering is when you runa scripted sequince at a low frame rate and then speed it up as a video file so it apears to look better than actualy possible on the given hardware. CGI stands for "computer generated image" and it refers to a pre-rendered sequince that was created in a 3D modeling program with effects and quality well beyond anything modern computers can do in real-time like the hulk and the killzone 2 video.

The lighting looks better do to the camera angle and the fact that it is scripted makeing it so that all those resources that would be used for AI and such can focus on the graphics engine instead.

Its not in-engine. Its CGI and the clipping you pointed out is not clipping and nor is the other things you pointed out. Sorry but you dont know what you are talking about.

You are mostly right but it does not have to be a game engine. It can be done with several modeling programs, how do you think they do things like The Hulk? - Not with a game engine.

you ever hear of the "Edit" button?
Use it.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. The graphics have been "touched up" in the cutscenes, because they don't have to run other things with the engine.Like I said before, you need to watch the video to really see the things I pointed out. Around 1:22 or so, you can REALLY see the hand clip all the way into the ground, it's impossible to miss.
But whatever... you can go ahead and think it's CGI. But if you do, then you should also think this will be one of the worst-made games in years. If they can't even get a pre-rendered "CGI" video done correctly...... then who knows how shitty the real game will be?As a matter of fact, yes... most of us have heard of it. But as you'll kindly notice..... there is no such button on this page.

Obviously you do not know what the term "touched up" means. "Touched up" refers to someone altering an original to make it look better ( a great example is photo air brushing). All games that use real-time game-engine videos should look slightly better than while actualy playing the game. Halo and Halo 2s videos are not touched up, they just have more resources available to make them look better.

On the subject of the CoD3 vid and I looked at all of you pics showing the verious "evidence" to it being real and honestly I think you need your eyes fixed, the only thing that you might* be right about is the hand clipping but even that is suspect. CoD is a franchise nutorious for CGI and pre-rendered videos so I bet on CGI. And for the record they were only banned from releaseing CGI vids in europe, not in the US.





PS The edit button only shows up for a short time after you post and only on the last one you made but it is in fact there.

Yes......the Halo 2 videos look better. One might even say they're a "touch up" from the real game.....


How is the CoD franchise notorious for CGI? The only CGI they've got is in commercials, which most games do anyway.
Although I didn't bother beating Big Red One.......

Immortal_Daemon, you seem to be a knowligble fellow in the ways of 3d animation and what not, so I'm sure that you'd be fully aware of the troubles of Inverse Kinetics systems for animation, and how avoiding clipping can be quite a challege...especially if you're strapped for time because your boss wants you to get that damned FMV sequence ready for E3.

Oh and for the record, the actual game developer hardly ever makes the FMVs themselves(they simply don't have the time, or tech(read:software) for the job), they tend to hire out a 3d animation studio to do the clip/s for them.
They'll often hand over alot of in-game assets(character models and what-not) so that the FMV will look like the game.

That said, that video is NOT in game...the rediculously detailed particle effects, and the gun/camera movements are dead giveaways...and you're an ignorant fool to think otherwise.

BTW, Treyarch(Big Red One) are making this, not Infinity Ward(CoD 1 and 2), and Rhythm & Hues(http://www.rhythm.com/) made the FMV for CoD 2:BRO and the CoD2 ads.

So yeah, never judge a game by a trailer that is clearly not in game(such as this one) since it's most likey not being made by the game's developer...as they are too busy making the game itself.

In conlusion I'll just say that I agree with yougotslayed's last comment. :)

Keep it simple(?)
CGI is generaly pre-rendered but something doesnt have to be CGI to be pre-rendered.

or CGI is generally pre-rendered but something doesn't have to be pre-rendered to be CGI?

haha. yougotslayed, nice explanations. I just tried to make my point clear with as few characters as possible since I saw someone not totally grasping the meanings. And about CGI, yes it is not rendered in real-time on the target device THUS prerendered. and replayed as a video to gain decent framerate. :P

and yes. if it could be rendered on the target device, then it doesn't have to pre-rendered CGI. (this what you mean?)
ah f*ck it. i give up.

Well I am not sure exactely what you are asking but I will try to answer anyways. CGI is when you use a computer program like 3D max to make a video. It is always (almost always) pre-rendered but if something is pre-rendered that doesnt mean it is CGI. If you read my posts carefully you will see that I know exactely what I am talking about and I am explaining it to the rest of you the best that I can.

So you mean
= not everything prerendered is CGI?
and if you want to flip it the other way.. so that, something generated with (for example) 3ds max and isn't pre-rendered..wouldn't that make it real-time? :)

I'm not saying you are wrong in any way. just trying to understand what you are saying with
"It is always (almost always) pre-rendered but if something is pre-rendered that doesnt mean it is CGI"
Like what?

Oh, it could be that you meant CGI has multiple meanings. I tend to just use it in game videos... nvm it's not that important. would've deleted the prev. msg but the edit button.. gosh.

Sorry, would have responded sooner but I got temporarily banned for my earlier comment to Immortal_Deamond. I think I made my point so I am not upset and I feel no need to continue argueing with him so everything should be fine.

But back to your questions. You are correct, not everything that is pre-rendered is CGI and vise versa. Also not all CGI is pre-rendered but almost all is, mostly because the whole point in CGI is quality and you can get a much better result useing the pre-rendering method I explained earlier. I will admit that I am not the best at explaining things through text but I try my best and I certainly know what I am talking about, unless we are dealing with opinions (then feel free to ignore me).

OMG!!!!!
THIS guy its totally right (its the same i think)

FF7 is an RPG, and an old one too so you cant compare it to this game.(RPG's aren't usually known for great gfx) And they dont really make RPG's like the older FF games anymore (FF7, 8, and 9) But dont you realize how many WW2 FPS shooters there are out as of today? Too many for me to even care...Theres already enough COD games alone, in my opinion, because they all take place during the same war. So if this game doesn't have good gfx then it will be the same as all the rest. Its not really a game known for its storyline, or anything so the only way ill be interested in ANOTHER ww2 shooter is if the gfx are really amazing.