71 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

Arkitekt wrote...

Oh so you actually believe that mass effect isn't your real life?

That, and I'm sick of hearing people whine about something insignificant breaking the "immersion" all the damn time.

[stonbw1]

I suppose it doesn't break the immersion, but it is somewhat unnatural (even in a video game sense). It's just a bit odd, because BW does such a tremendous job on all the details of the experience. Even small things that barely register like particles floating in the air or some random structure in a location that you can never access. It's just odd BW goes to such lengths for 'immersion' in those instances, but not natural behavior of NPCs. I suppose there's a legitimate reason, since as has been pointed out, NPC move all the time in other games.

[Catsith]

Cornughon wrote...

Catsith wrote...

Because it's not important to Bioware, and it never has been. They do it in the Fable games.. and the Witcher games, all of Bethesda's games, and pretty much every other RPG series I can think of, but apparently Bioware just don't know how to do it or could care less about it.

Actually Morrowind just had stationary npc's, aside from the one who runs up to you and that one out-of-his-mind Khajit who ran away.

I was referring to the random NPCs that populate cities and other hubs, not important quest NPCs. I know it's important for Bioware to keep quest-givers stationary because of the cinematics, and that's perfectly fine. But they do need to do a better job at giving more life to their cities and hubs.. Omega is a beautiful area, but nobody moves. Same with all other areas. I think it would really enrich the game overall if they added a little life.

[IndigoWolfe]

Naltair wrote...

lazuli wrote...

It's easier to animate NPC interactions with their environment, leading to more realistic dialogue and cutscenes, when the developers know where the NPC's will be. This is why all dialogue (if it can even be called that) in, say, Oblivion, is rather static and bland.

Face zoom and the world freezes while talking always kind of bugged me.

The Oblivion PC is a very riveting coversationalist.

[Arkitekt]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Oh so you actually believe that mass effect isn't your real life?

That, and I'm sick of hearing people whine about something insignificant breaking the "immersion" all the damn time.

Ok then scratch the "immersion". I was speaking of beautiful cinematic shots that stop being so.

[IndigoWolfe]

Catsith wrote...

Cornughon wrote...

Catsith wrote...

Because it's not important to Bioware, and it never has been. They do it in the Fable games.. and the Witcher games, all of Bethesda's games, and pretty much every other RPG series I can think of, but apparently Bioware just don't know how to do it or could care less about it.

Actually Morrowind just had stationary npc's, aside from the one who runs up to you and that one out-of-his-mind Khajit who ran away.

I was referring to the random NPCs that populate cities and other hubs, not important quest NPCs. I know it's important for Bioware to keep quest-givers stationary because of the cinematics, and that's perfectly fine. But they do need to do a better job at giving more life to their cities and hubs.. Omega is a beautiful area, but nobody moves. Same with all other areas. I think it would really enrich the game overall if they added a little life.

Dragon Age 2? People moved all the time.

[Kaiser Shepard]

IndigoWolfe wrote...

Dragon Age 2? People moved all the time.

Did they? The only thing I remember about Kirkwall is how it never seemed to change over the course of that decade...

[Elvis_Mazur]

Those places are small and we don't know if Bioware can implement something similar to Assassin's Creed. So, I would say say it's a design choice.

Plus, they don't stay still. Watch Miranda's loyalty mission ending and you will see a lot of people walking.

[The Spamming Troll]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Oh so you actually believe that mass effect isn't your real life?

That, and I'm sick of hearing people whine about something insignificant breaking the "immersion" all the damn time.

i feel sorry for you then.

you really are missing out.

[Savber100]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Oh so you actually believe that mass effect isn't your real life?

That, and I'm sick of hearing people whine about something insignificant breaking the "immersion" all the damn time.

i feel sorry for you then.

you really are missing out.

What is he missing out? The incessant whining or the redundant points that have been treaded over a million times? 

[jimmartens12]

PetrySilva wrote...

Those places are small and we don't know if Bioware can implement something similar to Assassin's Creed. So, I would say say it's a design choice.

Plus, they don't stay still. Watch Miranda's loyalty mission ending and you will see a lot of people walking.

Actually it's kind of a cinematic. It's built with the engine, but it's no gameplay. Because you can't interact with this area, it's possible to give the random NPCs a walk order.

But on Omega, wehere you can interact with the environment, it would kill the immersion, if you can't go forward, because at every second step two NPCs are blocking the way. Dou you know the situation where you recruit Samara and those two police officers stand in front of an entrance? There was enough place for Shepard to go through, but every character has a minimum place around themselves where nobody can enter.

That's at least one reason, why Bioware didn't bring in walking NPCs.

If the engine would allow it, to touch other people in normal gameplay, than it wouldn't be a problem.

[Catsith]

IndigoWolfe wrote...

Dragon Age 2? People moved all the time.

Certainly more than they did in DA:O, but Kirkwall was still pretty lifeless, compared to big cities in many other games like the Witcher. It was a common complaint I saw about the game in reviews and on forums.

[littlezack]

Character in ME do move. Granted, they don't walk around, but that's not what I really consider standing still.

They talk, have conversations, appear to be doing work on this and that. Most of the NPCs you come across aren't just standing ramrod straight - they're looking at something or being occupied with some activity, or at least seem to be.

They could walk around aimlessly in a loop, but that wouldn't improve things, at least not for me. Having one or two people go between a set area might help. I can see the pros and cons of doing it both ways.

[Someone With Mass]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i feel sorry for you then.

you really are missing out.

What, just because I'm always aware that I'm playing a game? Cool story, bro.

[mauro2222]

Hey... but they moved around on the Presidium of ME1

[Aaleel]

Bioware moves a person around here and there. But it's obvious a living world has never been a priority. I just don't expect it in their games, so it's no need to get upset if it's not there.

[Kusy]

Yeah, lost data. Because writing way-points for models that already have walking animations, since they run on the same skeleton as those characters that move around must have eaten so much memory that internet nearly imploded.

[Dean_the_Young]

stonbw1 wrote...

I've noticed NPC that you may encounter are always stationary.  I've searched the forums and am sure this has been discussed, but just can't find it.  Is this a development issue or a design choice?  Similar games wherein you talk to a stranger to initiate a side quest move around.  Heck they also have just random, non-story characters walking around too (e.g. Red Dead).  Just curious and you guys know more about game development than I do. Thanks.

Because it's a video game. That's why.

[Arkitekt]

Also, if you have moving NPCs, then if you stay around, you'll watch them go in circles, and then it becomes just stupid.

[whywhywhywhy]

Arkitekt wrote...

Nothing to do with "game engine" or "processor power", obviously this is bollocks.

Obviously you know nothing of game design.

Arkitekt wrote...
It all has to do with cinematics. Everytime you speak with someone you get a cinematic approach: the camera angles, the lighting, the position.

And what do you think is controlling the; transition to cinematic perspective, lightinf and positioning.  The game engine.  Which is the unreal engine.  It's common knowledge to those in the know what the strong points of the unreal engine are.

Arkitekt wrote...
If you are allowed to have these conversations in other "points" in the map, the camera may be completely off (inside walls, or other NPCs), the lighting completely atrocious, the movements incompatible with the surroundings. They plan each "talk" with all these things in mind, so of course you can't **** with this by having these NPCs wander in the game.

Besides, it doesn't break the immersion. Not for me at least.

Why wouldn't it be possible from a technical point of view ?  Please enlighten me.

[Kusy]

Arkitekt wrote...

Also, if you have moving NPCs, then if you stay around, you'll watch them go in circles, and then it becomes just stupid.

You ever tried making sense bro? I heard it's a blast.

[Kusy]

Arkitekt wrote...
If you are allowed to have these conversations in other "points" in the map, the camera may be completely off (inside walls, or other NPCs), the lighting completely atrocious, the movements incompatible with the surroundings. They plan each "talk" with all these things in mind, so of course you can't **** with this by having these NPCs wander in the game.

HURRR DURRR! I kno how to make games! HURR DURR cammera angles!
Seriously. This destroyed me.

[Arkitekt]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Nothing to do with "game engine" or "processor power", obviously this is bollocks.

Obviously you know nothing of game design.

Arkitekt wrote...
It all has to do with cinematics. Everytime you speak with someone you get a cinematic approach: the camera angles, the lighting, the position.

And what do you think is controlling the; transition to cinematic perspective, lightinf and positioning.  The game engine.  Which is the unreal engine.  It's common knowledge to those in the know what the strong points of the unreal engine are.

Arkitekt wrote...
If you are allowed to have these conversations in other "points" in the map, the camera may be completely off (inside walls, or other NPCs), the lighting completely atrocious, the movements incompatible with the surroundings. They plan each "talk" with all these things in mind, so of course you can't **** with this by having these NPCs wander in the game.

Besides, it doesn't break the immersion. Not for me at least.

Why wouldn't it be possible from a technical point of view?   Please enlighten me.

Great, you utterly missed the point. Again, this feature doesn't exist *because engine / CPU*, something that you even acknowledge in your last question (at least have the decency of being consistent). This feature does not exist because it would create huge problems given the way these cinematics are designed. They have distinct and subtle lighting, and these characteristics come from lights being place in very well studied places in order to make the overall scene a good scene. To see this, compare cinematics between ME1 and ME2. In ME1 they clearly hadn't perfected the mechanic, but they did in ME2.

Problem is, if you have conversations in different spots, you either have the lights "aligned" with the cinematics, with potential errors in the context of the scene (lights coming from places that should be darker, for instance), or you have lights that are "contextual" to the map, and then you will have a conversation that is potentially very badly lit. There is also issues with the cameras and such.

All these limitations are not limitations of the engine, but of game design.

[whywhywhywhy]

You actually responded heh, ok.  I'm going to temporarily ignore that you said it has nothing to game engine and processing power(I wasn't just referring to the cpu when I said that)  Because aknowledging it invalidates any argument you have- no had.  ....no tried to make.

Arkitekt wrote...
Great, you utterly missed the point. Again, this feature doesn't exist *because engine / CPU*, something that you even acknowledge in your last question (at least have the decency of being consistent).

Oh really ? Ignoring the fact that my question may have been an attempt to better understand your position, how does asking a question invalidate or even incinuate I've abandoned my position ?  So which question in particular caused this misunderstanding ?

Arkitekt wrote...
This feature does not exist because it would create huge problems given the way these cinematics are designed. They have distinct and subtle lighting, and these characteristics come from lights being place in very well studied places in order to make the overall scene a good scene.

So are you saying that it would be impossible to provide the proper lighting in any other spot ?  ok I'll ask you again, What technically prevents this in thegame right now ?  And are you saying the above couldn't be properly implemented in the game engine in regards to walking NPC's  ?

Arkitekt wrote...
To see this, compare cinematics between ME1 and ME2. In ME1 they clearly hadn't perfected the mechanic, but they did in ME2.

You responded that it had nothing to do with the game engine and processing power, that's technical.  I don't want you pointing back to game comparisons like *durp durp graphics durp*  You challenged something technical, respond to it technically.

Arkitekt wrote...
Problem is, if you have conversations in different spots, you either have the lights "aligned" with the cinematics, with potential errors in the context of the scene (lights coming from places that should be darker, for instance), or you have lights that are "contextual" to the map, and then you will have a conversation that is potentially very badly lit. There is also issues with the cameras and such.

This is nosense now your talking level design issues vs game engines issues.

Arkitekt wrote...
All these limitations are not limitations of the engine, but of game design.

So are you saying you know for fact walking npc transition cinematic perspective view interaction code is not implemented in the game engine ? Or that it is ?

By assuming that the game engine has the function but isn't used you try to regulate that the missing feature is a game design issue.  But I contest this, if it wasn't intended as a feature it would never have been implemented into game engine to begin with that's a waste of man hours.

Also if the feature was implemented but not used because of deficiencies in level design these could easily be overcome in code, I'm sure you'd be able to find examples in other games.  Considering that design tools manipulate parameters and format data for use within the game engine.  As way to increase productivity, the only way you could be correct is if Bioware implemented the feature in me2 and turned it off.  Any modders around come across a flag that enables npc wondering and AI npc location system ?

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 23 août 2011 - 06:49 .

[idoless24]

I never noticed that they didn't move around much..it is a little weird I guess but I would rather have that cinematic feel when talking to them then have to chase them around.