57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Salient Archer]

bigstig wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

@bigstig No problem'o man. Just thought I'd give some insight into the issue as It was one of those things that irked me a little bit about that scene.

For more info on the UE3 lighting this website gives some insight.

http://waylon-art.co...09-Lighting.htm

And that's why I will never make it as a games developer  a very interesting read although I think I understood less than half

Hahaha, tbh even some game developers shouldn't 'make it' as "game developers" (*cough*infinity ward*cough*).

I wouldn't worry to much, it's one of those things that's a lot easier to understand when it's hands-on than it is reading about it.

[Fingertrip]

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

I think there's a quote where he specifically say that keeping Shepard is quite crucial, if possible. You know, they're going to find another way of harvesting the galaxy, it might take abit longer- and they might take a few losses, which they'd probably would like to avoid.

[Salient Archer]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

@bigstig No problem'o man. Just thought I'd give some insight into the issue as It was one of those things that irked me a little bit about that scene.

For more info on the UE3 lighting this website gives some insight.

http://waylon-art.co...09-Lighting.htm

A quote from that article telling you exactly what you have to do to have the kind of weirdness we have here:

There are lots of other flags though, and you’re free to use these as you need. For instance – say you wanted a spotlight to affect a floor, but not the walls next to it. You could set up the spotlight so that only “Unnamed_1” is checked, then make sure “Unnamed_1” is also checked in the properties of that floor mesh.

As you can see: you have to deliberately match the light and object if you don't want lights that affects everything.

My point exactly. It can only be achieved through deliberation ... as to why they intentionally did it is another reason onto itself ...

Modifié par Salient Archer, 07 mai 2012 - 02:13 .

[Icinix]

Unschuld wrote...

My non-IT explanation for the shadows dancing around in that scene would be that it was an undesirable but unavoidable side effect for getting the lighting the way they wanted it on the characters (namely, their faces) during the cutscene.

I was thinking this as well at first, but then I noticed that the shadows are cast on the opposite side the shadow is on the bodies.

In affect casting a shadow towards the light source.

Now its still possible if there are several light sources around the place, but its still interesting.

Modifié par Icinix, 07 mai 2012 - 02:16 .

[Salient Archer]

Fingertrip wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

I think there's a quote where he specifically say that keeping Shepard is quite crucial, if possible. You know, they're going to find another way of harvesting the galaxy, it might take abit longer- and they might take a few losses, which they'd probably would like to avoid.

“Preserve Shepard's body if possible.”
“Neutralize Commander Shepard.”
“If I must tear you apart, Shepard, I will.”
You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard.”
“Why do you resist us, Shepard?”

[Unschuld]

Icinix wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

My non-IT explanation for the shadows dancing around in that scene would be that it was an undesirable but unavoidable side effect for getting the lighting the way they wanted it on the characters (namely, their faces) during the cutscene.

I was thinking this as well at first, but then I noticed that the shadows are cast on the opposite side the shadow is on the bodies.

In affect casting a show towards the light source.

Now its still possible if there are several light sources around the place, but its still interesting.

Differing intensity of multiple light sources? Choosing only one of them to cast the shadows?

[Salient Archer]

Icinix wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

My non-IT explanation for the shadows dancing around in that scene would be that it was an undesirable but unavoidable side effect for getting the lighting the way they wanted it on the characters (namely, their faces) during the cutscene.

I was thinking this as well at first, but then I noticed that the shadows are cast on the opposite side the shadow is on the bodies.

In affect casting a show towards the light source.

Now its still possible if there are several light sources around the place, but its still interesting.

With UE3 you have to lock a shadow to the object to achieve the result we are seeing, it's one of its key rendering component for lighting and shadows in the engine. If there are multiple light sources in the mapping we would see multiple shadows of differing intensities coming off of each character in relation to their position.

[Ch1m3Ra]

Salient Archer wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

I think there's a quote where he specifically say that keeping Shepard is quite crucial, if possible. You know, they're going to find another way of harvesting the galaxy, it might take abit longer- and they might take a few losses, which they'd probably would like to avoid.

“Preserve Shepard's body if possible.”
“Neutralize Commander Shepard.”
“If I must tear you apart, Shepard, I will.”
You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard.”
“Why do you resist us, Shepard?”

You can say that the Reapers killed Shepard so he won't be able to interfere with their plans. They may have killed him to take "revenge" for killing Sovereign. Once Shepard gets revived the Reapers begin to get interested in Shepard, not wanting to kill as they may not have seen someone like him before.

[prettz]

kind of off subject but I mad a indoctrination theory logo vid. more a parody but it's what comes to mind ever time someone shortens indoctrination theory to IT.

Modifié par prettz, 07 mai 2012 - 02:20 .

[Salient Archer]

[quote]Salient Archer wrote...

[quote]Fingertrip wrote...

[quote]paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?[/quote]

I think there's a quote where he specifically say that keeping Shepard is quite crucial, if possible. You know, they're going to find another way of harvesting the galaxy, it might take abit longer- and they might take a few losses, which they'd probably would like to avoid.



[/quote]

“Preserve Shepard's body if possible.”
“Neutralize Commander Shepard.”
“If I must tear you apart, Shepard, I will.”
You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard.”
“Why do you resist us, Shepard?”

Other lovely quotes by Harby that fill you with joy and warm fuzzies.

“We are your genetic destiny.”
“You do not yet comprehend your place in things.”“We are the Harbinger of your perfection.”“You are ignorant, we are knowing.”“We are the Harbinger of your ascendance.”“You have merely delayed the inevitable.”“The experiments will continue, Shepard.”
“Take what is useful, destroy the rest.”
“Progress cannot be halted.”“We are the Harbinger of your destiny.”
“Your worlds will become our laboratories.”
"Your worlds will become our lavatory"

[Rifneno]

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

That's a good question. I don't even believe this myself, but it's possible the Collectors didn't actually know that was Shepard's vessel. The Normandy was there on patrol because several other ships had gone missing. Whatever reason the Collectors had for destroying those ships may have been why they fired on the Normandy.

It is odd though. They didn't even try to take him alive. Then afterwards, Harbinger wants him like a 30 year old virgin wants Megan Fox. Just weird.

Salient Archer wrote...

Hahaha, tbh even some game developers shouldn't 'make it' as "game developers" (*cough*infinity ward*cough*).

Ironically, the worst is actually part of BioWare now. Mythic "Entertainment". EA bought both and put Mythic under BW's umbrella. Mythic made Dark Age of Camelot, the worst game ever. That game is less fun than cancer.

[Ch1m3Ra]

prettz wrote...

kind of off subject but I mad a indoctrination theory logo vid. more a parody but it's what comes to mind ever time someone shortens indoctrination theory to IT.

Creepy.

[Icinix]

Salient Archer wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

My non-IT explanation for the shadows dancing around in that scene would be that it was an undesirable but unavoidable side effect for getting the lighting the way they wanted it on the characters (namely, their faces) during the cutscene.

I was thinking this as well at first, but then I noticed that the shadows are cast on the opposite side the shadow is on the bodies.

In affect casting a show towards the light source.

Now its still possible if there are several light sources around the place, but its still interesting.

With UE3 you have to lock a shadow to the object to achieve the result we are seeing, it's one of its key rendering component for lighting and shadows in the engine. If there are multiple light sources in the mapping we would see multiple shadows of differing intensities coming off of each character in relation to their position.

Do the shadows have anything different about them with the lighting settings in the ME3 config? I think there are three different options for lighting by memory?

[Unschuld]

Salient Archer wrote...

With UE3 you have to lock a shadow to the object to achieve the result we are seeing, it's one of its key rendering component for lighting and shadows in the engine. If there are multiple light sources in the mapping we would see multiple shadows of differing intensities coming off of each character in relation to their position.

There's no way to selectively disable/reduce shadow intensity?

[Unschuld]

Salient Archer wrote...
"Your worlds will become our lavatory"

Harbinger is a real jerk.

[Salient Archer]

Lets play spot the similarities Firebase Ghost edition.

From Shepard Lives scene:



From Firebase Ghost:



PS: 'Shepard Lives' is a CGI rendered scene, which means all images are very deliberately decided upon and will not be reusing in-game textures or objects

Where as Firebase Ghost is naturally an in-game map.

Now I'm not saying that Shepard magically ended up in Firebase Ghost or anything like that, but what I am trying to get at is that the materials we see in the cinematic are of natural design and are clearly just cables and broken cement.

[Salient Archer]

Icinix wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Unschuld wrote...

My non-IT explanation for the shadows dancing around in that scene would be that it was an undesirable but unavoidable side effect for getting the lighting the way they wanted it on the characters (namely, their faces) during the cutscene.

I was thinking this as well at first, but then I noticed that the shadows are cast on the opposite side the shadow is on the bodies.

In affect casting a show towards the light source.

Now its still possible if there are several light sources around the place, but its still interesting.

With UE3 you have to lock a shadow to the object to achieve the result we are seeing, it's one of its key rendering component for lighting and shadows in the engine. If there are multiple light sources in the mapping we would see multiple shadows of differing intensities coming off of each character in relation to their position.

Do the shadows have anything different about them with the lighting settings in the ME3 config? I think there are three different options for lighting by memory?

Those settings are more directly related to system performance opposed to an in-game cinematic design element. Having said that, BioWare could have revised the code slightly but it would fruitless and there's no real need to. It always has to come back to someone deliberately choosing the shadows to behave that way, as to why they did this is up for speculation.

[paxxton]

Salient Archer wrote...

"Your worlds will become our lavatory"

LOL. I don't think Harbinger said that.

[Salient Archer]

Unschuld wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

With UE3 you have to lock a shadow to the object to achieve the result we are seeing, it's one of its key rendering component for lighting and shadows in the engine. If there are multiple light sources in the mapping we would see multiple shadows of differing intensities coming off of each character in relation to their position.

There's no way to selectively disable/reduce shadow intensity?

There's plenty of ways to manipulate the shadows in the engine, but to do anything beyond standard lighting requires deliberation and some kind of intention. There’s no real need to manually lock the shadows as it’s much easier to get accurate shadows without stuffing around. My only non-IT explanation is that a lighting artist was experimenting and never got around to correcting it and it somehow got past the whole design team and beta testers.

[Rifneno]

paxxton wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

"Your worlds will become our lavatory"

LOL. I don't think Harbinger said that.

A joke or a typo about "Your worlds will become our labratories."  Oddly I don't remember him saying that either, but it's listed as one of his quotes on the wikia.

[Salient Archer]

paxxton wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

"Your worlds will become our lavatory"

LOL. I don't think Harbinger said that.

I may have taken some liberties 

would you believe he also said "all your base are belong to us"?

[Stigweird85]

Rifneno wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

That's a good question. I don't even believe this myself, but it's possible the Collectors didn't actually know that was Shepard's vessel. The Normandy was there on patrol because several other ships had gone missing. Whatever reason the Collectors had for destroying those ships may have been why they fired on the Normandy.

It is odd though. They didn't even try to take him alive. Then afterwards, Harbinger wants him like a 30 year old virgin wants Megan Fox. Just weird.

Salient Archer wrote...

Hahaha, tbh even some game developers shouldn't 'make it' as "game developers" (*cough*infinity ward*cough*).

Ironically, the worst is actually part of BioWare now. Mythic "Entertainment". EA bought both and put Mythic under BW's umbrella. Mythic made Dark Age of Camelot, the worst game ever. That game is less fun than cancer.

I may be mistaken but I believe they DID go looking for Shepard.   It's part of the story in Mass Effect: Redemption. It could be ruse but TIM & Miranda recruit Liara and tell her that the collectors are working with the shadow broker to get Shepard body and since the collectors were under Harbringers control...

[MegumiAzusa]

Ch1m3Ra wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...

Fingertrip wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

I think there's a quote where he specifically say that keeping Shepard is quite crucial, if possible. You know, they're going to find another way of harvesting the galaxy, it might take abit longer- and they might take a few losses, which they'd probably would like to avoid.

“Preserve Shepard's body if possible.”
“Neutralize Commander Shepard.”
“If I must tear you apart, Shepard, I will.”
You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard.”
“Why do you resist us, Shepard?”

You can say that the Reapers killed Shepard so he won't be able to interfere with their plans. They may have killed him to take "revenge" for killing Sovereign. Once Shepard gets revived the Reapers begin to get interested in Shepard, not wanting to kill as they may not have seen someone like him before.

"Leave the dead where they fall."
"The dead are useless."
"Ignore the fallen."
The interesting thing here is:
“Preserve Shepard's body if possible.”
"Stop Shepard."
"Focus on Shepard."
"Neutralize Commander Shepard."

"You do no yet comprehend your place in things."

They seem to have an interest in Shepards body, but don't care if she is still alive, as opposed to ignoring any other fallen. Also Harbinger says Shep has a special place, with TIM being indoctrinated it could mean a reconstructed Shep could actually be of benefit to the Reapers.
Also note Cerberus is working with the collectors as stated by sources like Vega (okay he is sketchy but I would take his word in this case) meaning the Collectors contracting the Shadow Broker to get Sheps body could be part of the plot where TIM tries to show only the good side of Cerberus (like stuffing the Normandy crew with friendly faces)

[Salient Archer]

bigstig wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

That's a good question. I don't even believe this myself, but it's possible the Collectors didn't actually know that was Shepard's vessel. The Normandy was there on patrol because several other ships had gone missing. Whatever reason the Collectors had for destroying those ships may have been why they fired on the Normandy.

It is odd though. They didn't even try to take him alive. Then afterwards, Harbinger wants him like a 30 year old virgin wants Megan Fox. Just weird.

Salient Archer wrote...

Hahaha, tbh even some game developers shouldn't 'make it' as "game developers" (*cough*infinity ward*cough*).

Ironically, the worst is actually part of BioWare now. Mythic "Entertainment". EA bought both and put Mythic under BW's umbrella. Mythic made Dark Age of Camelot, the worst game ever. That game is less fun than cancer.

I may be mistaken but I believe they DID go looking for Shepard.   It's part of the story in Mass Effect: Redemption. It could be ruse but TIM & Miranda recruit Liara and tell her that the collectors are working with the shadow broker to get Shepard body and since the collectors were under Harbringers control...

You sir are correct! 

[paxxton]

bigstig wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

paxxton wrote...

I was just replaying the beginning of ME2. If Harbinger wants Shepard alive, why kill him then? Or did he make up his mind later on?

That's a good question. I don't even believe this myself, but it's possible the Collectors didn't actually know that was Shepard's vessel. The Normandy was there on patrol because several other ships had gone missing. Whatever reason the Collectors had for destroying those ships may have been why they fired on the Normandy.

It is odd though. They didn't even try to take him alive. Then afterwards, Harbinger wants him like a 30 year old virgin wants Megan Fox. Just weird.

Salient Archer wrote...

Hahaha, tbh even some game developers shouldn't 'make it' as "game developers" (*cough*infinity ward*cough*).

Ironically, the worst is actually part of BioWare now. Mythic "Entertainment". EA bought both and put Mythic under BW's umbrella. Mythic made Dark Age of Camelot, the worst game ever. That game is less fun than cancer.

I may be mistaken but I believe they DID go looking for Shepard.   It's part of the story in Mass Effect: Redemption. It could be ruse but TIM & Miranda recruit Liara and tell her that the collectors are working with the shadow broker to get Shepard body and since the collectors were under Harbringers control...

In the Lair of the Shadow Broker Liara tells Shepard that the Shadow Broker was looking for his remains to sell them to the Collectors.

Modifié par paxxton, 07 mai 2012 - 02:46 .