 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Action Games / Half Life / July 2006Minor FT2 teaser (movie)
TF2 teaser is released Nothing special, no gameplay, just characters animation Check http://www.planethalflife.com Download from eg fileplanet It saus that it'll be made available through steam 11 am PDT (valve time) But nothing to see atm? - Peter  SignatureHi! I'm a .signature *virus*! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! > TF2 teaser is released > Nothing special, no gameplay, just characters animation [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > - Peter Found here too: http://media.pc.ign.com/media/011/011640/vids_1.html >> TF2 teaser is released >> Nothing special, no gameplay, just characters animation [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Found here too: http://media.pc.ign.com/media/011/011640/vids_1.html And here: http://www.3dgamers.com/dlselect/games/teamfortress2/tf2_teaser01_720p.wmv.html The wait is around 12 minutes, much shorter than FilePlanet. Nothing special? I take it you haven't seen it, Peter? That is soooo good! Very Incredibles :) I love the cartoon style; IMO it's an ideal choice for the gameplay style of Team Fortress. No doubt some hardcore fans of the game will think Valve sold out to silly comedy stylings, but when has TFC ever been a game of realism? I bet they really struggled with matching up the original concept of a realistic military style of game for TF2 with the larger-than-life antics of the character classes in TF/TFC. It does look, though, that we'll merely be getting a graphics overhaul to the original game, rather than the major gameplay changes seen in clips from HL days (dual MG crews, for instance). I'm not sure that all those animations will be in-game. The Medic's and Soldier's sequences in particular do not look like game animations, and I'm not sure about the Spy either. Still, I like what I see :) -- Paul > Very Incredibles :) I love the cartoon style; IMO it's an ideal choice for the > gameplay style of Team Fortress. No doubt some hardcore fans of the game will > think Valve sold out to silly comedy stylings Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. If I want to see a Pixar movie, I'll go to the damned movies. For gaming I want realism. Without it, immersion factor drops to near zero. >>Very Incredibles :) I love the cartoon style; IMO it's an ideal choice for the >>gameplay style of Team Fortress. No doubt some hardcore fans of the game will [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > For gaming I want realism. Without it, immersion factor > drops to near zero. Then TF isn't the game for you :) Personally, I don't think graphics or realism make a good game, sure they help, but fun, balanced and flowing gameplay is what really matters IMO (Especially for multiplayer games, where often you'd probably miss the detail because you're far more wrapped up in trying to meet your big red sniper dot with the other guy's head ;) ). While that there are alot of great realism games out there, some of the best games i've played are completely detached from anything even remotely resembling reality (Can I just mention world of warcraft? ;) ) but they still have me totally hooked in, and easily able to lose half a day without stopping to see the time :) TF is most certainly not a realism game SignatureBen Cottrell AKA Bench > If I want to see a Pixar movie, I'll go to the damned movies. > For gaming I want realism. Without it, immersion factor > drops to near zero. I was a big fan of TFC (I confess I started there, not with QuakeTF), and I don't recall ever seeing an ounce of realism in it. Gameplay by the bucketload, but realism? Phooey. As Ben says, it makes sense to draw a distinct line between the realistic styles of CS and DoD, and the bizarre but internally consistent world of TFC. The more that modern graphics tend towards photo-realism, the more that unrealistic gameplay concepts look at odds with that sort of graphical presentation, unless you do something to match the graphics to the playing style. I think Valve have made a sensible decision to do exactly that. -- Paul I started thinking something odd was going on in alt.games.half-life when one foggy november evening "EDM" <EDM_nospam@rsii.net> came into my office and told me: > For gaming I want realism. Without it, immersion factor > drops to near zero. Team Fortress was never about realism - it was always about pure fun and organised chaos. Just getting the email alerts from gamespy, ign and gamespot was enough to have me 1. decide episode 2 was a buy 2. come back here again 3. annoy a few people with the fact that tf2 might finally come. And the new look of the chars makes me hope that the fun and organised chaos will be back. :D Iphigenie > Team Fortress was never about realism - it was always about > pure fun and organised chaos. > > Just getting the email alerts from gamespy, ign and gamespot was > enough to have me > 1. decide episode 2 was a buy Me too. Don't give a damn about Episode 2 (or Episode 1 for that matter), but TF2 will make it a must-buy :) > 2. come back here again Hooray! :) Good to see you, how are you? > 3. annoy a few people with the fact that tf2 might finally come. > > And the new look of the chars makes me hope that the fun and > organised chaos will be back. Oh, definitely *organised* chaos :) Can I be the Prez again? ;) (Hey, we haven't seen a Prez model!) -- Paul >> Team Fortress was never about realism - it was always about >> pure fun and organised chaos. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Me too. Don't give a damn about Episode 2 (or Episode 1 for that matter), > but TF2 will make it a must-buy :) Toadally. > Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. > > If I want to see a Pixar movie, I'll go to the damned movies. > For gaming I want realism. Without it, immersion factor > drops to near zero. Hmm 5 mill people worldwide is playing WoW Don't know how many is playing FFXI, SWG, Everquest etc Realism? - No people wants the gameplay - that is having a feast while playing Realism? - What's real about a game where you're able to spawn again if shot dead? - Peter > > Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Realism? - What's real about a game where you're able to spawn again if > shot dead? I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. But how immersed can you get inside a cartoon? I mean c'mon, cartoons are what they used to show in theaters before the actual movie started. I see Valve's move as a giant step backward not forward. They're basically throwing in the towel and saying, our engine can't give you realism, so we're settling for something far less satisfying. Meanwhile, watch what happens with e.g. Oblivion when the new platforms (Conroe, AM2 etc) start shipping in earnest. > I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, > and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. > But how immersed can you get inside a cartoon? 5 mill people is playing WoW - and this is cartoonish if anything is > I see Valve's move as a giant step backward not forward. Which games do you remember? Those with great gameplay or those with great details/lots of eyecandy? > They're basically throwing in the towel and saying, our > engine can't give you realism Imho they are moving focus from less interesting details to more interesting gameplay HL is still a far better game than HL2 when it comes to replay value I'd likely to start HL once a week just to watch the intro sequence I mean how many SP games have we seen the last six years which is not thrown "away" after a month? If you want realism consider a game like Blackout (deadline games - 1997) http://php.deadline.dk/games/blackout/desc_uk.php?type=0&lang=1&id=30&lang=1 I don't to give away the plot but the ending is dead scary and hits you like a boomerang as the ending depends very much on your actions during the game - Peter > > I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, > > and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Which games do you remember? > Those with great gameplay or those with great details/lots of eyecandy? The games I remember are the ones that have both. In fact eye candy is especially important in games like TF, because "gameplay" is limited to just figuring out where to run and hide on a static map, and which weapons to use. Big deal. I lasted about an hour before I got completely bored with TFC and I'm sure the same will happen in even less time with TF2. > > They're basically throwing in the towel and saying, our > > engine can't give you realism [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I mean how many SP games have we seen the last six years which is not > thrown "away" after a month? For 10+ years I've been hoping game developers would begin to combine open-ended, truly dynamic SP gameplay with MP capabilities, but it's been the exact same sh.t with different shovels. Run and gun, cut scene. Run and gun, cut scene. Repeat ad nauseam. > If you want realism consider a game like Blackout (deadline games - > 1997) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > like a boomerang as the ending depends very much on your actions during > the game Thanks, I'll check it out. >> > I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, >> > and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "gameplay" is limited to just figuring out where to run and > hide on a static map, and which weapons to use. WHAT??? It's nothing to do with that! Why you think people become dedicated snipers? Because you build up skill at it. Same for medic (hate 'em personally - all that stupid conc jumping...), soldier, scout, demo - in fact all classes except fatties. Big deal. > I lasted about an hour before I got completely bored with > TFC and I'm sure the same will happen in even less time > with TF2. Before you got pwned, you mean? ;o) And if you gave up on TFC that quickly, why are you even bothering talking about TF2? > WHAT??? It's nothing to do with that! Why you think people become dedicated > snipers? Because you build up skill at it. Same for medic (hate 'em > personally - all that stupid conc jumping...), soldier, scout, demo - in fact > all classes except fatties. OMG, you're a sniper! I despise snipers! ;) > Before you got pwned, you mean? ;o) Everyone gets pwned in TFC, it's part of the game. Number of kills/deaths is completely unimportant. -- Paul >> WHAT??? It's nothing to do with that! Why you think people become >> dedicated snipers? Because you build up skill at it. Same for medic (hate >> 'em personally - all that stupid conc jumping...), soldier, scout, demo - >> in fact all classes except fatties. > > OMG, you're a sniper! I despise snipers! ;) Good good - must mean we're doing our job. Although I'm one of the more active ones - I'm not keen on the ones that camp the same spot. Plus it's stupid to do that anyway, once you've given away your position. >> Before you got pwned, you mean? ;o) > > Everyone gets pwned in TFC, it's part of the game. Number of kills/deaths > is completely unimportant. Hehe, nah, there's getting pwned and there's getting pwned. I think you're thinking of: - Get pwned - Pwn - Get pwned - Pwn - Get pwned - Pwn etc. The scenario I was imagining here was: - Get pwned - Get pwned - Get pwned - Get pwned - Get pwned - Get pwned - Get pwned - Type a quick obscenity - Leave before the admin can warn you ;o) > "Paul Catley" <paul.notreallymyaddress@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ones - I'm not keen on the ones that camp the same spot. Plus it's stupid to > do that anyway, once you've given away your position. Ah, so you're not one of the snipers that spend the entire game picking off the opposing snipers, and bragging about your kill total? That's okay then (but I still despise them ;) ). I've been in games when there were 3 or 4 snipers per team, when there were many unfilled roles that would have been more useful. IMO, one sniper per team is quite sufficient, 2 max (in a big game). > Hehe, nah, there's getting pwned and there's getting pwned. I think you're > thinking of: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > - Pwn > etc. I'm not thinking of pwning at all, I'm thinking of capping. My favourite class was scout, I never pwned anyone :) Just, you know, grabbed the flag and won the game (with good support, of course). One of the nice things about TFC is that being a crap shot is not an impediment to enjoying the game :) > The scenario I was imagining here was: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > - Type a quick obscenity > - Leave before the admin can warn you That sounds more like my environment, though without the obscenity and the quitting. I got pwned, picked myself up, and ran and ran and ran again (and communicated). That's the trouble with snipers, they are pwn-fixated :) -- Paul >> "Paul Catley" <paul.notreallymyaddress@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > been more useful. IMO, one sniper per team is quite sufficient, 2 max (in > a big game). The moment you start bragging is the moment some hot-shot turns up and shreds you - so... best to avoid that. As for gangs of snipers sitting on the battlements in 2fort, they just make easy pickings for a mobile sniper who can creep up behind them. There is a certain amount of body language that can be red in TFC, despite the antiquity of the models. >> Hehe, nah, there's getting pwned and there's getting pwned. I think >> you're thinking of: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > about TFC is that being a crap shot is not an impediment to enjoying the > game :) I'd have to disagree with you there - I get a lot more fun out of popping things than capping these days, although there was a time when I enjoyed scout capping madness. >> The scenario I was imagining here was: >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > (and communicated). That's the trouble with snipers, they are pwn-fixated > :) Have to say I have the most respect for the guys who do get totally shredded and yet stick with it. I'm a friendly sort really... Although, having said that, one of my favouritest things (Roderney) is winding up big-mouthed kids - like when they start with the "ghey" stuff - I just say "Yeah, I am actually" (I'm not but never mind that) and see how long they can motor on. Thing is, I can type pretty fast and I've played way too many games to be bothered about my score. EDM skrev: > For 10+ years I've been hoping game developers would > begin to combine open-ended, truly dynamic SP gameplay > with MP capabilities, but it's been the exact same sh.t with > different shovels. Run and gun, cut scene. Run and gun, > cut scene. Repeat ad nauseam. LOL, so true Reminds me of sports like soccer, tennis, golf - you name it I'd say give 'em a ball each and tell 'em to grow up a little What kind of PC game do you fancy? - Peter > EDM skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > What kind of PC game do you fancy? I think (or at least I hope) people are getting fed up with the simplistic structure of SP and MP shooters. I know I am. I envision open-ended and completely dynamic gameplay, where players not only choose their role in a game, but create their own dynamically linked maps, weapons etc as well. A single game would therefore be infinitely changing and never anything close to the same experience twice. Players would not know the ins and outs of any map, weapon etc except for their own. This would require a huge amount of coding (stock objects, map/weapon creation routines etc) but the end result would nothing short of mind blowing. It would render the term "replay value" obsolete. In a very limited and still far too static way, the Elder Scrolls series points the general direction I hope to see us go. > The games I remember are the ones that have both. In fact > eye candy is especially important in games like TF, because [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > TFC and I'm sure the same will happen in even less time > with TF2. Further up the thread, you claimed to be a hardcore fan of TFC. Now it transpires that you don't actually like the game (and apparently don't know how it is played). Therefore, it seems rather pointless for you to express your views on whether a cartoon style is appropriate for TFC, since you'd still be unlikely to play it even if the graphics were photo-realistic. > For 10+ years I've been hoping game developers would > begin to combine open-ended, truly dynamic SP gameplay > with MP capabilities, but it's been the exact same sh.t with > different shovels. Run and gun, cut scene. Run and gun, > cut scene. Repeat ad nauseam. Now there I agree with you :) (except for the cut scenes, at least in HL/HL2). Perhaps that's why I don't play run-of-the-mill first-person shooters any more. The great hope for that kind of game was STALKER, but it now transpires that the dynamic AI didn't produce interesting gameplay, so they've reverted to scripted sequences. -- Paul > I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, > and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. > But how immersed can you get inside a cartoon? I mean > c'mon, cartoons are what they used to show in theaters > before the actual movie started. Have you seen World of Warcraft? It's a totally cartoon world, and last I heard it was rather popular. > I see Valve's move as a giant step backward not forward. > They're basically throwing in the towel and saying, our > engine can't give you realism, so we're settling for something > far less satisfying. So you're saying that Valve has so far been unable to convince you that their engine can render a realistic-looking world if they want to? > Meanwhile, watch what happens with > e.g. Oblivion when the new platforms (Conroe, AM2 etc) > start shipping in earnest. Different games require different graphical treatments. When I want an authentic simulation of the world, e.g. when playing a tactical shooter game or a flight sim, then I'd like the graphics to have a realistic feel. However, when a game involves deliberately jumping on grenades to blast myself up onto a balcony, bring on the cartoons! -- Paul > Have you seen World of Warcraft? It's a totally cartoon world, and last I heard > it was rather popular. And I don't like it. I prefer the old Warcraft 1 or Diablo 2 style. Signature.~. Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. http://www.linux-sxs.org / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you! /( _ )\ (Ubuntu 6.06) Linux 2.6.17.6 ^ ^ 20:20:01 up 4 days 3:43 1 user load average: 1.00 1.00 1.00 news://news.3home.net news://news.hkpcug.org news://news.newsgroup.com.hk >>I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's realistic, >>and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be realistic. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Have you seen World of Warcraft? It's a totally cartoon world, and last I heard > it was rather popular. Seen what? Never heard of it .. ;) SignaturePrivate Rydok <Monkey Illuminati> I started thinking something odd was going on in alt.games.half-life when one foggy november evening "EDM" <EDM_nospam@rsii.net> came into my office and told me: > I never claimed a game can't be lots of fun unless it's > realistic, and I never said gameplay itself is supposed to be > realistic. But how immersed can you get inside a cartoon? A lot! I totally separate immersion from realism - I enjoy both games which are realistic and games which are not realistic at all - and that covers realism in the graphics and physics, but also realism in the world and universe. There certainly can be immersion without realism in the graphical aspect of a game, and there can be immersion without realism in the world, but there cannot be immersion without a certain "inner cohesion" or "inner logic" to both the graphics and the world in the game. I guess for me immersion is about "buying into" the gameplay and the "inner logic" of the game. Means being "in" the game and you dont notice time pass. I have been immersed in abstract games as well as photorealistic games, 2d games as well as 3d. There's room for an "America's army" and a "Team Fortress" and a lot of other games in between. As a matter of fact it is harder to get immersion with a "graphically realistic" game because the slightest "miss" and the immersion is broken - we know the real world so well. Something falls or moves wrong, some shortcut is taken to move the story and you think "oh come on!". It's very acute for me in Oblivion and games like that where a lot of the game mechanisms and interface end up breaking immersion, because the immersion relies so much on the graphics. Anyway to go back to Team Fortress 2, TF is still some of the most fun I have had in mp. It had the classes to allow for different styles of play and favored teamplay and a bit of tactics without demanding lots of training and planning, therefore having a "pick up and play for an hour" side. Many of us enjoy having games you can just "pick up and play" in between all the hefty, life consuming, train around the clock monster games ;) SignatureIphigenie > I started thinking something odd was going on in > alt.games.half-life when one foggy november evening "EDM" [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I totally separate immersion from realism (Good information snipped only for brevity) I totally agree. I can still (at 43) get totally immersed in Disney's Jungle Book or The Incredibles... > Many of us enjoy having games you can just "pick up and play" in > between all the hefty, life consuming, train around the clock > monster games ;) I prefer to think of it as suspension of belief. A return to childhood if you will. Or perhaps I never left :) Welcome back Iphi. SignatureStri.tk >> Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Realism? - What's real about a game where you're able to spawn again if > shot dead? Realism? - where's the true 3d, depth perception? Where's the true 3d sound? The smell of the sweat of the guy waiting for you round the corner? PC games come NOWHERE near to reality. And to say that "immersion factor drops to near zero", that's as daft as saying that you can't get wrapped up in a black & white movie. Or a radio play. Or a book. Although I guess maybe if you're imagination is stone-dead it might be a problem. > >> Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. > >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Although I guess maybe if you're imagination is stone-dead it might be a > problem. Well, instead of making needless and personal sideswipes at each other, let's just wait and see what the market in general thinks about TF2, and not just a group of dedicated and rather rude Valveboi shills. >> >> Count me as one. Butt ugly IMO. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > thinks about TF2, and not just a group of dedicated and > rather rude Valveboi shills. Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've chosen to "give it back"... > Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've chosen > to "give it back"... Ok, it's time for a hug. Whoes first? *hug* SignatureStri.tk >> Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've >> chosen to "give it back"... > > Ok, it's time for a hug. Whoes first? > > *hug* The Redd does NOT hug. Oh, alright then, just a little one... and maybe a small peck on the cheek. And a quick pop on the chin. >> Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've >> chosen to "give it back"... > > Ok, it's time for a hug. Whoes first? > > *hug* Watch out for Stri as he goes for the 'reach around'. SignatureJethro[AGHL] aka Phat_Pinger Reply Email: jethro86 (at) gmail (dot) com >> Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've >> chosen to "give it back"... > > Ok, it's time for a hug. Whoes first? Whoes? Did you miss the "r"? >>>Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've >>>chosen to "give it back"... >> >>Ok, it's time for a hug. Whoes first? > > Whoes? Did you miss the "r"? Extra 'W' I would say. == Thad >>>>Who's to say that was a swipe at you? You obviously did, since you've >>>>chosen to "give it back"... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Extra 'W' I would say. Hehe - took me a moment... > "Thad" <spyder@barques.com> wrote in message > > Extra 'W' I would say. > > Hehe - took me a moment... You got to be quick to keep up with cajun wit ___ Neil aka HighVis -- > Well, instead of making needless and personal sideswipes at > each other, let's just wait and see what the market in general > thinks about TF2, and not just a group of dedicated and > rather rude Valveboi shills. Other than Marcus' last comment, who was rude to you? Disagreeing with you does not make us rude or fanboys (the last thing I am is a Valve fanboy). I happen to like the cartoon style, and I enjoy TFC. You don't. Expressing those views is merely a discussion :) I fully expect the "market" to consider TF2 a minority-interest game, much like TFC. Does that make it a bad game? I play many excellent games that don't have mass appeal. -- Paul > I fully expect the "market" to consider TF2 a minority-interest game, much like > TFC. Does that make it a bad game? I play many excellent games that don't have > mass appeal. Maybe I mis-remember, but didn't TFC have quite a mass appeal when it was first released? (Back when the name 'counter-strike' was just "Some mod that the ex-AQ guy is making"). I had sort of expected TF2 to be the next 'big' game, but maybe not :) SignatureBen Cottrell AKA Bench > Maybe I mis-remember, but didn't TFC have quite a mass appeal when it was > first released? (Back when the name 'counter-strike' was just "Some mod that > the ex-AQ guy is making"). TFC was popular, but IIRC nowhere near as big as CS, even when it was just some mod. Depends on what particular period of history you're talking about, of course :) I think by the time of its "TF 1.5" incarnation, it had already become a minority sport, but maybe I mis-remember :) > I had sort of expected TF2 to be the next 'big' game, but maybe not :) Maybe, but I doubt it. The fact that it's a bundled addition to an HL2 expansion indicates that it is not the standalone commercial product that was originally planned. (Have I got that right? Will it be bundled with Ep2?). We only have the classes to judge from, but they are all the same as in TFC. Maybe they have new abilities, and maybe the physics will be more Sourcey (though hopefully not more realistic!), but I suspect it'll be the same basic game in new clothes. Still, it's a great game, so I don't mind :) -- Paul (Johnny_Ace) "Ahh, 'When TF2 is released'; a mythical time when all great warriors and tacticians will be reunited, and join for the greatest battles known to man." Cyrus[AGHL] (Come back, mate!) >>Maybe I mis-remember, but didn't TFC have quite a mass appeal when it was >>first released? (Back when the name 'counter-strike' was just "Some mod that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > course :) I think by the time of its "TF 1.5" incarnation, it had already > become a minority sport, but maybe I mis-remember :) Certainly, but by that time, CS had almost become a valve-owned mod :) I meant its original release in the HL1.0.0.9 patch when TFC was the first (and only) playable mod for HL.. of course, mods like S&I and AHL came out quickly after.. but they never really made more than a tiny whimper - i think it took nearly a year for CS to establish itself as the big daddy. When CS reached Beta 5, it started attracting Valve and OpFor developers helping out, that was when the the mod really took off and started to feel like it was closer to being finished) >>I had sort of expected TF2 to be the next 'big' game, but maybe not :) > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > hopefully not more realistic!), but I suspect it'll be the same basic game in > new clothes. Still, it's a great game, so I don't mind :) Very true, it doesn't seem to be a whole lot different (gameplay wise) to its predecessors. Then again, perhaps it doesn't need to be. I had a feeling that there were alot of people who were put off TF altogether by the huge popularity of CS, and consequent lack of support for TF.. and that maybe TF2 would be like a sleeping giant ready to stomp his feet :) > -- > Paul (Johnny_Ace) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > (Come back, mate!) Wise words from ancient scriptures of the AGHL Royal vault.. I wonder if the prophecies will come true :) SignatureBen Cottrell AKA Bench >>>TF2 teaser is released >>>Nothing special, no gameplay, just characters animation [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Soldier's sequences in particular do not look like game animations, and I'm not > sure about the Spy either. Still, I like what I see :) Hmm, i'm not sure.. it's pretty clear that all that was rendered in the source engine.. why would they create the animations and not use them in the final game? :) I expect the medic and spy anims could be perfect for "idle" time (since even HL had idle animations for gordon's arms when you were just stood still :) ) Anyway, it looks awesome. I suspect it won't look as good on my computer, but i might be pleasantly surprised :) And I agree, I think the cartoony style suits Team Fortress perfectly... its just not a game geared towards realism (that sort of thing is best left for CS and DoD) can't see why people are complaining about the fact it looks like a pixar film... I'd have said that's quite an impressive achievement for a computer game :) SignatureBen Cottrell AKA Bench > Hmm, i'm not sure.. it's pretty clear that all that was rendered in the > source engine.. why would they create the animations and not use them in the > final game? :) Well, they could always use them in intros or class selection screens :) > I expect the medic and spy anims could be perfect for "idle" time (since even > HL had idle animations for gordon's arms when you were just stood still :) ) True, though a spy would need a convenient wall to look shifty against, and if the medic or soldier gave away their positions when idle by snapping rubber gloves or beating helmets with shovels, I'd be a tad pissed off :) Actually, some of them could be used as "Let's go"/respawn animations. > Anyway, it looks awesome. > can't see why people are complaining about the fact it looks like a pixar > film... I'd have said that's quite an impressive achievement for a computer > game :) Me too :) It looks like most of the classes are standing on the bridge of a 2forts map, though it's 2forts in Yosemite Sam World ;) -- Paul "When ah say whoa, ah mean... WHOA!" > Anyway, it looks awesome. I suspect it won't look as good on my > computer, but i might be pleasantly surprised :) And I agree, I think [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pixar film... I'd have said that's quite an impressive achievement for > a computer game :) Exactly, since most of Pixar's films took tens of hours to render PER FRAME! Looks awesome. Acercanto >> I'm not sure that all those animations will be in-game. The Medic's and >> Soldier's sequences in particular do not look like game animations, and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > film... I'd have said that's quite an impressive achievement for a > computer game :) Was it all rendered in Source? There's a *lot* of depth of field, background/foreground focus blurring going on - not likely things will look like that in the actual game >>>I'm not sure that all those animations will be in-game. The Medic's and >>>Soldier's sequences in particular do not look like game animations, and [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > background/foreground focus blurring going on - not likely things will look > like that in the actual game I'd hope not, that would be a little off putting during the game :) But the visual effects you mention aren't beyond Source's capabilities According to the Source Engine wiki, Motion blurring and depth of field adjustment are both as-yet unreleased/unconfirmed features, but we can see quite clearly that they do exist :) [Snippet from wiki] Cinematic effects With color correction and film grain[5] already released, Valve intend to add their other cinematic effects such as motion blur and depth of field to Source when hardware is able to render it to their satisfaction. The effects are accomplished with an accumulation buffer for quality, creating enormous overhead; for instance, twenty to thirty motion blur frames need to be rendered for every one frame that the user sees. For a constant framerate of thirty frames per second, a video card is required to produce between six hundred and nine hundred frames per second. This causes modern hardware to require a full two seconds to render each frame[6]. Motion blur and depth of field can be seen in several of Valve's promotional videos, including: * The Day of Defeat: Source video Prelude to Victory * The initial Portal trailer [1]. [/end] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_engine One thing to be said about Source - its far more than just a game engine - one guy spent some time creating a neat music video using G-Man's lip sync, and moving sequences from HL2 :) http://www.machinima.org/paul_blog/breen/StillSeeingBreen-v1.2-HQ.wmv SignatureBen Cottrell AKA Bench |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.