oh ok well hey, i personally am not against them, i just think in the middle of a level they would look weird. having them at pivotal points though or something would at least make them not stick out as not matching the rest of the game. i dont know how eric feels about them though so again i defer to him lol On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Matthew Freeland <mattthefiend@xxxxxxxxx>wrote: > ahhhhh that sounds nifty. :D I agree as well that pre-rendered cinematics > are a bad idea, was just floating the idea. > > > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> letterboxing is what you see when you watch a widescreen movie on your tv >> and it doesnt cut off the edges. >> >> it's the black bars >> >> eric was suggesting we use them in our game as an indication that a >> cinematic is happening which is a pretty neat way to show the player what's >> going on IMO :P >> >> >> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Matthew Freeland <mattthefiend@xxxxxxxxx >> > wrote: >> >>> Okay I have to ask... what is letterboxing? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 9:06 PM, Matthew Freeland < >>> mattthefiend@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> Well in games like half-life where the game never interrupts your input >>>> the way they handle it is key lighting and directional sound to make you >>>> look a direction. That's really smart and fairly easy to do with good QA... >>>> the problem with this particular case of the boss dying is that you have to >>>> rapidly reorient yourself after the battle and shift back into exploring >>>> mode. As the quake effect happens so quickly it's undoubtedly going to be >>>> missed 99% of the time so I think it's going to be requisite that the game >>>> pause for a sec after the battle and goes to either a scripted cinematic or >>>> even a pre-rendered event just so people get a feel for whats going on. >>>> >>>> My problem with the active sound/key lighting approach is that it CAN be >>>> good, but frequently when you have lots of colors and sounds floating >>>> around >>>> it's difficult to keep track of what is 'key' lighting. An example would be >>>> F.E.A.R., i don't know if many of you have seen/played it, but it does the >>>> whole ambient horror effects really well, but alot of times you get these >>>> annoying visions of ghosts or demons or whatever they are that try and >>>> scare >>>> the crap out of you. Sounds good in theory, but you walk into a room full >>>> of >>>> blood stains and weird noises and all the sudden loud scraping noise >>>> indicating one of the ghosts is popping up happens and while you're >>>> scrambling to try and find them and make sure ones not going to shank you >>>> when you're not looking you either fall off a cliff or end up missing them >>>> entirely because as it was being developed it was assumed you would be >>>> looking at THAT pool of blood on the left side of the room with the shiny >>>> light on it, instead of the one on the right side of the room with the 2 >>>> shiny lights on it. >>>> >>>> /end rant >>>> >>>> God I hated F.E.A.R.. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yeah, we could definitely do things like that. >>>>> >>>>> I think the only thing stopping us from doing that right now is the >>>>> lack of the ability to ignore player input for a period of time. >>>>> >>>>> We currently have the ability to offset the camera (its how we shake >>>>> the screen) so we could offset it along a specified path as events >>>>> happened. >>>>> >>>>> If we were going to go this route wed eventually want a system were you >>>>> can specify points of interest as a point and a camera looking vector, and >>>>> have splines interpolate between the points but if you guys and Eric wants >>>>> to go this route we might have to hold off on advanced features for now (: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Freeland < >>>>> mattthefiend@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Alternatively we can make it super cinematic and go to a flying third >>>>>> person camera that we can script like of like it were actually a scene >>>>>> in a >>>>>> movie. Think about it this way... The big scary cave monster at the end >>>>>> dies, after combat ends it goes to a quick cinematic that is just the >>>>>> camera >>>>>> moving on its own free-flying that pans and zooms out all hollywood-esque >>>>>> and shows the big scary monster falling to the ground briefly followed by >>>>>> lots of little rocks and debris falling down on its body followed by some >>>>>> big pieces of the catwalk above and the rocks that block your passage. >>>>>> Then >>>>>> the camera sweeps back into the position it was in prior to whipping the >>>>>> big >>>>>> scary cave monsters ass. Could be sweet. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Wurmz >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think panning the camera would work better than zooming out because >>>>>>> if you zoom out, you have no clue if the event is on screen or not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you move the camera, you know for sure what the player is looking >>>>>>> at >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I kinda like wurmz idea of taking control of the camera and making a >>>>>>>> cut scene. We could lock player control and fly the camera over. Or >>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>> simpler then that would be locking the camera and zooming out. Then >>>>>>>> zooming >>>>>>>> back in after the boss dies. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Alan Wolfe >>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Wurmz i am in complete agreement. It's an issue that the game does >>>>>>>>> neat stuff like bridge collapsing and cave in rocks blocking tunnels >>>>>>>>> and yet >>>>>>>>> they mostly happen off screen! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From a code POV I'm up for coding just about anything but if we >>>>>>>>> come up with a cool feature that would take too long to code, we can >>>>>>>>> always >>>>>>>>> do a temp solution now and do the real solution in a later milestone. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Matthew Freeland < >>>>>>>>> mattthefiend@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ahoy folks, got a mini technical question as to how we plan on >>>>>>>>>> directing peoples attention to particular details in their >>>>>>>>>> surroundings... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I bring this up because in light of the awesome script which Kent >>>>>>>>>> has been so wonderful to write... No one will really look up to see >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> platforms going squish. So how do we want to present it? Would it >>>>>>>>>> possible >>>>>>>>>> to make mini cutscenes where the engine takes over to force the >>>>>>>>>> camera where >>>>>>>>>> we want it to be? There are a few other alternatives I can think of >>>>>>>>>> as well, >>>>>>>>>> but in terms of the boss dying and then the little micro-quake >>>>>>>>>> occurring >>>>>>>>>> immediately after. Even if there is a small pause after combat ends >>>>>>>>>> before >>>>>>>>>> the earthquake appears there is still the ultimate problem that all >>>>>>>>>> 3d game >>>>>>>>>> development companies have had: making the player look UP. There are >>>>>>>>>> multitudinous other ways to doing so that don't involve taking over >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> players control of the camera which should also be addressed. If >>>>>>>>>> you've got >>>>>>>>>> an idea I recommend you make it as difficult as possible just to >>>>>>>>>> make those >>>>>>>>>> silly code monkeys work. :P >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For consistant presentation of the game I think we should probably >>>>>>>>>> hash this out with some immediacy and might even be worthy of a >>>>>>>>>> milestone >>>>>>>>>> entry. Those are my thoughts. Feel free to leave some input! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -Wurmz >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >