Never thought I would say this, but I finally think Tex could work through CGI (As long as Cubase or CJ contribute their vocal talents that is) 
. Yes, I'm a purist, but checkout the shots from "Moment of Silence" at : http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/th ... index.html
Makes me wonder, why we haven't heard much on the Tex front, despite all of these great adventure games coming out (Syberia 1/2, Dreamfall: TLJ, and Farenheit/Indigo Prophecy)
. Yes, I'm a purist, but checkout the shots from "Moment of Silence" at : http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/th ... index.htmlMakes me wonder, why we haven't heard much on the Tex front, despite all of these great adventure games coming out (Syberia 1/2, Dreamfall: TLJ, and Farenheit/Indigo Prophecy)
If you want drawn out and boring, I suppose Syberia is great stuff. Maybe they should have made it an illustrated book instead.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
Nice quote from PD there Jim. 
I think in about 4 years time we will start seeing some really amazing CG real-time human character developments. At the moment, even though you can get very high-poly models with pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, the realtime engine characters just look bad.
If they were to have tex in CG I would prefer to wait until technology reaches this benchmark. Also, I would still prefer to have it in 1st person... what always made the Tex games great is they put you in Tex's shoes, but still allowed you the ability to see form a onlookers perspective. I don't think Roswell in PD would have had the same spook-factor if you could actually see Tex walking around as an emotionless as a 3D puppet. 3rd person suits more 'cartoony' games more, as that is their style, like Grim Fandango or Full Throttle. A gritty PI story like Tex would not be complimented by a low polly character that handles like a shopping cart. In my opinion.
-Cub. =o)
I think in about 4 years time we will start seeing some really amazing CG real-time human character developments. At the moment, even though you can get very high-poly models with pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, the realtime engine characters just look bad.
If they were to have tex in CG I would prefer to wait until technology reaches this benchmark. Also, I would still prefer to have it in 1st person... what always made the Tex games great is they put you in Tex's shoes, but still allowed you the ability to see form a onlookers perspective. I don't think Roswell in PD would have had the same spook-factor if you could actually see Tex walking around as an emotionless as a 3D puppet. 3rd person suits more 'cartoony' games more, as that is their style, like Grim Fandango or Full Throttle. A gritty PI story like Tex would not be complimented by a low polly character that handles like a shopping cart. In my opinion.
-Cub. =o)
Well, to tell the truth, I don't think CGI is ready to be presented in a Tex game. CGI is not nearly as advanced as people think it is. I still look at the latest shooters like Doom 3, Far Cry and Half-Life 2 and while they all have beautiful graphics, many of the real-time effects still look bland. Just look at what they have achieved with CGI in cinema. It looks spectacular, light years ahead of any PC/Console game. It will take years until they'll be able to achieve real-time graphics as good as pre-rendered ones.
I still stand by my old principle that graphical design is far more important than technical graphics, but I won't get into it right now. Besides, let's face it. Tex in our minds will forever be an FMV game. Chris Jones as Tex is irreplaceable and while putting Tex as a 3D model with CJ's voice-over could work, the experience will not be the same as the real thing.
That's not to say there aren't any advantages to making a CGI Tex game. There are plenty. Without getting into too much detail and examples, here a few possiblities.
First of all, there will be a whole new aspect of game dynamics, where you could have full, unlimited interaction with the environment (that of course includes 360 degrees panoramic view and movement in all directions). It can include MUCH bigger locations, where Tex could actually travel by foot to long distances (kinda like an FPS). That's something the Tex series have not implemented in the past. What you were capable of doing is enter a location which was a room or a house or a facility of sorts and had very limited exploration possiblities (with a few exceptions). That of course has to be changed. I'm not saying they shouldn't keep the intimate, minimalistic feel of the Tex games, but indeed they should provide for more exploration.
Secondly, the entire visual scope of the game could be far greater. Theoretically, you could manifest anything you want into a 3D model (for example, a much more detailed Speeder), something that would otherwise be near impossible and not cost effective to create in FMV style (like real live sets a la Wing Commander IV, etc.).
And thirdly, dynamic gameplay. Tex can practically go anywhere, inspect everything, move anything that is not bolted down, etc. Smooth transition between actions for a smooth gameplay. Enormous freedom in the style of the GTA games (adjusted for adventure audiences of course). It basically has to work like an FPS, but converted to adventure gaming design where you have freedom to explore and look at EVERYTHING.
Adventure games of the past few years have enormously underused CGI. One can only imagine what AC and CJ can achieve with some advanced computer graphics. The potential is there, whether they'll take advantage of it or not remains to be seen.
These are only but a few examples. But let me make this clear, Tex in any form other than FMV will not provide the same, foreboding, familiar feel of the Tex series. So, if one does decide to create a CGI Tex game, he will have to carefully plan every little detail and achieve a sense of realism close to what the FMV Tex games presented. That is something that in my mind is not applicable as of yet in the gaming industry. But that's all speculation so far, anyway.
I still stand by my old principle that graphical design is far more important than technical graphics, but I won't get into it right now. Besides, let's face it. Tex in our minds will forever be an FMV game. Chris Jones as Tex is irreplaceable and while putting Tex as a 3D model with CJ's voice-over could work, the experience will not be the same as the real thing.
That's not to say there aren't any advantages to making a CGI Tex game. There are plenty. Without getting into too much detail and examples, here a few possiblities.
First of all, there will be a whole new aspect of game dynamics, where you could have full, unlimited interaction with the environment (that of course includes 360 degrees panoramic view and movement in all directions). It can include MUCH bigger locations, where Tex could actually travel by foot to long distances (kinda like an FPS). That's something the Tex series have not implemented in the past. What you were capable of doing is enter a location which was a room or a house or a facility of sorts and had very limited exploration possiblities (with a few exceptions). That of course has to be changed. I'm not saying they shouldn't keep the intimate, minimalistic feel of the Tex games, but indeed they should provide for more exploration.
Secondly, the entire visual scope of the game could be far greater. Theoretically, you could manifest anything you want into a 3D model (for example, a much more detailed Speeder), something that would otherwise be near impossible and not cost effective to create in FMV style (like real live sets a la Wing Commander IV, etc.).
And thirdly, dynamic gameplay. Tex can practically go anywhere, inspect everything, move anything that is not bolted down, etc. Smooth transition between actions for a smooth gameplay. Enormous freedom in the style of the GTA games (adjusted for adventure audiences of course). It basically has to work like an FPS, but converted to adventure gaming design where you have freedom to explore and look at EVERYTHING.
Adventure games of the past few years have enormously underused CGI. One can only imagine what AC and CJ can achieve with some advanced computer graphics. The potential is there, whether they'll take advantage of it or not remains to be seen.
These are only but a few examples. But let me make this clear, Tex in any form other than FMV will not provide the same, foreboding, familiar feel of the Tex series. So, if one does decide to create a CGI Tex game, he will have to carefully plan every little detail and achieve a sense of realism close to what the FMV Tex games presented. That is something that in my mind is not applicable as of yet in the gaming industry. But that's all speculation so far, anyway.
Oh I agree with you 100% that CGI has not reached a satisfactory level for the dynamic level of gameplay you speak of.
However, I agree with you that pre rendered can be breathtaking... allow me to elaborate on my little tangent:
The Tex games were all first person, the only time you ever saw Tex was in the FMV scenes. Now we could quite easily replace those FMV scenes with CGI as they would use pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, which as you said and I agree would have the potential to look quite spectacular. During the gameplay we don't really have to worry about the level of detail going into charaters as we would not see them... much like the details were not that complex during the momvment/interactive modes of the original Tex games. We just need the architecture to look good which is not out of reach for a PC (unlike the cutscenes I speak of).
If you could upcomming game engines (for the movement engine and architecture, and physics), with pre-rendered CGI cutscenes I think you would be onto a winner... would you agree?
-Cub. =o)
However, I agree with you that pre rendered can be breathtaking... allow me to elaborate on my little tangent:
The Tex games were all first person, the only time you ever saw Tex was in the FMV scenes. Now we could quite easily replace those FMV scenes with CGI as they would use pre-rendered CGI cutscenes, which as you said and I agree would have the potential to look quite spectacular. During the gameplay we don't really have to worry about the level of detail going into charaters as we would not see them... much like the details were not that complex during the momvment/interactive modes of the original Tex games. We just need the architecture to look good which is not out of reach for a PC (unlike the cutscenes I speak of).
If you could upcomming game engines (for the movement engine and architecture, and physics), with pre-rendered CGI cutscenes I think you would be onto a winner... would you agree?
-Cub. =o)
He means computer graphics, as in not real actors.
About graphics not being ready to presented in a Tex game, I don't think you need them to be good enough to be fooled into thinking they're real. If so, you are going to be waiting a loooong time. I realize some people are "purists" and whatnot, but I constantly feel that I am one of the only Tex fans that wouldn't mind if they put out a Tex game with good quality (like enough to score atleast an 8/10) CG graphics (as opposed to one with actors, obviously CG Tex is better than no Tex).
About graphics not being ready to presented in a Tex game, I don't think you need them to be good enough to be fooled into thinking they're real. If so, you are going to be waiting a loooong time. I realize some people are "purists" and whatnot, but I constantly feel that I am one of the only Tex fans that wouldn't mind if they put out a Tex game with good quality (like enough to score atleast an 8/10) CG graphics (as opposed to one with actors, obviously CG Tex is better than no Tex).
Cub, if I understand correctly what you're saying is they should use real-time CGI during interactive mode (movement, inspection, interaction with the environment etc.) and pre-rendered for interviewing, transitions and important scenes and other stuff that can't be implemented in real-time. So far so good?
I guess something like that could work, but few questions remain:
1. How good will be the pre-rendered cutscenes? The potential is there, sure. But pre-rendered cutscenes in the extensive scope you're talking about is kind of uncharted territory in the gaming industry. You see, pre-rendered scenes are usually implemented only in important transition points like intros, outros, mid-game transitions and so on. This kind of extensive pre-rendered cutscene usage is something that I have not seen before in games. What you're saying is that every interview, every discussion with other characters and virtually every transition point will be accompanied by a pre-rendered cutscene and I'm just not sure if that could work on such a big scale.
2. How will you handle the transition between real-time and pre-rendered? This is by far the MOST critical issue and one that will be very hard to address, I'm afraid. You can't just recreate an environment in pre-rendered scenes and expect smooth transition. Since most of the game will be presented in real-time, any pre-rendered scene will really look out of place unless it's in really high-resolution. Look for example at Broken Sword 3. The vast majority of the game was in real-time, but a few times (5 or so) it used pre-rendered scenes and most of them just looked totally out of place and so different than the in-game real-time engine that one would think they're from a different game. But since the cutscene usage was minimal you didn't really notice this. The fact that a very large portion of a Tex game will be presented in pre-rendered scenes makes this far more difficult. Another prime example is Atlantis Evolution of last year. The pre-rendered scenes completely changed the pace of the game every single time. What happens is you have a real-time game that uses a certain pace and speed and then you have pre-rendered scenes that completely change the game's point of view, pace and sense. This problem doesn't occur that often with FMV. If you can address this issue and provide for smooth transitioning between paces and real-time/pre-rendered, then you have solved 75% of the problem.
3. How will you address the issue of the high costs involved in creating and extensively using pre-rendered scenes? Again, this is another issue that will be hard to overcome. As you might expect, high quality pre-rendered scenes are costly, much more so than real-time. Look at the vast costs of some CGI films in the cinema industry and you'll get my point. Two of the main reasons why pre-rendered isn't used aplenty in games is the fact that they are non-interactive and cost more than real-time.
It could work in the hands of the right people with the right amount of cash and dedication. But then again, it might not. If indeed one could create a game as you say and have the transitions appear smoothly and present high-quality pre-rendered graphics, then by all means we'll have a winner in our hands.
But, the ultimate question remains. How will Tex Murphy fans feel about the transition from FMV to 3D graphics? This transition is FAR more drastic than say 2D to 3D as both are still CGI. I'm not so sure that Tex fans will respond well to a 3D Tex game, but if that's what it'll have to be, then I and hopefully others will learn to accept it.
I guess something like that could work, but few questions remain:
1. How good will be the pre-rendered cutscenes? The potential is there, sure. But pre-rendered cutscenes in the extensive scope you're talking about is kind of uncharted territory in the gaming industry. You see, pre-rendered scenes are usually implemented only in important transition points like intros, outros, mid-game transitions and so on. This kind of extensive pre-rendered cutscene usage is something that I have not seen before in games. What you're saying is that every interview, every discussion with other characters and virtually every transition point will be accompanied by a pre-rendered cutscene and I'm just not sure if that could work on such a big scale.
2. How will you handle the transition between real-time and pre-rendered? This is by far the MOST critical issue and one that will be very hard to address, I'm afraid. You can't just recreate an environment in pre-rendered scenes and expect smooth transition. Since most of the game will be presented in real-time, any pre-rendered scene will really look out of place unless it's in really high-resolution. Look for example at Broken Sword 3. The vast majority of the game was in real-time, but a few times (5 or so) it used pre-rendered scenes and most of them just looked totally out of place and so different than the in-game real-time engine that one would think they're from a different game. But since the cutscene usage was minimal you didn't really notice this. The fact that a very large portion of a Tex game will be presented in pre-rendered scenes makes this far more difficult. Another prime example is Atlantis Evolution of last year. The pre-rendered scenes completely changed the pace of the game every single time. What happens is you have a real-time game that uses a certain pace and speed and then you have pre-rendered scenes that completely change the game's point of view, pace and sense. This problem doesn't occur that often with FMV. If you can address this issue and provide for smooth transitioning between paces and real-time/pre-rendered, then you have solved 75% of the problem.
3. How will you address the issue of the high costs involved in creating and extensively using pre-rendered scenes? Again, this is another issue that will be hard to overcome. As you might expect, high quality pre-rendered scenes are costly, much more so than real-time. Look at the vast costs of some CGI films in the cinema industry and you'll get my point. Two of the main reasons why pre-rendered isn't used aplenty in games is the fact that they are non-interactive and cost more than real-time.
It could work in the hands of the right people with the right amount of cash and dedication. But then again, it might not. If indeed one could create a game as you say and have the transitions appear smoothly and present high-quality pre-rendered graphics, then by all means we'll have a winner in our hands.
But, the ultimate question remains. How will Tex Murphy fans feel about the transition from FMV to 3D graphics? This transition is FAR more drastic than say 2D to 3D as both are still CGI. I'm not so sure that Tex fans will respond well to a 3D Tex game, but if that's what it'll have to be, then I and hopefully others will learn to accept it.
In regards to the question about transition from real time to pre-rendered, that one has an easy answer. Which is, it always looked bad.
Playing Pandora, you walk up to the character and they're a 2d animate spirte/gif/whatever. Enter a conversation, and suddenly they're a person. With dimensions. That looked ugly. But, I didn't complain, because the game was likable enough and that is such the tacky detail that it doesn't matter.
Playing Pandora, you walk up to the character and they're a 2d animate spirte/gif/whatever. Enter a conversation, and suddenly they're a person. With dimensions. That looked ugly. But, I didn't complain, because the game was likable enough and that is such the tacky detail that it doesn't matter.
My blog:
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
http://nvracar.wordpress.com/
True, my friend. But that was acceptable 9 years ago, in 1996. I'm not so sure people will respond well to bad scene transitioning in 2006-2007 games. With today's technology it's just not acceptable. Besides, like I said, this isn't such a major problem with FMV as it's not CGI. Transitions between 3D real-time and 3D pre-rendered could appear far more drastic if not implemented correctly, which is the hard thing to achieve.Vracar wrote:In regards to the question about transition from real time to pre-rendered, that one has an easy answer. Which is, it always looked bad.
Playing Pandora, you walk up to the character and they're a 2d animate spirte/gif/whatever. Enter a conversation, and suddenly they're a person. With dimensions. That looked ugly. But, I didn't complain, because the game was likable enough and that is such the tacky detail that it doesn't matter.
I think CGI are the next generation for futuries games right now. I kinda think FMV are dieing in 21 century technology we are at in pre and real graphic. I give it about 5-10 years max for CGI to be fully over billions persec in CGI quality.
Look at PS3 or XBOX 360 game for example they are using CGI in pre or real cant remember that looks awesome and closely to FMV real-like. they are nearly at next generation level of CGI that make it more real but that is only a small step in the next generation but a few more years to get advance CGI. PC will be in top of the line in about few years with Longhorn (Whatever they are adding).
Half-life 2 and Doom III are a example of good next generation CGI background, gameplay, etc. but they are about few years or so to get top of the line CGI.
TM would probably be using CGI like Law n Order game on your PC that made character face look so real like on LND series on TNT (television network). You gotta trust AC how he does it cause it is tough in market. I wish AC the best of luck with along CJ.
Look at PS3 or XBOX 360 game for example they are using CGI in pre or real cant remember that looks awesome and closely to FMV real-like. they are nearly at next generation level of CGI that make it more real but that is only a small step in the next generation but a few more years to get advance CGI. PC will be in top of the line in about few years with Longhorn (Whatever they are adding).
Half-life 2 and Doom III are a example of good next generation CGI background, gameplay, etc. but they are about few years or so to get top of the line CGI.
TM would probably be using CGI like Law n Order game on your PC that made character face look so real like on LND series on TNT (television network). You gotta trust AC how he does it cause it is tough in market. I wish AC the best of luck with along CJ.