The Central "Jill Valentine" Discussion Topic

[Vector]

Damn. This place was boring for the last week or so. Now...well, now it just feels like home again. It's like...that rash that won't go away. It itches like HELL, but it's been there for so long that you've just gotten way too used to it.


...ugh...where's the ointment?

[Mr_Zombie]

If I had my way, they would be banned, and everything would be pre rendered, I'm happy DSC is all pre rendered. RE5 would of been a whole lot better with pre rendered cutscenes.

May I ask, how?
RE5 has really high-quality characters with detailed animation; using prerendered stuff you wouldn't achieve a much better result.

I can understand using prerendered cut-scenes in PSX and, to an extend, PS2 era, when graphics looked (really) bad. Although, as valentinesdead? has already pointed out, there are games that had real time cut-scenes back then that look great even now. MGS3, REmake, RE4, Tomb Raider: Anniversary just to name few.
EDIT: And how could I've forgotten about Silent Hill 3? Even though I love Sato's work in SH1 and SH2, I think that cut-scenes in SH3 surpassed (or at least were really close) to what he did in those two games.

This generation pushed graphics even more. If someone would show you cut-scenes from, let's say, DMC4 or Heavy Rain several years ago you would never say that those are real time because those look a hell a lot better than prerendered cut-scenes that were used in games back then. Things like really detailed models and hi-res textures, lighting & shadows, effects like bloom, HDR, motion blur and post processing really do the magic. Sure, CGI movies like Degeneration or Advent Children still look better (although, as valentinesdead? has said, they also look more stiff and plastic), but the difference is starting to become really small these days. So what's the point of using prerendered cut-scenes?

What I love about real time cut-scenes, and what you can't achieve using prerendered movies, is the consistency. What you see in cut-scenes is what you see in gameplay. Characters look the same (they are higher-poly, but that's because you don't need all those little details in gameplay models), wear the same costumes etc. It's even more important when you're playing on PC and use custom mods. What I hate about Pc version of RE4 is that even though my in-game Leon is modded (has stubble), I always see the default one in cut-scenes.

Pre rendered takes all the fun out of a cutscene.

Huh? I've just played DMC3. The graphics are far from perfect, but cut-scenes are still amazing due to its direction, music and acting. Graphics has nothing to do with "the fun".

Gah, why not just have dialog play during the gameplay of your gonna be lazy like that?

You mean, like in Half-Life series?

[Jill's Boob]

If I had my way, they would be banned, and everything would be pre rendered

Okay. You hate cutscenes using the "in-game" engine. Got it.

RE5 would of been a whole lot better with pre rendered cutscenes.

And MOAR Jill and NO Chris, right? Maybe some Jill V shopping scenarios? "Jill looks fabulous in this sun dress! Look out, Kijuju!"

Pre rendered takes all the fun out of a cutscene.

???

So you are for, or against pre-rendered cut-scenes?

Now, all I get is a crappy in game cutscenes that uses the game engine

Weren't you recently praising Uncharted for it's amazing character models, animation, voice acting, story, etc? You do realize that everything in that game is from the "in-game" engine, right?

Not to mention...your choice for "best console game this generation," Dead Space, utilizes the "in-game" engine for the entire game as well.

I hate just about every new style that has come into gaming in the last few years. Games are more about money now than fun.

Yet you keep on buying them and playing them.

Remember when first person shooter games had health packs? Ah.. those were the good days. Now every single fucking game has a regenerating health bar.

So are you now bitching about game mechanics, as opposed to cutscene renders? You want only health packs, but a new game style diverted from the norm and implemented a regenerating health bar.

Damn the game industry for diversifying game mechanics! The Australian boy is pissed!

You know, why make multiple games?

Multiple = different options = diversity

When did diversity become unpopular?

So, if "multiple" games are being made, and game mechanics are "diverse," apparently diversity would be popular. You even stated it up above, when you said that you hate EVERY new style that has come into gaming the past few years. That statement also indicates diversity. Ding-ding-ding! The bell's ringing, but no one's home!

Your posts are extra funny because you contradict yourself so often.

Get a clue. First look up the word "diversity." Then learn how to support your complaints, especially since you are damaging your own statements with your subsequent statements.

Or, just go to another forum and bitch about the people who disagree with you here. It's your choice, really.

[Stu]

To be fair, i'm bored of people bashing the likes of Capcom for this controversial idea that they might exist to raise money. If people are STILL to pig headed to understand this, i'll just leave them to it.

I just found it hilarious that in-game cutscenes were the greenlight to bring the whole money thing up again.

[Bertha]

As for the rest of your post. . .I"m just glad Obama hasn't (yet) appointed you as a game industry "Czar". Otherwise, you'd probably roll all systems back to the stone-age days of PS1 games, citing affirmative action since PS1 is BC on the ps2, and is far in the minitority of grapical capablities than any of the other systems out there.

....lulwut. The games industry is a business. A business is out to make a profit. Yes, flash games are an example of something out for fun (and so are things like Dark Biohazard) but if you're releasing a game into a market part of the goal is to make money. The driving force behind it isn't just fun.

In fact, the main driving force behind it is to make money. Always has been. That's why they're sold for a price and aren't handed out free all willy nilly.

Some people forget that game development companies = businesses. All businesses run to make a profit, so they will sell what people want to buy. The more people buy, the more they make of it. They make what customers demand, to make profit for their business. No reason to hate on Capcom to do what every other business doing, especially in these difficult times. Hating a company for running their business to optimize profitability (especially in the middle of a recession) is... odd.

This, this, and...this. It's not called the Game Industry for nothing. Making video games is all about making money. Yes, they are fun. But then look at sports. Baseball players are getting paid millions...to what? Play a game anyone can do in their own backyard. To those making games, fun just goes along with the total package. (But MissV is probably going to block me and/or ignore my post again, so whatever. XD )

If MissV had his way, everything would be the same. And despite his moans that diversity is dead, there actually is a great deal of it. That's why so many different games are made, and why others are popular and some aren't.

[Alexia_Ashford]

I'll paste what I said in the other topic.

Some people forget that game development companies = businesses. All businesses run to make a profit, so they will sell what people want to buy. The more people buy, the more they make of it. They make what customers demand, to make profit for their business. No reason to hate on Capcom to do what every other business doing, especially in these difficult times. Hating a company for running their business to optimize profitability (especially in the middle of a recession) is... odd.

[BadWolfX]

Games are more about money now than fun.

....lulwut. The games industry is a business. A business is out to make a profit. Yes, flash games are an example of something out for fun (and so are things like Dark Biohazard) but if you're releasing a game into a market part of the goal is to make money. The driving force behind it isn't just fun.

In fact, the main driving force behind it is to make money. Always has been. That's why they're sold for a price and aren't handed out free all willy nilly.

[valentinesdead?]

No! No way! I really hope RE5 is ignored in that department. I don't get the fascination with in game cutscenes. They never look as good, and they bug the hell out of me.

If I had my way, they would be banned, and everything would be pre rendered, I'm happy DSC is all pre rendered. RE5 would of been a whole lot better with pre rendered cutscenes.

Pre rendered takes all the fun out of a cutscene. I loved when I was a kid, I would play to complete a level, then I would get this awesome, beautifully rendered CGI cutscenes in great detail as a reward. Now, all I get is a crappy in game cutscenes that uses the game engine. Gah, why not just have dialog play during the gameplay of your gonna be lazy like that?

I hate just about every new style that has come into gaming in the last few years. Games are more about money now than fun.

Remember when first person shooter games had health packs? Ah.. those were the good days. Now every single fucking game has a regenerating health bar.

You know, why make multiple games? Why not make one huge game that consists of everything, that's the way gaming looks to be heading.

When did diversity become unpopular?

You might as well blame Hideo Kojima for that. He proved that video games could use in-game engines to tell stories. Even today, while looking rough in facial and soemtimes off lip synching, MGS2 still is easy on the eyes. True, most games back in the day used pre-rendered cutscenes, but that was because in-game 3D engines just couldn't do the things they can now. Using your logic, I guess MGS4, or ANY MGS game(ignoring the original) is just shit as far as cutsences. And honestly, most those "beautifully" pre-rendered cutscenes haven't aged well, have garbage animations and crap for facial animations. Hell, there are still games today that have stiff pre-rendered cutscenes(Umbrella Chronicles, cough cough), or in-game(a BUNCH of western made games).

MGS4 and RE5 are two great examples of in-game engines done right. Even the upcoming Heavy Rain--pre-rendered cutscenes are more or less outdated at this point. There's little to no need for them. DSC has'em(And they're quiet the looker I must say), but 1)It's a budget title like UC(sure Capcom's putting some money in it, but still), and 2)It's the Wii. If Capcom were actually putting all there weight behind a Wii Resident Evil game, and they can ala RE4, It woudl all be in-engine. Although, i obviously do prefer in-engine, I think one of the nice touches is that it keeps you in the game more. There's not a certain disconnect with how things look when you play versuses the "pre-rendered" stuff which can look rather "odd" at times.

Hell, even REmake used in-engine, with the exception of the intro and endings(a homage to the original RE, like Jill's and Chris's item slots, and just because the game's enviroments were pre-rendered to begin with). And even that game, if I remember correctly, was a "test demo" for RE4 detailed level of character models(which is why they used pre-rendered backdrops for the game, but I am glad they did, cause they're goregous) But RE4 was another benchmark for in-game more or less matching anything "pre-rendered" could throw at us.

And honestly, RE5 has the best facial animations in any game(in cutscene--in game it's the same like every other game, blank looks!) that are truly, for the first time, utterly convincing. There so many subtle touchs of emotion and/or looks from Chris/Jill/Wesker/Excella that really, there's simply no point in pre-renders anymore. Not when your engine can do so much, run and beautiful HD, and handle so many high-rez textures and polygons. Hell, I"ll even say, I prefer the RE5's and MGS4's in games to something like Dengeration's stiff, cartoony computer generated visuals. There's just a life-like fluidity in in-engine that pre-rendereds lack. Unless your Pixar or Dreamworks, I guess(but even then, all the stuff they do is cartoony to begin with. They haven't tried realistic approachs yet). It helps too that some of the technology RE5 borrowed from was from James Cameron's upcoming Avatar. It can only mean good things for games in the end


As for the rest of your post. . .I"m just glad Obama hasn't (yet) appointed you as a game industry "Czar". Otherwise, you'd probably roll all systems back to the stone-age days of PS1 games, citing affirmative action since PS1 is BC on the ps2, and is far in the minitority of grapical capablities than any of the other systems out there.

[missvalentine]

More and more game companies really need to take inspiration from Capcom's "in-game engine approach." Prerendered cutscenes are really becoming/shoud be a thing of the past in gaming, joining the static camera angles and pre-rendered backgrounds in their grave.

No! No way! I really hope RE5 is ignored in that department. I don't get the fascination with in game cutscenes. They never look as good, and they bug the hell out of me.

If I had my way, they would be banned, and everything would be pre rendered, I'm happy DSC is all pre rendered. RE5 would of been a whole lot better with pre rendered cutscenes.

Pre rendered takes all the fun out of a cutscene. I loved when I was a kid, I would play to complete a level, then I would get this awesome, beautifully rendered CGI cutscenes in great detail as a reward. Now, all I get is a crappy in game cutscenes that uses the game engine. Gah, why not just have dialog play during the gameplay of your gonna be lazy like that?

I hate just about every new style that has come into gaming in the last few years. Games are more about money now than fun.

Remember when first person shooter games had health packs? Ah.. those were the good days. Now every single fucking game has a regenerating health bar.

You know, why make multiple games? Why not make one huge game that consists of everything, that's the way gaming looks to be heading.

When did diversity become unpopular?

[Canas Renvall]

What confused look? His muscles don't allow a confused look. XD

[jagger916]

I loved the facial animation in RE5. Especially when Chris gets a confused look on his face.

[valentinesdead?]

And you know what's the best thing? With PC version of RE5 it will be pretty easy to change Jill's hair colour to brown again

And valentainesdead?, great screens. Capcom really did a great job with modelling and animating faces in RE5.

Lol. Now that's a great point. It'll be. . .interesting to see what some modders do concerning Jill's hair. And yes, Capcom really doesn't get enough credict with what they did with RE5's cutscenes. While the gameplay may not have been as polished, the cutscenes are the most technically advanced than any other game out there right now. It's just an amazing job just how accuarte the facial range is. You can say the VA's acted, but I think this is the first time a person can say the actual models *acted* too. More and more game companies really need to take inspiration from Capcom's "in-game engine approach." Prerendered cutscenes are really becoming/shoud be a thing of the past in gaming, joining the static camera angles and pre-rendered backgrounds in their grave.

Not to mention western studio's need to learn how to model characters like the japanese(RE5, MGS4). They know how to design character models. The US? We get toy action figure people. 0_0

[jagger916]

And all I have is a laptop.Shit...

[Mr_Zombie]

And you know what's the best thing? With PC version of RE5 it will be pretty easy to change Jill's hair colour to brown again

And valentainesdead?, great screens. Capcom really did a great job with modelling and animating faces in RE5.

[Jill's Boob]

Technically, since her hair died all the way down to the follicles, her hair was silver or grey and NOT blonde.