Insomniac would make Pixar proud. ACIT looks phenomenal.

Has anyone seen the new ACIT supervillain trailer? The animation is just incredible. I didn't think Insomniac could improve so much more over TOD but they just keep suprising us.

Super Villain

OMG, this crap needs to stop :|

yeah the CGI looks great. ingame not so much. not saying its bad but nowheres near pixar quality

yeah the CGI looks great. ingame not so much. not saying its bad but nowheres near pixar quality

washd123

yeah the CGI looks great. ingame not so much. not saying its bad but nowheres near pixar quality

washd123

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

yeah the CGI looks great. ingame not so much. not saying its bad but nowheres near pixar quality

munu9

[QUOTE="munu9"][QUOTE="washd123"]

yeah the CGI looks great. ingame not so much. not saying its bad but nowheres near pixar quality

Couth_

it wasnt exactly a compliment

and everything before the 1m mark is not ingame. theres an obvious dedregation of graphical quality when it switches to cutscenes (which im gonna guess are 'realtime') and actual gameplay. while the cutscenes are almost something id expect from pixar. in game. no.

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

washd123

wow i think that might be sig worthy... research the word "cgi"...then come back with an apology

.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

Rage010101

wow i think that might be sig worthy... research the word "cgi"...then come back with an apology

if were going by the literal deffinition of Computer Generated Image than every videogame in game or otherwise is CGI.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

Rage010101

wow i think that might be sig worthy... research the word "cgi"...then come back with an apology

[QUOTE="Rage010101"]

[QUOTE="washd123"]

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

washd123

wow i think that might be sig worthy... research the word "cgi"...then come back with an apology

if were going by the literal deffinition of Computer Generated Image than every videogame in game or otherwise is CGI.

CGI in traditional videogame definition means pre-rendered whereas a real-time cutscene is one that is being rendered in-engine in real time. There's a difference.Brownesque

thats why i rephrased it and i also explained what i meant.

inengine cutscenes accomplish basically the same effect as CGI prerendered ones. the machine just runs through the motions. the difference is this gen the graphics are usually good enough where all it needs is a bump in texture resolution, som AA, some effects and lighting, and voila. the fact that the scene itself is already recorded the machine just ahas to render the assets on screen allows it to focus the resources on those enhancements.

very few games truely have ingame cutscenes.

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] CGI in traditional videogame definition means pre-rendered whereas a real-time cutscene is one that is being rendered in-engine in real time. There's a difference.washd123

thats why i rephrased it and i also explained what i meant.

inengine cutscenes accomplish basically the same effect as CGI prerendered ones. the machine just runs through the motions. the difference is this gen the graphics are usually good enough where all it needs is a bump in texture resolution, som AA, some effects and lighting, and voila. the fact that the scene itself is already recorded the machine just ahas to render the assets on screen allows it to focus the resources on those enhancements.

very few games truely have ingame cutscenes.

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] CGI in traditional videogame definition means pre-rendered whereas a real-time cutscene is one that is being rendered in-engine in real time. There's a difference.washd123

thats why i rephrased it and i also explained what i meant.

inengine cutscenes accomplish basically the same effect as CGI prerendered ones. the machine just runs through the motions. the difference is this gen the graphics are usually good enough where all it needs is a bump in texture resolution, som AA, some effects and lighting, and voila. the fact that the scene itself is already recorded the machine just ahas to render the assets on screen allows it to focus the resources on those enhancements.

very few games truely have ingame cutscenes.

Toy story owns this gameSergeAndKid

Never put Toy Story next to R&C.

Toy Story is and always will be godly! :)

Never put Toy Story next to R&C.

Toy Story is and always will be godly! :)

BioShockOwnz

ACiT does look awesome, but please stop comparing it to Pixar. Nothing can touch Pixar.

That last screen shots looks really good for a rachet game. When it comes down to looking like pixard. rachet and clank a crack in time is the only one that can come close to looking like a pixar film, in cookigaki unbiased humble opinion.

Yeahhh no. When you're actually playing the game it looks noticably different. Even if it hadn't it's still nothing like a Pixar animation.

Very nice though, probably the best this gen imo.

To be fair, Toy Story is Pixar's oldest movie, movie CGI has come along way, whilst some games may be approaching Toy Story in how they look, there is a massive gulf between games and current Pixar movies.

i just finished watching wall-e for the first time, not but 20 min. ago, and this game comes no where close. toy story VHS? maybe, but this is far from pixar

I just want to play the game. I'm going to be spending my time enjoying the gameplay and the overall awesomeness of the game, not evaluating whether it looks like a Pixar movie or not.

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

washd123

No it isn't. It's valid.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

Rage010101

wow i think that might be sig worthy... research the word "cgi"...then come back with an apology

I will ask the one question how do you know the cut scene is rendered in real time? :P

.

Blazerdt47

Toy Story 2?

You're cheating.

Monster's inc would to be totally honest a much better Pixar film to compare Ratchet to :P both look awesome.But Pixar's most recent films just own it in sheer graphics but they arent rendedred for a game :P (mainly MI due to Sulley and its art style :P its more akin to R&C imo)

No it isn't. It's valid.hakanakumono

except not. how would it be fair to show off a video of the actual gameplay of any game at 720p with lowres textures and no AA and lower quality lighting and shaders and then show a video of the assets being rendered in a predetermined setting and path at 1080p 4x AA better lighting and better post processing effects like DOF and motion blur and then call it the same thing?

it may be rendered in real time but you cant play it or control it can you?

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]No it isn't. It's valid.washd123

except not. how would it be fair to show off a video of the actual gameplay of any game at 720p with lowres textures and no AA and lower quality lighting and shaders and then show a video of the assets being rendered in a predetermined setting and path at 1080p 4x AA better lighting and better post processing effects like DOF and motion blur and then call it the same thing?

it may be rendered in real time but you cant play it or control it can you?

That doesn't mean it's basically pre-rendered. No one is saying this is in-game graphics, it's simply in-engine and real-time.Brownesque

but whats the point of comparing something thats simply inengine? isnt that something all you console user cry about in graphics threads with modded crysis pictures? how its not how the actual game looks?

if were going to start comparing inengine videos then valve has hit pixar quality with its meet the X TF2 videos.

i think the term realtime is a bit of a misnomer for these types of cutscenes. since technically the machine is just running through the motions. the code is all there it isnt searching for the next shader it knows the next shader its all preprogrammed. you can suddenly change the lighting by running down a hallway or something.

using ingame assets while bumping up resolution and AA and lighting and pretty much everything even if rendered in 'realtime' is still the same as CGI.

washd123

Using that broad definition all parts of all games are CGI.