Is Diagonal Walking Animation and Moonwalking fixed at last?

[ancalimon]

I was wondering will we have the same stupid moonwalking animations?

 

[Lexx]

No. Animations are better, but not best.

 

[Plissken]

Diagonal walking not fixed. That was the first thing I checked. He just walks straight and moves diagonal. Frankly, I don't see how animations have gotten better. Faces are like they've been injected with botox, just like F3.

 

[Lexx]

Check out running animation plus running with pistoles, etc. It looks better. Also various other animations are at least a bit better.

 

[ancalimon]

I can't understand why they didn't add a diagonal moving animation. It can't be that hard. I guess there is no hope for it to be fixed anymore as it never got fixed for Fallout3.

Maybe if hundreds of people asked for it...

 

[Deon]

Yeah, Gamebryo limitations sometimes are too obvious. And I hope we will get more engine improvement and less "sorry we can't do it now" in their future games :p.

 

[Plissken]

It should also be noted that one improvement in animations is that SOMETIMES when enemies are shot, they have an animation for it, compared to F3's lack of "hurting" animation.

 

[Anarchosyn]

I can't understand why they didn't add a diagonal moving animation. It can't be that hard. I guess there is no hope for it to be fixed anymore as it never got fixed for Fallout3.

Maybe if hundreds of people asked for it...

It's an engine limitation. Gamebryo in the form Bethesda uses it just isn't capable of particularly advanced animation. Most of the individual animations in New Vegas look great, but it's the transitions between them and lack of variety that are the real problem, and that's a technical problem that I doubt can be too easily solved.

Bully used the same engine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebryo

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYQp1semBJ4[/youtube]

(ignore the crappy music).

I think the blame should sit on Bethesda's shoulders.

 

[Anarchosyn]

The issue is Bethesda's version of the engine, not the engine itself. I should have clarified. The Gamebryo used for Bully is likely very different from what was used for Fallout 3 and Oblivion, as are all the development tools, I imagine. You have to realise the engine dates back to Morrowind, and rather than overhauling a lot of the problems that existed in Morrowind, they simply settled for improving the rendering power. If they had been smart about building their technology like Rockstar, they would have had a much more versatile and capable engine on their hands.

True, which is why I posted that. It's not so much the engine but the hands the engine is in (was basically my point). Gambroyo is more than capable it's just that Bethesda hasn't invested the time or energy to address the limitations like other developers have (and why should they? They can get away with 9/10 scores due solely to the scope of their vision whilst the execution gets excused in ways other developers would only wish to be).

I give Obsidian a pass on FONV as the development time (2 years?) wasn't nearly long enough to address an engine retrofit. Now that Bethesda has access to Id Tech 5 I imagine we'll be seeing something nicer in the near (though rumor has it Bethesda has refused to use it for their next RPG release).

 

[Crni Vuk]

I can't understand why they didn't add a diagonal moving animation. It can't be that hard. I guess there is no hope for it to be fixed anymore as it never got fixed for Fallout3.

Maybe if hundreds of people asked for it...

It's an engine limitation. Gamebryo in the form Bethesda uses it just isn't capable of particularly advanced animation. Most of the individual animations in New Vegas look great, but it's the transitions between them and lack of variety that are the real problem, and that's a technical problem that I doubt can be too easily solved.

Dont you get tired to hear/say that ? Engine limitation my ass. While it is indeed with the one or other engine more difficult to achieve certain things something like limitations actualy do not exist really when working with game engines. What is more important are the targets and time you want to spend with it. To go with examples one has just to look at the countless modifications that are out for games as they many times push the limits of engines beyond what people think is possible. I can remember that for a game people said bullet penetrations would be impossible cause of engine limitations. Modders proved it that it was possible.

This is not to blame Obsidian or anything. They had a crap start ~ working with Bethesdas code to say that and only very lidle time to tweak the engine for their desire. But letz say someone would give a team 2 or even 3 years of time some skilled programmers, artists and animators they could sure do a lot.

 

[DemonNick]

I can't understand why they didn't add a diagonal moving animation. It can't be that hard. I guess there is no hope for it to be fixed anymore as it never got fixed for Fallout3.

Maybe if hundreds of people asked for it...

Actually it is that hard, apparently. Someone asked Sawyer and he said that the engine they were given to use doesn't really support animation blending, and that as a consequence they would have to manually create diagonal animations for the upper and lower bodies (since the upper would still have to be pointing its weapon at the crosshair) for each diagonal (since the poses are asymmetrical). Considering the schedule they had I can't really blame them for not wanting to take that on.

 

[Hair6a11]

I noticed the slightly improved animations to be sure - yet my first experience with a dog and it's very awkward ability to traverse terrain told the story. Oh well.