BiA3 Trailer.. wow

Sa74n

just saw the brothers in arms trailer and it looks brilliant. the i kinda got the impression the scene with the death of the soldier was a matinee (but not prerendered like killzone) but either way the grafics look really overwhelming. especially all the little debris and dirt flying around after the explosion or the clean sheet with the german behind. cloth sim ftw

hope the game has a good story and is more straightforward with controlling your soldiers.

http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=2577

LAGtheNoggin

Haha! Is dat sum King Tiger they're taking on with a 6 pounder? Now that's the kind of odds I like in a game.

Toomas

IMHO the textures are seriously lacking, at first it seemed like 2 years old game.
It may have high poly counts and what not but the textures make it look yuck.

adam

But.. but.. its a world war game. Again!

motives

i think the shaders & lighting guys needs to get to work

and i agree with brome. Again!

Tulkamir

The animation looks pretty nice as well. (Specifically the part where the player grabbed his falling soldier)

If they did something like that in game it'd deffinatly be cool.

However... too many World War games. I didn't like em to start with, but they're everywhere now.

Joao Sapiro

only decent one was mohaa ahahah!

EarthQuake

As said in irc... Shaders and lighting looks like crap, makes it look like a 3 year old game. Apparently its using UE3, but what thier doing with it you could do with quake3(look at COD2, looks quite a bit better, and runs off q3)

Moz

yes, and again, its a WW2 movie, not actually WW2

If the WW2 genre wants to continue to exist, it needs to start and stay realistic to simulation level and historical accuracy.

Daz

Re: lighting comments. Couldn't *possibly* agree more. When are Art Directors going to realise that 100% fully ambiently lit player characters look completely crap? There looks to be practically zero lighting or shading on these guys. Forgivable on PS2 due to technological constraints perhaps, not so on next gen pc or consoles I don't think.

Actually, I'm not buying that these movies are true gameplay. The civilian in the window pointing out the German soldier hiding behing the laundryline? Um ya, I'll believe that when I see it. If it's in game it's totally scripted.

[ QUOTE ]
If the WW2 genre wants to continue to exist, it needs to start and stay realistic to simulation level and historical accuracy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure about this. You're saying that for WW2 games to be succesful they have to be based on 100% historically accurate fact? If that's what you're saying then I disagree. Games should be fun first and foremost. Any other criteria is secondary imho.

I actually had moments of enjoying BiA. But this looks to be 100% *exactly* the same game with fancier graphics. I have MUCH more of a problem with people re-hashing the same game with 'suped up next gen graphics' than with people re-hashing the subject matter of WW2 per se.

aesir

you could have an action that has civilians do the pointing out animation at nazis whenever certain conditions are met... Or if it is scripted... who cares?

Frankly, I absolutely love games that are very heavily scripted. Might not be great for replay value, but it makes the scenes sooo much more interesting. If I were making a game right now, I'd script as much as I could.

Daz

I don't necessarily 'hate' it. There are certainly games that manage to pull it off far better than others. HL2 springs to mind.
But to fall back on it instead of truly making headway in genuine A.I seems a shame imho. The heavily scripted nature of the demo of CoD2 was enough to make me not make a purchase I'm afraid. Memorising what dude comes around a corner next isn't too much fun I don't think. Knowing exactly what happens next makes the world feel dead, artificial and unimmersive to me. Each to their own though.

rawkstar

2 words, dynamic difficulty. its in SiN episodes, go buy that game hahaha

ok, i really liked the video, it looked really cool, i agree the art isn't the best, it looks alot more gamey than realistic visually, but i thought it looked really fun, probably cuz i've never played any of their previous games... i probably should.

and i liked Cod2 too, i don't usually REPLAY alot of games so the initial experience is pretty important to me. A single player game in my mind is more of a custom tailored experience. Ofcourse that video looked a little too fabricated and scripted out, made me wonder how much of that is in the actual game... i don't know i don't mind scripted scenarios as long as there's alot of variety.

Daz

http://www.ubi.com/UK/Downloads/Info.aspx?dlId=1024

Daz

Interestingly, I just found some screenies that appear to show a much, MUCH better lighting engine than the movies:

http://www.biagame.com/images/screenshots/baker_shadows.jpg

http://www.biagame.com/images/screenshots//3_fire_teams.jpg

*edit* it's actually a little *too* good to the point of being suspicious perhaps?

vahl

http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com/showpost.php?p=996259&postcount=230

Da Killzone effect wait and see then..

Daz

Hah thanks vahl, that's certainly leaving things a little ambigous.

So, there's a piece on Gamespot today about the game, with a bunch of new screens and a movie, and I'm now curious, is the shadowcasting system in the U3 engine *really* this good? http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/images/2006/124/reviews/930277_20060507_screen002.jpg
I mean the shadows from the world are *completely* unified with that of the characters and and objects, and I don't know why, but I'm having a really hard time buying it. I guess because I've never seen it before. At least, not soft attenuated shadows. I'm sure someone can enlighten me. Currently I dont think I trust this screenshot.

rawkstar

its all real, UE3 is magic.

Joshua Stubbles

No!

I spotted a flaw in the engine - the smoke from the explosion doesn't cast a shadow! (only the debris) hehehe

Honestly though, I hear nothing but the highest of praises for Unreal Engine 3. I wouldn't doubt it in the least that the engine is capable of shadowing like that.

vahl

last little one to remove any doubt you could have :



a video that shows the differences between the old brother in arms and the new one

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?type=wmv&id=10395

I'm not bashing, but they'd better stop the BS...plus the ingame video looks very good to me, they did a nice use of the unreal engine, etc...while the pre rendered is too...pre rendered, anyways, they shouldn't be ashamed to show the game how it is, it's certainely a bit less appealing that a pre rendered movie but at least you're not cheating on the customer.

Daz

Yeah that's an interesting vid. He sure could use some realtime ambient occlusion for underneath his helmet there

What's the significance of that shot on the right vahl and where did that come from?

I still think the actual Artistry in the facial work could be better tbh.

vahl

the last shot comes from the shots and videos ubisoft released a few weeks ago, as final quality screenshots, the source site I'm referencing from (nofrag.com - french site, like firingsquad.com) wanted to show the difference between what ubi is announcing and will use for promoting and the game like it is now.

as I said before, I don't try to bash the game, I'm just sad to see that they have a nice looking game, maybe not top unreal engine 3 quality, but still nice looking, and they show pre rendered stuff, which really makes me feel bad because people will buy the game thinking that it looks like a cinematic ( remember the call of duty xbox advertisings)

and I think they could use less ambient lighting, that crap really flattens the normal maps...(they have nice normalmapped details in the video, but that are removed by the ambiant lighting)

Zergxes

[ QUOTE ]
But.. but.. its a world war game. Again!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. Actually, why don't we have any ww1 war games? I guess trench foot, dysentery, and mustard gas make for scary gameplay.