Animation in gaming
polycounter lvl 10
I have a question about animation in the game industry.
For the most part, I don't see that many pure "Animator" positions open very often. Is it because game companies generally don't have specialized animators?
Is this a trend that is changing?
What about the difference between game animation and film animation? I sometimes see job openings at game studios where experience with MotionBuilder is highely desired.
What types of things should an animator put on a demo reel if he is targeting game companies? Is it okay to have general acting shots like you might see in a short film? Or should an animator focus on cycles?
Does an animator at a game studio need to be well versed in other aspects of 3D art? For example, I can model and texture, but not at a professional next-gen level yet. I do want to improve my skills there, but only for personal fulfillment. But is it something that I should improve enough to use my own models in my reel?
Do studios need to see animation examples 'in game'? Are Maya playblasts okay? Rendered?
Most of the knowledge I have regarding animation reels is focused on film and TV. So I apologize if these seem like obvious questions.
For the most part, I don't see that many pure "Animator" positions open very often. Is it because game companies generally don't have specialized animators?
Is this a trend that is changing?
What about the difference between game animation and film animation? I sometimes see job openings at game studios where experience with MotionBuilder is highely desired.
What types of things should an animator put on a demo reel if he is targeting game companies? Is it okay to have general acting shots like you might see in a short film? Or should an animator focus on cycles?
Does an animator at a game studio need to be well versed in other aspects of 3D art? For example, I can model and texture, but not at a professional next-gen level yet. I do want to improve my skills there, but only for personal fulfillment. But is it something that I should improve enough to use my own models in my reel?
Do studios need to see animation examples 'in game'? Are Maya playblasts okay? Rendered?
Most of the knowledge I have regarding animation reels is focused on film and TV. So I apologize if these seem like obvious questions.
Replies
You're also fighting against the use of mo-cap. Why hire an animator when you can a monkey to rip mocap. Now before I get jumped for calling mo-cap clean up low talent, I realize it takes some skill but honestly I've never see any animator stick around a place that heavily relays on it... It has a way of crushing your soul.
There will always be animators, there are just fewer of them needed vs environment and character artists. Consider most skeletons are shared between characters and that most motion is mo-cap its not hard to see why. More often then naught, animators have to straddle a gap between technical and artistic to be useful enough to keep around. Sometimes it becomes so technical they don't hire animators they hire tech artists...
When you see MotionBuilder highly desired, you're probably looking at cleaning up mountains of mo-cap.
2-2:30min of a little bit of everything. They don't need to see a lot they just need to see what they're looking for, which is different for just about every company. If you have 2-3 companies you know you're going for and have a really good shot, maybe its wise to cut something specifically for them showing them your a good match.
Rigging and scripting knowledge are normally a big plus. An animator who can't skin or rig normally doesn't make it that far in the application process, but at a bigger studio with people dedicated to those jobs they might be able to work their way in. The smaller the studio the valuable a person is if they know a few disciplines well.
Getting it in game seems like icing on the cake. They'll more than likely be looking at your animation in whatever form it is in.
I'm wondering : What is the ratio of software such as Max and Maya like in different companies?
Now, most aspiring animators, like my self, and especially established ones know that to be a good animator is to have the eye for life, and to understand the principles, what makes a model come to life, ect, so it's not a big difference on what software you use.
But when I think of game animation, I think of Max, I don't know why but I just do.
And when I think of film animation I think of Maya.
Would you say that each package is easily suitable for game and film animation or one package trumps the other?
I always tend to think that Maya is based more on feature films. It also opens a lot more into acting shots and "proper animation"
And Max is a little more limited, technical and not used for such dynamic acting sequences and full body motion but for simple, scripted events.
Prove me wrong ? =] I probably am. lol.
I mean, I've heard f Blizzard using Max and Maya but if Maya is used for the awesome cinematic and Max Bipeds for the game animations then that sort of reinforces my statment above.
I mean, I don't hear a lot about companies doing film work by using Max.
They are both perfectly good tools but I'm not so sure on which is used more.
Especially when combined with the other points that were listed by Vig.
For example, I am a Maya user. I can animate in Maya. I also can do rigging and skinning in Maya. I'm also in the process of learning some Python.
But if I were to try using 3DS MAX right now, I wouldn't know where to begin. I imagine the animation parts would be pretty easy to pick up. But what about rigging? How different is it? Skinning? The last time I used 3DS MAX was version 2.5 with Character Studio.
I'm fortunate enough to be employed right now in a "Serious Games" company as a, you guessed it,... Technical Artist. But with the economy the way it is, it's always good to stay aware of what's needed out there. And if for some reason (knock on wood) I was to no longer be employed here, I really would prefer for my next job to be as an Animator, since I don't get to do much animation right now.
in the EU/UK biz all i see is environment artist and animator positions being advertised. last place had TONS of animators (literally dozens of 'em) and was still outsourcing overflow animation work at times, despite having a huge inhouse mocap setup and all.
undoubtedly in the majority of companies maya is the weapon of choice for an animator these days. it shouldn't matter much one way or another though - graph editor, dope sheet, NLE clip editing functionality etc are available in all the packages, it comes down to how useful/fast/stable the rigs are - and you can build custom ones with more or less identical functionality in any of the big packages.
the reason max is not used that much in animation IMO seems to be bias (based on the status quo from years ago) by those who make the pipeline decisions for once and the fact that most animators no matter which industry they're from know maya these days, you don't have to cross-train them if you just stick with that package.
also the games industry loves film animators, seems to be a one way love affair after the first project or so though.
I believe Maya may be more commonly used in games than you might think (but you're right that Max is probably still king). Even in studios where they use Max, it's possible to have Maya for animation. Regardless, if your animation is really good then I don't think it's a big deal for them to show you how to do the same things in another program. I can't imagine it would be very difficult to adapt in a work situation with coworkers to help you.
For smaller studios being more multi-disciplinary and application focused may be more important though.
To the original poster I recommend you learn a bit of mel/max/python scripting alongside once your a comfortable animator. As daunting as that sounds (it was for me) being able to make a script that gets your boring bits over with in a few short clicks is really worth while knowing how..
Seems like everyone has pretty much covered everything.
Sorry for my english, i need more coffee
In film, animators are digital actors. You have to be able to create performances and evoke emotions and give enough nuances, subtleties, and personality.
In games, animators are tied very closely to game design, where some of the biggest hurdles are to get the controls feeling natural.
for example: in a standard platformer, there is NO anticipation in a jump animation. When you press jump you're instantly in the air, and the longer you hold it, the longer you're in the air.
What this means is, creating concessions for animation, and finding ways to naturalize them for the fidelity of the controls.
You are also battling very nasty amounts of compression, which tends to mean subtle nuances of a performance are usually lost. (a HUGE reason why lip sync's are just awful in games).
And also rather than focus on performances, you tend to create more cycled work, that will not be personalized, but rather shared by many characters
As for animators not having other skills than animating; Some of the character animators I've met in both the commercial/film industry and the game industry consider everything else than animation to be "boring". One of them even went as far as lying on the job interviews so that he wouldn't have to do any of the less fun stuff which I find very risky. I myself do character animation but I prefer being a generalist since I love doing characters and other assets as well. Also it opens up a lot more doors too!
That's kind of what is making me think that film animation is a more valid career in context of animation articulation, personality, acting and all the stuff an animator needs to convey in a character. As you say "rather than focus on performance you create more cycled work" which, again, I feel isn't the best work for an animator. I think Film allows, like you said , to "focus on performances" which is what animation is all about whereas Game animation is more technical and more limiting I think. That's what I was trying to get at. I still see animation for Film as the "proper" more valid form of animation.
What I feel, from reading Animators Survival Kit over 3 times, and researching all of these other sites is that if you want to be a proper animator you have to focus on that alone. That's also another reason why I favour film over games.
The reason you feel that way is because the Survival kit was written for Film and Television. It says for games, but Williams had no experience with game animation. Don't get me wrong, it is a great resource, but one that needs to be taken in context. Many, many of the principals are very much the same in games and television, but there are also principals that differ, such as those mentioned in this thread, anticipation etc. Because of this the game animator has to be creative with his animation and find other ways for the character to do the same things with modified principals. There was a great link that I can't seem to find right now that put these modified principals in context. It doesn't make being a game animator any less valid of a career choice, and honestly there are animators on here that would probably take that offensively.
Where as film animation is using everything you can get your hands on, there are no limits besides the performance choice/script.
Its the difference of having everything or being tied up to constraints out of your control, thats what makes them both fun. Both are bloody hard.
Right, sorry, my bad. I understand what you mean. Don't want no hassle here