[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: chick flick? (story vs emotion)
- To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: chick flick? (story vs emotion)
- From: "Todd Gemmell"
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:12:27 -0800
- Reply-To: idrama (at sign removed to prevent spamming) flutterby (dot) com
- Sender: email@example.com
>>First off, I can confirm that Dan is indeed a graphics weenie's weenie and
>>would also agree that the current generation of graphics cards are enough
>>push the polys needed to convey emotion. The soon to be available cards
>>be pushing around 15 million polys a second (translation A BIG boat load)
>>and will just improve the fidelity and numbers of objects that can viewed.
>>Soon Lighting and transforms will be done by hardware on the video cards
>>then we can start working with more complex scenes.
>Are we more concerned with telling a story, or showing emotion? That's
>probably a totally incorrect expression - I know that I love playing in
>worlds, and so forth, but due to my crappy ass computer, I can't. The
>graphics discussion pretty much euthanasia's me from any sort of enjoyment
>into your world.
Well Story is the primary goal (I think for all of Us). Conveying emotion
has become a paramount part of my world and I would defer to Dan to explain
our concept nonverbal comunication. The reason we headed this direction is
that it eliminates needs for text, speech synthises and localization for
foreign countries. This is an untried concept, so I can not say it will work
but I am quite excited about the potential.
The world I am heading for probably wont run on todays machines even. I know
this an area where Dan and I disagree and we'll just see what path we take.
I am sad that it will this will limit the target audience at first but I
feel we need to build the technology to a certain standard (whatever that
may be) and let the hardware catch up :(