Post by: kennyb27 on March 28, 2003, 02:01:24 PM
Post by: Grey Ninja on March 28, 2003, 02:44:26 PM
Post by: cmoney on March 28, 2003, 04:34:46 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 28, 2003, 04:43:54 PM
Post by: Marcus Arillius on March 28, 2003, 07:32:47 PM
However, my problem is that with all-this hype about cel-shading, it really wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. It looks a lot like the calibur of graphics found in Kingdom Hearts. Not too impressive for me, not to say it isn't good, just not impressive. I am enjoying the graphics much better now though. I guess you could say I'm getting used to it.
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 28, 2003, 08:03:26 PM
How far are you, marcus, because I swear, there were times when the graphics blew me away, namely the first time you played as Link, the amazing particles flying around at Dragon Roost, when the Tower of the Gods appeared and afterwards (it still looks incredible), Hyrule under it's protective bubble, and all the wind effects. All of that, plus more, just amazed me.
Post by: StRaNgE on March 28, 2003, 09:18:47 PM
And to think I was one who was extra bummed about the change of graphic styles.
I still want both versions though, lol.
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on March 29, 2003, 08:43:22 AM
Post by: Marcus Arillius on March 29, 2003, 05:23:38 PM
Post by: mouse_clicker on March 29, 2003, 05:33:05 PM
Post by: RahXephon on March 29, 2003, 05:36:28 PM
BTW, best graphics ever, I am praying they do the toon shading again. It is just gogeous.
Post by: StRaNgE on March 29, 2003, 09:13:21 PM
High quality cartoon action...
Post by: Marcus Arillius on March 30, 2003, 05:22:46 AM
just got the Picto-box I noticed the blur A LOT more. In fact its really really blurry when using the Picto-box.
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on March 30, 2003, 06:56:06 AM
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on March 31, 2003, 09:46:29 AM
Post by: theaveng on March 31, 2003, 12:59:55 PM
Okay not "all". The cheap stuff you see on TV usually doesn't, but if you watch a high quality Disney or Don Bluth movie you will see blurring. Watch the opening forest scenes of Bambi or Beauty and the Beast. Look at the blurred background. It's just like what you see in Zelda: Wind Waker. As usual, you guys are complaining about a problem that doesn't exist... and it's due to your lack of knowledge and/or observation about how high-quality cartoons are made.
Please, make *legitimate* complaints.
-----Here's how Disney did it: They create multiple transparency slides. The bottom slide is the background. The middle slide is the foreground. Next is the character slide. The top slide includes ultra-close objects like branches. Sometimes these layers will go as deep as 10 layers! The camera focuses on the character layer which cause all the other layer to be blurred.
Post by: theaveng on March 31, 2003, 12:59:57 PM
QuoteThat's an odd comparison. Why? Because Kingdom Hearts didn't use cel-shading. It used the standard 3D polygon method. A more accurate comparison would be Zelda v. Dark Cloud (which looked terrible) or Zelda v. Dark Cloud 2 (which was beautiful).
Originally posted by: Marcus Arillius
However, my problem is that with all-this hype about cel-shading, it really wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. It looks a lot like the calibur of graphics found in Kingdom Hearts.
Post by: theaveng on March 31, 2003, 12:59:59 PM
QuoteThat's why you use the Z-trigger on the Ocarina Octoroks... so that doesn't happen. The only complaint I have on targeting is the Boomerang. Boomerangs can't change direction in mid-air and hit multiple targets. That's just not possible. Boomerangs fly in a continuous arc, and only hit objects on that arc. (shrug). Oh well.
Originally posted by: PorpoiseMuffins
Oh... I consider that a relief actually. I hate it when you think you're aimed perfectly and something hits right into you and kills you!
Post by: VideoGamerX on March 31, 2003, 01:19:29 PM
I really think this is something Nintendo was aware of before they stamped the game complete, but I think it was a pretty big goof. It doesn't hurt the game at all, really, but it's the ONLY valid reason for people to say Wind Waker is too easy. And because of this, the game is rather easy (using the term easy lightly because the game concepts are still intact).
And by the way, isn't the boomerange is supposed to be magical? Otherwise, I would agree with you. I think it's kind of neat that they added this ability to the boomerang and used it to help solve some of the dungeon puzzles.
Post by: Bloodworth on March 31, 2003, 01:38:43 PM
Difficulty...yeah, overall it can feel pretty easy, but there are places that will test your endurance later on.
Post by: kennyb27 on March 31, 2003, 03:07:07 PM
Quote
ALL CARTOONS HAVE BLURRING.
Okay not "all". The cheap stuff you see on TV usually doesn't, but if you watch a high quality Disney or Don Bluth movie you will see blurring. Watch the opening forest scenes of Bambi or Beauty and the Beast. Look at the blurred background. It's just like what you see in Zelda: Wind Waker. As usual, you guys are complaining about a problem that doesn't exist... and it's due to your lack of knowledge and/or observation about how high-quality cartoons are made.
Please, make *legitimate* complaints.
OK, I don't really care what Disney or Don Bluth does, I think (i.e. my opinion) that this style clashes with the cel-shaded technique EAD used for the game. In my opinion, it doesn't fit because it is way too close to the vantage point and it is too exaggerated. I understand what it is trying to do (in focus/out of focus), but I don't agree with it. And can you elaborate on something for me, what is your definition of legitimate, because, I believe, that if I can provide an ample argument, it is legitimate. Also, this is the Zelda forum, so therefore, it is legitimate (legal; complying with the law) to post my complaint about Zelda here. My legitimate complaint is also legitimate because I meant it in a sincere sense. In fact, I have never read or heard of a definition of "legitimate" that would contradict my OPINION here.
Post by: couchmonkey on March 31, 2003, 04:01:09 PM
Post by: Dozy Boy on March 31, 2003, 07:17:57 PM
Post by: PvtDaryl on March 31, 2003, 07:23:55 PM
i dont think its ALL cel-shaded since when does celshaded have heat waves and blurryness? exactly its a NEW style of art
Post by: theaveng on April 01, 2003, 07:37:46 AM
As for your eyes, they too have blurring. Eyes can focus on the foreground or the background, not both at the same time. Right now, my computer is in crystal-clear focus, but the chair on the other side of the room is blurred. Zelda the cartoon game is imitating that phenomenon.
Troy (Sidles away)
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 01, 2003, 09:50:58 AM
In responce to "who ever said the game was cell-shaded?" The answer would be Nintendo. The difference between zelda and those other cell shaded games is that Zelda does not draw lines around the edges of objects to make things look more hand-drawn. I think the reason the game doesn't look cel shaded after a while is because you just get used to it. If you went back to a realistic look you'd see the difference again. The game is definately cell shaded. There is no doubt. Cell-shading is a graphical technique that is easily distinguishable.
Post by: kennyb27 on April 01, 2003, 02:51:16 PM
QuoteOh...would you look at that. I did acknowledge it.
I understand what it is trying to do (in focus/out of focus), but I don't agree with it.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 01, 2003, 02:57:04 PM
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 06:32:32 AM
QuoteAnother wrong statement. The videogame is projected onto a flat 2D surface that is equal distance from your eyes. So when you focus on one corner of the screen, the whole screen is in focus.
Originally posted by: PorpoiseMuffins
The thing is that your eyes do that to an extent when you're playing a video game anyways without them putting in any effect.
Anyway, this is all a matter of opinion (whether you like blurring or not), but in my opinion the blurring is essential. The background is blurred in movies. The background is blurred in high-quality cartoons. Likewise I expect the background to be blurred in high-quality 3D games. Only sub-standard companies would put out games where everything, even distant objects, are sharply focused. It would make the game look 2D.
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 02, 2003, 09:57:03 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 02, 2003, 11:02:01 AM
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 02, 2003, 01:07:02 PM
Post by: VideoGamerX on April 02, 2003, 01:51:37 PM
The blur effect is supposed to suggest less focus on background and more focus on what's directly in our character's view. It's supposed to give us a sense of distance so we have an idea of just how far away some things really are.
Quote
Originally posted by: theaveng
Another wrong statement. The videogame is projected onto a flat 2D surface that is equal distance from your eyes. So when you focus on one corner of the screen, the whole screen is in focus.
First of all, the majority of TVs are not flat screen. Secondly, if they are curved, they are curved toward the projector. The surface is not equa-distant to our eyes. In order for that to be true, the screen would be of parabolic shape opening toward a focal point, and we would have to be that focal point. We have more than one eye and it is therefore impossible for the screen projection to be of equal distance from our eyes. Furthermore, it's natural for everything around our focus to be negated so it doesn't interfere or put strain on our eyes when we're trying to look at something specific. Why do you think our eyes move around in their sockets? If when we looked at one object, we could see writing out of the corner of our eyes just as clearly, we wouldn't need to change the direction we're looking in. There also wouldn't be a thing called a blind spot.
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I have to focus on a page in a book in order to read it. My eyes also flow from line to line so I can read more quickly and flawlessly. I have trouble reading the words toward the top of the page when I'm looking toward the bottom. The words tend to blur as they flow out of my focus. They do it naturally.
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 02, 2003, 03:53:09 PM
Anyways, I'm over the "little thing that bothers me" about Wind Waker. For some reason the blur effect isn't bothering me for the most part anymore. It looks good most of the time, especially when there's something big close to you, but still looks a little weird when you're just looking off into the distance. Oh well, it's not keeping me from enjoying the game or anything. I love this game so much. Definately the best out of Nintendo (EAD) since.... well, Ocarina of Time! Anyway, I guess I'm done complaining. My point still stands though; you should be able to pick what you want to focus on in an interactive video game.
Post by: theaveng on April 02, 2003, 04:49:26 PM
If the blurring bothers you, cool, but you can't call the game "flawed" when the programmers are just reflecting reality. It's a difference in opinion, not a flaw.
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 03, 2003, 10:06:49 AM
Again, I don't hate the effect anymore, but I don't like it because you can't switch focus. A game show on TV isn't interactive, but a video game is. A cut scene in a video game isn't interactive either, so I don't mind the effect at all in a cut scene. But the effect in Zelda is based solely on distance, not your personal eye focus. But hey? It brings up the question of what video games are trying to imitate. Real human vision? A camera lense? Looking through only one eye? Looking through two eyes? It's really confusing and I don't claim to understand it all. That's why I think they should have stayed away from it all together. But hey, I think I'll just stop whining and go play Wind Waker now :-)
Post by: kennyb27 on April 03, 2003, 11:50:38 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 03, 2003, 02:03:44 PM
. . . but I suppose it's for the best. I have a research paper due tomorrow and I'd never get it done if I had the game today.
Post by: theaveng on April 04, 2003, 02:32:00 AM
QuoteYes, and when you use your telescope and focus on a distant object, it too is in perfect focus. It's all about the focus. Wind Waker focuses on the foreground: on Link. If you want to focus the camera on something else, you use the telescope. It's not flawed... it's 100% accurate to real-world conditions.
Originally posted by: PorpoiseMuffinsAhh... But did you notice that when the camera looks right at the audience they are in perfect focus?
BTW, Mario 64 has the same blurring effect. Again, because the camera was focused on the foreground: on Mario. Did you guys not notice?
Troy
Post by: kennyb27 on April 04, 2003, 12:20:05 PM
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 04, 2003, 02:44:11 PM
Haha... Seriously though, it is kind of annoying to have to use the telescope just to look at something in the distance clearly. And the telescope doesn't then blur the things in the forground like it should if it were imitating real life. I mean, you have to assign it to a button and then push the button, and even then it doesn't fill the whole screen. What I'm trying to say is I wish it wouldn't always focus on the foreground. But I'm hoping that you skimmed my previous posts at least enough to know that's what I'm trying to say.
Anyways, I don't care about it anymore. It's not that bad. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm really complaining anymore, just trying to defend my intelligence. But go ahead, insult it if you want... :-)
Post by: PorpoiseMuffins on April 04, 2003, 02:47:36 PM
Yeah, that's because it wasn't there. Zelda: WW is pretty much the first game to use it during gameplay itself. Please don't take that like I'm trying to sound real smart or something, but it's true.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 05, 2003, 06:48:05 AM
Post by: Cashcow on April 05, 2003, 12:27:16 PM
Can't really explain why, but I like it.
Post by: VideoGamerX on April 05, 2003, 02:43:41 PM
The other thing I'm really enjoying is the night sky right now. There are two constilations that I can see. Are there any others? I only see the little dipper and Orion the Hunter.
Post by: rodtod on April 08, 2003, 02:30:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: StRaNgE
the further I get the more it seems not like a cartoon but a "Disnet" cartoon.
High quality cartoon action...
Oh hell no. Disney is crap compared to some of the animé production houses. Sure, it was king back when all the old classics were made (and certainly influenced animé at the time, as is evident in Miyazaki's more recent works), but nowadays Disney is nothing but a worldwide mishmash of talent drowning in corporate bigotry.
In other words, the name Disney has lost its honor and respect. No, today the real "Disney's" are Miyazaki (Spirited Away), Nishimura (Trigun), and Iwasaki (Love Hina), among others.
If you like what you saw in Wind Waker, then perhaps you should ditch the Disney and rent some decent animation. Anyone who thinks Zelda WW's style is neat or cool is definitely going to like animé in general.
