Topic: Uncanny Valley

[SixthAngel]

I am hearing from a lot of places that the new systems have reached this uncanny valley.  I know what the valley is and I was kinda creeped out by some of the characters in the final fantasy spirits within movie.  

I do not think the new systems have reached this point though.  Not too long ago everyone was saying that the new systems weren't that much of leap from the old systems and now I keep hearing this uncanny valley talk.  High definition doesn't add to this effect because watching the aforementioned final fantasy movie on a regular tv still brings about the oddness.  I think that this is propaganda from the companies trying to make their systems seem better but worst of all I think it is being used to cover up sloppy game making.  Making lifeless characters is being excused by people saying it is the uncanny valley's fault.  Put some effort into character design and what the the character will do and these problems should be cut down.  I especially think this is true because while I don't look up computer game information much I haven't heard this talk from computer game maniacs who reach the higher end graphics faster.
What are other people's opinions on this and do you think that this is just more propaganda?

[KDR_11k]

The uncanny valley is bad animation, nothing more, nothing less. Just because it's combined with high end graphics doesn't mean it's deeper. It's from a time of animatronics, those things produced awful animation.

[UltimatePartyBear]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
The uncanny valley is bad animation, nothing more, nothing less. Just because it's combined with high end graphics doesn't mean it's deeper. It's from a time of animatronics, those things produced awful animation.

But without high-end graphics, it isn't possible for computer animation to even enter the uncanny valley.  My understanding is that it's the result of a combination of realistic appearance and unrealistic movement.  I don't think video games have reached the point where the effect is repulsive yet, though.  It will be interesting to see what happens when they do.  There will probably be a renaissance of cartoonish character designs.

[JonLeung]

I don't know much about this "uncanny valley" thing but I remember reading about the oddness of CGI characters in The Polar Express.

Motion-capture reflective balls can't be placed directly on the eyes or tongue, so when we focus on a CGI character's face, especially when they speak, their less lively eye and tongue movements contribute to the unrealism.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

RE4 does a decent job within the limits of its mo-caps and art direction.

Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, DOESN'T.

[Ian Sane]

I've found with games the uncanny valley can be avoided simply with good art direction.  Interesting character designs and animation that doesn't look stupid is the key.  The problem comes from games where the characters move like puppets and the developers strive for realism to the point where the characters look boring.  EA is horrible for this.  However I find most Japanese developers, even when going for a realistic look, add just a bit of anime style to the graphics and the characters look fine.

Even with Twin Snakes I felt the movements just looked laughably stupid but I wasn't uncomfortable or afraid which I believe is what is required for the uncanny valley effect.

It would be interesting if someone intentionally used this technique to make scarier zombies or dolls come to life.  In other words the main character looks fine but the scary bad guys don't.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Killer7 FTW

[KDR_11k]

It would be interesting if someone intentionally used this technique to make scarier zombies or dolls come to life. In other words the main character looks fine but the scary bad guys don't.

I've still got this game idea where you're in midst of a robot insurgency and the robots look just like normal people with slight imperfections in their movement and appearance. The more difficult enemies would be harder to tell apart from the crowd.

[IceCold]

Quote
I don't know much about this "uncanny valley" thing but I remember reading about the oddness of CGI characters in The Polar Express.

I watched it in 3D, and I don't recall any of that. I guess it didn't look realistic enough - it was pretty bright and colourful.

[couchmonkey]

Has anyone seen the "Heavy Rain" video on IGN?  That thing creeped me out.  I think it was a PS3 demo, but it might have been Xbox 360, and the character looks almost real, but not quite.  The fact that she's horribly lip-synced makes it even more obvious, but without even seeing the video, just looking at still shots, I found it really "off".

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

It was a PS3 (PC) demo made before the REAL PS3 showed what it can do (and it wasn't anywhere near Gran Turismo HD).

[Kairon]

Yeah, I don't think that uncanny valley is an argument against realistic graphics. Instead, it's an argument against poorly implementing realistic graphics without first trying to understand what makes real, "real." You can't just motion-capture everything, there's a je ne sais quois that needs to be captured, and THAT is what makes art, art.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[King of Twitch]

Yea lip synching is one thing that can throw the whole thing off, Splinter Cell's newscasts provide huge lols when you imagine how little effort was put into that one detail.

[Spak-Spang]

That Heavy Rain is freaky.  The character acts completely unnatural and disturbing.  And its worse when they try to show the "realistic" facial details and such.

It is not just poor animation...the character's animation tries to be too realistic, but its obviously fake.  

Creepy.  Creepy. Stuff.

I would have to say that would be a horrible tech demo to show.  I wouldn't be praising the PS3 after watching that.

[couchmonkey]

Yeah, and yet, IGN had this big interview with them, and was all, "WOWSERS".  The guys on the PS3 and even more on the Xbox 360 channel seem to be head over heels for graphics, HD, the whole lot.  They did bring up the poor lip-syncing, at least.

[Caliban]

Be amazed because I sure was.
If you can skip immediately to the 11 seconds marker, and then rewatch the video from the beginning.
It's not perfect by any means, but it is quite a leap in development.
Oh by the way these guys, Image Metrics, helped doing the animations for GTA4. No wonder GTA4 had such good character animations.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I take it the video was compressed on purpose.

[NWR_pap64]

I take it the video was compressed on purpose.

Ditto. If the video was high quality you would notice the CG skin.

And the eyes...Man, all these companies nail everything BUT the eyes. They need to make more convincing human eyes.

[UltimatePartyBear]

I wish they hadn't messed around with goofy effects starting at :45 so we could see some more dramatic facial movement.  Something about the eyebrows suddenly looked off, but I couldn't tell if that was just because of the change in rendering.  I think it would be pretty easy to tell she wasn't real at a high enough resolution.  Even at this resolution, there's something weird about her lower eyelids, but I don't know if I would notice that if I weren't looking for flaws.  I doubt that would have been enough to tip me off that she wasn't real if I didn't already know.

Of course, how often do I scrutinize other people's lower eyelids?  Maybe they're all funny looking.  Or maybe that's a real person who's laughing at all of us as we proudly announce that we can tell she's fake because of some tiny detail.

[Caliban]

The full video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLiX5d3rC6o

I take it the video was compressed on purpose.

This technology is made to capture animation in more detail. Instead of rendering facial focal points, it will render facial pixel points.

[Bill Aurion]

Do game models REALLY need to get this realistic?  What's the point?

[GoldenPhoenix]

Emily looks really good but there is still something about it that is creepy, I think it is the eyes.

[Ceric]

In the article they mentioned that the eyes were the most work but for me it was the teeth that totally gave it away.

[Nick DiMola]

Yeah the eyes and the teeth are definitely the most noticeably ... wrong parts of it. Overall it is pretty amazing, however my friend who animates for a living said that the technology is not very applicable unless you are making something where you want someone's exact likeness in a game/movie.

[NWR_pap64]

Do game models REALLY need to get this realistic?  What's the point?

Because real=hardcore.

[Morari]

The uncanny valley is bad animation, nothing more, nothing less. Just because it's combined with high end graphics doesn't mean it's deeper. It's from a time of animatronics, those things produced awful animation.

In terms of CGI, I find that unrealistic lighting has a lot more to do with it nowadays. This is especially true in films. Computer generated humans tend to look like they're made of plastic, and it totally destroys any suspension of disbelief that may have existed.

[KDR_11k]

Do game models REALLY need to get this realistic?  What's the point?

So it's more fun to blow them to gooey bits with a rocket launcher, of course!