Animals

[OrbWeaver]

There is generally a trade-off between low-light sensitivity and colour perception, due to the proportion of rods and cones on the retina.

 

Also, a tapetum reduces resolution by causing the same image to pass across the retina twice, with a slight difference in position each time.

[Maximius]

Incidently there was always the question why colour blindness didn't evolve out of humans over all this time, because one should assume that a colour blind human should have definite disadvantages, when he can't make out the colour of a predator against the background of a tree (which is really hard for people like me). A few years ago they noticed though, that colour blind people usually have a much better night vision than normal people, which at least seems to be true in my case.

 

It could be that the genic sequences that cause color blindness are a kind of free rider that will never fully disappear even if it transfers no benefit to the organism. Lets say for example that the gene sequence AaAaAa is a beneficial trait and its selected for consistently. But for every one hundred AaAaAa's, there is one or two AaAaAA's, which proves to be a liablility to the organism. Even though there is a strong disadvantage against this second group that sequence will still crop up due to random variations in the first sequence, due to random mutations or whatever. the point is that not every genetic expression is a product of being selected for by Mom Nature, some actually will never be selected for at all but will never go away because they are so closely related to sequences that are regularly selected for.

 

 

 

 

Right obscurus?

[sparhawk]

Not neccessarily, because if you have a sequence that has no effect, you would expect it to be changed because of random mutations in that particular part. Thus such sequences should dissappear over time.

[Maximius]

Here are some more ideas for you guys to shoot down:

 

Take one of the Doom III monsters that runs on four legs, shrink it to dog size, re-skinn as dog, do same for cats.

 

 

Take a Belcher, shrink it down to create a domesticated Guard Belcher that doesnt belch but runs about sniffing and biting. Perhaps it could be made small enough to follow the Thief into low tunnels.

 

Take Maximius's ideas, wrap in brown paper, dispose of properly.

[Cyberwolf]

Take Maximius's ideas, wrap in brown paper, dispose of properly.

 

Alright!!

 

maybe we could have some special levels where you are the dog!

 

Actually come to think of it D3's four legged beasties had pretty fluid motion...but really how natural did they need to look, you see them pretty much from one angle (charging at you full steam), and that's about all they do, besides pause when they're shot.

Edited February 2, 2006 by Cyberwolf

[Maximius]

Not neccessarily, because if you have a sequence that has no effect, you would expect it to be changed because of random mutations in that particular part. Thus such sequences should dissappear over time.

 

 

Thats generally correct AFAIK, but some sequences that have no adaptive value will return because they are essentially slightly screwy versions of sequences that DO have adaptive value and which return in full time and time again. So if AaAaAa enjoys a strong selection pressure, the sequence AaAaAA which transfers a negative trait in terms of survival will continue to arise in a population. Even if AaAaAA is completely fatal to the organism, it will arise again in the future because one or two of all those AaAaAa's will eventually come up with double AAs at the end due to mutation.

 

 

Right obscurus?

[Maximius]

Alright!!

 

maybe we could have some special levels where you are the dog!

 

Actually come to think of it D3's four legged beasties had pretty fluid motion...but really how natural did they need to look, you see them pretty much from one angle (charging at you full steam), and that's about all they do, besides pause when they're shot.

 

 

Even if their motions were less than perfect, they would still be a fun addition to the set. Even if such creature galloped around instead of padding along like a dog or cat it would be a very nice touch methinks. Fortunately for me, Im completely ignorant of how such things could be done, if at all, which allows me a childlike freedom in making suggestions and asking questions of my betters.

 

Shrinking the Belchers doesnt seem that far fetched, and if more than one domesticated type were created you could have "cats and dogs" of another sort. And then a giant one with wings to make a DRAGON, thats right a DRAGON Oddity, ahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!! Raaaaaawwwwwrrrrrrr!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

 

And my idea of making a rat character for the gamer to play was already discussed and rejected, thank you very much. Im waaay ahead of you in the rejected ideas game, buddy!

[Springheel]

Shrinking the Belchers doesnt seem that far fetched, and if more than one domesticated type were created you could have "cats and dogs" of another sort

 

We already plan to have a few different sizes--babies and the like. But you couldn't just reuse the animations for a different animal model, because it moves in an entirely different way than normal animals (partially because it moves on two legs, and partially because it's a made up creature so players don't have a preconceived notion of what looks 'wrong').

 

Having bad animal models/animations adds nothing to the game--it actually detracts from the experience by requiring the player to work harder to suspend their disbelief. The cats in TDS are an excellent example.

Walking in circles and teleporting up onto chairs and stuff did not add anything to the realism of the atmosphere at all.

[obscurus]

Are there any free or affordable animal animation libraries you could make use of? IF not, I suggest using invented creatures. Dogs and Cats are very familiar animals to most people, so any strange animations or behaviours will be more noticible than a fictitious or unfamiliar creature. Adding some wildlife to the game would certainly add a bit of detail to aid in atmosphere and immersion, but if you concentrate on built up indoor areas you can get away with rats, 'roaches, pigeons and spiders. I'm sure it is at the lower end of everyones priorities though, and I think it would be better to spend the time on tweaking the human animations until they are as good as you can get them, rather than trying to add too much and spreading the resources too thin.

 

My $0.02...

[Ishtvan]

Yeah, I think we're going to have enough trouble just meeting our human animations quota.

[Maximius]

We already plan to have a few different sizes--babies and the like. But you couldn't just reuse the animations for a different animal model, because it moves in an entirely different way than normal animals (partially because it moves on two legs, and partially because it's a made up creature so players don't have a preconceived notion of what looks 'wrong').

 

Having bad animal models/animations adds nothing to the game--it actually detracts from the experience by requiring the player to work harder to suspend their disbelief. The cats in TDS are an excellent example.

Walking in circles and teleporting up onto chairs and stuff did not add anything to the realism of the atmosphere at all.

 

 

The cats...... in TDS.......shudder......

 

 

I agree with you springheel, but I was thinking that perhaps the regular Belcher model could be used, not as cats and dogs but simply as domesticated Belchers of differing sizes and abilities. So there may be a dog-sized one that sniffs around and has a bite attack, a cat sized one that hisses and chases rats, you get the picture. As far as my un-knowing ass knows, it would be easier to slightly modify an existing model than build one from ground up. But then I dont know diddly-squat.

Edited February 2, 2006 by Maximius

[Maximius]

Yeah, I think we're going to have enough trouble just meeting our human animations quota.

 

I missed your post earlier ishtvan, please dont think I even expect to see these things, I just like to chew over the ideas. I spend a lot of time thinking about this project actually but I cant really do anything except spout out notions. Its a bit frustrating, im not used to being hamstrung.

[bob_arctor]

Well the colour blindness gene is sex linked for a start, it's on the X, and recessive.

Males = XY if they have one it is expressed

Females = XX if they have one colour blindness gene and one normal the normal one is expressed.

 

So there are about 10% male colour blind people and less than 1% female.

 

So the two effects mean that it is carried along unknown. You can't know your female mate is a carrier, so your children have colour blindness or are carriers.

So it is brought along through that.

 

I don't know whether there are any benefits though. I shouldn't imagine so...most colour blindness is just a lack of sensitivity in cones with the photo sensitive pigments to certain wavelengths. Nothing to do with rods.

[bob_arctor]

I quite like having cats in games. I like cats.

However the TDS ones did look wrong. Along with most of the game's art. I am really glad your Thief looks like it does.

They didn't look so bad in DX somehow, because the rest of the graphics engine and technology and models were basic. But with better graphics tech when things look wrong they look REALLY wrong. Like most of the art in TDS.

[Maximius]

I quite like having cats in games. I like cats.

However the TDS ones did look wrong. Along with most of the game's art. I am really glad your Thief looks like it does.

They didn't look so bad in DX somehow, because the rest of the graphics engine and technology and models were basic. But with better graphics tech when things look wrong they look REALLY wrong. Like most of the art in TDS.

 

 

I fired up TDS the other night to check out the cats, not only do they turn as if they were rotating around a pole but the humans do the same thing when they are searching around for you! They run, stop,then rotate like they were standing on a Sit N Spin (a childs toy here in the U.S.) I can understand why animals would be a bit more difficult to model, given they usually have four legs and complicated movement patterns but holy crabcakes Eidos couldnt even do the HUMANS realistically.

[bob_arctor]

Yes I can't stand the TDS running animations. Nor a lot of the art (or style, whatever) they use.

Run run run!

Stop!

Turn!

Run run run!

[OrbWeaver]

All of the D3 animations were excellent, and there are creatures with 2, 4, 6 and 8 legs IIRC.

 

I don't think six-legged spiders are scary though; I guess they did this to improve performance but it doesn't look the same without the usual 8.

[Maximius]

All of the D3 animations were excellent, and there are creatures with 2, 4, 6 and 8 legs IIRC.

 

I don't think six-legged spiders are scary though; I guess they did this to improve performance but it doesn't look the same without the usual 8.

 

 

D3's animations are light years ahead of TDS's, I agree. I like the big demonic Tyrannosaurus Rex that you have to fight at one point about 2/3 of the way through. When it chased me, the hairs on the back of my head stood up, it reminded me of dreams I used to have of dinosaurs chasing me around my neighborhood. Too bad the game turned into a satanic version of Duck Hunt so quickly

[Domarius]

a satanic version of Duck Hunt

I love it! Best analogy ever!

[New Horizon]

I was just looking through the T3 animations, and was surprised to find that they actually have some pretty good cat turning animations. Why in the hell would they have not used them I wonder? Hopefully there is a was to get them ingame. They also have some pretty natural looking cat idle, sitting and cleaning anims.

[OrbWeaver]

I think they just gave up when it came to animations. Clearly the artists went to some trouble but the developers never got things properly set up in game for some reason.

[Fidcal]

That kind of explains for me why those cats were placed where they were. Level developers probably were told the animations would be improved later otherwise they might only have used them say walking in a straight line on top of a distant wall with the moon behind them. At least I like to think so. Might have been acceptable and hid their woodenness. No cats is better than wooden cats.

[bob_arctor]

Ah put in the nice cat animations someone! The minimalist project can add them in!

[Order of the Hammer Bureaucrat]

I suggest using invented creatures. Dogs and Cats are very familiar animals to most people, so any strange animations or behaviours will be more noticible than a fictitious or unfamiliar creature.

 

roaches, rats, pigeons, mice, ticks, lice, maggots - some very important animals

I agree, it's better to make a fantasy creature which fills the role in humans's minds and societ as cats or dogs and moves acceptably, than to try to create a cat with anatomically correct painstaking movements.

 

All of the D3 animations were excellent, and there are creatures with 2, 4, 6 and 8 legs IIRC.

 

I don't think six-legged spiders are scary though; I guess they did this to improve performance but it doesn't look the same without the usual 8.

 

Which 6-legged spiders? in T1?

 

I think they just gave up when it came to animations. Clearly the artists went to some trouble but the developers never got things properly set up in game for some reason.

 

That is so sad. Such sorrow and disrespect.

 

No cats is better than wooden cats.

 

Ceramic white good-luck cats are better than wooden cats. We can say they are imported luck charms from a far away eastern empire.

[Domarius]

The six legged spiders being reffered to, were the monsters known as a "Trite" in Doom 3. He did specifically say "Doom 3" in the previous sentence