Let's talk about the new trailer "Born From Ashes"

Off-topic
#21

not seeing what the problem with facial expressions are. some of the scenes looked very lifelike in fact. i guess it’s the lack of micro expressions? not really possible for traditional 3d facial animation, unless you overlay a movie on top of the face like team bondi did with la noire.

i think this is just another case of group think. few vocal guys get the crowd riled up and seeing things.

if anyone can point out specific issues that would actually be more helpful, just to verify you actually know what you’re talking about and not just hallucinating. give us a time stamp for the video and then explain how the facial animations are bad.

i’m fairly certain it’s because people are used to seeing exaggerated over the top facial expressions from older games and are now expecting that to be the norm even though that’s not realistic.

i appreciate the toned down and grounded representation of this game overall. the animations reflect that. no overacting in other words.

but i don’t know maybe there are issues i’m just not seeing where exactly they occur.

1 Like
#22

I’ve just re-watched it, this time without sound, and believe or not it actually improved my perception of the trailer overall. Which suggests that for me at least, most of the issues are potentially related to either the dialogue, or the speech / lip synchronization of that dialogue.

A real standout for me in terms of the animations is around 0:37-39. The throwing animations look really rigid and stiff. Unnatural even, rather than simply uncoordinated. Probably down to the arm position and bend of the elbows. Appears quite robotic.

There’s some definite dialogue-to-lip synchronization issues as well. The one that jumped out at me the most when I first watched it was with Henry’s mother, around the 55 second mark I believe. The facial animation and the screaming didn’t seem to convey the horror of the moment.

Anyways, potentially a number of elements in combination which have contributed to me feeling that something is a little bit off. But still just my own opinion.

4 Likes
#23

Splitting the game into three acts was not a bad idea in this way warhorse studios could focus on quality rather than the quantity of game content.moreover sales of act 1 could be source of profit and advertisement.what do u think guys?

#24

Not necessarilly. But they naturally compare similar games to each other. In this case I bet they compare KCD with Witcher 3 and TW3 is just better in the animation/dialogue department (KCD is much better in the environmental art, at minimum).

1 Like
#25

“The voice acting and lip sync are borderline cringey.”

Gameplay > Graphics and Facial Animations

2 Likes
#26

The previous trailer was better in every way, which makes me feel better. The part where Henrys mom was yelling for help made me start laughing it was that bad. I hope it was just a dream, and the actual cutscene where his parents are killed isn’t like that.

7 Likes
#27

Why did they make another? Because it will be presented on Stream and more trailers, bigger chance that people will find the game interesting. But to me, this second trailer does not show much different than in 1st, or maybe I just watched a lot of videos so it seems old to me.

#28

Can anyone from warhore team confirm that trailer was rushed and not properly made. Or that was final state of game?

#29

6 month to go, it’s unlikely that is the final state of the game.

#30

This! :smile:

[Character Limit]

1 Like
#31

It seems to me personally that there is an encoding/upload issue which has caused an offset between audio and video: around 50ms shift felt a lot better than the YT timing.

#32

There is nothing wrong with timing. People are just opening their mouths very minimalistic.

1 Like
#33

After watching the trailer a second time, I think that the problem is the voice and the lip sync of Henry’s parents. The rest is pretty good.

1 Like
#34

not even the clearly old guy talking like a 20- 30 something hipster :smiley: I’m not so fussed I think it is funny is all.

#35

"Clearly they used their fists for the voice acting haha."
So I have been deep in some comments these past two days.
Apart from obvious, voices not fitting the characters… I found there are some people complaining about no actual gameplay. But everyone seems to agree on good graphics.
My personal question is, what are fire arrows doing in the game? I thought they are not a real thing. Or should I find out in game that it was somehow possible?
And T. H. Chris in his new video asks what about Lord Robart, did you change his face? Because now he looks different than in Beta.

1 Like
#36

I thought the same thing when I saw them… I was under the impression that fire-arrows were just merely some Hollywood fantasy.

#37

I guess i could see their use if you wanted to completely sack a town or city. But generally when you siege something you want to take it while doing as little damage as possible to the actual structures as possible. No sense in spending time, resources, and lives taking something if you’re just going to burn it to the ground.

1 Like
#38

one example, Gothic 1: Gameplay AAA, graphics for 2001 year game - good, low budget, yet better than any other game released nowadays.
Just watch the video

2 Likes
#39

There is a timing issue exactly as @Lieste stated, however I couldn’t really care less. I liked the idea ever since kickstarter and loved the game since alpha and I am absolutely sure that this will be exactly the kind of game which will hook me up fast and won’t let me go until I complete everything there is in the game, which I can historically say only about 3 other games - Gothic I and II and Morrowind.

Most of games I start playing and get bored very soon, which won’t happen here simply because of the challenging combat and hopefully great story.

By the way even witcher games took some forcing after a few months to continue where I left and finish the games. They are cool and all, but…

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz