Hey there. Yeah yeah I know what your thinking it's been awhile since my last blog. That's my bad. However over the last couple of weeks I have been working on sound design for the film. I just finished the rough final sound for the film, I say rough because it is still far from completion. I believe that it would have been to hard to do sound for the model as I do not fully know what its actions will be. I do believe that what I have thus far is a step in the right direction and I look forward to seeing it further developed. After recording several dozens of versions of my voice for the dialogue I found some that I were happy with and I manipulated the pitch and added some filters to give it a robotic feel. I gave each dialogues different vibes this was due to mistake and intention. I did not intend for them to be as different as they are but I don't think that is bad thing. I believe that the dialogue came out really well and in the future if we wish to change the person saying it to provide more variety then we can do that because we do not need to sync the words to any lips. The background is simple yet effective, it provides and eerie and thrilling feeling to the scene.
Overall I'm happy with what I have done I hope my teammates feel the same.
Thursday, 12 May 2016
Thursday, 14 April 2016
15/04/16-Cinematic footage
Here are some more shots from our Monday shoot. I think that it went a lot better then the last time but my acting hasn't improved any unfortunately.
Sunday, 10 April 2016
11/04/16- Cinematic filming
Last Thursday we did our first set of filming. I feel as though it is very difficult to shoot at night as the camera lenses f-stop is not capable of going below 3 so that means to get enough exposure we had to increase the ISO and so this created a bit of noise.
Here are some stills of what we did:
Here are some stills of what we did:
Thursday, 7 April 2016
08/04/16-blog7_interactive_narrative
Blog 7
Game: The Banner Saga
Q1: Of the key narrative elements discussed so far in the course (interactivity, level design/linearity, moral choice/non-linearity, character), which do you think is the most prominent, important or interesting in your chosen game?
For this blog I have decided to return Banner Saga, a game I have previously played and enjoyed. Of the key narrative elements that we have discussed this term I feel that most of them are done to good quality in this game. But which is the most prominent, important or interesting. At this stage I think that the characters are the most prominent, important and interesting. Why do I think this? This is very much a character driven story, as I said in the previous post on this the issue of morality and what the player does can be considered but only for minor things. When it comes to the central, core story the player can only watch as the characters play through the dialogue. As such, "Andrew Burn argues, they play a dual role as both player agent and fictional character, belonging simultaneously to the "Ludic" and "Representational" systems that comprise the game."(The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies, 2013, Jessica Aldred) I think that what Andrew Burn states has relevance to this game because it really does a large portion of both character and player moments. the biggest being at the end when you decide who takes the arrow out of 'Rook' or 'Alette'. This is such an important moment as far as characters go because they are two of the most important characters in the game and now you have to decide which one dies. I feel as though the characters are well developed and they all have something to give to the story, for example, I felt that 'Rook' was brave and caring, whilst 'Alette' is scared and uncertain, 'Hakon' is stern and fierce, while 'Ludin' is spoilt and bossy. All of these characters serve something to the game, "there is a universal mythological structure underlying good and popular stories, and the Hero's Journey is the most useful way to get at that structure and use it to create new stories."(Into the Woods: A Practical Guide to the Hero's Journey, Bob Bates, 2005) I think that as we follow this non-linear story of different groups with their different characters it is easy to see that each group and even each character follows this concept of a 'Hero's Journey'.The design of the characters works really well with the style of the game the 2d animated fights and the 2d background provides and interesting change in a market that I think is being over-saturated in one style 3d animation. On another note, the fact that most of the dialogue is done through text is no problem at all. This in fact fits with the concept of Alette stitching the journey into the banner, its as if its a big story being told through pictures and writing in a book.
In conclusion I think that character is the most most prominent piece of this puzzle because of, design, character and player choices, hero's journey and because the player agent and the fictional character meld together so well to create a complete story and an enjoyable game.
Game: The Banner Saga
Q1: Of the key narrative elements discussed so far in the course (interactivity, level design/linearity, moral choice/non-linearity, character), which do you think is the most prominent, important or interesting in your chosen game?
For this blog I have decided to return Banner Saga, a game I have previously played and enjoyed. Of the key narrative elements that we have discussed this term I feel that most of them are done to good quality in this game. But which is the most prominent, important or interesting. At this stage I think that the characters are the most prominent, important and interesting. Why do I think this? This is very much a character driven story, as I said in the previous post on this the issue of morality and what the player does can be considered but only for minor things. When it comes to the central, core story the player can only watch as the characters play through the dialogue. As such, "Andrew Burn argues, they play a dual role as both player agent and fictional character, belonging simultaneously to the "Ludic" and "Representational" systems that comprise the game."(The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies, 2013, Jessica Aldred) I think that what Andrew Burn states has relevance to this game because it really does a large portion of both character and player moments. the biggest being at the end when you decide who takes the arrow out of 'Rook' or 'Alette'. This is such an important moment as far as characters go because they are two of the most important characters in the game and now you have to decide which one dies. I feel as though the characters are well developed and they all have something to give to the story, for example, I felt that 'Rook' was brave and caring, whilst 'Alette' is scared and uncertain, 'Hakon' is stern and fierce, while 'Ludin' is spoilt and bossy. All of these characters serve something to the game, "there is a universal mythological structure underlying good and popular stories, and the Hero's Journey is the most useful way to get at that structure and use it to create new stories."(Into the Woods: A Practical Guide to the Hero's Journey, Bob Bates, 2005) I think that as we follow this non-linear story of different groups with their different characters it is easy to see that each group and even each character follows this concept of a 'Hero's Journey'.The design of the characters works really well with the style of the game the 2d animated fights and the 2d background provides and interesting change in a market that I think is being over-saturated in one style 3d animation. On another note, the fact that most of the dialogue is done through text is no problem at all. This in fact fits with the concept of Alette stitching the journey into the banner, its as if its a big story being told through pictures and writing in a book.
In conclusion I think that character is the most most prominent piece of this puzzle because of, design, character and player choices, hero's journey and because the player agent and the fictional character meld together so well to create a complete story and an enjoyable game.
Sunday, 3 April 2016
04/04/16 - modeling
03/04/16- Blogwk6
Blog
Week; 6
Game: Wing Commander 3
Q: How is narrative developed through character interactions?
Characters and how they push the narrative along in any form of media including games is becoming increasingly more important as the quality of games increases. For example 'The Walking Dead' series relies on how the characters interact with each other to form the story. I thought that this was very similar with 'Wing Commander 3'. The difference between these two is the 'The Walking Dead' gives you a much more vast selection with which you decide what your character does ion the game giving them a similar identity. But in many video games "character may take on strong, fictional identities that are recognizably separate from those of their players." Because 'Wing Commander' is all acted with little input from the player the characters performance is almost set in stone making the character interactions, I thought, so much more important for pushing the narrative along. As you follow Mark Hamill's character around the rooms of the ship we get to select who and what he interacts with. I felt that you had no choice but to interact with the other character sin the available conversations, which further validates my point about interactions being so much more important in this type of game. When your characters interact in this game it does occasionally give you an two choices of dialogue to reply to a question asked by the other person. This does offer some variation to the interaction. However as far as the greater game goes I feel that this does not have an overwhelming impact on how it plays out as the set in stone dialogue seems to be the driving force of the story.
Week; 6
Game: Wing Commander 3
Q: How is narrative developed through character interactions?
Characters and how they push the narrative along in any form of media including games is becoming increasingly more important as the quality of games increases. For example 'The Walking Dead' series relies on how the characters interact with each other to form the story. I thought that this was very similar with 'Wing Commander 3'. The difference between these two is the 'The Walking Dead' gives you a much more vast selection with which you decide what your character does ion the game giving them a similar identity. But in many video games "character may take on strong, fictional identities that are recognizably separate from those of their players." Because 'Wing Commander' is all acted with little input from the player the characters performance is almost set in stone making the character interactions, I thought, so much more important for pushing the narrative along. As you follow Mark Hamill's character around the rooms of the ship we get to select who and what he interacts with. I felt that you had no choice but to interact with the other character sin the available conversations, which further validates my point about interactions being so much more important in this type of game. When your characters interact in this game it does occasionally give you an two choices of dialogue to reply to a question asked by the other person. This does offer some variation to the interaction. However as far as the greater game goes I feel that this does not have an overwhelming impact on how it plays out as the set in stone dialogue seems to be the driving force of the story.
Friday, 25 March 2016
25/03/16-Interactive media_blog_week5
Interactive Narrative
Blog: 4
Week: 5
Game: The Wolf Among Us
Q: Do the choices you make in the game contribute to the sense of meaningful interactive moments?
'The Wolf Among Us' Provides the player with the interactivity style common to the telltale games. But how do the choices the player makes contribute to this interactivity. I though that because this game doesn't actually have the sort of interactivity from games with a lot of player control, but of sorts the choices the player makes still effects the interactive moments.
A later choice in the first chapter of the game is where you go first. Do you go to Mr Toad's apartment or Lawrence's apartment? If you choose Mr Toad's, Lawrence will die but if you choose Lawrence's you are given the opportunity to save him. This contributes to any interactive moment afterwards because as a player you feel these things are now happening because of the choice you just made. From 'Storyplaying' (Sebastian Domsch, 2013), "Choice situations can be either a-temporal or have a temporal dimension, which means that there might be a limited amount of time during which the options are available, or that - after a finite amount of time - not making any choices will produce an outcome that is different from the choice situation and that therefore constitutes a choice in itself." This passage is relevant to your choice if you select Lawrence's apartment. Because as you hide in the closet from the burglar you are given the option to charge out and save Lawrence or do nothing. If you do nothing the option available disappears and it is as if you have a made a choice. This also applies to the many combat scenes you encounter throughout the game. Choices appear on the screen but if you choose to do nothing the scene continues on in a different way compared to if you had chosen the option on screen.
Basically the options you see on screen from the dialogue, to the combat, and to the general run out of the closet choices, it feels like meaningful interactivity because of what the player can assume will happen from each choice. If the player can get a rough image in their minds of what will happen if they chose this or that it makes the interactivity meaningful.
Blog: 4
Week: 5
Game: The Wolf Among Us
Q: Do the choices you make in the game contribute to the sense of meaningful interactive moments?
'The Wolf Among Us' Provides the player with the interactivity style common to the telltale games. But how do the choices the player makes contribute to this interactivity. I though that because this game doesn't actually have the sort of interactivity from games with a lot of player control, but of sorts the choices the player makes still effects the interactive moments.
A later choice in the first chapter of the game is where you go first. Do you go to Mr Toad's apartment or Lawrence's apartment? If you choose Mr Toad's, Lawrence will die but if you choose Lawrence's you are given the opportunity to save him. This contributes to any interactive moment afterwards because as a player you feel these things are now happening because of the choice you just made. From 'Storyplaying' (Sebastian Domsch, 2013), "Choice situations can be either a-temporal or have a temporal dimension, which means that there might be a limited amount of time during which the options are available, or that - after a finite amount of time - not making any choices will produce an outcome that is different from the choice situation and that therefore constitutes a choice in itself." This passage is relevant to your choice if you select Lawrence's apartment. Because as you hide in the closet from the burglar you are given the option to charge out and save Lawrence or do nothing. If you do nothing the option available disappears and it is as if you have a made a choice. This also applies to the many combat scenes you encounter throughout the game. Choices appear on the screen but if you choose to do nothing the scene continues on in a different way compared to if you had chosen the option on screen.
Basically the options you see on screen from the dialogue, to the combat, and to the general run out of the closet choices, it feels like meaningful interactivity because of what the player can assume will happen from each choice. If the player can get a rough image in their minds of what will happen if they chose this or that it makes the interactivity meaningful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)