Has CGI (good CGI) surpassed hand-drawn animation?
CGI and traditional animation
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
dailymotion.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
m.youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
This cinematic is nothing special.
CGI animation is not magical computers rendering everything you know.
I know, I personally know people in the industry, I'm just saying that this particular cinematic is far from being as impressive as many 2D animations.
How could one surpass the other anyway? They are completely different from each-other.
>I'm just saying that this particular cinematic is far from being as impressive as many 2D animations.
could you go into further detail?
actually curious
He won't.
They're two completely different artforms with entirely separate skills required so comparing them is stupid.
I wouldn't say that
But Blizzard cinematics are something speacial.
youtube.com
...
No.
Fuck you.
My sweet lord
Why does they need to compete with each other, when they can complete each other?
>Has CGI
In terms of visual? Yes
In the amount of work need to make it look good? I want to say yes but I don't know
In Popularity? No
How much do these CG shorts cost?
Like Blur Studios, how much would a 2-3 minute short from them be?
2D, hand-drawn stuff will ALWAYS have more "heart", no matter what. That said, CGI looks so damn good nowadays, I don't complain nearly as much about "the death of hand-drawn" nearly as much as I used to. I still miss it but as least cartoons are gorgeous again, even if they are made on a computer.
Why are CGI movies with a realistic artstyle not a thing? Shit like that looks amazing
That's some maximum comfy
I've still preferred most well done 2D action scenes to most well done 3D action scenes I've seen. I think the two mediums have different strengths, for me at least. It would be nice if both could have prominence in the field of animation.
W--W-WEW LAD
Beowulf was a flop so studios have been scared ever since.
That Final Fantasy movie too
>that wrist flick as he finishes throwing his coat on
it's the little things
Because by this time next year it will look like Reboot
CGI outdates itself extremely fast and has no lasting power when does with realism
dailymotion.com
why not both?
>being this retarded
From what I've heard blur charges around a million dollars a minute for their cinematic work.
we're reaching a plateau though
>surpassed
What do you mean? Is there a competition? They're different styles and that's it.
Polar Express too
youtube.com
Jurassic Park still holds up decades later.
it's about how you use it.
>implying
>Dreamworks will never make something like this again
End me
Whitcher 3 cinematic was better.
>youtube.com
>Worst expansion gets best cinematic
Fucking why
Legion > Wrath > Cata > BC > Vanilla > WoD > Pandaria
10 years later on. And that cinematic isnt much better than what they were doing circa WC3.
The body acting in the Warcraft short is just as intricate in its movement as that Milt Kahl test. The knight guy putting all his weight on one knee while he lifts himself up is just as subtle as some of the best 2D.
>Cata
>not worst or second worst expansion
No
I think if you were to rank by specific aspects that list would get shifted a bit but yeah that's a decent ranking, though I may change some of those > into = signs
>Anything worse than Casuallords of Deadlore
>Cata bad
Dragon Soul is shit but Cata is hardly bad. It's probably right in the middle quality wise
I know everyone hated MoP because lool Pandas
But MoP fucking rocked
Cata above Vanilla and BC is just plain wrong
Gameplay wise MoP is great
Story and tone wise it is absolute cancer
Now I wont be able to stand up for about an hour.
The story was bad, but the horde and alliance were more hostile to eachother than in any other xpac and I really liked that
Yet thats a near 10 year old cinematic.
And Christmas Carol, FF 7, Kingsglaive, and Mars Needs Moms.
Dear god, Mars Needs Moms. Probably singlehandedly killed it all by itself.
>Has CGI (good CGI) surpassed hand-drawn animation?
In profit? Yes.
In exposure? Yes.
In theatrical cinema? Yes.
Aside from that, if you suck, it sucks, if you're good, it's good. The medium doesn't matter, so praise the guys who do it well.
>>CGI outdates itself extremely fast
>>next year it will look like Reboot
>He hasn't seen Terminator Salvation, Furious 7, or the Dead Space 3 trailer.
Nah. I mean, I love traditional animation to death, but CGI cinematics are a guilty pleasure for me. Shit gets me pumped up every time:
youtube.com
Pandaria's cinematic is beautiful
Pandaria > BC > Wrath > Cata > Vanilla > WoD > Legion
Legion is a meme expansion.
Pandaria was one of the best looking expansions in term of variety. The only BAD zone was the stupid plains that were home to the raid boss.
Why is Blizzard CGI so fucking good?
2D and 3D animation have their strengths and weaknesses. I can't honestly compare which is superior since that's a matter of opinion and me taste.
Because they actually care about "quality" and "fun". Passion makes things better.
>Because the cinematics department, unlike the pvp and class design ones, actually care about "quality" and "fun". Passion makes things better.
Fixed that for you. No need to thank me.
>tfw that cinematic gave me a gay crush/boner for an orc
Fuck blizzard for turning me gay.
CGI is basically stop motion with fancier models and tools.
it's just a different style.
>It's a 2D vs 3D animation fight thread again
Goddamn. Both are good for their respective mediums.
>Kneepuncher: The Game: The Cinematic
Taaake ooon meee
The studios that make shit like the Warcraft cinematics specialise entirely in short clips, and each one takes the months for that alone
If they attempted a feature-length film, the quality would have to suffer dramatically
They just need more budget and manpower.
...
youtube.com
You tell me.
For God's sake man, I'm at work
>and each one takes the months for that alone
It was more like almost a year and a half.
It's not even an issue on budget or manpower. It's just not viable. That's just naive thinking.
The companies that usually fund this shit would say no to the amount of budget you'd need to create a FULL HOUR AND A HALF LONG+ feature film. And almost immediately in a few years, it would look dated. Yes, there are very special cases (like Blizzard's cinematics) but take another high-end studio like BLUR...
>youtube.com
It still looks good (except for some of the faces, also another problem) now but you can tell it's going to look dated in a few years. This is also one of their longest animated projects compared to their usually 2-3 minute trailers cinematics.
You are better off doing it live action with CGI touch ups like the actual Warcraft movie. I'm not saying that was good but doing it in that direction is more viable then what you guys are asking for, which is what everyone ALWAYS asks for without knowing how fucking impossible and/or inefficient it really is.
Bump
I haven't been keeping up with the technology to know how it's coming along, but I'm sure the shortcuts will develop. At some point the scanning {geometry, texture, skeleton, movement} will be flawless, and then projected to fill in the gaps for the personality not explicitly recorded. We'll be recreating dead people.
I can't wait for augmented reality. We might even give up on custom bodies if the augmented reality can accurately replace all senses.
>You are better off doing it live action with CGI touch ups like the actual Warcraft movie
The live-action parts ruined the movie. Every human scene was awful
...
...
at least post some cel shading to make it fair
japanese cel shading is going to shape the future of animation
unf