Low resolution cutscenes...sloppy.

[DemonKing]

I understand that this game on PC suffers a little due to it sharing a console platform, but I really can't accept the atrocious low-res cutscenes that occur in 2 or 3 parts of the game.

 

Instead of enjoying what would probably be a cool progression of the story, I spend all my time squinting at the screen trying to work out what the hell is going on.

 

Is there any technical reason we PC gamers have to put up with this? Or is it just "lazy port" syndrome?

[Kaftan Barlast]

Its because OE didnt make the cutscenes using high-end CGI like BioWare did for K1, rather they used the game engine to generate those scenes, that why it looks bad.

 

 

Also, the video files themsleves are low-quality for some reason. probably to save space.

[DemonKing]

Its because OE didnt make the cutscenes using high-end CGI like BioWare did for K1, rather they used the game engine to generate those scenes, that why it looks bad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hmmm...well I seem to remember some of the cutscenes in the original KOTOR had the same problems. I assumed it was something to do with the game being a console port - it's a bit confusing because some of the cutscenes look fine but others are positively blurry and pixelated.

[Nur Ab Sal]

That is why I say that Obsidian sucks.

[dufflover]

I really can't accept the atrocious low-res cutscenes that occur in 2 or 3 parts of the game.

 

You'll understand if you've heard about the 10khz low music quality - there's a thread somewhere in the forums.

More like "I'm not be suprised".

[Darth Frog]

Its because OE didnt make the cutscenes using high-end CGI like BioWare did for K1, rather they used the game engine to generate those scenes, that why it looks bad.

 

LOL, what are you smoking? If they used the game engine for rendering the cutscenes then we could view them in high resolution without any compression artifacts whatsoever. In fact the harshest contrast is in cutscenes like the Harbinger arrival, when the scene switches from Sion mediating on the Harbinger bridge (pre-rendered video looking like 320x240 with the most horrible compression/interlace artifacting) to the Harbinger docking, which is rendered by the game engine and thus shown in 1280x960 FAA or whatever.

 

Pre-rendered video can make sense even if the game engine is used for pre-rendering it. This allows scenes to be much more complex than they could be if client boxes had to render them at real-time speed (especially weak outdated technology like Xbox) because so the scenes can be pre-rendered on the juiciest hardware the developer can lay hands on and rendering speed does not really matter - even one frame per minute would be perfectly acceptable.

 

The problem with TSL vidoes isn't the technology that was used to generate the video frames, the problem is that the encoding of those frames is so atrocious that it would have been considered substandard even 10..15 years ago.

[Kaftan Barlast]

What I meant is that they, by the looks of it, used the game engine with the in-game models to generate the pre-rendered video cutscenes, as opposed to making them with full detail models using a proffessional CGI enviroment. And they went with low-resolution and high compression aswell.

 

 

Why they didnt just script those scenes is beyond me.

[Yst]

Yeah, it's pretty mind-boggling. I have to think Xbox users with HDTVs would see this ugliness as well.

 

What I don't get is why cut scene graphics would be standardised around a resolution that makes them hideous on pretty much any modern screen.

 

Newsflash: gamers do not game exclusively on NES-era TVs in the year 2005. Building graphics on the presumption of 25 year old screen technology seems goofy.