Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Massive Two Towers Battle 563

ShadowLight writes ""In December vast hordes of eager filmgoers will mob cineplexes across the land and witness, at the climax of The Two Towers, one of the most anticipated scenes in recent movie history: the great Battle of Helm's Deep." This article talks about the software, named Massive, used to create this 50,000 creature battle."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Massive Two Towers Battle

Comments Filter:
  • The AI used (Score:5, Funny)

    by Damion ( 13279 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @06:53PM (#4754707) Journal
    The way I heard that the AI for the battle scene was programmed was such that every one of the creatures had a slightly different set of paramaters, with the same goal of maximizing damage, while minimizing casualties.
    On the first run, every single one of the thousands of little AIs decided that the best way to minimize casualties was to turn and run away.
    • by duckpoopy ( 585203 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:05PM (#4754800) Journal
      "The only way to win is not to play." -WOPR, 1982
    • Re:The AI used (Score:5, Interesting)

      by lawndart ( 144110 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:09PM (#4754836)
      Actually one of the guys from Massive gave a talk at my lab and they had video of it. All the little dudes in back rows turned and ran away. Evidently their software agents couldn't see any of the enemy agents so they ran around trying to find some!
    • Re:The AI used (Score:5, Informative)

      by br0ck ( 237309 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:09PM (#4754837)
      You've heard an exaggeration from the previous SlashDot article [theonering.net].

      In another early simulation, Jackson and Regelous watched as several thousand characters fought like hell while, in the background, a small contingent of combatants seemed to think better of it and ran away. They weren't programmed to do this. It just happened. 'It was spooky.' Jackson said in an interview last year.
      • by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Monday November 25, 2002 @11:40PM (#4756390) Homepage Journal

        watched as several thousand characters fought like hell while, in the background, a small contingent of combatants seemed to think better of it and ran away

        Those characters had the AI modelled after French soldiers. You do know why the streets of Paris are lined with trees, yes? Because the Germans like to march in the shade.

    • by Rai ( 524476 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:14PM (#4754884) Homepage
      RUNAWAY!!
    • by pyros ( 61399 )
      I like the helicopter flight sim demo in australia where the kangaroo AI's were modeled too closely to people. They scattered, regrouped, and launched a surface-to-air strike taking down the chopper. Sorry I don't have a link, but I did actually read it from some news site or magazine, like Info World or something.
      • by Verne ( 249617 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:02PM (#4755188)
        I got it in email as follows:

        The reuse of some object-oriented code has caused tactical
        headaches for Australia's armed forces. As virtual reality
        simulators assume larger roles in helicopter combat training,
        programmers have gone to great lengths to increase the
        realism of their scenarios, including detailed landscapes and,
        in the case of the Northern Territory's Operation Phoenix,
        herds of kangaroos (since disturbed animals might well give
        away a helicopter's position).

        The head of the Defence Science & Technology Organization's
        Land Operations/Simulation division reportedly instructed
        developers to model the local marsupials' movements and
        reactions to helicopters.

        Being efficient programmers, they just re-appropriated some
        code originally used to model infantry detachment reactions
        under the same stimuli, changed the mapped icon from a
        soldier to a kangaroo, and increased the figures' speed of
        movement.

        Eager to demonstrate their flying skills for some visiting
        American pilots, the hotshot Aussies "buzzed" the virtual
        kangaroos in low flight during a simulation. The kangaroos
        scattered, as predicted, and the visiting Americans nodded
        appreciatively... then did a double-take as the kangaroos
        reappeared from behind a hill and launched a barrage of
        Stinger missiles at the hapless helicopter. (Apparently the
        programmers had forgotten to remove that part of the
        infantry coding.)

        The lesson? Objects are defined with certain attributes,
        and any new object defined in terms of an old one inherits
        all the attributes. The embarrassed programmers had learned
        to be careful when reusing object-oriented code, and the
        Yanks left with a newfound respect for Australian wildlife.

        Simulator supervisors report that pilots from that point
        onward have strictly avoided kangaroos, just as they were
        meant to.

        From June 15, 1999 Defence Science and Technology Organization
        Lecture Series, Melbourne, Australia, and staff reports


        Right, now hit me with the karma baby!
    • by Alien54 ( 180860 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:46PM (#4755479) Journal
      Of course, there's humor too:
      • To avoid surprises, Massive programmers weeded out ineffective agents and duplicated ones that worked. About a dozen initial master characters formed the basic genetic blueprint for more than 50,000 digital creations, which were then individualized by adding random variables such as aggression or happiness. (A few update Tolkien; keep an eye out for a background character in The Two Towers who, in the middle of the battle, seems to take a call on his cellphone.)
      At least they're not calling in an air strike, like Granada.
      • Grenada (Score:4, Funny)

        by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @09:28PM (#4755694) Journal
        They didn't use cell phones, they used pay phones and calling cards. When I was in the Army in 85-88 I knew some guys who were there.

        The only one I knew who was wounded by enemy, rather than friendly, action was shot in the ass by an irate farmer, armed with a shotgun, who thought it 'them damn kids' after his livestock again.

  • BFD. (Score:4, Funny)

    by DarkHelmet ( 120004 ) <mark&seventhcycle,net> on Monday November 25, 2002 @06:55PM (#4754724) Homepage
    I have this awesome rendering package called B.R.A.I.N... When I read the book, it made this breathtaking scene with over 100,000 monsters...

    And the coolest thing about it is that I did it 3 years ago when I actually read the book.

    • Re:BFD. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Twirlip of the Mists ( 615030 ) <twirlipofthemists@yahoo.com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:11PM (#4754851)
      I have this awesome rendering package called B.R.A.I.N...

      I tried that technique too, but after 200 pages of Frodo and his buddies wandering through the woods and talking about mushrooms, my B.R.A.I.N. made me throw the fucking thing across the room.

      Maybe I'm just a low-brow or something, but I tend to prefer books where things happen.
      • Re:BFD. (Score:5, Funny)

        by captaincucumber ( 450913 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:20PM (#4754925)
        I think you need to install a plugin package called P.A.T.I.E.N.C.E.
        • Re:BFD. (Score:4, Funny)

          by Cid Highwind ( 9258 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:14PM (#4755275) Homepage
          I prefer to just link the reading routines to libskimmer.so. If nothing's happening, flip ahead a few (2-3) pages. If people are swinging swords or some important-sounding exchange is going on, flip back and read the intervening pages. If not, set mypage=thispage, and recurse. If Tom Bombadil is singing or if someone is explaining elven family structures, skip the whole damn chapter.

          (ob-herasy)It works well on the Old Testament, too!(*lightning bolt*)
      • Re:BFD. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Imperial Tacohead ( 216035 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:27PM (#4754965)
        Personally, I hated the book the first time I read it. Unlike The Hobbit, which is filled with action and adventure, the vast majority of Lord of the Rings consists of traveling to somewhere where something might happen, and having a sense of dread and foreboding about it. When I read it the second time, I knew that nothing was going to happen for long stretches of the book, so I was able to have greater patience with the whole thing, and get more out of it. Although I still found the endless talk of destiny and family trees and Elven racial superiority to be extremely tedious. (Incidentally, I'll be interested to see if the dark-complexioned evil men of Harad and their war elephants will show up in the next two movies.)
        • Re:BFD. (Score:4, Interesting)

          by chabotc ( 22496 ) <chabotc@ g m a i l.com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:23PM (#4755334) Homepage
          Well i think you sumerised the feeling that the book was supposed to replay quite well. A large part of the book is about man's journey towards death .. "dread and foreboding"

          It is also definatly true the book is very much about the characters development, and not the modern heroism that most current books seem to aspire to.
      • Re:BFD. (Score:4, Funny)

        by EuroChild ( 523969 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @11:12PM (#4756282)

        After months of trying to get my brother to read LotR he finally started and sent me this email which sums up Fellowship pretty well:

        Very different to the movie isn't it? Lots of unecessary, and not very interesting detail. He likes to take his time, old JRRT. You know: they travelled along the creek before reaching an outcrop of green grass, which in turn lead to a valley of birches. Passing through them, they noticed a green mound upon which was some moss which has nothing to do with the story, nor does the ridge they then decided to walk across. The oak lined track they followed for several hours is also irrelivant, but it can be seen in a map in the back of the book. "Would you like me to carry that pack for you sir?" Sam asked Frodo obediently. "No thankyou Sam. Sit boy. Good Hobbit!" Frodo replied.

        • Re:BFD. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Col. Panic ( 90528 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2002 @12:38AM (#4756607) Homepage Journal
          Very different to the movie isn't it? Lots of unecessary, and not very interesting detail.

          Yes, unlike film, books must convey ideas that stimulate all the senses in simple print. Authors strive to describe sights, sounds and scents using nothing more than pen and paper. Some readers relish such writing and pore over the pages word-by-word. Others just want to get to the action. To each their own.
  • by Uhh_Duh ( 125375 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @06:55PM (#4754729) Homepage
    My guess is that a few bored programmers got together one night and decided to render themselves some women. They got greedy and started making themselves multiple partners, then realized all they did was fight over who had to be this guys girlfriend.

    That's when the light went on.
  • by krugdm ( 322700 ) <slashdot&ikrug,com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @06:57PM (#4754745) Homepage Journal

    ...to make massive duplicates [slashdot.org] of previously posted stories!

  • by GeckoFood ( 585211 ) <geckofood@nosPAM.gmail.com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:00PM (#4754762) Journal

    ...this 50,000 creature battle...

    This is sure to be a big box office draw, but 50,000 scantily-clad beach bimbo babes might do even better at the box office!

  • I hope they have some interesting features on the Two Towers DVD(s) related to MASSIVE. There was a bit on the Special Edition DVD of the Fellowship of the Ring, but not as much as I would've liked.

  • by SuperMario666 ( 588666 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:03PM (#4754787)
    In Return of the King, the final film in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the climactic battle--yes, the Battle of Helm's Deep is just a run-up--is rumored to employ more than 100,000 characters.

    Oh Hell Yes.

    I can't be the only geek with a hard-on here can I?
  • anticipated? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ArmorFiend ( 151674 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:03PM (#4754792) Homepage Journal
    one of the most anticipated scenes in recent movie history: the great Battle of Helm's Deep.

    Uh, what kind of monkey anticipates this battle? It's hardly ranks among the many battles in Return of the King. And at the end of the day there's plenty of similar stuff out there: braveheart, Ben Hur, yadda yadda yadda. Please spin down the hype reflex.

    • Re:anticipated? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jgalun ( 8930 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:12PM (#4755261) Homepage
      Actually, I am very much anticipating the Battle of Helm's Deep. Let me give you my good reason, and then my bad reason.

      The good reason is that, if I recall correctly (and I'm not positive I do), the three major battles in the Lord of the Rings are different: the Battle of Helm's Deep is about holding on with no reinforcements coming, the battle at Minas Tirith is heavy on Nazgul and is about holding out til reinforcements come, and the final battle is about dying valiantly in an effort to delay Sauron until Frodo can destroy the ring. So they do have different feels.

      Anyway, the bad reason for why I am looking forward to the Battle of Helm's Deep is that I didn't really like the first LoTR movie that much. I was a huge fan of the books when I was younger (I read them, and the Silmarillion, dozens of times), but I felt that the movie lacked the sense of mystery and sadness (at the passing of the great ages of magic and elves) that the books had. To me, the magic of the written word could not be translated into the screen. I could imagine Gandalf somehow becoming more imposing, but seeing it in the movie seemed like a parlor trick rather than magic. Similarly, I could imagine Galadriel being somehow different and magical, but seeing her with a glow about her is just...too straightforward.

      That being said, the one thing I loved about the movie was how beautiful it was. The scenes in that movie were astounding. And that's why I'm looking forward to the Battle of Helm's Deep. :)
      • PARENT: +5 Spoiler (Score:3, Insightful)

        by fferreres ( 525414 )
        Handle with care. I read LOTR so much time ago that I forgot all the details. I'm trying and making a huge effort not to remember anything. Would be nice not to see many spoilers and still be able to have a discussion about the visual effects and other generics that do not tell what will happen.
  • by kitzilla ( 266382 ) <paperfrogNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:03PM (#4754793) Homepage Journal
    The "Two Towers." Now a software program called "Massive." No trend here.

    My Vorpal Sword is bigger than yours.

  • by Prince_Ali ( 614163 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:07PM (#4754818) Journal
    Dan Koeppel, a film-school dropout, has written for Wired and The New York Times Magazine. Although a longtime Tolkien reader, he draws the line at The Silmarillion.

    Wuss.

    • Reading The Silmarillion and The Book of Lost Tales was great! For the better part of a year, my insomnia was cured -- whenever I would have trouble sleeping, I'd try to slog through the next three or four pages and it would knock me out like a hammer to the head. I can't tell you how often I've wished for such a soporific book since finishing those, but nothing else that I've found comes close.
  • by dubbayu_d_40 ( 622643 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:08PM (#4754820)
    would care what effects are in movies anymore. They can do anything, they have BIG computers.


    This is a good thing. The last Star Wars finially convinced me that Lucas is a POS because I wasn't distracted by his "special effects."


    Hopefully effects will now be more relevant to the story if we are taking cgi for granted.


    My guess is TTT can hold it's own without the gee whiz cgi.

    • They can do anything, they have BIG computers.
      They have effects that fit seamlessly into the video? They have entire films of CG humans that are indistinguishable from real humans?

      Sorry, but I think they've got a ways to go, and I'm really interested to see what these movies can do to raise the bar.

  • by dmccarty ( 152630 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:10PM (#4754849)
    In a momentous surge of self-denial, Timothy was able to restrain himself for a full 20 days before posting a repeat story [slashdot.org] about The Two Towers. Slashdot readers, rejoice!
  • by Viking Coder ( 102287 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:11PM (#4754850)
    How about a new category? "Movie SPOILERS". That way, I can filter out articles on it, so I don't have to accidentally read about "the most anticipated scene" in a movie that's not out yet, just in case I've been working very hard to NOT see anything about the movie, so that I can fully enjoy it when it finally DOES come out?

    Damnit.

    Oh by the way:
    It's a sled.
    They drive off the cliff.
    It's a guy.
    Rose lives, Jack dies.
    He's dead.
  • by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:11PM (#4754852)
    I cringed during the CGI sequences of "Attack of the Clones." I really liked Lord of the Rings. Please let this new scene be a breakthrough and not an embarrasing distraction.
  • by Allen Varney ( 449382 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:11PM (#4754853) Homepage

    The Two Towers Visual Companion [barnesandnoble.com], a movie tie-in, features a nice four-page foldout illustrating the battle's progress. (N.B. The book's foreword, by Viggo Mortensen (who played Aragorn), is worth a read. Maybe I'm a bigot, but I hadn't expected an actor's commentary to be so perceptive and nuanced.)

    • by bravehamster ( 44836 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:26PM (#4754960) Homepage Journal
      Maybe I'm a bigot, but I hadn't expected an actor's commentary to be so perceptive and nuanced.)


      Do yourself a favor and go buy the 4 disc version of FoTR. Find a time when you have 7 hours to spare and watch the last two discs. Viggo is "an old school actor, a gentleman" as some of the others refer to him. This is a guy that takes his craft very, very seriously. That guy impressed the hell outta me, moreso even than Ian McKellan or Christopher Lee. And that's saying quite a lot. He's intelligent, soft-spoken, and cares about what he does. When's the last time you saw an actor like that?

      • by Chris Brewer ( 66818 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:56PM (#4755153) Journal
        And don't forget that he was called in when they were already shooting. The original actor was cast "too young". Which if my calculations are correct, Aragorn is supposed to be at least in his 50s - going on the basis of the Story of Arwen and Aragorn (in the appendix). After being in NZ for two days he had to shoot Weathertop.

        The originally cast actor (I refuse to name him - he appeared in Queen of the Damned if you must know) has said in an interview that Wellington is the arsehole of the world (No Karma for guessing where I am), but he says he's "not bitter."

        For those who haven't bought/watched the appendencies of the extended version: after talking on the phone to PJ, he wasn't sure about whether to do it or not, but his son Henry said something like "OMG, they want you to be Aragorn, and you're thinking about it???". Henry was also responsible for checking that Thror Oakenshield's map is still around for Gandalf to look at.
        • And don't forget that he was called in when they were already shooting. The original actor was cast "too young". Which if my calculations are correct, Aragorn is supposed to be at least in his 50s - going on the basis of the Story of Arwen and Aragorn (in the appendix). After being in NZ for two days he had to shoot Weathertop.


          Well, that's the official line, yes. I believe in reality it had rather more to do with the original actor blowing up mailboxes in the neighborhood in Wellington he was staying in.


          Jedidiah

  • interesting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by selectspec ( 74651 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:11PM (#4754856)
    "...you can still usually tell when something is synthetic. But we'll soon be crossing over into a time where that's not possible."


    I think we're pretty close to this already. I remember watching the sept 11 planes hitting the towers and thinking it looked "fake" like a movie, simply because it was too incredible believe.

    • Re:interesting (Score:4, Insightful)

      by RedWizzard ( 192002 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @10:31PM (#4756083)
      I agree. I noticed that a lot of the people who complained that the CG in Fellowship was bad were only complaining about the bits that had to be CG - the cave troll, gollum, the eagle. Most of the CG went completely unnoticed because it was so seamless and realistic.
  • by M.C. Hampster ( 541262 ) <M...C...TheHampster@@@gmail...com> on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:14PM (#4754877) Journal
    Regelous' laptop still contains an early sequence in which a pair of fighters--an Orc and a human--began a strange dance borne of too-finely balanced combat and obstacle avoidance modules.

    This kind of reminds me of the middle-school "proms" we would have at graduation.

  • by bugnuts ( 94678 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:17PM (#4754892) Journal
    In the star wars episode 1 big battle, it looked like a bunch of CGI fighting more CGI. Granted part were robots, but they all looked robotic. I felt nothing, and it was due to the obvious cgi and actions.

    Sounds like Massive may do it right, assuming the graphics and actions are both believable. This sounds to be quite promising!
    • by FreeUser ( 11483 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:40PM (#4755041)
      In the star wars episode 1 big battle, it looked like a bunch of CGI fighting more CGI. Granted part were robots, but they all looked robotic. I felt nothing, and it was due to the obvious cgi and actions.

      Did you feel anything in the opening sequence of the Fellowship of the Ring, at the battle where Isildur cut the ring from Sauron's hand? If so, that would confirm your evaluation of massive (at least for yourself), and would quite frankly agree with mine.

      OTOH Star Wars I and II were without feeling for reasons having nothing to do with the quality of the computer animation and special effects, and everything to do with terrible writing, mediocre directing, and wooden delivery ... something I doubt any of the LOTR movies suffer from, but I digress. :-)
    • In the star wars episode 1 big battle, it looked like a bunch of CGI fighting more CGI. Granted part were robots, but they all looked robotic. I felt nothing, and it was due to the obvious cgi and actions.

      Yeah, and in Empire Strikes Back all the AT-ATs look to me like models that are being clumsily animated with stop-motion, and Jabba looks like a puppet whose lips don't match the words, and there are big dark grey boxes aroung all the TIE fighters.

      But my imagination took up the slack. I don't know where the idea came from that CGI is somehow supposed to supplant the moviegoing imagination. I think, ironically, it's because the effects look very close to realistic, but not 100% indistinguishable. Perhaps if they looked worse, the audience's imagination could fill in the gaps, but I doubt that will work anymore -- the audience simply expects too much.

      No, the battle in Episode I is not easily mistaken for the "real" thing -- but it wouldn't have been any more convincing, IMHO, if it were a dozen guys running around in rubber Gungan suits as squibs go off all around. (Although it probably would have been funnier, at the very least.)

      So, no. CGI isn't perfect. Special effects have limitations. They always have. I don't know why, all of a sudden, they're expected not to.
  • by Amazing Quantum Man ( 458715 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:17PM (#4754893) Homepage

    <HUMOR>
    We still need to get Jackson to rename the movie [petitiononline.com], because he's obviously trying to cash in on 9/11!
    </HUMOR>
  • by scotay ( 195240 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:17PM (#4754895)
    A 50,000 character particle system would run slower than Doom III!!!

    This Massive stuff will be slow on the fastest next-generation movie theater accelerators even with tons of memory.

    When the credits are rolling, the frame rates might be okay, but in the battle scene I bet they drop to around 24fps.
    • After I stopped laughing at the parent post, I had to ask myself *when*, not *if*, this actually might be the way movie theaters work.

      After all, if you can really generate a scene completely in software, it probably takes a LOT fewer bytes to describe it than the raw imagery. How big was the entire source material for Final Fantasy? I'd bet it was a LOT smaller than a fully-digital movie at full theater resolution.

      Taken to its logical conclusion, I wonder how far away the day will be when a "movie" as delivered to the studio is actually merely the script, along with a bunch of texture files, character maps, landscape grids, MIDI files, etc., essentially a huge .WAD file. I can easily see the day when a photorealistic movie could be generated solely by the computer.

      To karma whore for a second, too, it's interesting to note that if the movie theater rendering system that drove this method were sufficiently more advanced than the average user's home PC, it would make it completely impossible to pirate a digital movie on a 1-for-1 basis - you'd only be able to capture the rendered film, and have a much larger digital file to handle. What a bonus for the movie industry that could be.

      A final thought about this idea. Assuming that the hardware in each theater were not identical, and even if they were, it's entirely likely that each time the film were projected (hence rendered then projected), it would be slightly different. Hmmm.
  • by Embedded Geek ( 532893 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:28PM (#4754978) Homepage
    vast hordes of eager filmgoers will mob cineplexes across the land...

    Forget your piddly 100K of Orcs. I can't wait to see the CGI scene showing that horde charging the theatres!!

  • by chopkins1 ( 321043 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:38PM (#4755036)
    I found it rather amusing that one of the quotes from this story says, "...keep an eye out for a background character in The Two Towers who, in the middle of the battle, seems to take a call on his cellphone."
  • Waldo? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:44PM (#4755067)
    The real question is, Where's Waldo?
  • by nebenfun ( 530284 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:50PM (#4755111)
    my friends,
    This is my last post of slashdot. After seeing this [mac.com], I have decided that life is not worth living. I loved Star Trek and Tolkien and then this [mac.com] happened.
    Doing the real ctrl-alt-del,
    nbfn
    This is a real site...
    not goat stuff

  • by CrackHappy ( 625183 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @07:53PM (#4755131) Journal
    Here is an interesting article [digitalanimators.com] which addresses some of WETA's other issues in creating the film, and talks a little about their uses of Linux as their core OS.
  • Cell Phones (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:05PM (#4755215)
    keep an eye out for a background character in The Two Towers who, in the middle of the battle, seems to take a call on his cellphone

    Don't people ever learn? How many more people have to die before we stop using our cell phones during battle?

  • by Vegan Pagan ( 251984 ) <deanasNO@SPAMearthlink.net> on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:31PM (#4755378)
    Is it just a coincidence that the biggest set of virtual humans in movie history is studied by a guy called Sims?
  • by DeadBugs ( 546475 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:41PM (#4755442) Homepage
    Maybe in a few years when the Sims Online has run it's course, they can integrate the "Massive" program and have a huge battle at the end.

    I would pay to see that.
  • by dargaud ( 518470 ) <slashdot2@@@gdargaud...net> on Monday November 25, 2002 @08:54PM (#4755527) Homepage
    Yesterday I went and saw James Bond. There was a whole bunch of action movie previews (including LOTR) before that, where you could (barely) tell that all the action sequences were CGI... And I thought that now that they can do basically anything with CGI we are going to go back to good story lines to distinguish movies. No more 'the story was so-so but the effects where great'. Now that all the movies have effects for anything (explosions, fights, monsters, impossible scenes, dead actors...) they won't be able to do better only based on the effects. The newer Star Wars proved that. As effects become more commonspread and cheaper, I hope the money goes to the (good) story writers.
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday November 25, 2002 @11:44PM (#4756407) Homepage
    CG effects people have been doing this sort of thing for a while, and it's been getting steadily better. Early attempts include the penguin army in one of the Batman movies, and the baby 'zillas in Godzilla. Back when I was doing Falling Bodies in 1997, another startup did KinemaWay, which was a particle-based system for crowd scenes, done as a plug-in for Softimage|3D. Worked OK, but the market is so tiny that it's hard to make any money selling such a thing as a software package. Motion Factory did something a bit more powerful as a game engine, but that engine was used for Prince of Persia 3D and not heard from again. Recently, it's resurfaced as a part of Softimage|XSI, selling for $40K.

    So far, the characters driven by these systems don't have real physics. They're mostly canned animation sequences being keyed by a state machine. Often, the moves are motion-captured and blended; otherwise they're created by animators. It's more of an automated cut-and-paste at the motion level than general motion generation as in robotics. The motions generated wouldn't necessarily work in the real world, but from a distance, they look good.

    Incidentally, doing software for Hollywood is a pain. Hollywood film projects have two modes. Either the project is in development hell and they don't have any money but want freebies. Or the project is in production and there's plenty of money but no time.

  • by David Wong ( 199703 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2002 @01:12AM (#4756737) Homepage
    I for one look to the day when nations can resolve their differences with such software rather than actual warfare.

    There is no excuse for sacrificing young lives when a simple computer simulation would show the world exactly how the USA would kick their asses deeply into the dirt.

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Working...