Why did Valve use a low quality FMV for the ending of Portal 2? *No spoilers* - Games

Go look through Dev Commentary, they tell you that it was made on PC first, and issues were encountered when porting to consoles.

[QUOTE=Neolithic v7;29326909]Don't bother, most people here couldn't possibly recognize a flaw with a Valve game. But yes, using FMV was stupid and certainly wasn't true to Valve's style.[/QUOTE] Maybe they wanted to try something new and see the reaction. A test, if you will. Portal 1 was just a giant test anyways. Personally although it could of been slightly higher quality it was still pretty amazing and the actual quality of it was great.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;29326922]I'll agree, but I don't see what's so hard to include the animations in the game files as an option to turn on instead of the fmv.[/QUOTE] They probably found it easier to just edit the things in animation with the Source Filmmaker. It's a bit hard to sync the music with the turret speakers and the wheat in the ending, and etc. Besides, its not like Source could handle all of those turrets and wheat.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;29326627]Can we just confirm this game was made for consoles? The menus have fmv's scenery now[/QUOTE] Wait so what Did you just say, because it's a cutscene, that it's a console port?

OH NO prerendered WHAT WILL WE EVER DO VALVE YOU ARE SCUM FUCK YOU SKLJ:SDKJDH Seriously, get the fuck over it, I didn't give a shit because I liked it, and unless you want to render all those turrets onscreen at once AND that wheat field, AND have an ever longer loading screen for the menu, then get the fuck over it and stop blaming it on being made for consoles when it clearly fucking wasn't. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] if you honestly thought Valve was dumb for using pre-rendered then there is probably no hope for you. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] i honestly can't see the big deal of using pre-rendered over realtime, especially when it could be used to ensure that everybody can see the ending with the effects as intended. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] I can guarantee that only ~20% of the people who played this game could see it in real time. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] the entire game is in real time you fucks [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] goddamn

[QUOTE=KingKombat;29327124]OH NO FMV WHAT WILL WE EVER DO VALVE YOU ARE SCUM FUCK YOU SKLJ:SDKJDH[/QUOTE] Valve fanboy butthurt much? We didn't like the pre-rendered cutscene, most likely it was put there as a compromise with the console verisons, that's our opinion, deal with it.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;29326780]yeah the fmv really took me by surprise, Valve has always used real time for everything. HL2: EP3 ending in crappy fmv's here we come :eng99: Whatever, still pre-rendered as opposed to beautiful, crisp, real-time. All because consoles have 2004 hardware that could not render the ending with good fps for shit. Curious, what resolution are you playing at? At 1920x1200 it is obvious when the fmv starts due to the very huge difference in picture quality. To answer your question: [sp]When GLaDOS lets you leave, and you go in the elevator, it becomes an fmv[/sp][/QUOTE] Mine is at 1920x1080 and it doesn't look bad at all. Spoiler: [media]http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8848/sentryz.png[/media]

ITT, no one knows what a bloody FMV is. FMVs are fully not computer generated movies, and always feature some kind of tv-like capture of actors. Think Command & Conquer cutscenes, that's FMV (although not in-action unit shots, those are CGI).

fuck it, they're pre-rendered and I seriously don't think it was justa compromise for console players. I know for a fact I wouldn't have been able to render that in real-time. Not all those turrets. Not smoothly at least.

[QUOTE=.FLAP.JACK.DAN.;29327192]Mine is at 1920x1080 and it doesn't look bad at all. Spoiler: [media]http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8848/sentryz.png[/media][/QUOTE] That's because the footage runs at 16:9 as that's the most common ratio. I'm on 16:10, or 1920x1200, so the footage has black borders on the top and bottom.

[QUOTE=KingKombat;29327124]OH NO prerendered WHAT WILL WE EVER DO VALVE YOU ARE SCUM FUCK YOU SKLJ:SDKJDH Seriously, get the fuck over it, I didn't give a shit because I liked it, and unless you want to render all those turrets onscreen at once AND that wheat field, AND have an ever longer loading screen for the menu, then get the fuck over it and stop blaming it on being made for consoles when it clearly fucking wasn't. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] if you honestly thought Valve was dumb for using pre-rendered then there is probably no hope for you. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] i honestly can't see the big deal of using pre-rendered over realtime, especially when it could be used to ensure that everybody can see the ending with the effects as intended. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] I can guarantee that only ~20% of the people who played this game could see it in real time. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] the entire game is in real time you fucks [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] goddamn[/QUOTE] WHOAH I FORGOT THE TURRET MODELS WERE LIKE 9000000000 TRIS AND TOOK A SUPERCOMPUTER TO RENDER 50.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;29326627]The fuck is this? That was so anti-climatic, I go from crisp clear max settings 1920x1200 with 8x MSAA to like terrible and compressed fmv (since when does Valve do this?!). [b]apparently now the content of the ending can be affected by its video quality[/b] Can we just confirm this game was made for consoles? The menus have fmv's scenery now (no more realtime like in HL2 :ohdear:), the menus still use the L4D menus made for controls without pointing devices, that glitchy save message, and now this? [b]apparently pre-rendered videos are proof of console ports, and there is absolutely no reason to use them otherwise[/b] *sigh* Other than all of that the game was great but too short to be full price imo. And I bet you the PS3 version's fmv is higher quality, that's usually what happens with PS3 versions. [b]apparentl- actually I'm not quite sure how anyone could come to this conclusion[/b][/QUOTE] :downs:

The problem is that the videos are only 1280x720 and 24fps

I noticed the difference on 1920x1080 but honestly, I don't care either way. It was a great ending and it made me happy to complete the game and if I could repeat it fresh, I would. Why do you people kick it in the balls because it used something new? There were a ton of turrets for the choir and I doubt it could have been properly played off in real-time.

Yeah, the quality of the video didn't hit me, it was the FPS change.

I love everyone complaining about how it's noticeable because it's a different widescreen ratio that what they have. My screen's ratio is 5:4. And honestly with the turret part I could barely tell whether it was a FMV or not. The wheat field is different story though.

[QUOTE=Legend286;29327317]WHOAH I FORGOT THE TURRET MODELS WERE LIKE 9000000000 TRIS AND TOOK A SUPERCOMPUTER TO RENDER 50.[/QUOTE] okay, let's see you render a choir of turrets in real time no really gimme your average fps when you do so

[QUOTE=KingKombat;29327403]okay, let's see you render a choir of turrets in real time no really gimme your average fps when you do so[/QUOTE] Exactly. That and they were all moving and doing animations. That woulda hit even harder.

[QUOTE=Alyx Zark;29327417]Exactly. That and they were all moving and doing animations. That woulda hit even harder.[/QUOTE] the animal king turret would've destroyed me

[QUOTE=Killerelf12;29327396]I love everyone complaining about how it's noticeable because it's a different widescreen ratio that what they have. My screen's ratio is 5:4. And honestly with the turret part I could barely tell whether it was a FMV or not. The wheat field is different story though.[/QUOTE] 5:4 isn't the most modern ratio from monitors.

Let's go over this guys. Remember the first scene in the game, where you are in the motel room and it moves for around 30 minutes (not a spoiler by now, really). That was rendered within the engine and that took around 97 days to code completely. If it had been a pre-rendered video, would've been around 1 week or two. At the end with all the models, the syncing of all the animations at the same time to sing correctly and paced correctly, the long ride upward, and the wheat field would've been completely impossible to render in-game for computers as well as consoles (even the source engine has a limit of entities). They couldn't really put a loading screen in the middle, that would've been way to anti-climatic. So they set on a pre-rendered video for the end that did exactly what it needed to, conclude a great game.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;29326627]And I bet you the PS3 version's fmv is higher quality, that's usually what happens with PS3 versions.[/QUOTE] That's because PS3 uses Blu-Ray discs, which generally have several times more capacity than most games need. Thus, games with FMVs can leave them uncompressed and high-resolution since there's so much free space on the disc. ...however, you're wrong. I have Portal 2 on the PS3 and its FMVs look exactly the same as the PC's. Contrary to all the whining, Portal 2, like all Valve games, is a port [b]from PC to consoles[/b], not the other way around. [QUOTE=DOG-GY;29326703]The ending was brilliant but there's no reason why it shouldn't have been realtime and I was disappointed with that. Still, brilliant.[/QUOTE] It wasn't real-time probably for several reasons. The first practical reason that comes to mind is that it [sp]has a zillion turrets, all animating at the same time, which would be difficult to render for a lot of people, especially in sync to the song. Plus there's no way real-time Source could make that grassy field look that beautiful; I'm glad they FMV'd that.[/sp] Also, it's not like you can do anything during the cutscene, so what would be the point of having it real-time anyway? Another reason is possibly that they're just utilizing their 'movie-making' skills in-game now rather than just in trailers. We all love the pre-rendered TF2 Meet the Team videos and I've seen people say they wish Valve would make a feature-length movie. So now that they're starting to utilize that tech in their games it's suddenly terrible? Valve's fanbase is seriously impossible to please. :v:

[QUOTE=Coffee;29327437]5:4 isn't the most modern ratio from monitors.[/QUOTE] I know that. It's a decent monitor, it works, and it didn't cost me ~$200 or so because I already had it. Plus, makes it easier for me to max out games, and it fits on my desk better. I was just saying how funny I found it that everyone forgets there are still people using things other than widescreen.

[QUOTE=Aurora93;29326940]it's probably because it involved a lot of models and AFAIK Source does not support geometric impostors yet[/QUOTE] I'm not sure that impostors were necessary for that scene, surely just standard LOD'ing would've worked? EDIT: Nevermind. Just looked at that scene again.

[QUOTE=KingKombat;29327403]okay, let's see you render a choir of turrets in real time no really gimme your average fps when you do so[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Alyx Zark;29327417]Exactly. That and they were all moving and doing animations. That woulda hit even harder.[/QUOTE] You know animations don't make a model any more costly. You want 50 turrets with a playable framerate? fine, I'll give you more than that. [img]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/595809294184831067/3AF2072CEF55A76A5E1A33045F4F11611D9E8AFE/[/img] [img]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/595809294184830211/1EEC6C39F1E97A2208DDFF402EC11AB4126BB162/[/img] You are dumb. I actually just crashed the game, I placed so many that I ran out of edicts. At the time I had about 200 down, with 50 fps.

[QUOTE=Feuvert;29327508]Let's go over this guys. Remember the first scene in the game, where you are in the motel room and it moves for around 30 minutes (not a spoiler by now, really). That was rendered within the engine and that took around 97 days to code completely. If it had been a pre-rendered video, would've been around 1 week or two. At the end with all the models, the syncing of all the animations at the same time to sing correctly and paced correctly, the long ride upward, and the wheat field would've been completely impossible to render in-game for computers as well as consoles (even the source engine has a limit of entities). They couldn't really put a loading screen in the middle, that would've been way to anti-climatic. So they set on a pre-rendered video for the end that did exactly what it needed to, conclude a great game.[/QUOTE] The thing is, my sound delayed and every fucking sound thereafter was 5 seconds off from the actual gameplay :v: I'm not disappointed they did it in a cinematic fashion, whatever works. [editline]21st April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Legend286;29328319]You know animations don't make a model any more costly. You want 50 turrets with a playable framerate? fine, I'll give you more than that. [img_thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/595809294184831067/3AF2072CEF55A76A5E1A33045F4F11611D9E8AFE/[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/595809294184830211/1EEC6C39F1E97A2208DDFF402EC11AB4126BB162/[/img_thumb] You are dumb. I actually just crashed the game, I placed so many that I ran out of edicts. At the time I had about 200 down, with 50 fps.[/QUOTE] Actually, animations make a model MUCH more costly.

OP makes my brain hurt. I'm going to go lie down.

[QUOTE=t h e;29328380]The thing is, my sound delayed and every fucking sound thereafter was 5 seconds off from the actual gameplay :v: I'm not disappointed they did it in a cinematic fashion, whatever works. [editline]21st April 2011[/editline] Actually, animations make a model MUCH more costly.[/QUOTE] Not at all. It's certainly not noticeably slower on modern hardware, anyway. You're still batching the models in a single draw call, regardless of how many animations they have.

long story short OP is dumb in many ways and only one of his arguments can actually hold up

[QUOTE=Legend286;29328431]Not at all. It's certainly not noticeably slower on modern hardware, anyway. You're still batching the models in a single draw call, regardless of how many animations they have.[/QUOTE] I'm just thinking in a logical way, since I have no knowledge on techincal things whatsoever, so I'm most definitely wrong, but I just thought that if there's more things moving the computer has to use more CPU to render the movements, I think its much easier on the PC if theres a still model as oppose to a moving model. Could be wrong though.