 Noclipped Screenshots.
#11465 posted by Shambler on 2007/01/05 01:34:34
I took many of the screenshots for TSQLR using noclip and going into the scenery.
This was not to show a radically different perspective from the player, but because the player will be moving around and able to perceive a lot more of a particular scene in a short space of time. To capture that in a single image I often tried to get as far back as possible in that scene to get as much in view as possible - I think that gave a more accurate picture of what the player would experience.
As you might guess I don't have a problem with people doing it for normal screenshots, and in some ways it can be good to give a player a taster of the style without revealing what they'll see. Although Trinca's is a bit of an extreme example.
#11466 posted by Trinca on 2007/01/05 01:42:31
:p Shambler u will die a lot in my next maps :p there are tree in progress!!!
 Screen
#11467 posted by madfox on 2007/01/05 11:44:55
I like to keep my screenshots as desktop-layer.
in that way I stimulate my fantasy to the map.
So it had to be called glammershot!
no-clip screenshots are fine to quickly archive the event of a level.
but in game screenshots expose a more exciting moment of the level, ie monsters in action, no clipping ever will.
Therefore I claim it as the one and only screenshot!
I love my white, overall resolution of my monitor as the best, ever-lasting screenshot of Shambler. So I condamned it to be shot.
 /me Votes For Noclipped Screenshots
#11468 posted by PuLSaR on 2007/01/05 12:54:40
 I Used To Vote For 'noclip' Screenshots
#11469 posted by - on 2007/01/05 13:05:46
Then I got a job, and reliezed how shitty and unrealistic they make my work, and wish only to have actual gameplay represented by screenshots, rather than 'marketting'.
 MIke:
#11470 posted by metlslime on 2007/01/05 13:37:30
you forgot to respond to my final point, which is that true-to-gameplay screenshots can still be misleading.
 Metlslime
#11471 posted by Mike Woodham on 2007/01/05 13:58:02
No, I didn't forget.
 .
#11472 posted by necros on 2007/01/05 14:01:36
maybe i'm missing the point here, but screenshots should be taken in whichever way looks the best and makes for a nice picture...
who cares if it's noclipped to an unreachable location on from a PoV of the player?
 Screenshots
#11473 posted by bear on 2007/01/05 14:05:28
Shambler pretty much wrote what I was thinking - that the purpose is often to try to cram in as many interesting bits as possible in order to try to sum up something that can not accurately be described in one image.
 ALL Screenshots Are Pointless And Unrepresentative Of The Game.
#11474 posted by Kinn on 2007/01/05 17:28:38
the only way you should sell a game is from extended video footage of actual gameplay.
Yeah. I went there.
 Well
#11475 posted by PuLSaR on 2007/01/05 17:35:43
do screenshots taken from areas reachable by means of (quad)rocketjumping act as gameplay screenshots?
 Mike:
#11476 posted by metlslime on 2007/01/05 17:38:34
1. true-to-gameplay screenshots can be just as misleading as noclip screenshots
2. noclip screenshots can can be just as useful and informative as true-to-gameplay shots
3. therefore, noclip shots are not pointless or useless at all. They are just as good as the other kind for previewing a level prior to downloading.
Since you agree with #1 and don't make any comment against #2, why don't you agree with #3?
 Er...
#11477 posted by metlslime on 2007/01/05 17:39:36
Since you agree with #1 and don't make any comment against #2
Should read:
Since you agree with #2 and don't make any comment against #1
 Also:
#11478 posted by Kinn on 2007/01/05 17:54:42
jesus christ that was a good vindaloo
nice to be back
 Extended Video Footage Of Actual Gameplay Is Pointless And
#11479 posted by pjw on 2007/01/05 18:40:31
unrepresentative of the game. After all, whoever is playing isn't playing exactly like you will, are they?
Seriously, noclip screenshots are not a problem. Deception and/or misrepresentation is a problem. This doesn't seem complicated.
 Speaking Of Deception...
#11480 posted by metlslime on 2007/01/05 19:28:15
Have you ever been dissapointed becuase the name of a level is too good compared to the level itself?
I remember thinking "The Soul Grinder" must be some awesome, mythological machine buried at the heart of the level. Turns out it was just a bunch of rooms with monsters in it.
I once named a level "Concourse" becuase i figured that name's blandness matched the blandness of the level itself.
 Re: Speaking Of Deception
#11481 posted by R.P.G. on 2007/01/05 19:34:34
I once named a level "Penile Devastation" and it had a giant penis in it, so I hope no one was disappointed.
Also, I once named a level "s4wk" but some people seem to think it's actually pretty good.
 Metl
#11482 posted by Blitz on 2007/01/05 19:47:14
I know I was severely disappointed when I played godfun.bsp and it was neither god nor fun.
 Blitz
#11483 posted by Zwiffle on 2007/01/05 21:38:46
You misread; that was supposed to be GodfUn.bsp, and it WAS both godf and un.
 Pjw
#11484 posted by Kinn on 2007/01/06 03:34:36
i guess i failed at sarcasm then :(
 Kinn
#11485 posted by pjw on 2007/01/06 11:03:50
I knew you were joking. I was too (at least before the "seriously").
Maybe we both failed? :)
 This Entire Discussion Is Pointless
#11486 posted by - on 2007/01/06 16:14:34
Everyone will continue to take screenshots how they want and name maps with titles better than the actual map.
#11487 posted by - on 2007/01/06 16:16:07
(er, that post was directed at one-upping Kinn/PJW)
 Your Mom
#11488 posted by pjw on 2007/01/06 17:07:12
is pointless.
#11489 posted by Kinn on 2007/01/06 18:09:50
I knew you were joking. I was too
hey I knew that :}
(/me glances nervously from side to side)
|