Release your movie in native 120 fps and I'll turn off motion interpolation. Until then, minor flickering artifacts when it fails to resolve motion, or minor haloing around edges of moving objects, are vastly preferable to unwatchable judder that I can't even interpret as motion sometimes.
Every PC gamer knows you need high frame rates for camera movement. It's ridiculous the movie industry is stuck at 24 like it's the stone age, only because of some boomers screaming of some "soap opera" effect they invented in their brains. I'd imagine most Gen Z people don't even know what a "soap opera" is supposed to be, I had to look it up the first time I saw someone say it.
My LG OLED G5 literally provides a better experience than going to the cinema, due to this.
I'm so glad 4k60 is being established as the standard on YouTube, where I watch most of my content now... it's just movies that are inexplicably stuck in the past...
> Every PC gamer knows you need high frame rates for camera movement.
Obviously not, because generations of people saw "movement" at 24 fps. You're railing against other people's preferences, but presenting your personal preferences as fact.
Also, there are technical limitations in cameras that aren't present in video games. The higher the frame rate, the less light that hits it. To compensate, not only do you need better sensors, but you probably need to change the entire way that sets, costumes, and lighting are handled.
The shift to higher frame rates will happen, but it's gonna require massive investment to shift an entire industry and time to learn what looks good. Cinematographers have higher standards than random Youtubers.
> You're railing against other people's preferences, but presenting your personal preferences as fact.
It is a fact that motion is smoother at 120 fps than 24, and therefore easier to follow on screen. There are no preferences involved.
> Also, there are technical limitations in cameras that aren't present in video games.
Cameras capable of recording high quality footage at this refresh rate already exist and their cost is not meaningful compared to the full budget of a movie (and you can use it more than one time of course).
> It is a fact that motion is smoother at 120 fps than 24
Yes, but that's not what you wrote. "unwatchable judder that I can't even interpret as motion sometimes" is false, unless you have some super-rare motion processing disorder in area MT of your brain.
> Cameras capable of recording high quality footage at this refresh rate already exist and their cost is not meaningful compared to the full budget of a movie
Yes, but that's not what I wrote. The cost to handle it is not concentrated in the camera itself. Reread my comment.
The cost of recording/storing 120fps video, and editing/rendering effects at this fps is costly and incredibly meaningful to take into account when creating movies.
You've not met a real hater if you think this, and should consider yourself very lucky. That was just a frustrated user.
A real hater will obsessively use your product, yet simultaneously attempt to find any reason whatsoever to hate your product (or you), no matter how small, and be extremely vocal about it, to the point of founding new communities centered on complaining about you. Should you address the issue, they will silently drop that one from their regularly posted complaints and find or invent a new one. Any communication you send to them will be purposefully misinterpreted and combined with half truths and turned against you.
Some of these people probably have genuine mental illnesses that makes them act like this.
Just to be clear, this particular user didn't ever become a fountain of sweetness and light - they were pretty touchy and cranky at the best of times, if I remember right (it's been over a decade), but accepting them as they were let them become a contributor instead of toxic.
Honestly I have thick enough skin that I'm happy to let them be themselves as long as we can reach a basis of professionalism and get a positive result.
You're right that there are many people you can't reach, and trying is a waste of effort, but I think an appreciation for human dignity requires me to at least make the attempt, and sometimes you're rewarded.
Yeah, which is why I think it's important to draw a line between a frustrated user (has genuine issues with his use of the product, can be turned by fixing them), a casual troll (reposts some bad feedback because he thinks it's funny) and a hater (malicious, bad faith, communication not recommended)
With my old saas app (now sold, and then the new owner killed it) I used to love getting angry emails. Almost every time the user ended up turning into an advocate and product champion. I don't know if they were "haters" per-se but they were almost always suprised to get an email back from a real person who cared about their concerns, and over time they changed their opinion. That may just be an artifact of early saas in 2010. Not sure if the same thing can happen these days.
I've seen pathological users like the sibling is commenting about. I don't want to out any community in particular but some of subreddits surrounding open source games can get pretty yikes.
Not saying you're wrong to find silver linings, just wanted to corrobate that sometimes that is insufficient (as far as I can tell, given impassioned haterness germinating for years).
I am exactly the type of guy you are speaking about. That's me. I have fired off countless hate messages at various companies, usually complaining about their piece of shit web site. The reason I do this is because I have standards (not even high standards--just standards) and I'm sick of being surrounded by incompetent losers who have none at all, nor any desire to listen to any kind of feedback or improve. I'm so fucking tired of seeing everything around me slide into oblivion while people dance around like monkeys, clueless.
At what point are people going to look around and suddenly realize that their appliances, automobiles, hardware, software, is all GARBAGE, and all the corporations and governments peddling this crap are totally corrupt? Need I even begin listing 100,000 concrete examples that surround us everywhere, daily?
People's motivations in this corrupt society have nothing to do with quality or "doings thing right", not even as a tertiary concern; it's all about virtue signalling and money making and feeding one's narcissism, and that's about it.
I remember for example finding a web site back in the day where the author examines all these different UI fails, and explained exactly what they were doing wrong and how to fix it. Flash forward a couple decades later. Did anyone learn anything? NO. Everything has only gotten far worse.
I've lost count of how many times I've landed on the web site for some open source software project, that's full of marketing material bragging about its open-sourcedness and how great that is and what wonderful and admirable people they are because of this......and try as I might, CANNOT FIND A SOURCE CODE DOWNLOAD LINK ANYWHERE ON THE DAMN SITE. I end up having to fucking Google "xyzware source download" to actually find the damn source. WTF? These are exactly the sort of people I send "FUCK YOU" emails to.
The reason people like me will go out of our way to help you if you "show even the slightest willingness to fix things" is because THAT'S SO RARE these days. We want to reward and help you. And yes, we're still grumpy, because everything else is a giant dumpster fire and that's not going away soon, but hey, at least YOU'RE trying!
I completely agree, this is perhaps the least sensible part of common English syntax.
"Hello," he said.
"Hello", he said.
Only one of these makes actual sense as a hierarchical grammar, and it's not the commonly accepted one! If enough of us do it correctly perhaps we can change it.
I’ve always wondered about this. I guess typographically they should just occupy the same horizontal space, or at least be kerned closer in such a way as to prevent the ugly holes without cramming.
It’s true, though, that the hierarchically wrong option looks better, IMHO. The whitespace before the comma is intolerable.
This is an interesting case where I am of two autistic hearts, the logical one slowly losing vehemence as I get older and become more accepting of traditions.
Is indie music no longer indie if they sell really well? Is an indie film no longer indie if it gets too many awards? This kind of redefinition of indie as "poor people" is ahistorical and unhelpful. Indie means independent of a major studio. Which they are.
If your studio has enough resources that it could easily be its own publisher, the definition "independent from a publisher" is no longer of much use. It's also wrong: this project did have a publisher and various other investment in it.
The founders of this studio come from rich family backgrounds, to think they have anything in common with what the average person understands as an "indie game" developer is laughable. For example, they supposedly rented an office to work in, in a building owned by the founder's father's real estate firm, of course.
Projects like these used to be called AA games. It's a fantastic game, it doesn't have to be indie to be good.
I'm always a bit baffled by this project. While it's cool that he can create hundreds of hours of content for his puzzle game, does anyone actually want to play a single puzzle game for this long? Would it not be better to make a few different, shorter, higher quality experiences?
I agree. His first and second game are based on deep themes and unique concepts. He explores the medium of video games in new ways. The selling point of this game seems to be "largest puzzle game ever". I'm excited to see if there are deeper ideas once I play it though.
One of Blow's favorite games is Steven's Sausage Roll. I personally didn't enjoy it because the intellectual content of that kind of puzzle is, as far as I can tell, exploring a large tree of sausage roll states. And while I had a few aha moments playing it, as far as I can tell the way you do that at the end of the day is just to try all the possible states.
From a German user perspective, ICU and your fancy library are incorrect, actually. Mass is not a different casing of Maß, they are different characters. Google likely changed this because it didn't do what users wanted.
The whole thing is complicated, because it actually is complicated in the real world. You can spell the name of Gießen "Giessen" and most Germans consider it correct even if not ideal, but spelling Massachusetts "Maßachusetts" is plainly wrong in German text. The relationship between ß and ss isn't symmetric. Unicode captures that complexity, when you get into the fine details.
This is a very good example! Still, “correct” needs context. You can be 100% “correct with respect to ICU”. It’s definitely not perfect, but it’s the best standard we have. And luckily for me, it also defines the locale-independent rules. I can expand to support locale-specific adjustments in the future, but waiting for the adoption to grow before investing even more engineering effort into this feature. Maybe worth opening a GitHub issue for that :)
Right, nothing wrong with delegating the decision to a bunch of people who have thought long and hard about the best compromise, as long as it’s understood that it’s not perfect.
I never understood why the recommended replacement for ß is ss. It is a ligature of sz (similar to & being a ligature of et) and is even pronounced ess-zet. The only logical replacement would have been sz, and it would have avoided the clash of Masse (mass) and Maße (measurements). Then again, it only affects whether the vowel before it is pronounced short or long, and there are better ways to encode that in written language in the first place.
I agree that writing it "sz" might have created less problems.
However, it is likely that it has never been pronounced "sz", but always "ss" and the habit of writing "sz" for the double consonant may have had the same reason as the writing of "ck" instead of the double "kk".
reply