• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Undead Zone : Why realistic graphics make humans look creepy

deadhorse32

Bad Art ™
The Undead Zone
Why realistic graphics make humans look creepy.
By Clive Thompson
Posted Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 2:20 PM PT



In 1978, the Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori noticed something interesting: The more humanlike his robots became, the more people were attracted to them, but only up to a point. If an android become too realistic and lifelike, suddenly people were repelled and disgusted.

The problem, Mori realized, is in the nature of how we identify with robots. When an android, such as R2-D2 or C-3PO, barely looks human, we cut it a lot of slack. It seems cute. We don't care that it's only 50 percent humanlike. But when a robot becomes 99 percent lifelike—so close that it's almost real—we focus on the missing 1 percent. We notice the slightly slack skin, the absence of a truly human glitter in the eyes. The once-cute robot now looks like an animated corpse. Our warm feelings, which had been rising the more vivid the robot became, abruptly plunge downward. Mori called this plunge "the Uncanny Valley," the paradoxical point at which a simulation of life becomes so good it's bad.

As video games have developed increasingly realistic graphics, they have begun to suffer more and more from this same conundrum. Games have unexpectedly fallen into the Uncanny Valley.

Consider Alias, the new title based on the TV show. It's a reasonably fun action-and-puzzle game, where you maneuver Sydney Bristow through a series of spy missions. But whenever the camera zooms in on her face, you're staring at a Jennifer Garner death mask. I nearly shrieked out loud at one point. And whenever other characters speak to you—particularly during cut-scenes, those supposedly "cinematic" narrative moments—they're even more ghastly. Mouths and eyes don't move in synch. It's as if all the characters have been shot up with some ungodly amount of Botox and are no longer able to make Earthlike expressions.

Every highly realistic game has the same problem. Resident Evil Outbreak's humans are realistic, but their facial expressions are so deadeningly weird they're almost scarier than the actual zombies you're fighting. The designers of 007: Everything or Nothing managed to take the adorable Shannon Elizabeth and render her as a walleyed replicant.

The Uncanny Valley can make games less engrossing. That's particularly true with narrative games, which rely on believable characters with whom you're supposed to identify. The whole point is to suspend disbelief and immerse yourself. But that's hard to do when the characters create goosebumps. You fight searing battles, solve brain-crushing puzzles, vanquish enemies, and what are you rewarded with? A chance to watch your avatar mince about the screen in some ghoulish parody of humanity.

The screwiest part of this phenomenon is that game designers pride themselves on the quality of their sepulchral human characters. It's part of the malaise that currently affects game design, in which too many designers assume that crisper 3-D graphics will make a game better. That may be true when it comes to scenery, explosions, or fog. But with human faces and bodies, we're harder to fool. Neuroscientists argue that our brains have evolved specific mechanisms for face recognition, because being able to recognize something "wrong" in someone else's face has long been crucial to survival. If that's true, then game designers may never be able to capture that last 1 percent of realism. The more they plug away at it—the more high-resolution their human characters become—the deeper they'll trudge into the Uncanny Valley.

Instead, maybe they should try climbing out, by going in the opposite direction and embracing low-rez simplicity. Roboticists have begun doing this. Like Mori, they've learned that a spare, stripped-down robot can seem more lifelike than an explicitly humanoid one. I own a Roomba, one of those Frisbee-shaped vacuum robots, and it doesn't look even vaguely human. Yet as it zips around my living room, it seems amazingly alive, and I can't help but feel warmly toward it. This is because of another quirk of our psychology: If something behaves in only a slightly human way, we'll fill in the blanks—we'll read humanness into it. (That's partly why our pets seem so intelligent and humanlike.)

Comic-strip artists have known this for years. As comic-book theorist Scott McCloud points out, we identify more deeply with simply drawn cartoon characters, like those in Peanuts, than with more realistic ones. Charlie Brown doesn't trigger our obsession with the missing details the way a not-quite-photorealistic character does, so we project ourselves onto him more easily. That's part of the genius behind modernist artists such as Picasso or Matisse. They realized that the best way to capture the essence of a person or object was with a single, broad-stroked detail.

Some of the best game designers understand this, too. Jet Grind Radio, the old Fear Effect* series, and the more recent Viewtiful Joe all use the chunky style of cel-shaded animation to create characters who are cartoonish yet vividly alive. Lara Croft is another good example. Even as her games became more graphically precise, the designers left Croft as a very stylized figure, the better to have players identify with her. And the only game designer who has produced a 20-year string of popular characters is Shigeru Miyamoto, the architect of Nintendo's Disneylike visual style.

Unfortunately, though, gaming's Uncanny Valley could be here to stay, simply because players have become used to it. In the real world of plastic surgery, face-lifts used to look horrifically strange but now go unnoticed. Likewise, we've played with dead, fish-eyed characters for so long that they seem kinda normal. Creepiness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Correction, June 10, 2004: This piece originally described the Fear Effect series of games as the "Fear Factor" series. (Return to the corrected sentence.)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102086
 
How very true! The closer that characters get to looking human, the more you realize there's something lacking. That was even true to a certain extent with the superb graphics of Final Fantasy: TSW.
 

Belfast

Member
I pretty much agree. That's why I continue to believe CG should be used to create unrealistic creatures/characters or cartoon features. So many games look SO bad, because despite the high level of technology, their human characters look bland and plasticky, with generic characterizations and bad animation. And its the reason why the upcoming The Polar Express movie is going to suck. THESE CHARACTERS AREN'T ATTRACTIVE. The animated medium wasn't made for realism, yet we continue to push forward with it.
 

DaCocoBrova

Finally bought a new PSP, but then pushed the demon onto someone else. Jesus.
Skin tone makes all the difference in the world. SH3/4 is a great example of that. As good as the modeling is, the odd flesh tones they chose make them look...odd.

FF:TSW was another example. Aki specifically.
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
FF:TSW suffered from in many scenes, yes. Polar Express looks DREADFUL, with it's zombie children and Tom hanks. Just shudderingly godawful. The only real-life looking CGI that I can say *almost* doesn't suffer from this at all, is the Oni 3 intro which somehow manages to capture the essence of look and motion of a living human, and does so unbelievably well.

In the real world of plastic surgery, face-lifts used to look horrifically strange but now go unnoticed.
Then again, this is a quite a stupid comment. Not only has plastic surgery been an order of magnitude worse looking some 30 years ago, but it's still pretty damn obvious 95% of the time.

SH3/4 is a great example of that. As good as the modeling is, the odd flesh tones they chose make them look...odd.
SH3 and 4 are supposed to be freakish and odd, so it kinda works in their favor, actually :p Still, I'd say it's the facial animation in SH3 that gives it that freaky look more than skin tones (heather and douglas for example have pretty good skin tones) Still compared to mentioned Alias and James Bond, SH3 does a good job of making characters look more alive than dead.
 

explodet

Member
Marconelly said:
The only real-life looking CGI that I can say *almost* doesn't suffer from this at all, is the Oni 3 intro which somehow manages to capture the essence of look and motion of a living human, and does so unbelievably well.
A possible reason for this may be because of Capcom's penchant for using CGI models based on actual humans, or more specifically, celebrities. The familiarity of the face may offset the CGI flaws - the eye tries to match the model with the real thing instead of pointing out the differences to an actual human that may or may not exist.

Just a theory.

Of course, that didn't help other CGI modelers, like the strange-looking Jennifer Garner mentioned in the article in the first post. Hmm....
 

Lord Error

Insane For Sony
A possible reason for this may be because of Capcom's penchant for using CGI models based on actual humans, or more specifically, celebrities. The familiarity of the face may offset the CGI flaws.

Just a theory.
I would say, could easily be the opposite... You should be more prone to find out flaws in something that you are highly familliar with, but on the other hand it makes the modeler's job easier if his model is based on reality. Besides, I'm honestly not at all familiar with the actor who is the basis for Samanosuke :p
 

human5892

Queen of Denmark
This is a good point and an actual, observable phenomenon, but I personally don't react quite as bad as the author seems to ("Oh GOD IT DOESN'T LOOK REAL I'M HORRIFIED") whenever I see a character in a game or CGI movie trying to look realistic. I accept that the technology isn't there yet, and if the character is rendered impressively, I can even appreciate how the modelling is done, rather than what's not there.

However, I do think that this type of tech is not advanced enough yet to make a movie like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within; it made it hard to forge attachments to the characters comparable to if they had been flesh-and-blood actors (not to mention the script blew). In videogames, however, I accept that it's the best they can do for right now.
 

Kiriku

SWEDISH PERFECTION
I think the CG movies in FFX aren't that bad, at least I don't think of corpses when I see the characters. But maybe that's because the character design isn't trying to be altogether 100 % realistic.

And BTW, as someone mentioned before, this "problem" is perfect for games like Silent Hill and similar. :D
 
This also explains why characters like Jade from BG&E, or Ico and Yorda, who are deliberately more stylized than human, can be so likeable and endearing.
 

Mike

Member
This is a great topic, Milhouse, thanks for bringing it up.

I always thought I was alone when I felt that realistic character models looked like zombies. It's an interesting testament to the way human beings perceive things, as we do tend to focus on that 1 percent.

But that said, yes, it works great for Silent Hill and Resident Evil.
 

yoshifumi

Banned
that's a really interesting article. too bad the day that animated people will really look real is probably never going to happen.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
"You fight searing battles, solve brain-crushing puzzles, vanquish enemies, and what are you rewarded with? A chance to watch your avatar mince about the screen in some ghoulish parody of humanity."

i really like the way this guy writes.
 

Firest0rm

Member
I think it has to do with perception. When the android looks so human, our mind accepts them as human but at the same time notices features that don't seem human like. Therefore it creates that kind of fear of them, because their not normal "humans" even though our mind is convinced they look like one. But when the android has clear features that distinct it from a human then the mind is capable of accepting these differences. Its like seeing a person with skin disease, some people are scared of that individual.
 

sprsk

force push the doodoo rock
belgurdo said:
I've never thought "omg corpses" whenever I see odd-looking people in CG movies. I always just think, "bad art."


This is the result of bad art, yes. This problem exists in most western games, realistic or not. look at games like sudeki for instance.
 
The funny thing is that we had this discussion on the oldfirstGAF, it was under some topic, but no one but a few other people bothered to take part. :p

The first things I notice about "humans" in CG are their movement, and just overall look. I don't think we'll ever get it right and really think we should just stop trying. I'm one of people who notices these details far too often and movies like The Matrix sequels and Spiderman are completely ruined for me.

The only movie I really wasn't turned off by the CG was, TSW. Yeah the skin tones were off, but I think they got everything else pretty damn close to actual movements. So it terms of physical quality, I still think that TSW is the best. But then again, the enviroment means everything. If the Matrix was entirely CG I don't think anyone would have noticed or cared that Neo just looked god awful, but at the moment, most real life beings in CG just stand out way too much next to live action or live actions scenes.

But there's one character who I think throws that rule out of wack. Gollum. I never once sat and thought of Gollum as a CG character while watching the movies, he was another real being to me. You felt his pain and so on and weren't bothered by how he looked. Even when he interacted with the other characters. I think that the way the LOTR films were made, with Andy Serkis (Who alone I think really made Gollum so successful) as sort of the main entity and the stand-in. The huge amount of post production, it's still just mind blowing that they pulled that off. Other movies like the Star Wars prequels have tried this, but it just doesn't come off as well. Though, I do still think Jar Jar was the first step toward Gollum despite how people find him annoying (I think that's the point, though. He wasn't annoying because he was CG. :p). Anyways, I think Gollum as to be one of the greatest creations in the CG "industry".

But then again, he is a fantasy character. Humans are something I just can't ever see being full replicated in full CG, not anytime soon at least. Then again, I would like to see someone spend years on just ONE model of a human. I think we could be capable of getting something VERY close with current technology.. But perfection? Never going to happen.
 

Ristamar

Member
DarthWufei said:
The only movie I really wasn't turned off by the CG was, TSW. Yeah the skin tones were off, but I think they got everything else pretty damn close to actual movements. So it terms of physical quality, I still think that TSW is the best.

FF:TSW still suffered from extremely sterile and lifeless facial animations (on top of simply being a terribly boring movie, IMO).
 
Ristamar said:
FF:TSW still suffered from extremely sterile and lifeless facial animations (on top of simply being a terribly boring movie, IMO).

Indeed, hence why I said it wasn't perfect, right? I haven't seen any better really, but I haven't seen everything.
 
In accordance with the logic of the article above, it makes me wonder if FF:TSW would have been much more successful if they had gone the complete fantasy route with super-deformed characters like Cloud and the gang. And set it in beautiful Final Fantasy-like environments instead of yet another post-apocalyptic wasteland. And wrote a good story.

For all its good intentions, I really think FF:TSW set back the whole concept of doing an adult-oriented CG movie. Especially considering all of the money they poured into it. I wonder when we'll see another attempt.
 

Ristamar

Member
Lucky Forward said:
And set it in beautiful Final Fantasy-like environments instead of yet another post-apocalyptic wasteland. And wrote a good story.

The two most glaring faults of the movie. It didn't feel very Final Fantasy-ish, and while I wasn't expecting Oscar worthy material, the story was painfully weak. In fact, it was easily one of my most disappointing movie experiences ever.
 
FF:TSW still suffered from extremely sterile and lifeless facial animations

I've seen this claimed so many times that I started to believe it, but when I recently rewatched the movie on DVD I was surprised at the variety and detail of the facial animations and, actually, how exaggerated and cartoonlike it was in some ways. I think people were so hung up on judging how 'real' the characters did or didn't look that they missed a lot of interesting details that didn't fit in to that way of looking. If you really pay attention to the facial movements you'll see that they're often influenced by the Disney style of animation, for example.
 

mrmyth

Member
The problem wasn't the facial animations. The doctor's CG was photorealistic at times. The main problem with all of the characters is that they didn't breathe. No chest movement. You spent the whole movie with something bothering you and you couldn't quite place it. Therefore everything looked off.
 

3phemeral

Member
The CG was fine, especially the Dr. Ross', but the mouth animation for practically everyone else was lacking, espcially during moments of lip syncing when the mouths seemed to squash and stretch more often than actually physically pronouncing the words. Emotional displays, even subtle ones, were spot on.

As for the article, I think I'd have to disagree. Particularly when it comes to computer graphics done right; can illicit a sense of endearment or allow you to relate to the character at least. FF8's facial animation was perfect, more particularly moments like Rinoa's wink at the dance, Squall's look of glossy-eyed happines just before he leans in for a kiss. The only hurdle I see preventing the acceptance of realistic CG humans would be properly syncing mouth animations to the voice actor. Otherwise, once those movements are perfected and the CG quality oustanding, there shouldn't be anything holding it back.
 

belgurdo

Banned
Lucky Forward said:
In accordance with the logic of the article above, it makes me wonder if FF:TSW would have been much more successful if they had gone the complete fantasy route with super-deformed characters like Cloud and the gang. And set it in beautiful Final Fantasy-like environments instead of yet another post-apocalyptic wasteland. And wrote a good story.

For all its good intentions, I really think FF:TSW set back the whole concept of doing an adult-oriented CG movie. Especially considering all of the money they poured into it. I wonder when we'll see another attempt.


Methinks a FF movie would have failed no matter how they sliced it because most of their "fans" simply wanted FFVII: The Movie.

And I think we're probably going to be seeing Shrekish crap for the next 20 years because no company will likely want to try another stab at a serious CG film.
 

Fusebox

Banned
That's because the gaming industry foolishly decided to ignore quality titles like Pit Fighter and Return To Zork that proved digitised video footage works far better than wasting time and money trying to render 3D models.
 

slayn

needs to show more effort.
... and all this is precisely why 2d games are better looking than 3d and why I've been trying to explain it all this time, now I can just link to this article ^_^
 

belgurdo

Banned
slayn said:
... and all this is precisely why 2d games are better looking than 3d and why I've been trying to explain it all this time, now I can just link to this article ^_^


And 2D games can't make proper looking people either (without pasting photographs or filming people or some other complicated process, and the end result is still kind of washed out or lacking detail), which is why Japanese devs always used "chibi" characters all the time and characters in a lot of western games didn't even have faces or noticable features. :p
 

Ranger X

Member
This is great article! I can see that myself when playing videogames with people and speaking on boards too.

But again, i must be alien but this brain reaction isn't affecting me. Well, let's say i never noticed if it does somewhere.
 
Lara Croft is another good example. Even as her games became more graphically precise, the designers left Croft as a very stylized figure, the better to have players identify with her.

Yeah, that was the reason CORE left the Tomb Raider engine static for three games... and the mechanics... and the controls
 

Ranger X

Member
"Yeah, that was the reason CORE left the Tomb Raider engine static for five games... and the mechanics... and the controls"



fixed ;)
 

Tellaerin

Member
yoshifumi said:
that's a really interesting article. too bad the day that animated people will really look real is probably never going to happen.

It's certainly not going to happen if everyone decides it's impossible and gives up. :p

I think the technology to create CG indistinguishable from 'the real thing' is already there, or nearly so; it's technique we're lacking. Eventually, we'll isolate and codify enough of the 'rules' of human movement, expression, and appearance to be able to generate human models that look 'right' while in motion--it's just a matter of biology, observation, and most importantly, time. Never say 'never'.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
A realistic CG human would look... human. If a CG human's flaws make it looky creepy, it is by definition not realistic.
The closest thing to a completely convincing CG human was the CG Obi-Wan in the Jango Fett vs. Obi-Wan fight in AoTC. And, FF:TSW was subpar, even for the time. (Wrecked CG New York in A.I.: Artificial Intelligence kicked the shit out of wrecked CG New York in TSW, for example.)
 

shantyman

WHO DEY!?
A game like Riddick is helped by it's sometimes low res display and darkness, because the flaws of the models are not highlighted as much.
 

cybamerc

Will start substantiating his hate
FF:TSW was not meant to look photorealistic (as in an imitation of real life). While the models were meant to look like humans the overall look is quite stylized due to the lighting and sfx. Animation was a problem though but I'm sure they did their best with the available resources.

Cool movie though.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Heh, thinking of Tomb Raider, it's actually a shame that the Angel of Darkness engine won't be re-used. While the game built around it was certainly flawed, the engine is quite remarkable looking in motion and is one of the most impressive I've seen on PS2. The environments were quite large, geometrically dense affairs that featured nice textures, plenty of special effects, and excellent image quality while running at 60 fps.

Surely someone could put it to use once again...
 

rawk

Member
I don't think Gollum or CG Jango Fett run into these problems because

A) CG Jango has no face or skin showing. Plus, a lot of what is showing on him is supposed to look like metal/plastic -- perfect for CG.

B) Gollum is not exactly supposed to look like a realistic human. Obviously much harder to do than Jango, and yeah they did a GREAT job, but it would have been even harder to make him look like a real human.
 
HL2 models are the best ingame so far, IMHO. They sidestep the phenomenon somehow--although I can't put my finger on it. The eye movements surely help, but the lighting and texture work is just really nice.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
>>>I don't think Gollum or CG Jango Fett run into these problems because

A) CG Jango has no face or skin showing. Plus, a lot of what is showing on him is supposed to look like metal/plastic -- perfect for CG.<<<

I mentioned Obi-Wan, not Jango Fett, specifically for that reason. If I were going to mention things with no skin showing, I'd use the clonetroopers as an example. (There is one shot of about a hundred with their helmets off, but they're all kinda small in frame) Most people can't believe they were ALL CG.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
PotatoeMasher said:
HL2 models are the best ingame so far, IMHO. They sidestep the phenomenon somehow--although I can't put my finger on it. The eye movements surely help, but the lighting and texture work is just really nice.

They WERE in the original demo, but they certainly do not appear to be anymore. They seem to have lost SOMETHING since that original demo was shown...
 
Top Bottom