On Bringing
Modern Warfare 2 To Life
By Chris Remo
One of the
most important aspects of making a game realistic is its graphics -- a core
conceit of the generational transitions the console industry is founded on.
And
for a game like Infinity Ward and Activision's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, that's even more strongly
true; drawing inspiration from what's happening in the world now and bringing
it credibly and viscerally to your screen, the Modern Warfare games live
and die by visual veracity.
It's
particularly worth noting that the Call of Duty games are driven as
intensely by character action and interaction as they are by enemy combat --
two major, and complicated artistic problems to tackle.
To find out
more about what goes into the visuals of what's already being billed as the
biggest game of the year, Gamasutra sat down with Joel Emslie, the game's lead
character artist.
Here, he discusses the processes by which the most respected
name in war games gets its considerable visual punch:
The name of
your game is Modern Warfare. By its nature, the game's characters have
to compete with our intrinsic knowledge of the actual modern world we live in,
and what we see on the news. How do you approach that as a character artist,
along with the practical concerns of making gameplay-readable designs?
Joel Emslie: First and foremost, it's
getting animation right. The human eye picks up on everything. It doesn't need
very many pixels of movement to realize that something looks fake, so the
movement is first and foremost.
We've improved all of our rigging. We've
improved the way we make faces. We've really been tightening the screws with
what we've been doing this whole time on the PC, Xbox 360, PS3 -- just really
stepping it forward each time we make a new game and learning from all the
mistakes from last time. But to set it in reality, the first thing is the
animations, getting it to move right.
The second
thing is that we're always inspired in trying to be as authentic as possible,
but to get things to read properly in a combat environment with the fog of war,
particles, tracers, and whatever else.
You need to step into a thought process
that's almost more from a theatre standpoint. So you're looking at costume
design. You're getting parts of your characters to read properly, or to make
things look more realistic.
We have
texture streaming; that really helps. The variation that we have in this game
is a step beyond what I've ever worked with in my career. So we have that
fidelity, but fidelity is nothing if you're not using it properly -- the way we
lay out our characters, the way we're packing pixels into their arms and legs
and packs. We're really pushing how we do ambient occlusion, so the packs and
the gear sit on the character properly. They settle in to look more realistic.
You have to
feel it's natural. Even getting characters like "Soap" MacTavish to
stand out. I've been looking at certain movies for a long time. I'm a huge fan
of [2003 war movie] Tears of the Sun. There's a character that caught my eye.
I've always wanted
to do a character inspired by that, with a mohawk, which just pops. You
can just spot him a mile away. He's a great character. He's in there telling
you what to do, and you can spot him, which is great.
We're trying
to bring that element into other characters as well, refining their headgear so
they stand out, and trying to get them to pop.
On the notion of that
theatricality, people frequently discuss games like this and say, "Why
does it all have to be photorealistic?" But the reality is, there's still a
lot of artistic interpretation that has to go into it, for it to read the right
way. How do you strike the balance between being too clinically realistic, and
not realistic enough to be convincing?
JE: It's an old design
philosophy that everybody learns. It's Design 101: Function precedes form.
Everything moves properly. You need to design a costume that actually works
with the animation and movement with the character.
Some stuff can be too
hyper-real. If we were approaching a super hyper-real [aesthetic], there would
be a lot of really crazy stuff we'd have to do in order for things to work that
just aren't there yet. You have to accommodate for that.
One other
thing we did is to sit down and take a look at what worked on the last project
and what could work again for this one. The first thing we found is that
everybody's always making grenades. They're making grenades over and over
again. Every time I assign a squad to somebody, he's got to go make grenades
and smoke rounds and everything.
You mean artists? They're remaking all those assets from scratch?
JE: Yeah. If
I've got a squad [to design], I'll say, " I'm going to do this squad. I'm
going to have to make a new grenade. Do you already have the grenade? I might
use it, I might not."
Why is that, out of curiosity?
JE: Artists, when they step into something, want to tackle it and make
it work for what they're doing. So we started to standardize that type of
thing. When you look at the modern theatre right now, when you globetrot around
the planet, the loadouts and the gear and the equipment start to get very
similar.
They're manufactured by certain companies, and [the differences]
really come down to palette and some minor details here and there. For the most
part, modern gear has similarities that you can standardize and work off as a
base.
So we
stepped into that and we put a lot of design into it. We designed loadouts --
an assault loadout, a [light machine gun loadout], and so on. You really can
look at a shotgun guy, and see that he's very noticeably wearing a bunch of
shells on him. There might be a "bad guy" version of that and a
"good guy" version. We can step into palettes there, which really
helps.
And all that
gear in the design is inspired by and is based on, as closely as possible, realistic
gear. We're not making buckles up from scratch. We research all this stuff like
crazy. A couple of us have even gone shooting on ranges.
We'll go out and shoot
weapons and get familiar with all the gear as much as possible. You start to
get into some really cool stuff -- high-speed rigs, snaps, equipment that
ensures you don't drown if you fall in the water.
It just
helps us make cooler loadouts. We incorporated all that into our basic
loadouts. We all sat together, assigned the loadouts one by one to each person,
and then shared them amongst ourselves.
Each time we got a new squad, the
character artist could focus on what really matters -- the headgear, the bust.
What you're shooting at most of the time is this right here, so they focus on
that. They've got a great base to build on, and then you're just making it your
own from there on out.
Has that pipeline kind of changed much from Modern Warfare? It
sounds like you've had some revisions to the process since the last game.
JE: Yeah. We had a lot of ground to cover
in this game, a really high demand for multiple squads. We're going all over
the globe with this game. And there's a lot of hero play. We have a lot of main
characters that need to stand out properly, so a lot of things had to change.
The biggest
change was how we did our faces. We got Steven Giesler, who worked on [the
computer animated film] Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. He's one of the only
artists I know who has his art on the cover of Maxim magazine. He's a great
guy.
He's a genius when it comes to the human face. He's just brilliant at it.
He came in and really restructured the way that we're doing our faces. It comes
to that same philosophy of the loadouts, where we refine something that we've
been doing over and over again to create a really, really solid foundation.
He built
this system where, for normal characters or just for variation, we could go in
and blend different characters together. We could take a Caucasian, a South
African male, and a female face, and blend all those in together and get this
really great-looking unique face.
Just with a slider and a dial, he'd throw it
into his computer and go, "That one's great. Let's use that one."
He'd then bring it over to the artists, and they would work on it, put on some
scars, mess it up, put some flare into it, and then send it into the character
pipeline.
It's badass.
That was the biggest change that we did. The other stuff is more along the
lines of what I'm saying -- refining how we're doing everything. The tools to
make these things have come a long way in the last five years. That really
helps.
I imagine it's fun to be working in this structure Infinity Ward
likes, where you go from protagonist to protagonist over the course of the
game. There must be a certain pressure to try and keep one from being too much
more memorable than another.
JE: Truth be told, when the players get their hands on it and see the
characters, we'll see if we've been really successful with the characters being
really noticeable and memorable, along with their voices. When you combine all
that together, you've got a character that stands out.
But there
will be other characters who are very military, and it's hard to act through,
or to get across with all this headgear, that it's a special character. The
voice helps. But it's a challenge. It's a big challenge. Like I said, we have a
lot of fidelity. I'm really unbelievably proud of the character team. The whole
team in general, artistically, really brought it a step forward with all that
stuff, along with environment and everything else. It's all crazy this time.
What's your
environment process like? Do you pair up a level designer with an environmental
artist?
JE: No. It's more like fighting fires.
When we go in, we have level designers who are really good at geometry, and
they can rip things apart and put them back together really quickly. Then we
have level designers who are unbelievably gifted at scripting. And we have some
who are good at both. Those are the higher, upper-echelon guys who can really
just go in and kick ass at things.
Then they're
all always supported by an environmental art team that comes in and does
positional lighting, and all of that stuff. Sometimes, certain level designers
can do that all themselves, and they're talented. But we tend to go in and
triage things as we go. The design is always rapidly changing.
Things are
changing constantly up until the very end. If we're not satisfied with what's
going on here, we'll come in and firefight it.
Finally, I know there's been some chatter about this online - but has Bobby
Kotick really succeeded in taking all the fun out of your video game development
process?
JE: No way.
Absolutely not. Kotick's a great guy.
Return to the full version of this article with comments
Copyright � 2009 Think Services