Muscles: The secret to better animated game characters

by Blake Snow { Sep 7th 2006 at 2:15PM }

It's no news that better animated characters start with the subtle details; facial expressions, glaring eyes, and muscle movement. While animators still have a ways to go, researchers from the Bournemouth University in the UK have developed an easy-to-use algorithm that makes skin and muscles move more realistically compared to traditional skin-based design. Technology Review reports: "Skin-based [design] isn't the most accurate way to capture the nuanced movement of skin as muscles contract below: that requires information about the shape of the muscles themselves. And ill-fitting skin can make an animated character look fake."

So lead researcher Jian Zhang believes that animating from the muscles up creates better results. In regards to building better animation, Autodesk's (they make design software) Michel Besner said: "When we ask an artist to do more quality [animations] it forces them to become doctors."

The approach does have its critics, however, with some calling the technique in question merely "an incremental contribution on what exists." But hey, if virtual HGH gives gaming an edge, we say bring on the needles. Right, baseball?

[Thanks, Jason]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

AlloyNES @ Sep 7th 2006 2:22PM

The question is: Will this muscle technique make the gameplay better, or will we all just feel content simply KNOWING that the character we're seeing is as realistic as possible, even if we can't tell a difference with the naked eye?

Let me rephrase that: This is a waste of money.

Negativecool @ Sep 7th 2006 2:27PM

Mass Effect is the first thing that popped in my head as I was reading this.

That game has the craziest facial models and animations I've ever seen in any game hands down (HL2 animations do not impress me by comparison). It kinda makes me want to go out and buy a 360.

So in contrast to AlloyNES's indifference, I wish this new technique well, and applaud all advances in gaming whether it be for graphics, physics, animation, or gameplay.

Z-247 @ Sep 7th 2006 2:56PM

I just want them to get better at cloth animations. Clothing in games is usually really stiff looking, or too far the other way and it flutters constantly like you're wearing crepe paper.

Bennet @ Sep 7th 2006 2:45PM

I don't need the girl!

canebi @ Sep 7th 2006 2:50PM

@1
you're an idiot.
I'm a character animator for a games company im not going to name, and animation is extremely important to how the game plays. The human eye can pick up imperfections in movement extremely easily even the smallest imperfection can ruin the movement and look of the character. This can ruin the entire belief of the world players are playing in. Bad animation can spoil the whole feel of a game and that attributes to how it plays.

People need to think before they speak, especially these 15 year olds who don't even have a job at the local Safeway yet.

As for animating with muscles I think it's a great idea, as the muscles drive the force of almost any human movement and is key to being able to create a good motion.

Ryan @ Sep 7th 2006 3:06PM

"The human eye can pick up imperfections in movement extremely easily even the smallest imperfection can ruin the movement and look of the character. This can ruin the entire belief of the world players are playing in."

So it would ruin my belief in a world filled with dragons, giants, pixies, tingles, talking animals, giant enemy crabs, etc.?

Yeah, that would be a problem...

AlloyNES @ Sep 7th 2006 3:07PM

@4

First of all, I'm 24 years old and a graphic designer. Secondly, if what you say is true, then why are DS games selling so well? Is it because all the games have characters with realistic muscles?

And why do I still have fun playing Super Mario Bros games? Sure I'm a bit miffed that Mario's moustache isn't rendered hair by hair, but that's okay because I'm sarcastic.

nalgae @ Sep 7th 2006 3:17PM

Sure, gameplay is important, but, like you pointed out, we already have plenty of fun games with good gameplay already (ie DS games).

Realism is one of the many options for bringing games to the next level. Video games are an intellectual, visual, auditory and slightly physical experience. Wii is improving on the physical, Xbox and Ps3 are improving on the auditory and visual, while only developers themselves can improve on the intellectual.

Take the Sims 2. It's a fun game with a certain style of gameplay that has been nearly perfected. What can be improved about it? 1) More stuff to do. 2) Less loading. 3)Quicker interface. 4) Better graphics.

The question is simply what the developers want to focus on. Any of those things I listed above would improve the game considerably. Right now, they're simply adding more stuff to do, and that's fine. If they tap into any of the other things, even better.

AirIntake @ Sep 7th 2006 3:17PM

In the movie Alien, they spent a large amount of money making an extremely detailed alien suit. The problem was, there was still a normal person inside it, moving it, and making it not look very alien at all (it's still a great movie). In Aliens, they spent much less money on the suits, and more time training the actors how to move in them. The result was much more 'realistic' aliens, even though they had less detailed costumes than the original.

My point is that accurate movement is much more important than plain graphic detail. If the muscles flex properly, we are more inclined to believe that we're watching a real person, rather than an animation. No amount of texture detail or extra polygons can make up for this.

Of course, it would be best if the whole body was animated properly, and not just the muscles.

LunarDuality @ Sep 7th 2006 3:47PM

I just hope that these new techniques start to take real physics into account so that we need less "canned" motion capture and get more realistic and interactive motion.

Todd H. @ Sep 7th 2006 4:10PM

How about working on making characters interact with environment realisticly at first, like how they're feet look when running on the field. Or how they end up stepping into the field sometimes, or jumping through each other, etc...

Sorry for the Madden tirade, but these are things that still seem to be problem and you would think they would have a handle on this by now...

Lone Starr @ Sep 7th 2006 4:23PM

DILLON!!!! You SoB! What's the matter? The CIA got you pushing too many pencils?

canebi @ Sep 7th 2006 4:21PM

Well of course it doesn't apply to every game. I did mention HUMAN movement. I just expected everyone to assume they weren't retarded in thinking that Mario's jump up animation has to have his muscles ripple when he forces himself upwards... sigh.

J. McNair @ Sep 7th 2006 5:38PM

@ Ryan:

No, it wouldn't RUIN your belief in a world populated by (and I quote) "dragons, giants, pixies, tingles, talking animals, giant enemy crabs, etc".

It would ENHANCE your suspension of DISBELIEF. Almost EVERY creature on your list is based on either a modified or scaled human or animal anatomy.

Guess what? Mammals, fish, birds, amphibians and reptiles have muscles too. Many art director for many projects using CG want their characters in their world to be as living as those in this one. Whether they're shooting for absolute realism (mind the uncanny valley..I hear it's deep) or stylized realism, better movement = more believable characters. Muscle-based character animation would do nothing but reward the extra work with a more convincing living and breathing world.

I just wish for it to be combined with existing techniques like inverse-kinematics and motion capture.

Makes me also wonder if this might be accelerated using next-gen physics engines?

--JM

refinedsugar @ Sep 7th 2006 5:26PM

lol, wrong movie Lone Starr. The pix is from Commando.

Lone Starr @ Sep 7th 2006 5:28PM

@ refinedsugar

lol, i know. it's just that any picture of arnold makes me recall that fantastic line.

AoE @ Sep 7th 2006 9:07PM

I loved this line: "When we ask an artist to do more quality [animations] it forces them to become doctors."

Welcome to the club 3d artists, glad you could join us :)
As any character illustrator/painter will tell you, learning the underlying anatomy (muscles/bones) is the very first step in becoming a halfway decent character artist. Soon you'll know where the infraspinatus is located too ;)