[Thanks, Crimson_Ryan!]
Thatgamecompany's Flower recreated in LittleBigPlanet 2
by Griffin McElroy 
on Oct 10th 2010 9:00PM
72
[Thanks, Crimson_Ryan!]
Reader Comments (72)
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:03PM dnelson1025 said
pretty neat, using one game to create another
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 12:38AM That Burning Sensation said
@dnelson1025 '
Yeah but can you make a FPS!
Reply
Yeah but can you make a FPS!
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 12:28PM richardoswald said
@That Burning Sensation Yes. Yes you can! Can't wait! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwsKb-M-Atk
Reply
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 2:03PM Misfit Toy said
@BrianReal
I don't even see the code anymore. All I see is blonde, brunette, red-head...
Reply
I don't even see the code anymore. All I see is blonde, brunette, red-head...
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:04PM Snappyguy said
Very cool level. Amazing to play.
If anyone is wondering, that is just the background coming forwards, not the "player" going into the scene.
If anyone is wondering, that is just the background coming forwards, not the "player" going into the scene.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:06PM dnelson1025 said
pretty neat, using one game to make another
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:07PM ZigmaTheEliminator said
How the hell...
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:09PM Bjork said
I like the changing environment. But right now, the game-play here seems pretty slow compared to the actual Flower game. The fact that the concept is actually being recreated in LBP2 is something else, though!
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:10PM den69 said
Don't mean to be picky but would be cool if it got faster the more petals you collect.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:21PM Jacksy said
Pretty amazing :D
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 1:22AM ChuckBartowskiX said
@CaptainProtonX
Read that in the voice of your avatar.
Reply
Read that in the voice of your avatar.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 2:33AM Mike Sylvester said
@ChuckBartowskiX Beats the script for Lords of Shadow.
Reply
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:24PM Swizzler said
dammit I hate depth of field in games. Anything more than a foot away from you becomes HORRIBLY HORRIBLY blurry. Do the people who write the depth of field stuff for the game engine have horrible vision or something? Stuff doesn't normally get blurry for me until 100+ feet, and I wear thick glasses!
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:37PM shadowskill11 said
@Swizzler So... you are mad because you are visually disabled and most people do not?
Reply
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:52PM CleanUndies said
@Swizzler
ummm.... This is a side scrolling game to begin with. so depth of field is relative. LBP isn't a game that requires much depth of field. Not sure what other game you are talking about because MOST games now days, even the bad ones, have good Depth of field. maybe its time to get a new TV or HDMI cable or Eyes your choice...
Reply
ummm.... This is a side scrolling game to begin with. so depth of field is relative. LBP isn't a game that requires much depth of field. Not sure what other game you are talking about because MOST games now days, even the bad ones, have good Depth of field. maybe its time to get a new TV or HDMI cable or Eyes your choice...
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:28PM sonicspike41 said
@CleanUndies
http://www.cubed3.com/media/2010/September/resirev10.jpg
http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/thumb/2/2e/Depth_of_field.jpg/700px-Depth_of_field.jpg
Reply
http://www.cubed3.com/media/2010/September/resirev10.jpg
http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/thumb/2/2e/Depth_of_field.jpg/700px-Depth_of_field.jpg
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 3:12AM Hyperion45 said
@sonicspike41 You do realize that if you focus on something in the foreground of your vision, everything in the background -does- actually get blurry/distorted? Hold your hand a foot away from your face, and a foot away from a surface (your computer screen will do). Now focus on your hand so that you can see the lines on your palm clearly. Now use your peripherals to look at the computer screen (don't change your focus from your hand to the screen). See how that works? Now focus on the screen and use your peripherals to look at your hand. Same thing. Now look at the pictures you posted. Now realize that they have nothing to do with the whole depth of field they are arguing about. Congratulations, you just learned a little bit more about your own eyesight.
Reply
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 4:44AM Extinction said
@sonicspike41 Screenshot 1 was a cutscene, 2 was a menu. Not in game
Reply
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 7:25AM (Unverified) said
@Hyperion45 Look at your screen. That back at me. Now at your screen. Now back at me. Sadly, your screen isn't me.
Reply
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 1:00PM ferret said
@sonicspike41
in addition to the other things being said, depth of field is, beyond actual eyesight issues, a technique both films and games use to draw the viewers attention to a specific item. Is it important for the viewer to see something in the background? Focus on it.
By focusing on one thing, that implies a lack of focus on others.
Reply
in addition to the other things being said, depth of field is, beyond actual eyesight issues, a technique both films and games use to draw the viewers attention to a specific item. Is it important for the viewer to see something in the background? Focus on it.
By focusing on one thing, that implies a lack of focus on others.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 3:21PM sonicspike41 said
@Hyperion45
I know how eyesight works in regards to focus. I'm quite capable of adjusting my focus without the use of other objects (like my hands or feet). I can even adjust my focus so that it's in between two objects (focusing on the empty air space between them). So yeah, I know about focus.
My point was simply that sometimes developers tend to overdo the depth of field in games so that it looks unreal, such as the RE 3DS shot. It's too pronounced and, at least for me, draws attention TOWARDS the out of focus/blurry object. That seems like the opposite of what they were going for.
Also, when focusing on an object closer to me/farther from me than another object, the second object doesn't get as blurry as it gets doubled (seeing two barely blurry copies of the background/foreground). That's another reason DOF in games bothers me, it can (such as my second screenshot) draw focus to the right areas (the gun) but it still looks unrealistic since the background doesn't double.
Reply
I know how eyesight works in regards to focus. I'm quite capable of adjusting my focus without the use of other objects (like my hands or feet). I can even adjust my focus so that it's in between two objects (focusing on the empty air space between them). So yeah, I know about focus.
My point was simply that sometimes developers tend to overdo the depth of field in games so that it looks unreal, such as the RE 3DS shot. It's too pronounced and, at least for me, draws attention TOWARDS the out of focus/blurry object. That seems like the opposite of what they were going for.
Also, when focusing on an object closer to me/farther from me than another object, the second object doesn't get as blurry as it gets doubled (seeing two barely blurry copies of the background/foreground). That's another reason DOF in games bothers me, it can (such as my second screenshot) draw focus to the right areas (the gun) but it still looks unrealistic since the background doesn't double.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 3:39PM CleanUndies said
@sonicspike41
"sense the background doesnt double"?????????? Imagine how that would actually look in a game... you should be able to see for yourself how dumb of an idea that would be.
the images you linked are using a technique called "Rack Focus" (not the focus you get from looking at a nice set of tits...) Googe it!!!
Reply
"sense the background doesnt double"?????????? Imagine how that would actually look in a game... you should be able to see for yourself how dumb of an idea that would be.
the images you linked are using a technique called "Rack Focus" (not the focus you get from looking at a nice set of tits...) Googe it!!!
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 10:30PM sonicspike41 said
@CleanUndies
Dumb? How so? If adding DOF is so important because it adds to the realism of what ours eyes normally do, why is it dumb to take it a step further and make it even more realistic?
Hold your hand a few inches from your face, star at it, and tell me the background isn't doubled.
Reply
Dumb? How so? If adding DOF is so important because it adds to the realism of what ours eyes normally do, why is it dumb to take it a step further and make it even more realistic?
Hold your hand a few inches from your face, star at it, and tell me the background isn't doubled.
Posted: Oct 12th 2010 5:14AM CleanUndies said
@sonicspike41
yes it does have double effect thats really cool. Now do this; go out and get a gun, hold it in your hand about waist high. Do you see your gun like you do on an fps, i'm thinking not. my point is, that there is a line that you have to draw between absolute realism and games that are fun to play and easy to pick up. This double effect idea IS DUMB!!!! there is no point to it when Rack Focus works and people feel the immersion.
Reply
yes it does have double effect thats really cool. Now do this; go out and get a gun, hold it in your hand about waist high. Do you see your gun like you do on an fps, i'm thinking not. my point is, that there is a line that you have to draw between absolute realism and games that are fun to play and easy to pick up. This double effect idea IS DUMB!!!! there is no point to it when Rack Focus works and people feel the immersion.
Posted: Oct 12th 2010 11:07AM sonicspike41 said
@CleanUndies
If I held a gun, or any object, at my waist I would be able to see the gun being held at my side. It wouldn't be quite as pronounced as in most FPS games, but isn't that where blurring the gun would come into play?
The RE shot doesn't use Rack Focus, since rack focus is a film technique "where focus is changed while shooting". You can't change the focus, while shooting, in a still screenshot.
Your reasons seem to be "We don't need to be real all the time, and I think this is dumb, so it should never be used ever by anyone because I think it's worthless."
Reply
If I held a gun, or any object, at my waist I would be able to see the gun being held at my side. It wouldn't be quite as pronounced as in most FPS games, but isn't that where blurring the gun would come into play?
The RE shot doesn't use Rack Focus, since rack focus is a film technique "where focus is changed while shooting". You can't change the focus, while shooting, in a still screenshot.
Your reasons seem to be "We don't need to be real all the time, and I think this is dumb, so it should never be used ever by anyone because I think it's worthless."
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:25PM Enigma7ic said
Looks pretty lame compared to the actual game, but I like that it shows how LBP2 has more than just 3 levels of depth...
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:28PM TheTARDIS said
The developers weren't kidding when they said they wanted to create something that would be remembered forever. If this is the kinda thing you can make...wow. What's next?
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 9:39PM hxczuner said
@ben linus I don't understand why this comment was downvoted....
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:00PM Surfaced said
LET ME INTO THIS DAMN BETA
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:10PM CrimsonRyan said
I love this game and I haven't even played it yet.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:13PM saturn118 said
The only problem I have about LBP is its community. No matter how much they improve the tools available the community will always mainly focus on recreating other games. The levels will be impressive but their appeal always wears off within minutes. In the end, why would I want to play a bad remake rather than the original.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:29PM soypancho said
@saturn118
It's proof of concept man. These are tech demos showing what LBP2 and it's community is capable of in terms the average Joystiq reader can understand.
If you're genuinely concerned about the lack of originality, read this-
http://www.lbpcentral.com/forums/content.php?200-Creator-Spotlight-17-Teebonesy
Reply
It's proof of concept man. These are tech demos showing what LBP2 and it's community is capable of in terms the average Joystiq reader can understand.
If you're genuinely concerned about the lack of originality, read this-
http://www.lbpcentral.com/forums/content.php?200-Creator-Spotlight-17-Teebonesy
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:18PM KiraXD said
@hxczuner
because he should have bought it instead of gameshared it.
because he should have bought it instead of gameshared it.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 12:05AM Ausohoj said
@ben linus
I now want to punch you n the face for a few reasons.
1. You gameshare, which i don't see the point of and hate
2. You wrongly replied to someone (if this reply goes somewhere other than where it intended, I will punch myself in the face)
3. You say flower, what I believe to be the greatest game ever made, is $10 too much. It's actually $60 too less.
Reply
I now want to punch you n the face for a few reasons.
1. You gameshare, which i don't see the point of and hate
2. You wrongly replied to someone (if this reply goes somewhere other than where it intended, I will punch myself in the face)
3. You say flower, what I believe to be the greatest game ever made, is $10 too much. It's actually $60 too less.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 5:19AM Premature ejaculation man said
@Ausohoj
I'd rather have the option of gameshare than to not have it like on Xbox :(
Reply
I'd rather have the option of gameshare than to not have it like on Xbox :(
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 10:24PM Sly C said
holy wow
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 11:05PM 343 Guilty Fart said
This is just fantastic.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 11:07PM lenandude said
Wow! Its going to be awesome to play remakes of games on LBP 2. I can't wait to get this game and see what I can do with the creation tools. I'm sure I couldn't make anything like that, but now I have more options to make a cool level. Or levels.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 11:12PM (Unverified) said
LBP2, making crappier versions of established games.
Posted: Oct 10th 2010 11:23PM TraceurRyuk Prepping for LBP2 said
@(Unverified)
Except that you can make anything you want, not just already established games.
Reply
Except that you can make anything you want, not just already established games.
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 2:07AM Enigma7ic said
@TraceurRyuk Prepping for LBP2
Except that if it's anything like the original LBP, the gameplay part will suck. It may look cool, but playing is a whole 'nother beast, and from what I've seen, MM hasn't exactly fixed any of it (although I'm not even sure that they can)
Reply
Except that if it's anything like the original LBP, the gameplay part will suck. It may look cool, but playing is a whole 'nother beast, and from what I've seen, MM hasn't exactly fixed any of it (although I'm not even sure that they can)
Posted: Oct 11th 2010 4:32AM soypancho said
@(Unverified)
MM- Hey gamers, we're gonna make this incredible creation tool that lets anyone make polished, awesome games on a current gen console. You don't need to know any programming language, we'll distribute it for you for free, and forget paying thousands for a dev kit, we'll hand it over for $60.
Joystiq readers- http://pawatercooler.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/crying_baby.jpg
Reply
MM- Hey gamers, we're gonna make this incredible creation tool that lets anyone make polished, awesome games on a current gen console. You don't need to know any programming language, we'll distribute it for you for free, and forget paying thousands for a dev kit, we'll hand it over for $60.
Joystiq readers- http://pawatercooler.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/crying_baby.jpg
Featured Stories
Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma
Posted on May 25th 2012 3:30PM