SlyTF1 wrote:Because I hate fully CGI movies!
And you are but one out of millions of moviegoers. Besides, while done in full CGI, such movies as Beowulf
, The Polar Express
, and even that awful Mars Needs Moms
movie had such brilliant CGI that at times looked more like live action than not.
And, since that is used to hush people who didn't like the Transformers movies, it is a perfectly applicable response here.
The movies you mention were flops, but from my understanding, it wasn't because of the CGI. Only one I saw was Beowulf, and the cgi was not what was wrong with that film, I will tell you.
Sabrblade wrote:Also, it IS possible to diminish the complexity of the robot designs for live action CGI and have them still look good. Just look at this video. These are the G1 designs, yet these CG models (with some slight modifications to look a tad bit more realistic)
OMFG THIS IS NOT G1!!!!!!!!!
But, idiocy aside, I think it stupid to believe that the live action designs are utterly unsustainable without an overkill of complexity. Having no engineering credentials to my name, I still would bet that Bayverse Prime would look believable if you didn't seen a whole bunch of spinning gears in his shoulder during a close up. I think that at some point we have to see the uber-complexity as being designers and animators kind of showing off their skills to some extent, which is completely fine. Kind of like "Hey, look at how many moving parts we can animate at once!" And I am not saying that isn't cool, just that I doubt it's totally necessary. So I think the designs could be simplified a little if the situation called for it.