4th August 2010, 2:36 AM
This has been an annoyance for a while. The History Channel has a somewhat recent habit of doing CG recreations of historical events. That's all well and good, except the CG is somewhere between N64 and Dreamcast in quality. Even that would be laughable but tolerable except that they advertise this CG in advance as "the latest state of the art computer animation". Liars! Even assuming as they seem to that their audience has no video game players, they have to at least acknowledge that their viewers MAY have seen Lord of the Rings or Star Wars or, heck, even Up (awesome movie by the way). Everyone knows what good CG looks like.
It's an annoyance. Before anyone says "so what, do you expect them to tell the audience their CG sucks in advance?", well, not really. I expect them to either make their CG good enough to match their claims, or to simply not make that claim. Just say you did computer simulations. Still though, considering they (apparently) used Wings3D to make these "recreations", they're clearly on a budget.
It's an annoyance. Before anyone says "so what, do you expect them to tell the audience their CG sucks in advance?", well, not really. I expect them to either make their CG good enough to match their claims, or to simply not make that claim. Just say you did computer simulations. Still though, considering they (apparently) used Wings3D to make these "recreations", they're clearly on a budget.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)