Abstract
This paper conducts a comparative analysis of transitions generated using the Unity engine. It selects fifteen animations featuring a humanoid character, introduces breaks in marker trajectories, and fills them with transitions generated by the game engine's animator. These transitions are then compared with the unmodified original character animation. The study compares animations by calculating the average deviation in bone rotation and position between the original and generated motion throughout the animation. The results show that the Unity engine excels in generating transitions for slow animations involving the lower body limbs, with the largest errors occurring in the bones at the extremities of the limbs.
Reference17 articles.
1. M. Masuch, N. Röber, Game graphics beyond realism: Then, now and tomorrow, Level UP: digital games research conference (DIGRA), Faculty of Arts, University of Utrecht, 2004, http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/05150.48223.pdf.
2. J.K. Hodgins, J.F. O'Brien, J. Tumblin, Perception of human motion with different geometric models, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 4 (4) (1998) 307-316, https://doi.org/10.1109/2945.765325.
3. M. Oesker, H. Hecht, B. Jung, Psychological Evidence for Unconscious Processing of Detail in Real‐time Animation of Multiple Characters, The Journal of Visualization and Computer Animation 11 (2) (2000) 105-112, https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1778(200005)11:2<105::AID-VIS222>3.0.CO;2-Q.
4. J. Lee, J. Chai, P.S. Reitsma, J.K. Hodgins, N.S. Pollard, Interactive control of avatars animated with human motion data, ACM Transactions on Graphics 21 (3) (2002) 491-500, https://doi.org/10.1145/566654.566607.
5. C. Rose, B. Guenter, B. Bodenheimer, M.F. Cohen, Efficient generation of motion transitions using spacetime constraints, In Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques (1996) 147-154, https://doi.org/10.1145/237170.237229.