Ingame conversion of Replay videos to usual video formats.

[Eagle]

Heya guys!

I wanted to know if in the future, it would be possible to convert replay videos from the game in more usual formats like avi, mp4, flv etc... Quake 3 had a really good system for that. (get into the replay and use a command to start converting/exporting the sequence into a different format)

Anyway, i think the title tells everything already. ^^

I know there's some things more important than that, it was just an idea... It would avoid using fraps over the replay or in game to record an uglier version of the sequence..

Ninja! *smoke ball*

[HornetMaX]

It would avoid using fraps over the replay or in game to record an uglier version of the sequence..

I see the point but whatever GPB will do, it won't be any better looking (assuming the same bitrate in the final video).

Video compression is video compression, not a lot of magic around these days ...

MaX.

[Eagle]

Screen recorders would decrease fps and quality when recording. But not this.

On q3, i could make 720p/30fps videos with this system instead of 360p/16fps with fraps over the game. It was extremely useful and i'm sure it can be for a lot of peoples here.

- Everyone will be able to make good quality videos (even low configs)

- Easier way than the replay>screen recorder + ugly quality> convert to lighter formats for the upload

[HornetMaX]

Screen recorders would decrease fps and quality when recording. But not this.

On q3, i could make 720p/30fps videos with this system instead of 360p/16fps with fraps over the game. It was extremely useful and i'm sure it can be for a lot of peoples here.

- Everyone will be able to make good quality videos (even low configs)

- Easier way than the replay>screen recorder + ugly quality> convert to lighter formats for the upload

Quality wise and in terms of CPU/GPU load (FPS drop) I don't think it makes a significant difference if the encoder is internal in GPB or external (like FRAPS or AfterBurner).
I don't see any reason why it should.

It all depends on the encoder used: some have good quality and good compression, but require a lot of cpu power. Some require less cpu but have less quality and/or less compression.

I don't use FRAPS but I'm farily confident AfterBurner is better (dxtory seems to be good to, bur AfterBurner is free, really free).
If you have a Intel CPU with Intel integrated graphics you can use Quicksync with AfterBurner, which make the work lighter on the CPU.
NVidia has ShadowPlay, AMD has someting similar (depending on how recent the card is).

Anyway, no matter your system no matter the software, live encoding (while gaming) will always generate some FPS loss.
Only way to encode live small impact would be a an external video recorder, something like this (check the products section) : http://gamerzone.avermedia.com/. Even with that, it's not granted you won't have any FPS drop.

The only advantage of what you are proposing is that you would not have to re-watch the replay to encode it. But of course this comes at a price.

MaX.

[Eagle]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-O2UYLZdzU

Config:

CPU: AMD Athlon V120 single 2.2Ghz

GPU: ATI Radeon HD4200

RAM: 3GB DDR3

Screen: 1366x768

Results:

IoQ3 convert to avi: 720p (max for the screen)/26fps

Fraps recording to avi: 360p max (half size)/ 14/19fps

________

When you usually record with a screen recorder (not on high configs), you lower the settings to not have too much fps decrease, here you don't even need to.

Max resolution, fps gain. Clearly better.

Try it on a game q3/ioq3 based.

As for dxstory, it is a bit better than fraps, but needs to be well set.

[HornetMaX]

Uh, I never lower the game res, at worst I lower the recorder res/fps/ quality vs load trade off or compession vs load trade off.

If your game had a better video encoder, they could make quite a lot of money out of it, video encoding is quite a hot topic.
Unless there's some hidden trick which makes the encoder specific to that game, but that would be irrelevant for any other game.

MaX.

[Eagle]

Sometimes it's not enough. As for the encoder, that's what i meant, having similar system as q3 so medias can be exploited at their maximum. Just a though, but it would be cool.

[HornetMaX]

Oh, I may have misunderstood you.

Did you mean that in q3 you have to record a demo while playing, then(quote) "get into the replay and use a command to start converting/exporting the sequence into a different format" ?

So what's the advantage ? That the conversion of (let's say) a 10min replay (from the game internal replay format to a video like .avi/.mkv) does not oblige you to actually waych the 10min of replay (eventually taking less than 10min) ?

MaX.

[Eagle]

Almost right. You got the principle, but for the conversion you have to wait much more than the video length.

I'll start to fully explain how it works in q3.

1. Launch game session.

2. Record with the game's recorder.

3. When you're done with your fabulous media, return to the menu and go in the replay menu to start viewing your video.

4. Just when it starts, open the console and type /video to make the game converts the video from dm_68 (q3 in-game video format) to avi. The video will still play when it converts and the conversion will end only when the video does. Since it's playing and converting at the same time, the video loose speed (to few fps) and makes the conversion pretty long. But the result is more efficient than with a classic game recorder.

5. You have your avi file in a directory of your hdd and is now ready to upload (or maybe another conversion to a more lighter format, this time with a classic converter like format factory).

Seems pretty confusing but it's millions time simpler than it looks.

Usually, you don't stay behind your screen when there's a conversion, so it's up to you to find when you do it.

I hope my bad English didn't strike again.. ><

Ps: q3's in-game recorder is a start/stop button like fraps etc.. but doesn't reduce fps and deliver the exact same quality as when playing. GPB records automatically and seems to be as effective as q3's.

[HornetMaX]

Well, then I'm lost.

How is this more interesting than using AfterBurner ?!?

I really don't get what is the advantage.

MaX.

[Eagle]

AfterBurner isn't really for everyone. Then as i said already, fps and quality gain. I'm sure it can have it's effect on big configs too. Real 1080p (or more) + 60fps ? (if it's for uploading on youtube, it'll be lowered to 30 fps anyway...) No needs to lower the graphic settings of the game or the recorder.

And since gpbikes is recording automaticaly, you would just have to go in the video and type the command. Done.

[HornetMaX]

AfterBurner isn't really for everyone.

Why ?! 

Then as i said already, fps and quality gain. I'm sure it can have it's effect on big configs too. Real 1080p (or more) + 60fps ? (if it's for uploading on youtube, it'll be lowered to 30 fps anyway...) No needs to lower the graphic settings of the game or the recorder.

And why would you care about FPS in reply mode ? It doesn't really matter unless it's falling to ridiculous levels.

Quality wise, AfterBurner and Fraps can give all the quality that you want, including lossless formats (i.e. exactly what you see in the replay), if you have enough disk space and write speed.

You can't judge quality from the video you posted: that game has prehistoric graphics, textures are extremely uniform, ...

And since gpbikes is recording automaticaly, you would just have to go in the video and type the command. Done.

GPB (like any game, including q3) is recording a demo file: that's not a video file.
With AfterBurner (or Fraps) you'd just go in the replay, start it and click ctrl+whatever: how is that more complicate ?!

MaX.

[Eagle]

Why ?! 

Was that what you were referring to ? http://gaming.msi.com/features/afterburner

Good luck to keep that program running and recording while playing.. :|

And why would you care about FPS in reply mode ? It doesn't really matter unless it's falling to ridiculous levels.

Quality wise, AfterBurner and Fraps can give all the quality that you want, including lossless formats (i.e. exactly what you see in the replay), if you have enough disk space and write speed.

You can't judge quality from the video you posted: that game has prehistoric graphics, textures are extremely uniform, ...

Think about smaller configs, not everybody have 1k$ computers.. And i'm sure there would be a gain for high config as well.

Any screen recorder can't rise the graphics better than how it is in game already, so recording with better graphics IG and without any tweaks from the recorder would be useful yea. Plus, lossless quality have a price of ressources... (and i was talking about a converter at the beginning, not a recorder..)

As for the game

1. It is from 2000

2. It wasn't an official map.

3. There can be hd textures or not, it won't be different. There's shaders used in this map btw. (i have set low mipmap and no texture filtering, so it could render more beautiful than that.)

GPB (like any game, including q3) is recording a demo file: that's not a video file.
With AfterBurner (or Fraps) you'd just go in the replay, start it and click ctrl+whatever: how is that more complicate

With fraps etc... When you can't record when playing (due to fps loss), you record the replay. But if you want to have optimal quality and fluidity, a ig converter specialized for the game would be better.

It can be a benefit for everyone, why rejecting an idea like that ? After, there's more important things like the physics completion, tools etc... But i still think it would be useful and something to think about.

[HornetMaX]

Was that what you were referring to ? http://gaming.msi.com/features/afterburner

Good luck to keep that program running and recording while playing.. :|

You're still missing the key point: you don't need to use it while playing !!
GPB records the replay while playing (always): after that, you go in replay mode and use AfterBurner (just like the q3 integrated thing).

It can be a benefit for everyone, why rejecting an idea like that ?

Because it brings nothing, unless I'm missing something.

If your config is able to encode while watching a q3 replay, then it is also able to use AfterBurner while watching a q3 replay.

Same goes for GPB. The fact the capture and encoder is external has only a minimal overhead.
Integrated capture and encoding will give marginal gains (for the same encoding algorithm, of course).

MaX.

[Eagle]

Q3 has an internal converter, which doesn't reduce quality and fluidity (with my old config, it went down to 26 fps when converting, but considering youtube limits to 30, the loss is very minor, but again, old game + old config, gpb can surelly do better), that's the point. :|

If your config is able to encode while watching a q3 replay, then it is also able to use AfterBurner while watching a q3 replay.

Does AfterBurner encode a lossless quality without performance issues ? I doubt that.. Plus, afterburner seems to be more than a simple windows with a simple start/stop recorder.

GPB already capture the game seance, no needs to capture it once again adding recorders' problem, THEN converting it to another format.

An internal converter and maybe the possibility for few formats would be more useful and easy to use than using few others programs over and after the game.