| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Gameplay anyone? | |
Once graphics can't go any further, gameplay with be the only factor. The Golden Age :D | |
Here's hoping that gameplay isn't left in the dust for these visual developments... | |
And multiplayer, actors, and story line spring too mind. | |
It's exciting isn't it, finally we shall have meaningful games again! | |
Well, Epic and other graphics engine companies are going to have to come up with a way to make modeling characters and objects in these new graphics easier, or dev costs will go through the crumbling, twisted frame that was once a roof. | |
I think it's interesting that anyone in the games industry is still talking about photo-realistic graphics when 3D animation studios--always ahead of the curve in graphics technology since they have much lower framerate requirements--seem to have rejected the idea years ago. What's the difference? | |
Well, in the field of motion capture, the uncanny valley has already been crossed as far as film is concerned. So I'd say 10-15 years is actually a bit too conservative. I don't understand what he means by not 'feeling real' though. You can't --have-- photorealism without the feeling of realness. They're inherently tied together. That's why the term "uncanny valley" exists in the first place - so you have a way to describe something that is close-but-no-cigar. Not only that, but I seriously doubt that, in ten years, we won't have a way to mimic realistic motion and facial animation in realtime. Like I said, it's already happened in non-realtime CG houses. The jump to games is nowhere near a decade off. Maybe five. Maybe even three. On the other hand, the path to creating Strong AI is far, faaar away. Much further than 15 or even 30 years, at the rate we're going. | |
But whose going to pay for modeling 1,400 polygons on the fingernail of a generic medieval shopkeep? | |
I relly hope that companies will put gameplay first not graphic because if someone makes a game that looks the best humanly (or computerly) possible and leve the gameplay in the dust then why make a game, go make a movie. Take Half-Life 2, i mean come on, admit it, the graphics could have been better but thats not the point, it was the best single-player game i've ever played. seiriosly, take gameplay into affect befor graphics, gameplay trumps graphics every way | |
Screw multiplayer. A photo realistic game with good voicing, gameplay and story will be amazing. | |
If at least half of the money right now being spent on graphics was spent on gameplay, think what could be accomplished? | |
no no no! I wasnt stories about games with amazing stories, games that stories blow you away with excitement, sorrow or joy. | |
With photo realism the chances are a lot of actors are going to want to get in on it. As Andy Serkis did with Heavenly Sword. | |
I think it comes down to creating convincing animations in real time. We can create static images that are indistinguishable from reality (PhotoShop, anyone?), and we can use mo-cap and post-production tricks to create convincing animations in films, but doing it in real time is an altogether different beast. Watch your character run up a flight of stairs in a typical third-person game, and you'll notice that we have a ways to go on even the most basic animations. When it comes to complicated stuff like facial expressions and body language, it's going to take a long time before it's completely seamless. | |
Photo-realism? Sounds neat. | |
Show me photorealism in a movie before you start forecasting photorealism in videogames. Thanks. | |
Heh...you've already been shown. You just didn't notice ;) | |
10-15 years away...for Epic maybe. | |
Well said. | |
Thank you, now I regret being born 20 years ago :/ | |
I thought that the cap of polygons was equal to the amount of pixels available on screen? I'll revise my graphic notes tonight then. (did you know the same amount of pixels in Unreal Tournament 3 characters were used to create a level in Unreal Tournament 2004? O.o) What about Uncanney Valley? He sure hasn't forgetton about that, "They have to feel human". Not only that, but when something seems too realistic in our mind we notice the tiny flaws that makes it unrealistic, and thus the image is shattered. He also said that we still have to create the algorithms to achieve it, something which I can say will be hard to do, I'd imagine. If we can predict the human brain and put an algorithm to cater to it to create realistic humans, then I'd say GAI (General Artificial Intelligence) wouldn't be far off. | |
Epic can do it because their: Epic | |
They said 8 years ago that we'd have graphics like that today. Not holding my breath | |
I don't want games to look realistic, it'll make it easier to blame games for things. | |
So it looks real, heh, real is what I see outside. Not to sound hateful of realism but I prefer stylization mainly because of the Uncanny Valley which has been getting a lot of attention on this thread. If you know a character isn't realistically human it's human characteristics stand out and makes them more aesthetically pleasing. If a character is trying to be photo-realistic and human but it doesn't exactly make it, the non-human characteristics stand out and viewers won't like it. | |
Meh. Who needs photo-realism? What will it really bring to a game? Give me a great game, and I won't care that the graphics are dated. I still play lots of old games, for me the "golden age" was the 90s. What I'd prefer is the current engines being used to their full potential, and then extra work on scripting, characterization, animation and so on. | |
No, everyone else will do it far sooner. I say by 2015, we'll have roughly half the games being photorealistic. Whether this affects movement or not in the problems in the uncanny valley will probably be more difficult. An of course, we now have to point at Heavy Rain - less than a year. | |
I just hope that the industry doesn't forget to make completely unrealistic games as well. I know it probably won't happen, but I'm a bit wary of the prospect of not having a new Psychonauts or something. | |
The Resident Evil 5 cutscenes are better looking and more realistic than anything I've seen shown for Heavy Rain. I suppose the biggest difference between the two is that Heavy Rain constantly looks that good, whereas the in game graphics for RE5 aren't as fine as the cutscenes (although I'd say it is one of the best looking games out there). | |
I don't think I like that, I hate seeing human actors in cutscenes, I hope they just set it at the final fantasy 13 cutscene graphics and leave it, I like that animated image. When they make violent games photo realistic, we are going to cop a shitstorm from the murders that will be blamed on video games. | |
Keeping in mind the current trends of gaming, I cannot wait to play these new, photorealistic games on my 32,000 dollar computer, after paying 745 dollars for the game at walmart (On Sale!). the gaame's 32 minute campaign will be well worth it. | |
It will be a glorious time to be alive. :D | |
Really? Heavy Rain is still right in the middle of the uncanny valley for me. It doesn't look photorealistic at all. | |
| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Extra Punctuation
Experienced Points
MovieBob: Intermission
First Person
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Loading Time
Hexproof
Ask Dr Mark
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
The Darkness II Review
Reckoning Review
Exodus Review
Final Fantasy XIII-2 Review
Scarygirl Review
Amy Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
Epic: Photo-Realistic Graphics 10-15 Years Away
Games are only 10-15 years away from truly realistic graphics, says Epic's Tim Sweeney, but making games look real isn't enough. They have to feel real, too.
Assuming you aren't already in your twilight years or haven't contracted pig flu, you'll probably live to see graphics in games achieve genuine photo-realism, according to Epic Games' Tim Sweeney.
"We'll certainly see that happen in our lifetimes," Sweeney, who said true realism is "only about a factor of a thousand away," remarked. "It's just a result of Moore's Law. Probably 10-15 years or that stuff, which isn't far at all. Which is scary."
Scary in the sense that we'll be able to generate virtual people who actually look like people, inevitably paving the way for the destruction of the human race by Cylons/Terminators/etc, right? Well, not entirely. As Sweeney sees it, even if games look completely real, they're not necessarily going to feel that way.
Things that require "simulating human intelligence or behavior" like animation, conversations and more, are "really cheesy" in games right now, and it's going to be some time before technology can convincingly replicate the intricacies of the human body. "We simulate character facial animation using tens of bones and facial controls, but in the body, you have thousands," Sweeney said. "It turns out we've evolved to recognize those things with extraordinary detail, so we're far short of being able to simulate that."
Sweeney said that even if we had infinitely powerful computers, we'd still run into problems since "we don't know how the brain works or how to simulate it." Before truly realistic graphics can exist, he explained, developers would have to "simulate the brain and nervous system" on a computer. Now that sounds a little bit more like the end of the human race than Gears of War with super realistic graphics.
[Via Gamasutra]
Permalink