Topic: The next leap in gaming graphics?

I like that they're dong this and all, but what i want is a realistic first-person perspective. Like blinking, focus effects, cross-eyes drool

This isn't just about realism, guys, for all of you who are saying games don't need to be this realistic. I agree with that sentiment completely, but what this represents is more than making things look like they actually exist. It represents an ability to generate far greater detail, which even in a heavily stylized game is a good thing and something artists can use for ART and not just photorealism. The more detail an artist can put into a game, the more of an emotional impact he or she has the capability of producing. Not that the two are directly related, but more power goes up, so does the possibility for artistic expression.

To put it simply, this doesn't just mean more realistic Call of Duty. This means more detailed Muramasa, Okami, and Zelda.

^^ Actually it doesn't mean more detailed Muramasa, since that was entirely 2D, lol. But Okami and Zelda, yeah. :3

I imagine this has been tried... and failed. You could make a first-person game blink easily... but YOU as the player blink while playing it. The point of the first-person perspective is to become the character. If you're watching him blink without blinking yourself, then you are not HIM, you're just seeing what he does through his eyes. With the way things are, what your eyes focus on, is where the focus of the screen is, just like in life, and when you blink and the world goes black for that split second, is when he blinks and the screen goes black for that split second. In a real, high intensity battle stage, you wouldn't want the game sporadically going black. That could really throw you off and would severely hamper the immersion.

True, haha, you caught me. But you could potentially make a New Super Mario Bros. type of Muramasa with 3D models in 2D gameplay. I don't know how much it would help, but, eh whatever. My point remains.

What's the point of playing games if the graphics look like real life? I want to escape to a fantasy world that does NOT look like real life.

Also, unlimited my tail-end. There is no such thing as unlimited, but these guys sure do love to blow smoke about it

Come on, there are those fantasy games that are manga-styled for the most, and they won't really
clash with OMGZOR rocks and stones IMO.

Who says this can't be used to create a fantasy world? Any kind of game can benefit from detail, realistic or not.

I wasn't thinking about the need games have for this kind of technology, I was just marveling at the fact that we've come so far. Wow. It's amazing, you guys. Please don't make a big deal out of this.

I was playing a G&W game today and thought...... REAL

@TeeJay
You have a good point. Heh, I'll stop, but saying please won't stop the rest of the internet.
I don't mean to put this rudely, but you'll just have to let people do their arguing while you turn your back.

Oooh wow realistic grass and trees.Yawn.

Meh it seems like mostly fluff to me

yawn

blah blah technology cool graphics dude

goes to play Tetris

Minecraft creator Markus 'Notch' Persson declares it a "scam" and a thousand Minecraft fanboys take to the YouTube video page to spam up the comments pages.

But read his post - it says how this sort of technology is unrealistic in practical terms, and that animating thousands of tiny atoms would require outrageous levels of processing power.

I'll be keeping my eye on it though - it can still be developed further.

Um... what.... this is how I thought PS3 and 360 games already looked like! I only have a Wii... I thought the current graphics were better than that.

They are all right as is though. The tree can be blocks but you don't notice those kind of things when you play and helps if there isn't that much so online doesn't lag as much as it could.

Well it is a scam because there is no such thing as "unlimited." There will always be limits

@lz: Obviously it's not completely unlimited, lol. The technology is interesting though... Apparently it works like a search engine (like Google). For instance, if the resolution is 1024x768, they search for that many points and display them on the screen. Because of that I'm guessing that the entire world doesn't need to be loaded in memory and thus renders the number of points all but irrelevant, so in that sense, it's unlimited. At least that's what I read, lol.

Don't forget dirt! Thank God we'll have individually rendered grains of dirt!

I for one am not, and it does look cool. Kudos to them as long as they aint scammin', but personally this tech is beyond me in terms of actual reality in my games if that somehow makes any sense.

What I meant to say was: Do games need this level of detail. Do trees really need to look exactly like trees when you're going to be spending the majority of the game running by them? Do the dirt grains need to be individually rendered? I'm all for artistic impression, but this is a little much, IMO. Polygons worked just fine, I never found myself being less immersed because of them, and I dount I'll be anymore immersed without them.