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.
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.
Then I suppose you wouldn't mind if all the surrounding buildings or environment in movies were just cardboard cut-outs? I mean, your focus is only on the main characters right? I doubt real buildings will enhance the movie at all, no one even looks at them.
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.
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.
Then I suppose you wouldn't mind if all the surrounding buildings or environment in movies were just cardboard cut-outs? I mean, your focus is only on the main characters right? I doubt real buildings will enhance the movie at all, no one even looks at them.
Honestly, yes but that's not the point. The point is that graphics were already good enough. Now they're introducing something that's probably gonna be a lot more work when it's obviously unncessary.
[16:04] pixelman: I'm imaging exploring Mirkwood right now. I'm a hobbit... and giant spiders are falling out of the trees. The moonlight's shining through the leaves and reflecting off the water... mmmm~ [16:05] pixelman: Of course that's too close to real life to be enjoyable.
Imagine how long it would take to choose/color every single polygon. Or even make the shape itself. Now, it's cool, but each game would require like its own hard drive or ten disks. Also imagine the pricing on this. I thought Shenmue was expensive.
SPREAD THE JOY OF THE GREAT TURTLE
HE IS UPON US AND WILL TAKE US TO THE GREAT WAVE
JOIN THE COURT OF TURTLES AND BE REDEEMED THE COURT OF TURTLES
Though again, you can do some cool sand effects. Like play as a man with a shovel, you get some realistic shoveling. Or water... instead of the game picking up presets amount, you pick up w.e you want. Good Pikmin mechanics when plucking.
I don't think the next generation of console development will be about the graphics anyway. The next gen consoles will be significantly more powerful, but for doing different, cool things - better AI, bigger worlds, more reactive, rather than linear stories, better online and social features.
There are heaps of ways consoles can get morempowerful, but visuals aren't one of those, I believe.
I thought the whole point of video games was to get away from reality not get closer to it
Who said these have to be perfectly real graphics? Imagine fantasy games where the artists have complete freedom. They could produce something that looked exactly like this, or this. All this means is unlimited freedom for the artist.
I don't think the next generation of console development will be about the graphics anyway. The next gen consoles will be significantly more powerful, but for doing different, cool things - better AI, bigger worlds, more reactive, rather than linear stories, better online and social features.
There are heaps of ways consoles can get morempowerful, but visuals aren't one of those, I believe.
I certainly hope you're right. That's something I could get behind.
Forums
Topic: The next leap in gaming graphics?
Posts 41 to 59 of 59
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.