How far do we want graphics to advance?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Enjoy the tread....
So this is the Matrix....
quick somebody upload me a MJOLNIR Mk6 and a MA5B, pref with with inf. Ammo please
 
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/118/1182471p1.html

Technology company AMD (supplier of graphics hardware for the Xbox 360) is claiming that the Xbox 360's successor will be capable of producing the kind of visual detail seen in James Cameron's Avatar, as reported on examiner.com via the August issue of Official Xbox Magazine US.

Cramming the kind of technology it took to render every frame of the eyeball-searing Avatar into a console within the next year or so sounds impossible, but AMD is claiming the next Xbox will launch with this within reach.

AMD would not confirm it was actually working on the next Xbox but director of ISV relationships at AMD, Neal Robison, has said that gamers have a lot to be excited about. Beyond visual fidelity Robison claims that the AI and physics capabilities of the next generation will allow for every pedestrian in an open-world title like GTA or Saints Row to be an individual character with a unique personality. This would mean NPCs would react in a whole host of new and different ways to in-game actions.

Of course, this is far from the first time this sort of hyperbole has been tossed out into the public. Gamers have been teased with promises of Toy Story graphics for the PS2 and Toy Story 2 graphics for the original Xbox before.

Well, they appear to be working on it.
 
Honestly? I would say the best possible thing would be graphics that are as real as they can get to be equal to real life. Better yet, the ability to literally be the main character of the game. Kind of like in the movie Gamebox 1.0 or something resembling the combat training rooms in Ender's Game where they had the suits that disabled their limb(s) that got "shot." Basically you use your real person to interact in-game with everything and so on. But something like that is not possible in the short-term future, it seems.

So in today's world with today's technology, the graphics need to take hints from what they were a few years ago to improve now. As an example, in Reach, Homefront (and with this I disregard every horrible aspect of the game, and only use it as support for what follows), L.A. Noire, and probably many more recent games, the problem is the interactable models just plain stand out and glow. Its like the old school cartoons/animations where the only objects that would change position on-screen would be a more vivid color than the objects that were left untouched. It's just as enhanced visuals of the game world are developed problems like that can arise. Relating to my statement at the beginning of this paragraph (and I'm probably contradicting myself from earlier here), games used to have graphics where things like dropped guns fell into the environment and looked like they belong there, but now when a weapon is dropped and hits the ground it just appears straight out of place.

Finally, the fact is, as graphics improve to be better and better, whatever there are problems with now will just look even worse and stick out even more. It's like washing a dirty car then leaving a circle in the center unclean. Like improve the detail of a forest to be hyper-realistic, then omit the properties of that scenic pond in the foreground (the complex stuff like surface tension, mixing with debris at the shoreline, and actual wetness of whatever the water touches, or even the fact that water splashes); you will have major problems there and a true eyesore. There are many things that could be improved now before we move on to real-life graphics in videogames, and if said details are imminent, I am much happier returning to my 2007-era (or around that timeframe) games and their graphics, for the simple reason that though they aren't better than today and they aren't as hideous as those before their time, everything is balanced at the same stage of ugly so that it all fits nicely.

But that's just my ambiguous, multi-directional opinion.
 
Honestly? I would say the best possible thing would be graphics that are as real as they can get to be equal to real life. Better yet, the ability to literally be the main character of the game. Kind of like in the movie Gamebox 1.0 or something resembling the combat training rooms in Ender's Game where they had the suits that disabled their limb(s) that got "shot." Basically you use your real person to interact in-game with everything and so on. But something like that is not possible in the short-term future, it seems.

So in today's world with today's technology, the graphics need to take hints from what they were a few years ago to improve now. As an example, in Reach, Homefront (and with this I disregard every horrible aspect of the game, and only use it as support for what follows), L.A. Noire, and probably many more recent games, the problem is the interactable models just plain stand out and glow. Its like the old school cartoons/animations where the only objects that would change position on-screen would be a more vivid color than the objects that were left untouched. It's just as enhanced visuals of the game world are developed problems like that can arise. Relating to my statement at the beginning of this paragraph (and I'm probably contradicting myself from earlier here), games used to have graphics where things like dropped guns fell into the environment and looked like they belong there, but now when a weapon is dropped and hits the ground it just appears straight out of place.

Finally, the fact is, as graphics improve to be better and better, whatever there are problems with now will just look even worse and stick out even more. It's like washing a dirty car then leaving a circle in the center unclean. Like improve the detail of a forest to be hyper-realistic, then omit the properties of that scenic pond in the foreground (the complex stuff like surface tension, mixing with debris at the shoreline, and actual wetness of whatever the water touches, or even the fact that water splashes); you will have major problems there and a true eyesore. There are many things that could be improved now before we move on to real-life graphics in videogames, and if said details are imminent, I am much happier returning to my 2007-era (or around that timeframe) games and their graphics, for the simple reason that though they aren't better than today and they aren't as hideous as those before their time, everything is balanced at the same stage of ugly so that it all fits nicely.

But that's just my ambiguous, multi-directional opinion.

Thats a good opininn! lol
 
Thats a good opininn! lol
Ha ha thanks! For a while there I thought I had wasted so much time to write something that ended up seeming to be left unread.

Oh and I didn't look up a lot into that infinite detail, but it is a pretty great concept they have. Do you know if it supports animation yet? Because that seems like it would be a major issue, what with the need to connect each vertex to each other then adding complex movements and bounds to each one.
 
Ha ha thanks! For a while there I thought I had wasted so much time to write something that ended up seeming to be left unread.

Oh and I didn't look up a lot into that infinite detail, but it is a pretty great concept they have. Do you know if it supports animation yet? Because that seems like it would be a major issue, what with the need to connect each vertex to each other then adding complex movements and bounds to each one.

I was wondering if they had done any animation with it as well. I haven't seen any :(
 
sorry for the late findings of this thread but anyways
well my opinion on this topic is that yes, really good graphics will be cool but once we get photo realistic graphics in a VR game i dont think it will be too good because, if you think, games today already pull at our emotions and indulge us into the world and what not, so imagine if your pulled into the world its all around you, you can only see and hear whats in this game and as you advance into the game you get emotionally involved, as this world seems very real , so if a character dies i think some people will be emotionally effected by this, so i think keeping graphics not so real will give a gamer the chance to realize that its not reality and its just a video game
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top