1/4 of the way to Photorealism

yahoo.com/news/tim-sweeney-says-still-years-211951497.html
Well we'll obviously see it in our lifetimes, but the question is when? 2036?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/5ZeHq
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

it will never happen in games, or anything that isnt a walking sim with 3d scanned assets.

its already expensive as fuck to make games look the way they look now and it barely has an effect on sales.

Who cares, honestly?
For movies and animation, I imagine this is very important, but for vidya photo-realism won't actually effect how the game works. It'll just make it look nicer.

I think what's much more interesting is that he points out even with an unlimited ceiling for performance, you still wont see very good looking games because we don't have the tools to do it yet. Kind of like that horrible "look we subdivided the model of a dude's head and there's no more detail!! Increasing poly count does nothing!!"
The name of the game is inverse kinematics, games will look like shit until more progress is made in that field.

I care less and less about photorealism and more about the diminishing quality of gameplay. Fuck graphics. Even normalfags don't care anymore, or at least expect some eyecandy but don't notice more than that.

gameplay has been devolving for almost a fucking decade

and graphics are all going for cinematic piss filters that look fake as shit getting further away from realism


gaming will never ever reach perfection

The biggest obstacle to photorealism is just now starting to become apparent. It's the rasterization method of rendereing. Stacking all the effects needed to approximate reality in a raster environment is actually getting more computationally expensive than just raytracing everything in real time. With subspace diffusion you don't need to worry about light bounces bogging it down, per ray instancing means unlimited draw distance and objects on screen, and raybending can handle physics and animation. You also get free implicit surfaces and complex geometry so tesselation is unnecessary.

Now if only we had a way to search through the millions of voxels that would make up a small scene without reenacting chernobyl.

You don't need voxels for raytracing, you silly goose. It works just fine with any modelling method.

Oh cool, I don't know why I thought you needed voxels. I guess it's just because every recent example I've seen of people pushing ray tracing had voxels. You kind of lose out on the whole graphic fidelity if you're using polygons, though. Unless you had polygons so small they may as well be voxels.

But its really not, the 2000s saw the rise of the Game Engine as a natural response to hardware getting more complex and game budgets rising. the whole point of Game Engines is to lower the cost of development while still allowing your game to have graphics to remain competitive. Dev toolkits take care of a hell of a lot of the work

no fucking thanks. I've been playing Sega Saturn games all fucking day and I'm having the time of my life. Realism can eat my sweaty, sega clenched butthole because I want more good games with more interesting visuals and more fun design.

This obsession with immersion, realism, and simulation is a fucking cancer, and I want to cut it out of the industry. VR should be purged too.

making an AAA game have VHS filters

There's also splines and curved surfaces, which can save enormously on memory use while being arbitrarily complex.

Love me some Sega. I'm really exited about the Saturn drive being cracked. Soon I'll be able to get my isos to load in SSF without sacrificing a virgin.

This is something I so don't understand. I mean indie games with a slightly pretentious premise can have shit filters, but AAA games? why the fuck would they cover the millions of dollars worth of 3D models and textures with shit?

because 80's action movies
making good looking models, models that aren't blocky shit, then add a VHS filter to set the mood for an 80's themed game

you'll have more fun with an original xbox and its complete library than having every high end PC game playable at perfect framerates and top visual quality for eternity.

On Unreal Shit games if you disbale the filters by force everything looks so much better, its unbelieavable someone would look at that and thinks its better. The lighting in that engine is pure aids.

...

If you don't have anything to say don't say anything at all.

...

I'm convinced everybody on Holla Forums who says this is underage

I haven't been playing video games for that long: the n64 was my first console, and even I know that old video games on average were way, way worse then modern games.

Old games had bugs out the ass and almost no quality control. half the fucking time you put a disc or cartridge in it wouldn't even read.

Games have ridiculously huge budgets and are polished to a sheen now. Games are much, much better then they used to be to the point where an 8/10 is considered a "bad" score/

I think that's it, actually: Games are just so good now that people take them for granted and their standards are ridiculously high now.

Realistic physics is more important than realistic graphics.

I don't want a game that looks like real life though. Every game that, essentially, doesn't have an art style looks like shit. See ARMA.

into the trash it all goes

People who praise the good old days also tend to forget that releasing broken games was literally a business model.

Games like Resident Evil 1 and many NES games were released in a very hard to finsh state, as to make more money from rentals. We are talking about speeding the game up, so that some levels are impossible to finish (Batttletoads did this), or cutting ammo and weapons from the game (Resident Evil 1).

This is where you went wrong user, don't call it "Realistic" because it's not. Call it "interactive" or "Detailed" which is much more accurate.

I too prefer GTA4 than say 5 for the fun I can have with the game due to the more detailed physics of cars and characters. The story is also a whole lot better, though I couldn't force myself through Ballad of Gay Tony. I was bored to death with that story and totally uninterested and unsympathetic to the faggots in that story. I empathized with Niko and Roman, and to a lesser extent the Jew and his biker gang.

...

Also anyone who says "graphics don't matter in a video game" has got to be an underaged faggot. Graphics have always mattered in every single generation of games. It's the reason why your not still playing pong on an atari, unless you're some hipster faggot who unironically likes "retro" shit. As someone who grew up playing all that crap I'd never in a million years go back to that garbage. One of the things everyone looked forward too as the years moved on were improved graphics and more realistic settings and atmospheres and it's what's driven the industry since it started

Euclidean released holoverse, which shows off their animation within their engine.

Remember that Euclidean is not a game company but a software company, their engine in the right hands can make something beautiful.

Explain why they play older games then with vastly worse visuals and that have their own problems. I'll say one reason. Very few FPS games these days have level design on par with the old greats like Doom, Duke Nukem 3D or Quake. Few 3D platformers have a moveset as fun as SM64. Exploring Morrowind is a lot more fun than being dragged by the nose in Oblivion, which if you turn quest markers off the game ceases to actually function.

People should stop wasting their time on "realistic" graphics and focus on gameplay instead.
Besides games which go for a realistic style age like milk, where's cartoonie like graphics still look great to this day.

...

why wouldn't it be.

See, this shit is why people play games. They're looking for that "next step" into what modern technology can achieve. I'm an oldfag now and it's more exciting seeing what the future can bring us rather then groveling on the shit from the past

Added to filter

Same :^)

photo realism will not make me want to play mass effect 3 or Call of duty

What the fuck are you on

I imagine eventually we'll be able to create programs that are clever enough to be able to do most of the work an artist would normally do. You could probably just describe what you want with a kind of simplified language, and it would create photorealistic models and environments on the fly.

2036 seems a bit too soon for that, though. Maybe 2050.

more like 2100

When some engine gets good enough developers wont have to bother remaking assets. It will all about making scripts and the gameplay, pretty much what cawdude developers do by rehashing the same game.

There's a difference between "graphics don't matter" and "I don't care for photorealism" you autistic turbonigger.

Same with everything in modern "AAA" gaming - zero fucking design sense and zero fucking taste.

Nigger that console had 10 good exclusives tops, I agree previous generations were better but thats the worst example you could come up with

archive.is/5ZeHq