Because those are very important to demonstrating an efficient method for approximating subsurface scattering as demonstrated by the visual quality of the dudes skin.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Epic's Tim Sweeney: Lifelike Graphics Will Happen During Our Lifetimes
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
Because those are very important to demonstrating an efficient method for approximating subsurface scattering as demonstrated by the visual quality of the dudes skin.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Uh. No.
It is designed to show off a particular effect, (the way light interacts with skin) having all that other fluff would be pointless.
Also this tech demo runs at like 120fps+ on current hardware, where most tech demos with a ton going on run at 30 if that when released.
dragonelite
Member
Cause hair and muscular movement have a lot to do with the tech demo demonstrating the research done in rendering realistic skin.
Sure why not? whole new markets for 'serious games' when the tech advances beyond just the military sim type stuff.
Simulating a real environment, with AI characters, and having your player controlled character act exactly how a real person does, without compromising the player experience seems an impossibility to me.
You could easily take a scene from a film, receate it in CG to the point where people couldn't tell them apart, but once you have player agency, and aren't scripting every person in the game that masterfully, it's going to fall apart.
It takes hundreds of millions of dollars to get a two hour CG film vaguely near that quality, a real-time game, where AI has to react to the player is impossible.
Other places and other times. It would be amazing to visit Rome in year 0, or Tenochtitlán in the XV century, or Edo with perfect lifelike graphics. That's the best part of Assassin's Creed games for me.
Eventually someone will think "Gee, wouldn't it be cool if I could kill people here?" and work from there.
I dunno, we've come a LONG way already. Look back at what was being attempted in the late 90s, for instance. What we have today with games attempting to be cinematic is dramatically different. Your implications would suggest that, although detail will increase, the presentation will not improve. I don't buy that.
Games are not movies, of course, but they can still provide realistic character interaction while providing an experience very different from a film. Something like Mass Effect could never be experienced in a movie but could benefit from more realistic character portrayal.
Bel Marduk
Banned
It depends on the game really. They could opt to make it super realistic and lifelike that it could compromise a player experience (unless the game being lifelike in a video game scenario IS the experience), or they could still make it very realistic while still realizing that adding fantasy/nonrealistic elements (like big budget action films) to the gameplay is still the way to go.
I just wonder how expensive stuff like this would be in the future for a game that's more than just 2 hours long.
Oh please, Battlefield 3 on PC with ultra settings already look almost lifelike in some places, and im still not crazy enough to kill people in real life.
Haunted
Member
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
I think you are mixing up "impossible" with "further down the road".
When talking simulations, computers will inevitably be able to simulate Earth and everything on it.
Will we see THAT in our lifetime? Maybe. Maybe not. (Leaning towards not)
But take a game taking place in a self contained environment, like lets say Bioshock 1's Rapture. I think a lifelike experience within that environment will be possible in the not to distant future. Where the Graphics and Animation are indistinguishable from reality.
AI is an iffy road in ALL fields not just gaming.
10 years from now we could have AI more intelligent and human like than human beings themselves. Or we could just have super advanced Watson Like supercomputers that still don't think or at like humans at all.
Edit: And since you mentioned dreams I have to throw this in there. Many believe we will have a (much more than now) symbiotic relationship with tech in the future. We are already decrypting thoughts in peoples brains into words and images today, in the future I think technology will be used in conjunction with the brain to achieve things not possible otherwise, and increasing our ability to render lifelike environments instantly. (Imagine instead of booting up a console, you close your eyes and take a simulated vacation to Italy (that in reality only lasted a few hours).) using the power of Computers combined with the power of the mind. Once we reach the point of being able to really harness the power of computers using our thoughts, the development and speed at which technology evolves will reach a singularity and by that point, video games will be one of the less interesting things on our minds.
Sadly I am doubtful we will see THAT in our lifetime, though I do see it as happening in the next 100-150 years. (Crossing fingers though)
Heck yeah I want it. I'm afraid we'll be stepping into the uncanny valley look a lot next gen though.
I'm not mixing it up, I disagree. In a hundred years, maybe you could remake BioShock, leave the game running for weeks and watch as rust corroded individual rivets on a dead Big Daddy, maybe you could walk thru the dirt and grass in Arcadia, and the various biological material caught in the tread of those boots could cause plant life to grow in a new area. Maybe a computer could run the game simulation on those kinds of levels, but I don't believe it could simulate the realistic actions of humans to any situation. Nor do I think game budgets will be large enough any time soon to massively increase the quality of the simulation, even if technology increases as it has been.
tripskylark
Neo Member
Meanwhile lighting still won't be as good as toy story
*Cue 30 picture of modded GTAIV*
shinobi602
Member
Hell yes?
Always-honest
Banned
It will be horrible.
Anyway, just fix jaggies and give us a decent framerate.
I rather have games look different from reality.
Anyway, just fix jaggies and give us a decent framerate.
I rather have games look different from reality.
Shai-Tan
Banned
real people in movies are "shot" and it's nothing like real life so there's really not something to worry about thinking it would be as if it were a real shooting.
MarkMclovin
Member
Yes, lets put a stop to making graphical improvements!
I would prefer to see all games start off with 60fps minimum first though.
dragonelite
Member
He probably means with reality the resolution we are rendering at and the lighting.
The reason he probably said that our eyes are like 30Megapixel camera hence his 8k x 4k resolution being high enough. Because our eyes can't sample anymore pixels.
People asked the same question about porn when we moved to HD.
Yeah, it does a good job at that. But the point I was referring to was that this tech demo showed that realistic graphics are possible in ten years. And having one bald head without hairs (which will take an enormous amount of processing power to get photorealistic) in a tech demo today is absolutely zero indication of where graphics will be in ten years.
astroturfing
Member
when i'm 160 and on my deathbed, i better be able to choose what kind of matrix i spend my days in.
so yeah, keep at it Epic.
so yeah, keep at it Epic.
shinobi602
Member
Why do so many people always assume that once we reach 'life-like' graphics, then every game will automatically look life-like?
Do you really think unique art direction and different engines and styles of graphics will just disappear? There will still be unique games of that caliber just like today, and there will be games that apply real-life graphics, like some attempt at today.
I say bring it.
herzogzwei1989
Banned
In 20 years? Yeah I'd say so. But that's like Xbox6 and PS7 lol.
I'm pretty sure we already reached that level when Rocksteady released this trailer a while back.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muCtJsy-d9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muCtJsy-d9w
I assumed everyone would still want Gritty browns and greys 40 years from now.
TheMan
Member
A good question might be:
will developers have the tools necessary to create lifelike graphics in a cost-effective, time-efficient manner within our lifetimes?
I bet if you gave a group of good artists top of the line hardware along with plenty of time and money, you could create graphics that are lifelike right now...but budgets can't balloon forever.
will developers have the tools necessary to create lifelike graphics in a cost-effective, time-efficient manner within our lifetimes?
I bet if you gave a group of good artists top of the line hardware along with plenty of time and money, you could create graphics that are lifelike right now...but budgets can't balloon forever.
NinjaBoiX
Member
I think they are almost there with film as it is. I remember a time around 5 years ago where you could easily pick out CGI. Now it's generally, "ah, that must be CGI", purely because it would be almost impossible to shoot otherwise.
But in games? Yeah, I think 20 years is a little optimistic.
Ill say give it 2 console generations max
In 3-4 generations its mobiles turn to reach the same level, what happens then? Mobiles replace everything.
Yeah, I can see those mobile 55" units we'll be carrying around. Mobile is great where it's feasible but mobile devices will never ever replace home devices.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
go pc and turn down your graphics?
i know i wont be getting ptsd from a game. we see people die realistically in movies all the time. sure i pressed the shoot button to make the cg representation of data disappear but i also doomed those other soldiers to there death when i pressed play on saving private ryan. how could i be so hearltess?
Not really imagine this:
Mobiles of the future,
Can stream content to TV/monitor, connect to any wireless controller/keyboard/mouse, much like a pc.
It will happen at some point when graphics stagnate. Its inevitable.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
And I'll still probably have more fun playing Tim's old ASCII-based games than the "lifelike" stuff... I vastly prefer stylized graphics myself.
Though I agree we will get to a position where we can get near-lifelike graphics. If the market doesn't totally collapse on itself first
I vastly prefer stylized graphics myself.Though I agree we will get to a position where we can get near-lifelike graphics. If the market doesn't totally collapse on itself first
sixteen-bit
Member
I'll never have to leave the house again!
dragonelite
Member
Is there a place we can watch the presentation online..
Mr. B Natural
Member
The game industry (and movie industry) is stuck in the 90's on so many levels it's not even funny. The fact that we're still trying to tech our way out of the 90's mentality is testament that we're still stuck there.