Support NeoGAF

[Campster]

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=68325

Crytek lead artist, Michael Khaimzon, speaking at the London Game Career Fair today, has described PC shooter favourite FarCry as "too stylized" compared to current FPS project Crysis.

"Three years ago it looked amazing," he said. "Now it's too stylized, too cartoony, the colours are far too much. With Crysis we went for realism... We wanted every leaf to have its own shading. It was very important for us. We have to model every leaf separately. There's a crazy amount of polygons."

Way to continue not letting our medium develop its own aesthetic. As if games weren't stylistically homogenous enough before, we're now apparently actively trying to elimite any sense of style or art design.

And individually modelling leaves is just ridiculous. First of all, we've all seen the gameplay videos of Crysis. It consists mostly of running around shooting things. You're not going to have time to appreciate hand-made tree leaves when running and trying to avoid enemy fire. Second of all, you want to talk about diminishing returns, well, here it is. Where can we go from here? Modelling individual pores on people's faces? There's no future in this. It isn't sustainable.

Hundreds of aspiring game developers watched Khaimzon's presentation at the Café Royal on London's Regent Street this afternoon, which also included practical advice to get what he described as the "crazy" world of next gen games development.

Well, at least he can appropriately describe the mindset of the so-called Next-Gen.

 

[valkillmore]

1. They did not model every leaf seperately. They most likely have some auto leaf renderer.

2. He's right about Far Cry.

 

[X26]

Problem with next-gen is devs put graphics above all else, and it ends up hurting other things that are far more important after the initial WOW of the graphcis wear off such as frame rate

 

[jett]

Crysis to be Marty Chinn's favorite game ever, confirmed.

 

[Campster]

Problem with next-gen is devs put graphics above all else, and it ends up hurting other things that are far more important after the initial WOW of the graphcis wear off such as frame rate

If you think framerate is the problem we're ignoring in favor of graphics, you're sort of missing the point.

 

[Oldschoolgamer]

Isn't Crysis the game with the crazy gun modification system? If so, they can talk about graphics all they want. That in itself is a tad bit different than the norm.


He's right about far cry though.

 

[Kevin]

Next Gen Sex:
http://www.alanwake.com/screenshots.html


While it is true that developers are putting more working into graphics then gameplay some games look like they will deliver on both. Alan Wake looks like it will uphold the quality that Remedy has served us with Max Payne 1 & 2 and I simply can't wait for this sure to be immersive game.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Problem with next-gen is devs put graphics above all else, and it ends up hurting other things that are far more important after the initial WOW of the graphcis wear off such as frame rate

I agree but it didn't start with this gen. It's always been there.

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

No, actually DoA is a pretty good franchise.

 

[Campster]

I'm still not getting where this game is hyper-stylized.

The overly shiny pixel shader on the water gives everything a glossy-ish feel, but that's about it. The rest of the game could have easily been in Soldier of Fortune 2, fancy pixel shaders and bump mapping aside.

 

[Stoney Mason]

No, actually DoA is a pretty good franchise.

Spoiler

For me too poop on

 

[Mr. Spinnington]

Spoiler

For me too poop on

Spoiler

Stop highlighting stuff, hahahaha you're still doing it. Buy DOAX2

 

[Der Kommisar]

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=68325



Way to continue not letting our medium develop its own aesthetic. As if games weren't stylistically homogenous enough before, we're now apparently actively trying to elimite any sense of style or art design.

And individually modelling leaves is just ridiculous. First of all, we've all seen the gameplay videos of Crysis. It consists mostly of running around shooting things. You're not going to have time to appreciate hand-made tree leaves when running and trying to avoid enemy fire. Second of all, you want to talk about diminishing returns, well, here it is. Where can we go from here? Modelling individual pores on people's faces? There's no future in this. It isn't sustainable.



Well, at least he can appropriately describe the mindset of the so-called Next-Gen.

They were always going for realism, now they can achieve a higher level of it, what the hell is the problem. I could see your point if this meant all art styles were disappearing in favor of extreme realism, but that's not the case; FarCry wasn't ever supposed to be art.

 

[human5892]

Way to continue not letting our medium develop its own aesthetic. As if games weren't stylistically homogenous enough before, we're now apparently actively trying to elimite any sense of style or art design.

You can work in a realistic space while still maintaining both style and good art design, you know. There are hundreds of thousands of fantastic paintings in galleries around the world that illustrate this point.

 

[loosus]

Not sure what "style" it was, but I thought it was a very pretty game. Very easy on the eyes, anyway.

 

[C4Lukins]

He is right about Far Cry, at least the recent XBOX and 360 versions. It is a nasty mixture of realisim and cartoonishness that makes for a pretty jarring visual experience.

 

[Campster]

They were always going for realism, now they can achieve a higher level of it, what the hell is the problem. I could see your point if this meant all art styles were disappearing in favor of extreme realism, but that's not the case; FarCry wasn't ever supposed to be art.

First of all: Aesthetic completion. If you have a game that looks photoreal, great. But if you're going for a visual simulation of reality, you'd better also be simulating whatever systems you're modelling realistically. I.E., don't pour millions of dollars into making Quake 3 look photoreal. Pour millions of dollars to make you hypertactical Rainbow Six style squad based strategy shooter look photoreal. There are plausible reasons why Madden, which takes pride in the degree to which it attempts to simulate the entire football experience, tries to go for a realistic look. Same goes for a racing sim like PGR3. But there's no good reason for something like Rez, Tetris, or Doom 2 to attempt photorealism given their mechanics and the ridiculous cost it takes.

Second of all: The problem isn't that this one single development team is attempting to recreate reality using absurd methods. The problem is that this plagues the industry as a whole; this entire forum is built as much (if not more) upon circlejerking to the latest screenshots than it is to actually playing or discussing gameplay. Game players and developers are obsessed with providing the most realistic visuals possible, under the misguided assumption that (much like the ever-subjective fun) it automatically improves one's game.

Third of all: I'm not going to get into a "What is art?" argument because it would only end in tears. But I will say that there are plenty of people who would consider FarCry a creative endeavor, and as such it could be judged by those standards. And I would also say that if everyone wanted to create "Just a game," then where does that leave the medium?

 

[Spastic Colon]

What about the blood n' guts?

I hope they're spending enough time on impressive blood n' guts

 

[Campster]

You can work in a realistic space while still maintaining both style and good art design, you know. There are hundreds of thousands of fantastic paintings in galleries around the world that illustrate this point.

Right. But A) Photorealistic paintings are still an abstraction, and it's the abstraction that makes them worthwhile. Otherwise they might as well be photographs. B) Photorealistic paintings don't cost millions upon millions of dollars and hamper the medium by making risk management a part of doing business leading everyone to create thirty or fourty Mona Lisas every year.

And again, I'm not saying photorealism in the abstract is bad. I'm saying it's insanely expensive to produce, especially in the context of individually modelling each leaf instead of finding procedural ways to do things. It's like asking someone to recreate reality by *hand* instead of a series of simple rules. And that cost hurts the medium. Also, I'd argue we're currently obsessed with doing it "because we can" rather then stylistically choosing it for artistic purposes. Again, will you notice how nice the hand-made leaves are when shooting people in Crysis?

 

[human5892]

Again, will you notice how nice the hand-made leaves are when shooting people in Crysis?

I don't know...I guess I'd have to play it.

I do see your point based off of his statement about the leaves, but there are plenty of tools out there -- and more becoming available all the time -- for developers to achieve the realism they're striving for without having to painstakingly model foliage and the like. If Khaimzon and company want to pursue the more difficult route -- if what he's saying is even the truth without any embellishment or exaggeration -- then so be it, I suppose. There will still be plenty of developers who use the "leaf clone" tool and be quite content with that.

Really, pursuing a realistic style makes sense for most genres, and is sound in a business sense as well. I'd like it if we got more games that went for more of a fantasy or imaginative setting -- especially from Western developers -- but in the end I understand they're just responding to what makes sense for the game they're making, which is in turn largely dictated by the people who buy.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I feel like if you're going to be upset by this issue, your anger might be a little misplaced -- I think the public is really accountable for this sort of trend. Then again, truly great games can buck the trend no matter what the style, which is comforting to me; Grand Theft Auto is a fantastic blend of realism and a more cartoonish style and does not pursue hyper-realism.

 

[Gigglepoo]

I just hope there is a reason to play this other than the graphics.

 

[drohne]

individually modeled leaves that most players won't even notice -- modelled out of some extravagance or "because we can" sentiment -- may be the only aspect of crysis that suggests the artistic.

 

[.dmc]

His 'hand modelled leaves' comment is probably just hyperbole, I don't actually believe it.

 

[thirty]

people actually think far cry looks realistic? wtf?

 

[thetrin]

I think I was on the can when cartoony and stylized became bad. Wtf is going on?

REALISM IS THE NEW ART....what?

 

[PedroLumpy]

Someone who said that they agree with Far Cry being to stylized clarify themselves. From what I remember of the game the only style that was stressed was Hawaiian shirts.

Now if you are referring to the (vastly inferior) console Far Cry's(ies?) I understand completely and you need say no more.

 

[Gearharaden]

Realism is stupid. I want more 100 foot monsters to hammer away at with a minigun that I hold with one hand.

What happened to the shooter part of first person shooting? The genre isn't first person look at grass the whole damn time.

In Crysis, they have all these stupid doodads like weapons customization and a seperate world and all this, but the hit detection looks miserable, and shooting somebody looks like these big flashes of red, not blood. When I shoot somebody, I want them to splash me with a torrent of their blood, explode in a font of terrible gore.

But no, FPS always have to have puzzles and platforming and a whole bunch of other stupid shit. Jesus, it's like we've been going backwards in game development. Making things more complicated and more stupid shit to add, does anybody really support once simple genres like the FPS being turned into basically a first person RPG with guns?

 

[Warm Machine]

How big is a leaf because palm leaves are quite large. Individual tree leaves ain't happening unless he is talking about the normal maps used to source the mass textures from.

 

[Mr. Pointy]

But no, FPS always have to have puzzles and platforming and a whole bunch of other stupid shit. Jesus, it's like we've been going backwards in game development. Making things more complicated and more stupid shit to add, does anybody really support once simple genres like the FPS being turned into basically a first person RPG with guns?

I agree. The last single-player FPS I really enjoyed was F.E.A.R. and believe it or not, I quite liked F.E.A.R.'s incredibly linear level design in a way because it always meant that there was a bunch of goons to kill every 2-3 minutes.

 

[thetrin]

Realism is stupid. I want more 100 foot monsters to hammer away at with a minigun that I hold with one hand.

What happened to the shooter part of first person shooting? The genre isn't first person look at grass the whole damn time.

In Crysis, they have all these stupid doodads like weapons customization and a seperate world and all this, but the hit detection looks miserable, and shooting somebody looks like these big flashes of red, not blood. When I shoot somebody, I want them to splash me with a torrent of their blood, explode in a font of terrible gore.

But no, FPS always have to have puzzles and platforming and a whole bunch of other stupid shit. Jesus, it's like we've been going backwards in game development. Making things more complicated and more stupid shit to add, does anybody really support once simple genres like the FPS being turned into basically a first person RPG with guns?

Word. Realism is ****ing boring.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Realism is stupid. I want more 100 foot monsters to hammer away at with a minigun that I hold with one hand.

What happened to the shooter part of first person shooting? The genre isn't first person look at grass the whole damn time.

In Crysis, they have all these stupid doodads like weapons customization and a seperate world and all this, but the hit detection looks miserable, and shooting somebody looks like these big flashes of red, not blood. When I shoot somebody, I want them to splash me with a torrent of their blood, explode in a font of terrible gore.

But no, FPS always have to have puzzles and platforming and a whole bunch of other stupid shit. Jesus, it's like we've been going backwards in game development. Making things more complicated and more stupid shit to add, does anybody really support once simple genres like the FPS being turned into basically a first person RPG with guns?

Actually smelling gunpowder while you empty a mag at a 100 monsters would be pretty cool though right? I think you're problem is with design, not realism. Personally, I love realism, the stuff cant be realistic enough for me really.

 

[thetrin]

Actually smelling gunpowder while you empty a mag at a 100 monsters would be pretty cool though right? I think you're problem is with design, not realism. Personally, I love realism, the stuff cant be realistic enough for me really.

It depends what part of realism you`re talking about. Realism doesn`t automatically mean fun, and but the opposite is also true. The problem is that many times, designers think that realism in every aspect is what we want, when many times, I really don`t.

I have no fun dying in one hit in a game. That`s ****ing stupid and not fun.

 

[Alien Bob]

not quite the jump from Half Life to Half Life 2

 

[Fallout-NL]

It depends what part of realism you`re talking about. Realism doesn`t automatically mean fun, and but the opposite is also true. The problem is that many times, designers think that realism in every aspect is what we want, when many times, I really don`t.

I have no fun dying in one hit in a game. That`s ****ing stupid and not fun.

'One hit, one kill' mode in Goldeneye entertained me for hours on end (to name one instance where the added realism equaled added fun). Same goes for round-mechanics in CS, people started to be more careful with their 'lives' and finally someone managed to change the pace in deathmatch games. I really loved that. But apart from this, I agree with you, there's stuff we dont need.

 

[thetrin]

'One hit, one kill' mode in Goldeneye entertained me for hours on end (to name one instance where the added realism equaled added fun). Same goes for round-mechanics in CS, people started to be more careful with their 'lives' and finally someone managed to change the pace in deathmatch games. I really loved that. But apart from this, I agree with you, there's stuff we dont need.

Exactly why I don`t like one hit kills. I enjoy games like Quake FAR FAR more.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Exactly why I don`t like one hit kills. I enjoy games like Quake FAR FAR more.

Ah, well this is a matter of taste then.

 

[thetrin]

Ah, well this is a matter of taste then.

Well duh.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Well duh.

/edit: Nevermind that.



Ehm how about Unreal Tournament's instagib? The games style is very 'deathmatchy' of course, but it has the one shot/one kill feature, yet it retains that fast-paced character that makes games like Quake and UT great. Still this is only one type of realism, apart from this they could also go all out on the potrayal of physical damage on you or your opponent (or your enviroment for that matter, which could have an influence on the gameplay).

 

[thetrin]

/edit: Nevermind that.



Ehm how about Unreal Tournament's instagib? The games style is very 'deathmatchy' of course, but it has the one shot/one kill feature, yet it retains that fast-paced character that makes games like Quake and UT great. Still this is only one type of realism, apart from this they could also go all out on the potrayal of physical damage on you or your opponent (or your enviroment for that matter, which could have an influence on the gameplay).

Instagib was great. Why? Well, it`s pretty simple. When you die, you don`t stay dead FOR THE REST OF THE ROUND. Other than your opponent racking up a kill, there was no real disadvantage to being killed. On the other hand, games where being killed holds with it a vast penalty (like waiting for the next round, or losing the last 30 minutes of progress) are just not fun.

 

[diffusionx]

He is right about Far Cry, at least the recent XBOX and 360 versions. It is a nasty mixture of realisim and cartoonishness that makes for a pretty jarring visual experience.

Crytek didn't develop those, though.

The original Far Cry is still, imo, one of the best looking games out there.

Chasing realism is a waste of time.

 

[Azih]

Donkey Kong Country was a really fun game.


In any case I don't understand the hate from the original poster. Hyper Realism is just as valid a style choice as cell shading or pastel painted backgrounds or whatever. Diversity is good and this is one aspect of it.

 

[WARCOCK]

I really dont see what is wrong with this. It is only one aspect of how to visually express a game. Much like the realism of italian renaissance art which aspires to recreate a trend expressed earlier in antiquity, it certainly didnt restrict or prevent the creation of cubism. Recreating reality is certainly challenging, kudos to them for trying to visually emulate the physical world with one's and zero's. I think its too early to start speculating the death of the fictional and fantastic based on a single game, and besides im sure you can make some funky looking shit on the crysis engine Now listen if everything was based on the abstract and abnormal we would all start to crave for so called realism, open your mind.

 

[Draft]

Realistic art is not necessarily boring art.

 

[Pimpbaa]

I don't mind realistic graphics, but I hate when the theme of the game is realistic (or historical) along with it. That's what I liked about HL2. Realistic environments invaded by aliens, it made it extra creepy.

 

[Frank the Great]

http://www.alanwake.com/screenshots/screenshot.php?shot=Alan_Wake_2006_017

snakes in a car!

 

[DIrtyWeasel]

Is it really necessary for Crytek to put the word "Cry" in thier games?

 

[Pimpbaa]

Is it really necessary for Crytek to put the word "Cry" in thier games?

I think so. Because I bet the modelers in their team are crying at having to model every leaf separately.

 

[Gigglepoo]

I think so. Because I bet the modelers in their team are crying at having to model every leaf separately.

They are so lucky EA is funding them.

 

[relyt9]

Modeling each leaf in huge jungle enviroments + Dev. time = 20 years. I call HAX@!!111!!

 

[Redbeard]

The goddamn nerve of these guys, wanting to make a more realistic looking jungle! Who the hell do they think they are?