If we have *potentially* reached the point of diminishing returns on graphic developments what's the next selling point.

22•22

Doesnt need recognition
Nothing special in particular as i think that this generation will be very similar to the last one in that regard.

I'm convinced that the visual enhancements are already enough for the average consumer who doesn't spend hours upon hours in a forum to discuss those things. Here and there you will find a developer how is pushing the boundaries with new gameplay innovations or groundbreaking AI and such things but all this will be in the minority. Maybe a new trend will be set with a specific gameplay twist that gets adopted throughout the industry and draws people in but overall i don't expect anything in particular.

For sure.

What us hardcore longtime gamers want is very different from a casuals POV. And it's pretty obvious what we want; whole tread is full of it. I was thinking about the casuals.. But there's a large distinction to be made in that subgroup as well. So like I said, it's mostly about playing something linked to an IP, be it Marvel or something that's trending in YouTube
 
Last edited:
Most games don't even come close to the level of motion capture and animation (especially the facial animations) of TLOU2, so first of all I'd like to see games reach that level of quality. Having "realistic graphics" and shit animation really ruins the immersion and the overall graphic quality for me.
 

jigglet

Member
Yep pretty much. I can't even be bothered to play Street Fighter V. I love the gameplay but just loading the game up and getting a game is just too time consuming.

Load times and frames on current gen consoles matter way more to me than graphics.
 

Bartski

Gold Member
Games don't have to look any better. They have to play better and be more interactive and systemic. This is what truly holds games back - chasing after picture quality in 4K or higher.

I think Ray Tracing is the most overrated tech ever, totally not worth it for how much it costs and is the no.1 factor in this misdirection.

I wouldn't mind games just looking like Ragnarok or even TLOU2 throughout the PS5 gen, but had 100x times more breakables, 1000x more rigid bodies per frame, realistic material simulation, fire water etc, and how that informs emergent gameplay also on a micro-scale with complex enemy AI behaviour reacting to it and game mechanics arising from those factors.
 

NeoIkaruGAF

Gold Member
Checkerboard 6K at 61fps.

If you think this is a joke, think a bit longer and harder at what makes people drop their pants in any PS5 vs XSX thread.
 

Con-Z-epT

Gold Member
I wouldn't mind games just looking like Ragnarok or even TLOU2 throughout the PS5 gen, but had 100x times more breakables, 1000x more rigid bodies per frame, realistic material simulation, fire water etc, and how that informs emergent gameplay also on a micro-scale with complex enemy AI behaviour reacting to it and game mechanics arising from those factors.
 

ZywyPL

Banned
Unfortunately we are in the uncanny valley period, which is why games that aim for realism throw me away so much. Everything looks great on static screen, but the moment the animations kick in everything is odd, cringy, from facial expressions, eyes behavior, body movement, it's simply bad and doesn't match the level of visuals. Same for the worlds that look like a painting on screens, but then when you actually get to move around them, everything is mostly static, non-interactive even in a slightest degree, dead.

Recent The Ascent gave me a glimpse of what I expect from future games - a dense, detailed world, that is alive and interactive. Spider-Man's muscle deformation tech is also another example of moving away from the usual stiff shoulders/animations to something actually believable, realistic. So I expect 2-3x of this kind stuff from AAA studios once cross-gen time is over.
 

Con-Z-epT

Gold Member
What us hardcore longtime gamers want is very different from a casuals POV. And it's pretty obvious what we want; whole tread is full of it. I was thinking about the casuals.. But there's a large distinction to be made in that subgroup as well. So like I said, it's mostly about playing something linked to an IP, be it Marvel or something that's trending in YouTube
Sadly most market share is covered by the average consumer and this will dictate what the hardcore gamers get to a great extend. Not in general of course. You're completely right with your point and it is getting harder and harder to predict what will trend in the future. As long as there are graphical improvements, even if minor, this will be the first selling point as is it again in this generation. If we would really see a stagnation in that regard it would make sense to talk about a new selling point but there are already enough buzzwords for a whole generation to be covered.
 

Bartski

Gold Member
Recent The Ascent gave me a glimpse of what I expect from future games - a dense, detailed world, that is alive and interactive. Spider-Man's muscle deformation tech is also another example of moving away from the usual stiff shoulders/animations to something actually believable, realistic. So I expect 2-3x of this kind stuff from AAA studios once cross-gen time is over.
yeah Ascent is great but is also an example where you cut corners to make it all look detailed and pretty. There is zero real collision between in-game characters and those impressive thick crowds and all destruction (except a couple of walls in specific locations) is purely cosmetic. A sequel with some kind of Euphoria physics hybrid would be so much better, even something at GTA IV level.
 

Haggard

Banned
One look at Metro Exodus EE shows what even a single partial RT implementation can do when it`s done right. And then there`s also tech like Nanite on the Horizon which is transformative for environment-geometry.
We´re not even close to the end of the line of what`s graphically possible and we´re still far away from actual photorealism in anything realtime.
And then there`s still a whole and nearly untouched world left when it comes to interactivity.
Imagine fully destructible Nanite level environments instead of today`s static setdressing.
 
Last edited:

marjo

Member
Diminishing returns doesn't mean that graphics aren't improving, just that it takes a relatively larger increase in computational power to achieve a similar perceptual improvement to what it has in the past.

We absolutely are experiencing diminishing returns in terms of real time time graphics (offline rendering is even further along the curve).

My answer to the OPs question is far more physics based interactive environments. Most games today aren't even as interactive as something like Half Life 2, let alone generations ahead. That's what I'd like to see.
 

BlvckFox

Gold Member
I want the focus to be on hyper density. My dream game is in one city block with highly intelligent NPCs, beautifully detailed environments and extreme levels of interactivity. I want to see what happens when Open World is redefined not by sweeping ever expansive worlds but a super small focused thriving world.
 
Last edited:

22•22

Doesnt need recognition
Sadly most market share is covered by the average consumer and this will dictate what the hardcore gamers get to a great extend. Not in general of course. You're completely right with your point and it is getting harder and harder to predict what will trend in the future. As long as there are graphical improvements, even if minor, this will be the first selling point as is it again in this generation. If we would really see a stagnation in that regard it would make sense to talk about a new selling point but there are already enough buzzwords for a whole generation to be covered.

Well said.

I deleted a more indepth amateur analysis of OP's premise/question because I realized I'm lazy and couldn't be bothered finishing my thoughts but it's an interesting semi complex topic indeed. Graphics will always play a big factor, such is human nature. But the difference in what different target groups want, expect, etc and how that influences what developers and by extent publishers bring forth is again very interesting
 
Last edited:

Buggy Loop

Member
Might be a bit hasty on this since we are still in the cross gen phase. However we are probably getting to point where advancements in graphics is getting smaller. Its my opinion that for AAA games graphics is the top selling point. Since graphics appeals to not just the hardcore group of gamers but the causal group too. First party games especially Sony ones have always pushed the boundary of what is graphically possible.

After seeing games like FS, R&C, FH5 and even TLoU2 (damn good looking game for a PS4 game) how exactly can games look any better and if differences are not so great anymore whats the new big selling point for the hardcore and casual gamer.

Good graphics in VR is the next logical step to impress. (and better headsets)

I was more impressed with Half Life Alyx's visuals in VR than 99% of all the eye candy games out there. There's something about every surfaces, reflections, shading having a 3D depth that is simply unmatched outside VR.
 

22•22

Doesnt need recognition
yeah Ascent is great but is also an example where you cut corners to make it all look detailed and pretty. There is zero real collision between in-game characters and those impressive thick crowds and all destruction (except a couple of walls in specific locations) is purely cosmetic. A sequel with some kind of Euphoria physics hybrid would be so much better, even something at GTA IV level.

Yeah the devil is in the details.

But those details won't be noticed by the majority of consumers so why should they bother unless you know, they look at their profession as art instead of a product.

What Con-Z-epT Con-Z-epT mentioned..
 
Last edited:

Iamborghini

Member
Raytracing will certainly be the next big thing. If you think about it, since movies uses this technology the quality of VFX it at a new level, some of the VFX scenes are so good they are invisible.

The benefits in gaming will be modular scenes, everything could move and maintain high quality lighting, no more static baked levels designs.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
I don't know that we're at a point of diminishing retutns. Technology just hasn't caught up with people's desire for completely photorealistic real-time graphics in video games. We're closer than we've ever been but computational power is only part of it. The cost and effort of modeling a game world with photorealistic assets is just as limiting as the technology. A lot of games could look better if developers had more time, but time costs money and that forces limits. Modders get closer because they can take as long as they want because they don't have to hit a release date.
 

JCK75

Member
I think you have to keep in mind that they are still working with the tools and assets of the previous generation.
With more power and RAM I'm sure it will be a bit before engines start coming up with new texture maps that increase details beyond anything we've seen.. it just won't happen overnight.
 

DrAspirino

Banned
Might be a bit hasty on this since we are still in the cross gen phase. However we are probably getting to point where advancements in graphics is getting smaller. Its my opinion that for AAA games graphics is the top selling point. Since graphics appeals to not just the hardcore group of gamers but the causal group too. First party games especially Sony ones have always pushed the boundary of what is graphically possible.

After seeing games like FS, R&C, FH5 and even TLoU2 (damn good looking game for a PS4 game) how exactly can games look any better and if differences are not so great anymore whats the new big selling point for the hardcore and casual gamer.
Physics.

Physics require A LOT of AI and parallel processing power; and physics haven't improved much since the PS360 era.
 
Last edited:
I was blown away by the stuff they showed on the PS4 when that was first launching, but this time it just feels like a PS4 Pro Pro. Maybe I did it to myself by buying the PS4 Pro when it first came out. I'm sure that if I came directly from a base PS4, to PS5, I would be much more blown away by the sheer fidelity of everything.
 

Stuart360

Member
Graphics will get better as this gen goes along for sure, but anyone who knows my post history will know how many times i said in the year leading up to launch that there will be tons of next gen games that look like good last gen games but at higher rez and/or framerate.
It wasnt some wild theory, its just when you go from targeting 900p-1080p to 1620p, 1800p, and even 4k, plus doubling framnerates, well a lot of that extra power from the next gen consoles is gobbled up instantly.

If next gen games were still targeting 30fps on the whole (and we will certainly see more 30fps games as the gen goes on) well we would of seen a decent jump in a lot of games.
Would you really want to go back to 30fps for most games though?.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Might be a bit hasty on this since we are still in the cross gen phase. However we are probably getting to point where advancements in graphics is getting smaller. Its my opinion that for AAA games graphics is the top selling point. Since graphics appeals to not just the hardcore group of gamers but the causal group too. First party games especially Sony ones have always pushed the boundary of what is graphically possible.

After seeing games like FS, R&C, FH5 and even TLoU2 (damn good looking game for a PS4 game) how exactly can games look any better and if differences are not so great anymore whats the new big selling point for the hardcore and casual gamer.
Smaller??? CGI's graphics takes hours to render 1 frame and real time graphics are getting on par???
 

avin

Member
MSFS is the next big thing. I would encourage those of you that haven't seen it to look at what became possible here, even if you don't like the genre. It still blows me away almost every time I play, in small ways. But modeling reality from the air and interaction through a machine you operate is a lot easier than doing it on the ground.

My worthless prediction - the next big thing will be the AI in the cloud underpinning NPCs and what it makes possible, together with voice recognition rather than menu prompts. A believable human world. I think a more believable physical world on the ground is much, much harder. We'll see those improvements also, but it'll take longer before they blow us away.

You don't like those opinions, well, I have others.

avin
 
Last edited:
Smaller??? CGI's graphics takes hours to render 1 frame and real time graphics are getting on par???
I think we need to see more "things" packed into a scene, really making the world look "lived in". Some games look really barren and bland in world detail. Things like trash, rocks, cracks, rubble, bushes, lots of different plants, different types of trees, vehicles, general wear etc.

One of the things I loved about Days Gone is that the world had so much detail. Each house was even packed with detail. I want stuff like that but even MORE.
 
We’re not even close to seeing the peak of graphics this gen, but I think the major advancements will come in the form of world size/asset diversity.

The Spider-Man GDC talk opened my eyes to the restrictions of HDD data streaming and how devs have bent over backwards to make it work. Going from 25MB/s budget to 1GB/s+ budget is going to be a game changer once devs start building games around new engines
 
We haven't come close to reaching diminishing returns. The start of every generation people ask that and then by mid-end generations the game blow the previous gen out of the water. We aren't even close to pixars level of fidelity yet from 5 years ago...lets get there first.
 
How game engines work may not be sufficient enough for the realistic scene.
What? Care to explain to us how a middleware can interfere with graphics?

With more power and RAM I'm sure it will be a bit before engines start coming up with new texture maps that increase details beyond anything we've seen.. it just won't happen overnight.
If a dev depends of texture maps by a 3rd party middleware, their graphics will never be cutting edge.
 
Last edited:

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
If that does indeed happen, a switch like console with full power coukd be the lure for each console manufacturer.
 
When you're playing with the exact same controller. Expect games to fulfill that limitation. Even with all the raytracing features.
 

Fbh

Member
I'd be fine with graphics staying at the level of Horizon or the new GOW this gen if it means continued support for 60fps at decent resolutions.
Have devs focus on gameplay, game mechanics, world interaction, physics, scope, AI, etc.

My main disappointment with the new GOW isn't the textures or 3D models or draw distance, all of which look fine. Its that the gameplay, world design, environments and structure look almost identical to the previous one, just with some new skills and enemies.
 

NahaNago

Member
I want the focus to be on hyper density. My dream game is in one city block with highly intelligent NPCs, beautifully detailed environments and extreme levels of interactivity. I want to see what happens when Open World is redefined not by sweeping ever expansive worlds but a super small focused thriving world.
yeah, I agree with this. I would like the selling point to be that world is alive with life. Whether it be from having tons of animals that hunt for food and are hunted or more realistic lives of humans who go about their daily lives.

Now I'm wondering when we get to actually talk to npcs in games instead of clicking a button. Otakus will never leave their rooms when they are finally able to talk and spend time with their waifu's in vr.
 

Loxus

Member
What? Care to explain to us how a middleware can interfere with graphics?


If a dev depends of texture maps by a 3rd party middleware, their graphics will never be cutting edge.
Skin indentation, muscle flex, body physics, cloth physics, hair physics, object detection/clipping, building/furniture destruction, earth/ground deformation, object interaction, interactive maps, in-game user interface and A.I. interaction.

That's just a small list of things that needs to be turned up to 11 to be considered next-gen imo.

With that being said, don't you video game engines needs to be reworked to make those things possible?

Better textures isn't what gamers what when we say want to see next-gen but those things I listed above.
 

nemiroff

Gold Member
We haven't reached it yet. I've been reading "diminishing returns" since the PS360.

Yeah I was about to write exactly that. It's funny how it has been a frequent topic for so many years. It never fails to crawl up from under the old rocks regularly.
 

Umbasaborne

Gold Member
Cpu heavy, features, like cloth that doesnt clip through characters, good and realistic water effects that react to bullets/movement, dense vegitation that reacts to stimulus like
Moving through it or wind. Realistic levels of destruction. Thats the next gen stuff that would really knock my socks off
 

martino

Member
Games don't have to look any better. They have to play better and be more interactive and systemic. This is what truly holds games back - chasing after picture quality in 4K or higher.

I think Ray Tracing is the most overrated tech ever, totally not worth it for how much it costs and is the no.1 factor in this misdirection.

I wouldn't mind games just looking like Ragnarok or even TLOU2 throughout the PS5 gen, but had 100x times more breakables, 1000x more rigid bodies per frame, realistic material simulation, fire water etc, and how that informs emergent gameplay also on a micro-scale with complex enemy AI behaviour reacting to it and game mechanics arising from those factors.
Even without them the more the tech progress the more people we will be fine with that and will not really care for more (especially if the overall price to get that keep getting higher)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom