Jimquisition: Photorealistic Sociopathy

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Have no God before rendering, for it is a jealous God.

^THIS Is why the new console generation worries me.
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
Well, now we know how Jim sounds while having sex. God help us all...
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
16,865
838
118
Super-realistic graphics tend to convey the complete opposite to an emotional connection from me. Heavy Rain was as uncanny valley as you can get, and L.A. Noire reached a whole nother level where everyone looked like real people wearing rubber man suits and hats.
 

Ickabod

New member
May 29, 2008
389
0
0
Thank God for Jim. Now if only some developer would actually listen.

Gameplay will trump graphics all day long.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
I remember back when the entire escapist thought Jim was too full of himself and everyone wanted the show cancelled when he first started making these videos. Now I rarely see anything but praise for the Jimquisition.

Eat it, disbelievers. I love this show. Great episode.
 

andersgeek

New member
Jul 6, 2010
126
0
0
I wouldn't say BioShock Infinite goes for a cartoony art style or something -- it's certainly not as (photo-)realistic as some of the Call of Honourfields but it goes for as realistic as its fantasy setting allows -- but this is an episode were I could've shouted "Amen!" every five seconds nonetheless. Good job!
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Honestly, on the subject of going off topic, I was kind of hoping for a crack at the EA v. Zynga debacle...
 

Mistilteinn

New member
Jul 14, 2012
156
0
0
If someone wants to see realistic graphics, there are these things called "outside" and "life". One is a massive world map to explore, and the other is probably the longest running MMORPG in history. Maybe if certain developers tried them out outside of their jobs, they'd realize that not everything needs to look 'real' to convey emotion or keep the player invested in the world. Video games are a form of escapism, and real life is, well, real life. Let's try keep them separate, eh?
 

TheScottishFella

The Know-it all Detective
Nov 9, 2009
613
0
0
Damn. Jim is looking sexy. Jonathan Holmes is a lucky man :p

OT: Also, completely agree, though I do feel you may on touched on this topic before, just can't remember the episode name :p
 

Imp_Emissary

Mages Rule, and Dragons Fly!
Legacy
Aug 9, 2020
2,315
1
3
Country
United States
As soon as I read the title I knew how you were going to talk about this. Well done!

If you can't get even a little emotionally connected to any character in a game simply because they don't look completely like a real life person, you may be a sociopath. Also like others have said, the "real" looking games not only tend to have not so great characters, but also can really put you at the bottom of the uncanny valley.
 

SnakeoilSage

New member
Sep 20, 2011
1,211
0
0
I'm sorry, the camera insisted on lingering, so I didn't realize I was supposed to connect with Elizabeth emotionally, and not stare at her plunging neckline.

solvemedia caption: lunch time
 

Rellik San

New member
Feb 3, 2011
609
0
0
I regularly have this debate with so called 'hardcore' gamers.

"Urgh... you're not hardcore, you're playing that stupid ball rolley sticky thing game, that's for kids."
"Says the man who shelled out £50 for a 6 hour wank fantasy because he's too scared to join the real army..."
 

irmasterlol

New member
Apr 11, 2012
178
0
0
I feel like a lot of people mistake wanting good graphics and wanting photo-realistic graphics. I want good graphics. I think most of us do, because gaming is primarily a visual medium. Good and even great graphics are more influenced by art direction and design than having the shiniest new Crytek engine and so many pixels we have to start inventing new numbers. Journey, for example, might not have been as emotional as it was if it wasn't so damn pretty.
 

ReinWeisserRitter

New member
Nov 15, 2011
749
0
0
Not a lot to say that wasn't already said. Hell, I was even planning to cite books, a medium where skilled hands will use the lack of visual representation as an advantage. No, photo-realism, and the argument that we need it, is just going to make video games worse, and continue it down the path of ruining the potential video games have: to show us worlds that aren't possible, aren't realistic, but make us give a shit anyway, while making us a part of them.

No, that's not the most easily profitable way. No, that won't get all the instant gratification money prolific developers crave like their next drug fix. But the drive for the lowest common denominator does nothing for the industry as a whole, and for the people who stick around more than fifteen seconds in it, and no amount of bullshitting from the developers shooting for it can hide that that's all they're doing; they care nothing about improving video games. They're just after what they see as easy cash.

On a barely related note, Bioshock Infinite could use a lot less fucking cleavage, especially when your perspective is constantly looking downward at the character. Kind of funny how we're using it as an argument against cheap, shallow immersion when such an obvious hook as "LOOK, SHE HAS TITS. THINK YOU'LL STICK AROUND IF YOU GET TO STARE AT THEM THE WHOLE GAME?" is employed.
 

BeeGeenie

New member
May 30, 2012
726
0
0
This whole idea of "needing" photorealism is just stupid. These game companies really are clueless.
2D sprites are just as capable of producing an emotional reaction as any modern title. They just don't want to admit that they're not very good at creating good stories and likable characters.
 

ReinWeisserRitter

New member
Nov 15, 2011
749
0
0
irmasterlol said:
I feel like a lot of people mistake wanting good graphics and wanting photo-realistic graphics. I want good graphics. I think most of us do, because gaming is primarily a visual medium.
I disagree; I think gaming is primarily an interactive medium, and the interaction can make up for flaws absolutely anywhere else, especially on the visual end. Good graphics are probably second-to-last on my list of priorities in a video game.

There's no excuse not to have good art direction and aesthetics regardless of the quality of your graphics, though, and I think that's much more important as a result; low quality graphics can still be very pleasant to look at as long as they're presented well.
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
Anyone that says you need photorealistic graphics for empotional investment, I have two words for you:

Aerith Gainsbourough

Final Fantasy VII was a game that drove a lot of emotion despite a graphics level making characters look like Lego a lot of the time. Hell, FFVI got me in a few places with fucking pixels. Just admit you'd rather be making movies and move on.

I've been saying this for a while, but on a different tangent: graphics take up a lot of data and system resources. It's something I've been on about since 3D: yes, it's nice to see the back wall, but if there's nothing there it's wasted programming. MGS4 has a lot of quality graphics, but less gameplay than all but the NES instalments. Looks aren't everything, and I'd rather have a few extra dungeons, characters, or mini games than a trip through uncanny valley.
 

eltonborges

New member
Apr 25, 2008
55
0
0
There is not a single game that have a mandatory rule about graphics in order to work, but nothing worked so well in gaming history as a FPS with "realistic graphics of manly man doing manly things" with MW in the cover. But in order to that happen, we needed Doom guy, Wolfenstein guy, Blood guy, Outlaw guy, Duke guy, Unreal guys and girls, 007 guys and girls, XIII guy and girl, Quake and Timesplitters guys, girls, robots, fish tanks, monsters, carcasses and the list can go on. Realistic graphics are the new tool at disposal of the developers, but if to get here so much have happened before. That 2K guy had forget about all the other games that happened before, that created and shaped the genre. I just can't understand how someone who make games can just ignore all the history and legacy that is behind the modern shooters.
 

MonkeyPunch

New member
Feb 20, 2008
589
0
0
Hilarious ending.

I totally agree with most things said, but I'm just wondering whether we've recently had a bunch of devs say things like they have in order to try and push the likes of Microsoft and Sony to push out their new consoles?

Not the best way to go about it, no doubt I just wonder if that was maybe their ulterior motive.
 

irmasterlol

New member
Apr 11, 2012
178
0
0
ReinWeisserRitter said:
I disagree; I think gaming is primarily an interactive medium, and the interaction can make up for flaws absolutely anywhere else, especially on the visual end. Good graphics are probably second-to-last on my list of priorities in a video game.

There's no excuse not to have good art direction and aesthetics regardless of the quality of your graphics, though, and I think that's much more important as a result; low quality graphics can still be very pleasant to look at as long as they're presented well.
Ok, I'll grant you that it's largely interactive, but the game still tells its story visually. Musical cues can adjust the tone of some actions, but we still predominantly see the actions of the characters and how they impact the world and characters around them.

The Power of Flight featured article on the main page may have made me a bit biased towards visual storytelling today.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
"Religious statements have no place in something that isn't religious.

... Thank God for me."



OT: I think everyone agrees. That guy dun fucked up when he said that. You just need to say one word to completely destroy his argument... Pixar.
 

ReinWeisserRitter

New member
Nov 15, 2011
749
0
0
irmasterlol said:
Ok, I'll grant you that it's largely interactive, but the game still tells its story visually. Musical cues can adjust the tone of some actions, but we still predominantly see the actions of the characters and how they impact the world and characters around them.
It doesn't have to, though; a game can be based entirely on, say, sound, with no visuals whatsoever and as long as it's done correctly, it could still be a riveting, if extremely difficult to pull off, experience.

Visuals are only a vehicle for the gameplay, as everything else is, to give shape to it and attempt to make you feel apart of the action. Graphics are merely the only method thusfar successfully employed to show us what the action is.

Of course, because so many game developers would have rather been movie directors, or just aren't very creative - usually both - that's usually what we get: interactive movies, sometimes barely interactive ones. But their lack of creativity isn't a flaw of the medium itself, nor does it represent what video games as a whole are capable of.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
 

AJax_21

New member
May 6, 2011
268
0
0
It's really weird for Crytek to be spouting this bullcrap especially since I thought Crysis 2 shined more through its art direction and scene composition. Yeah, I know they're tech-savvies and they wanna push the latest hardware to its limits but I honestly thought they learned a lesson on with Crysis 2 with it focusing more on art direction in contrary to its predecessor.
 

Scrustle

New member
Apr 30, 2011
2,031
0
0
I've always thought that the characters in Minecraft actually do a pretty good job of conveying emotion. There's hardly any detail to them, but if you watch an LP of the game and see people convey in-game body language along with their voice, a surprising amount comes across.
 

snowfi6916

New member
Nov 22, 2010
336
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
I don't think the outrage about Chick Fil A is about the fact that their CEO (or whatever) is against gay marriage. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The problem is that he stated that he is using the money WE give him to support anti-gay marriage groups. Which pisses people who do support gay marriage and eat at Chick Fil A off, because they don't want their money going to something they don't support.

If you want to give money to those groups, use your own money, not the company money.
 

Alterego-X

New member
Nov 22, 2009
611
0
0
I'll just leave this there from the previous topic on that issue:

Alterego-X said:
I think the quote was misconstructed as "we" won't care about games until they are photorealistic, while it was intended to talk about expanding the market. "We" might love abstract games until our face is blue, but that won't magically make them more accepted.

All the counterexamples about non-photorealistic emotional things are either tiny niches, or seen as childish.

There is western animation for children, and anime for otaku.
Garfield Comic strips in newspapers, and Superhero comics for nerds.
Cartoonish party games for casuals, and arthouse indie games for hardcore gamers.

Paintings themselves are made by and for conisseours, while the rest of us couldn't tell a Van Gogh from a Hitler. As soon as we invented photography, ordinary people started to use that everywhere from portraits to landscapes, simply becase photorealistic is seen as superior.

So yes, I could actually agree with him, that if gaming wants to be recognized in the mainstream as an art form, it needs photorealistic dramas, romances, epics, and mysteries, not even more 2D platformers that look like expressionist paintings.
I'm not saying that pursuing photrealism is a GOOD THING for gaming as an art form, or that any of these things that the people above me are wrong.

Yes, minimalistic games can be expressive, animated films can make us cry, it's all about technique, etc.

But does the public see it that way, too? The people who sneer at the omnopoteia of comic books, and at the "bug-eyed" anime characters? Because that's what a studio cares about. 2K couldn't give a shit about the artistic merit of Braid and Bioshock, if CoD sells more, and that is what will make more people to be more invested in gaming.

And for the normal people that we call "casual gamers", this might very well be the way to connect them to gaming beyond flashy childish party games.

Given how they prefer live action entertainment over books, animation, and every other medium, it very well might be true that more identifiable facial expressions are a part of the Lowest Common Denominator for them.
 

irmasterlol

New member
Apr 11, 2012
178
0
0
ReinWeisserRitter said:
It doesn't have to, though; a game can be based entirely on, say, sound, with no visuals whatsoever and as long as it's done correctly, it could still be a riveting, if extremely difficult to pull off, experience.

Visuals are only a vehicle for the gameplay, as everything else is, to give shape to it and attempt to make you feel apart of the action. Graphics are merely the only method thusfar successfully employed to show us what the action is.

Of course, because so many game developers would have rather been movie directors, or just aren't very creative - usually both - that's usually what we get: interactive movies, sometimes barely interactive ones. But their lack of creativity isn't a flaw of the medium itself, nor does it represent what video games as a whole are capable of.
That seems like something that would have to fail miserably several times before anyone managed to pull it off. I'm certainly not here to sing the praises of the interactive movie crowd, the best stories merge seamlessly with the gameplay etc. etc.

I concede your point, but only in theory. I'm struggling to imagine a context in which it would actually be possible, but I guess that's why I'm not an innovative game designer pushing the limits of the medium.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
Chrono Trigger - one of the best games of all time, full of emotion, with graphics that still holds up.

Final Fantasy 6 - More moving than FF12 FF13 combined... Final Fantasy 4 was more moving too.
 

Sir Shockwave

New member
Jul 4, 2011
470
0
0
...You know, I look at that guy and think he's talking out of his arse. Something I'm surprised Jim didn't pick up on is that the man has double standards - Borderlands 2 comes out very soon, and both that and it's predecessor use a Cel-Shaded look. It may not be as bright and cartoony as Zelda (If anyone remembers XIII, that may work as a better comparison), but Cell Shaded is Cell Shaded and Hypocrisy is Hypocrisy.
 

octafish

New member
Apr 23, 2010
5,137
0
0
Graphics Shmaphics, current gen consoles are starved for RAM, bring on the next gen.
 

shadowmagus

New member
Feb 2, 2011
435
0
0
Redd the Sock said:
Anyone that says you need photorealistic graphics for empotional investment, I have two words for you:

Aerith Gainsbourough
Came here to say this. We're done here.
 

ReinWeisserRitter

New member
Nov 15, 2011
749
0
0
irmasterlol said:
That seems like something that would have to fail miserably several times before anyone managed to pull it off. I'm certainly not here to sing the praises of the interactive movie crowd, the best stories merge seamlessly with the gameplay etc. etc.
Video games using a visual medium didn't start out very well either, if you remember, and it wasn't the graphics' fault; it was because what was being done hadn't been tried and true yet. It took a few years for video games that thrilled and engrossed people to really come along, and even a lot of those don't stand up so well today because what they started has since been improved in some way or another.

irmasterlol said:
I concede your point, but only in theory. I'm struggling to imagine a context in which it would actually be possible, but I guess that's why I'm not an innovative game designer pushing the limits of the medium.
I'm not saying I am either, but the thing that makes people interesting is that we can make that which was not there before; we can make the unfeasible feasible, in the right hands. Video games themselves are an example of that, and as I've said before, we're wasting their potential, and by extension our own, by trying to make them emulate life.
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,225
0
0
well Crytek is on my list of 'devs that don't know how to do they're jobs' now.

fucking morons ....

photo realism can help, but only if the story is there to support it, it will not, and cannot achieve any connection with the target audience if the characters and story are all crap.

case in point, Vindictus, the game it self looks very good, but you get all the story bits from

[sub]pictured: one badass mofo[/sub]

riveting no? well, yes actually, the writing of the game is actually good enough that i actually cared, and subsequently felt rage and sadness when characters i liked died (in a fully voiced cut-scene, they aren't that cheap) or, in one characters case, inspired raw hatred.

no, i don't get to kill the son of a *****
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
I remember nothing of Crysis except thinking "well, it looks nice." At one point, there might have been an alien ship, but don't hold me to that. I couldn't sit through an hour of L.A.Noire, because it's uncanny valley effect hit me harder than anything else ever has, and it creeped me the fuck out. Photorealism does nothing if you don't have anything worth showing, and even fails if it's just shy of it. I'll take stylized any day, since it provides something extremely memorable.
 

Pink Gregory

New member
Jul 30, 2008
2,296
0
0
I think someone said it before on this forum; look at the body language and facial animations possible in the Source engine, how old is the Source engine?
Jeez even LA Noire is, what, 2 or three years old (and therefore outdated technology, apparently), and I don't think it's really necessary to advance beyond that in terms of attempted photorealism.

Some of the statements from developers sound like they're standing in front of an unlocked door, and waiting for the development of perfect animatronics in order to open it.
 

Shoggoth2588

New member
Aug 31, 2009
10,250
0
0
so THAT'S what was exactly said. What a stupid notion although it does make me realize that there are some standard DS games that aren't Pokemon I should pick up within the next couple of weeks. As I've said before in other threads Final Fantasy 4, 6, 7 and, 9 have brought on some pretty big emotions in me and I didn't even really care about plot/characters in games before Metal Gear Solid (that one game that looks like it was made using paper-craft you may have heard of). Whereas for modern games like Modern Warfare I couldn't even tell you the name of the protagonist or why I should care. When I first got to the nuke scene it was a big deal but it was marred by fact that my player character was just a nameless, faceless drone who I neither knew or cared about. If I knew he had a Terra Master card collection missing only one card before the bomb detonated, I would have cared that he ended up microwaved from the inside out.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Wow... do some devs STILL believe this crap? I know devs are just people to so their fully entitled to their own oppinions but hasn't EVERY bloody gaming website on the web basically been calling bollox on this chain of thought? Gah I thought this argument was over but I guess that was just silly of me.
 

Dangit2019

New member
Aug 8, 2011
2,449
0
0
Jandau said:
Well, now we know how Jim sounds while having sex. God help us all...
It was just so hot, wasn't it. No one else will ever be able to match the powers of the sex god that is Jim Sterling.
 

praus

New member
Jun 21, 2010
64
0
0
Sseth said:
I remember back when the entire escapist thought Jim was too full of himself and everyone wanted the show cancelled when he first started making these videos. Now I rarely see anything but praise for the Jimquisition.

Eat it, disbelievers. I love this show. Great episode.
The first few episodes were a bit rough around the edges. I can see why a few people might have been turned off (a lot of people lack vision). I liked them anyway and I'm glad I stuck it out. His videos are now some of my favorite webisodes out there.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
This is why most of my favorite games have had stylistic cartoony type graphics that weren't in any way realistic. I'm guessing these guys (the Crytek and 2k guy) have much the same attitude as James Cameron who waited 15+ years to make Avatar because the tech was ready yet instead of making the best use of the resources he had at the time.
DVS BSTrD said:
Have no God before rendering, for it is a jealous God.

^THIS Is why the new console generation worries me.
Also this is why we can't have nice things.
 

GonzoGamer

New member
Apr 9, 2008
7,063
0
0
They've been digging in that hole this whole Generation Jim.

When this generation began my wish was for a Burnout game that had bigger crash junctions. Sure maybe I was wishing small but I was playing a lot of Burnout Revenge at the time.
I didn't need them to look more realistic, what I wanted was more complicated intersections with more cars doing more things. Then they came out with a Burnout game for this generation and while it looked more slick, it didn't have any sort of crash junctions at all.
I feel that's kind of been the picture of the industry for this generation: using all the extra processing power to try and make things look more "realistic" when they should be making these virtual worlds feel more realistic.
 

LostintheWick

New member
Sep 29, 2009
298
0
0
This video helps to illustrate the importance of indie developers. A place in the industry where there is true heart in the work.
 

scw55

New member
Nov 18, 2009
1,185
0
0
Bastion made me cry.
Modern Warfare 2 didn't. I was gutted that Ghost died, but only because he had that bad-arse balaclava and we'd never see it again.

Mass Effect 3 made me very emotional too but that was Bioware and the graphics were always rather cartoony really.
 

mdqp

New member
Oct 21, 2011
190
0
0
Well, text adventure were the beginning of the videogames, if I am not mistaken, and they exist and engage people even today, so what are we talking about?

As someone else said before, this is about money, and trying to pull in a crowd as large as possible, meaning "casual" gamers. I don't know if they are attracted by shiny things, but the industry seems to think so, so that's what they'll chase.

Photorealism has nothing to do with evoking emotions, or even simply making a good game. Design is what is important in the graphical department of game, and nowadays we have enough power to run basically all a designer might need (or want) to make a good game.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Have no God before rendering, for it is a jealous God.

^THIS Is why the new console generation worries me.
Honour thy graphics card and processor is the one that worries me.
OT: Silly Jim. You want substance? *shakes head* Where did I go wrong?
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
scw55 said:
Bastion made me cry.
Speaking of making em cry, I remember my first major emotial response was to the end of Actraiser. A game that had blocky little dudes who made Minecraft look high end. Is it the deepest emotional reaction I've eve rhad? No, but there were a couple touching moments in the game.

Granted, this was a game pushing "Mode Seven" back when it was serious business, but that's not why it was endearing. It's also not why I still fondly remember it, even after playing games like Modern Warfare.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
gamejunkiey69 said:
Playing a game just for it's graphics is like watching porn for it's plot.
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
A) The last point I made was said entirely to facilitate the "Thank God for me" joke. It's a fairly bog-standard technique called Hypocritical Humor.

B) I'm a centrist.

C) Fuck Chick-Fil-A in its arse with my big gay penis.
 

HalfTangible

New member
Apr 13, 2011
417
0
0
Dammit, I was perfectly ready to thank god for you and then you go and do that chick-fil-a crap AGAIN...

First of all Jim, 'i support traditional marriage' is a political opinion, not a religious one.

Second of all, you should at LEAST hate the food served somewhere before you cut out your own fat over it >.>
 

Magmarock

New member
Sep 1, 2011
479
0
0
I agree with both of your points, but I do kind of see where Crytek is coming from. I felt that the Xbox was the reason why Crysis 2 wasn't anywhere near as good as Crysis 1 and so I was glade that they are focusing on PC's instead. I remember you saying in one of your previous videos that consoles are just crappy PC's and I agree with that too and I even think they Crytek might as well.

I really enjoy PC shooters such as Crysis but I feel that console hold them back, but it's not due to lacking in graphical power, it's due to the games being dumped down for the console crowed.
 

templar1138a

New member
Dec 1, 2010
894
0
0
...how the hell could anyone think "It tastes like hating gay people and shit!" supports Chick-fil-A-Holes?

As for graphics, I'm glad to see you're not an elitist prick who thinks graphics are completely insignificant, but you do feel damn good writing can make up for sub-par graphics. Too many gamers take a black-and-white stance. It's nice to see you know a thing or two about middle ground.
 

mdqp

New member
Oct 21, 2011
190
0
0
templar1138a said:
...how the hell could anyone think "It tastes like hating gay people and shit!" supports Chick-fil-A-Holes?

As for graphics, I'm glad to see you're not an elitist prick who thinks graphics are completely insignificant, but you do feel damn good writing can make up for sub-par graphics. Too many gamers take a black-and-white stance. It's nice to see you know a thing or two about middle ground.
I guess some people find hating "gay people" so delicious that it overshadows even shit... And that might be part of what makes me hate humanity, just maybe.
 

blackrave

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,020
0
0
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
I agree and disagree with Jim at the same time. While I 98% agree that developers need to focus more on art direction instead of technology, the other 2% disagrees, because I've been playing The Secret World the entire weekend (AMAZING game) and that game has some serious technology behind it, backed up with an amazing and stellar art direction.

That game has both great technology and amazing art direction, it has both colorful and gritty scenarios, but the grittiness only enhances the mood Funcom was trying to convey and seriously, that game just oozes atmosphere wherever you turn around.

I'm all up for great technology, but only if it's backed up by great art direction.
 

Gottesstrafe

New member
Oct 23, 2010
881
0
0
C'mon Jim it's pronounced "Col-bear Repore". The T's are silent. Take a listen. [http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/86305/may-07-2007/intro---5-7-07]

Back on topic though, yeah I teared up too my first time playing FF VI when I reached the opera scene.

And what, no shout out to WALL-E or To the Moon [http://freebirdgames.com/to_the_moon/]?
 

ElPatron

New member
Jul 18, 2011
2,130
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions.
Hey, I hate the so-called "liberals" as much as the average sane person, but I think his point was that Chick-Fil-A isn't a damned church and people shouldn't give a fuck about the brand just because of his president.

We get it, Jim thinks that the food is disgusting. Maybe I am inclined to defend Jim but I think that he meant that we shouldn't let religious debates sink into our lives.

Rellik San said:
"Says the man who shelled out £50 for a 6 hour wank fantasy because he's too scared to join the real army..."
I don't like your opinion.
 

Aeonknight

New member
Apr 8, 2011
751
0
0
Graphics serve to do 1 thing, enhance the story by allowing better representation of what the developer had in mind when creating the game. If there's nothing worthwhile to represent, then it's all a waste.

captcha: "respect me"
answer: no, fuck you.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
From the title I thought this would be about violence in realistic games and Jim was going to discuss morality of this issue since now games are becoming really realistic, imagine a Postal 2 with crisis graphics...

Anyway, everyone already knows that better graphics doesn't mean better experience, but finally Jim approached this issue on a new manner, the emotion.
 

Xan Krieger

Completely insane
Feb 11, 2009
2,918
0
0
Jim that just means more chicken for me. Seriously if everyone boycotted companies they disagreed with nobody would be buying anything.

Also I fully agree with your points about photorealism, every game in the metal gear solid series made me cry at some point. They had some of the most emotional moments of any game series and I've never even played MGS4. Just the ones on xbox or PS2 and that was far from photorealistic.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.

Also, you missed sound and music, pretty important too.
 

TitanAura

New member
Jun 30, 2011
194
0
0
I'm going to disagree with you on one thing, Jim. A religious statement has a place anywhere and everywhere regardless of whether anyone agrees with it or believes in it, including the speaker him/herself. As much as it grates on my nerves more than anything to have someone try to win an argument against me by throwing an "insert religious text here" quote at me and think that it trumps all other arguments because you can't prove a religious statement or opinion as being false.... I would rather have the freedom to do the same than suppress anyone's right to say otherwise. I believe Chick-fil-A has a right to express such an opinion even if doing so is a very very stupid thing to do indeed.
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
What I find somewhat ironic, that none of these big companies seem to realize, is a lot of their "modern games" fail to reach the emotional heights of their older, outdated, less-graphically impressive games.

Final Fantasy IV and VI made me feel far more emotion towards its characters than FFXII or FFXIII.

Silent Hill 1 & 2 have stories and emotional characters far beyond SH: Homecoming and Downpour.

In fact, some of the most "emotional" games I've played have very unrealistic graphics. ICO, Okami, Alice: Madness Returns, Killer7, Xenoblade, Chrono Trigger/Cross, Limbo...

2K is WRONG to assume that graphics equate emotion. We could still be using SNES-era graphics and creating stories that resonate with characters you empathize with. Technology is a poor man's tool of expression. The real meat of creativity and talent lies in everything BUT the technology; the art direction, the writing, the story pacing, the music. Technology is merely the paint.

While some people prefer oil paint over watercolor, or pastels over pencil sketches, the true talent lies, not in the material used, but in the way it is used. And I've seen some gorgeous pencil sketches in my day.

Off-topic: I have no problem being bisexual and supporting Chick-Fil-A. If I was going to boycott everything I don't agree with, I'd never shop at Wal-mart, never watch a film by Roman Polanski, never play Dragon Quest, never read H.G. Wells, and never listen to 90% of available music. Do what you like, and if they support a cause you disagree with, well, gosh, deal with the fact they don't share your opinion. That's just life.
 

stringtheory

New member
Dec 18, 2011
89
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.

Also, you missed sound and music, pretty important too.
I follow Yathzee's stament of 'Gameplay drives the car while story navigates and picks the radio station' damn accurate, too bad so many games manage to get it wrong
 

Trishbot

New member
May 10, 2011
1,318
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.

Also, you missed sound and music, pretty important too.
No, I agree. A well made story can surpass awkward gameplay in my book, provided the story is good enough.

Some great examples include Silent Hill. The game controls very poorly, but the story is so insanely good and rich and full of meaning and depth that I don't care one bit how clunky moving around and combat are. The same applies towards many RPGs, whose mechanics I hate but whose story, world-building, and characters are so indelible to experience that I would gladly suffer through random battles and bad menus to see more.

And sometimes a great game can be ruined by a bad story (Mass Effect 3, Bionic Commando, Final Fantasy XIII, etc.)

Granted, you can have great gameplay and a bad story (Mario!) and you can have a great story and bad gameplay, but I'm of the opinion that it's all in the approach. While I'd like BOTH to be good, sometimes a great narrative can overcome bad game design, and sometimes great gameplay can overcome a stupid story.

And sometimes, just sometimes, we get something like PORTAL. Yay.
 

BreakfastMan

Scandinavian Jawbreaker
Jul 22, 2010
4,368
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.
Easy: Because the way one experiences a story in a game is far different from a movie or a book, providing something that both movies and books cannot provide, and many enjoy that difference. Simple as that. :p
 

brazuca

New member
Jun 11, 2008
275
0
0
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Visual style, animations and graphics are all part of the same thing, visual presentation. Great graphics are a trip to the uncanny valley without good animation. Games like Witcher 2 and Metro 2033 failed to show great animation. Visual style can criple the exp. if they are the one element your game shows too much. The cheerleader, zombie game. Forgot what it was called and No More Heroes. Lots of visual style, in fact too much.
 

Frission

Until I get thrown out.
May 16, 2011
865
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.

"Oh no, I'll defend a guy on his free speech, by saying that someone else should not say something"

Oh wait, you forget the fact that he's using the money to pursue his own viewpoint.

Since you're not overtly pleasant, I can say without guilt that you should do your own damn research before running your mouth.

On topic: I liked the fact that you talked about books. You can make an engaging character with only the power of words.
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
I think MovieBob covered this in his"Reality Sucks" Game Overthinker video, although he said it was mostly because he didn't LIKE reality in his games because he hates the real world and prefers video games as an escape from that. Others, like Extra Credits, have said there ARE merits to photorealistic graphics, but we're not quite there yet, and it's a lot cheaper more cost-efficient to make a good-looking, yet less graphically impressive game. Really, though, I think that reality has it's place, but too many games are trying to hard to mimic the look of reality, without actually getting the appeal of reality, or using it properly in a game.
 

Frostbite3789

New member
Jul 12, 2010
1,778
0
0
Rellik San said:
I regularly have this debate with so called 'hardcore' gamers.

"Urgh... you're not hardcore, you're playing that stupid ball rolley sticky thing game, that's for kids."
"Says the man who shelled out £50 for a 6 hour wank fantasy because he's too scared to join the real army..."
Yeah! That'll teach them! Fight their sorry flawed arguments with sorry flawed arguments of your own!
 

Illessa

New member
Mar 1, 2010
67
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.

Also, you missed sound and music, pretty important too.
Because games can tell stories in ways that other mediums can't.

Take Journey - that game had me in floods of tears at the end and sure a film version could have had similar striking visuals, religious overtones, and Austin Wintory's beautiful score; but it was a game so it was me climbing that mountain and forming an emotional connection with my companion and that made it far more effective than a film could ever be.

Hell, Psychonauts is possibly my absolute favourite game and it's only middling in the gameplay stakes. It gains points for wonderfully inventive level, art and sound design of course, but where it really excels is the detailing in the narrative. Most people just run through the game in a few hours, and the story makes perfect sense if you do that, but the game constantly rewards you for exploring, even the most incidental characters have little plot arcs and character quirks that you can entirely miss even with multiple playthroughs. Obviously skimming through a book can have a similar sort of effect, but the way this kind of variable pacing can be a natural part of games is really interesting to me.

I don't know if I'd be able to make a straight-up prioritised list like blackrave did (and I would absolutely agree that kickass sound design is really important), but I can say that having interesting storytelling is the one way to guarantee that I will sit up and pay attention to your game. And whilst I extoll the virtues of games with interesting or well-executed game mechanics, its the ones with interesting narrative that stick with me for years.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
HalfTangible said:
Dammit, I was perfectly ready to thank god for you and then you go and do that chick-fil-a crap AGAIN...

First of all Jim, 'i support traditional marriage' is a political opinion, not a religious one.

Second of all, you should at LEAST hate the food served somewhere before you cut out your own fat over it >.>
Name one reason an atheist (ie non religious reason) would give to deny same sex marriage that isn't an outright lie and I might buy that. Just to curb some of the easy lies, our world is drastically overpopulated so a couple not producing offspring isn't bad in fact this needs to happen more if we're ever to reach some sustainability. Adopted children tend to do better with gay parents then straight in every peer reviewed statistical study. This isn't because gay people are better parents but only those who really thought about having children and really want them have kids and so they are self selecting. This is also due to the stricter vetting procedure of adoption. In other words gay people don't accidentally have kids and lock them in a closet for 10 years because they both can't and wouldn't bother.

Also, homosexuality is most likely a common (roughly one in ten) genetic mutation like having a longer second toes. This can be shown many ways, one of which is that homosexual men also have higher predispositions towards other specific physical traits. In other words, it is not a choice. Therefore, politically, in a society that claims universal freedom and life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, denying some people the right to love is fundamentally against the founding principles of the country and, politically speaking, only has religious rational to make the division. Given the doctrine that calls for separation of church and state the reasons and many other religious based decisions are also against the fundamental principles of yours, and nearly every other first world country, most of whom no longer consider it an issue.
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
Also, the idea that "games need to be photorealistic to be emotional" is akin to those idiots who think that animated movies or TV show can't reach the depth or maturity that live action can give, completely ignoring what REALLY drives the emotions in those fields.
 

Alandoril

New member
Jul 19, 2010
532
0
0
I agree, it's complete nonsense. I've felt plenty of genuine emotional reactions to games from this generation. So many in fact that I've lost count of them.

All this photo realism things comes across as is corporations making excuses for the fact that they are running on empty.
 

Howling Din

New member
Mar 10, 2011
69
0
0
The most pathetic thing about this issue is that so many people consider the argument relevant.
It's not. Anyone who gives this issue an excessive amount of their time in any way should find something better to do.
 

XDravond

Something something....
Mar 30, 2011
356
0
0
More often than not the unrealistic games evoke more emotions in my emotionless soul than the realistic ones, except perhaps one emotion the rage when screwing up etc in for example BF3... :)

But Bastion, BGE, Limbo, Braid, even freaking Kingdom Hearts were more emotion evoking than Crysis, CoD 99million, BF3... But will they learn no, will they understand no.
Why? They are execs leading a company with money as only driving power they don't care if a game is bad as long as it's selling and will make their upcoming titles also sell....
Whilst the smaller developers (and some unique ones like Valve) do it more (rarely only though) for conveying emotions or make good games or just have fun, money is more of a secondary positive incentive to make something great....

Thats at least how I see it, there's always exceptions to the rules however.
 

Akytalusia

New member
Nov 11, 2010
1,374
0
0
you're a good guy in a good position. keep bein' awesome and spreadin' the good word, Jim.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
TitanAura said:
I would rather have the freedom to do the same than suppress anyone's right to say otherwise. I believe Chick-fil-A has a right to express such an opinion even if doing so is a very very stupid thing to do indeed.
I don't recall Jim suggesting that Chick-Fil-A (or its representatives) should not have the right to express an opinion.
 

ThunderCavalier

New member
Nov 21, 2009
1,475
0
0
*facepalm*

I get the feeling that most next-gen Triple A developers have never played a game like Final Fantasy VI, which doesn't have realistic graphics but is possibly one of the emotional games I've ever played, and one of my all-time favorites.

Seriously, every new year, we get less and less memorable characters coming out for games that we accurately remember even months or years after we've put down the game. I can only think of Reznov of CoD (for his campiness and sheer likable dickishness) and the Geth from Mass Effect as memorable characters that really stand out and you can remember even after you've put down the game from this generation, but way back in the older games, I can think of Crash, Spyro, the entire cast of Final Fantasies VI and VII, and Mario and Luigi's portrayals in the Mario & Luigi GBA series.

Stop allocating money to the graphics department, and start spending more money on your story. I've seen MW3 and Battlefield 3 on my HDTV, and they look gorgeous. Now that I've stopped caring, please give me a story worth a damn.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
I chuckled at "Colbert Report".

Anyway, I have to imagine this is the reaction to calling out how David Cage is kind of bad with emotions:
Which, funnily enough, proves the point almost as well as the awkward sex scenes. Unless that cop was supposed to have Tourette's, in which case, I apologize. But I think we all know that he isn't supposed to have that.

Also, great use of "Thank god for me" this week.

Sseth said:
I remember back when the entire escapist thought Jim was too full of himself and everyone wanted the show cancelled when he first started making these videos. Now I rarely see anything but praise for the Jimquisition.

Eat it, disbelievers. I love this show. Great episode.
Damn straight skippy. I liked this show then and I still like it now. Suck it, haters.
 

Dr. Crawver

Doesn't know why he has premium
Nov 20, 2009
1,100
0
0
pretty good episode, but I just have to say this just because.

Hatfilms Hatfilms Hatfilms oh my god Hatfilms were in this.
 

Clive Howlitzer

New member
Jan 27, 2011
2,783
0
0
I agree completely. I think aesthetics are way more important than graphical fidelity and have for the longest time. I wish developers would realize this also.
 

noreshadow

New member
Feb 5, 2009
30
0
0
I cant wait until we achieve photo realism in games, so we can stop trying to achieve photo realism in games.

Maby then the people with the money can stop showing off fancy new rendering engines in scripted events and focus on fun original idea's AND OR story's

(of the opinion a game doesn't need a story, so if your going to include one, it better be good.)
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Nah. I love Bastion, Portal or BGoE just as much as I love Crysis, AssCreed or Far Cry.

The thing is, you can make a simplistic-looking, but otherwise great game on old hardware.

You want the next, better Crysis? Can't do.

I fully agree graphics isn't everything. But the point is that games shouldn't RELY on graphics and good graphics shouldn't REQUIRED of ALL games. But it's still important in some games. And yes, Crysis was awesome.
 

Varya

Elvish Ambassador
Nov 23, 2009
457
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
I know I'm gonna regret diving in to this, but the Chick-fil-a thing is not about what someone said, it's about what he does.
Maybe, in general, it isn't right to punish a whole company for what the guy on top thinks, but there's a pretty solid reason why to make an exeption in this case. The dude doesn't just gives money to anti-gay-marrige causes, he has donated to make homosexuality illegal, and to stop the US from condemning the "Kill-the-Gays" from Uganda (I think, not great on geografy).
Think about that, he thinks that we shouldnt say that killing gays is wrong. Buying from Chick-fil-a is giving him money, giving him money is supporting murder, that's the long and the short of it.
I'm a vegetarian, and we don't even have Chick-fil-a's where I'm from, but I feel like going to the US just to not eat there, that's how bad this is.
 

Varya

Elvish Ambassador
Nov 23, 2009
457
0
0
wackelpudding said:
I wouldn't say BioShock Infinite goes for a cartoony art style or something -- it's certainly not as (photo-)realistic as some of the Call of Honourfields but it goes for as realistic as its fantasy setting allows -- but this is an episode were I could've shouted "Amen!" every five seconds nonetheless. Good job!
Nah, BioShock Infinite has a conciously cartoony look. Take a look at the main girl, her anatomy isn't proper, just look at her eyes, and it isn't about fantasy, it's because a cartoony faces are easier to relate to, their expressions are more clear. And look at the art for that game in general, it's subtle, I'll give you, but it's colouring and texturing is conciously non-realistic. It fits the setting better, and photorealism would take away from the unique tone of the game
 

lord.jeff

New member
Oct 27, 2010
1,468
0
0
Redd the Sock said:
Anyone that says you need photorealistic graphics for empotional investment, I have two words for you:

Aerith Gainsbourough

Final Fantasy VII was a game that drove a lot of emotion despite a graphics level making characters look like Lego a lot of the time. Hell, FFVI got me in a few places with fucking pixels. Just admit you'd rather be making movies and move on.
Actually the graphics is what made that game so big it was in the early days of 3D and the first time we saw a non sprite character give emotions. Better graphics can help but should never be the main appeal of a game if it is it's not a game it's a tech demo
 

-|-

New member
Aug 28, 2010
292
0
0
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
 

Samantha Burt

New member
Jan 30, 2012
314
0
0
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who thinks photo-realism is a requirement for something to be art has zero grasp on what art is actually.
 

karamazovnew

New member
Apr 4, 2011
263
0
0
Why is Limbo given as an example with "10%" graphics? Limbo looks great, a testament that visual expression can be achieved with good art direction. But anyway, back to our 3d world.

While playing Skyrim and The Witcher 2, I felt that the better a game looks, the harder it is to make it immersive. Why? Because of the bloody screen. I've spent my early teen life playing flight simulators and not a month goes by without me searching the internet for the latest news in head tracking gear and head mounted displays. The 3d gimmick has never caught on, and even with photorealistic graphics it would still be limiting. What we need to do is go INSIDE the game. Publishers should support the virtual helmet industry, to market cheaper and cheaper versions. Even Borderlands 1 would be THE SHIT if played on such a device. Yes, there are lots of issues regarding control and aiming, but the rewards of cracking that would be amazing. I mean ffs, the mouse is still regarded as the best way to aim a weapon in a game. Surely we can do better. The first wave of helmet games would be simulators, maybe even sparking new interest in a dying genre. But soon after, you'd have exploration games, where the environment would become more and more important.

So, to sum up, photorealism? Neah. Head mounted displays? Now you're talkin...
 

Sovereignty

New member
Jan 25, 2010
584
0
0
I'm not gonna lie. I sat through the whole episode and now 5 minutes later couldn't say a damn thing about it. Completely forgettable.

That's really not a good thing. I obviously speak for just myself, but where usually I find some humor and memorable points to take from it... This week, I am just struggling to try and figure out what you were trying to say? Console generation isn't over? Graphically pleasing = suck? I don't know...
 

tautologico

e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0
Apr 5, 2010
725
0
0
karamazovnew said:
Why is Limbo given as an example with "10%" graphics? Limbo looks great, a testament that visual expression can be achieved with good art direction. But anyway, back to our 3d world.

While playing Skyrim and The Witcher 2, I felt that the better a game looks, the harder it is to make it immersive. Why? Because of the bloody screen. I've spent my early teen life playing flight simulators and not a month goes by without me searching the internet for the latest news in head tracking gear and head mounted displays. The 3d gimmick has never caught on, and even with photorealistic graphics it would still be limiting. What we need to do is go INSIDE the game. Publishers should support the virtual helmet industry, to market cheaper and cheaper versions. Even Borderlands 1 would be THE SHIT if played on such a device. Yes, there are lots of issues regarding control and aiming, but the rewards of cracking that would be amazing. I mean ffs, the mouse is still regarded as the best way to aim a weapon in a game. Surely we can do better. The first wave of helmet games would be simulators, maybe even sparking new interest in a dying genre. But soon after, you'd have exploration games, where the environment would become more and more important.

So, to sum up, photorealism? Neah. Head mounted displays? Now you're talkin...
If you haven't done it already, I suggest you take a look at this Kickstarter project:
Oculus Rift [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game]

It's mainly a kickstarter for developers (rewards include the devkit but not the "user" device alone), but they have a working prototype and apparently they managed to impress a lot of people in the industry (just watch the video). It seems exciting stuff.
 

Casey Goddard

New member
Apr 1, 2012
18
0
0
I touched on a similar topic awhile back on my blog. You can read it here (if your interested):

http://caseygoddard.blogspot.jp/2011/11/under-hood.html

Basically, I think graphic showcase games are to video games as a whole, in the same way muscle cars are to automobiles in general. Yeah, they got a big engine are fun to mess around in, but the suspension and handling aren't great. They got horrible gas mileage, and you can't do a whole lot with then aside from showing off.
 

-|-

New member
Aug 28, 2010
292
0
0
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who thinks photo-realism is a requirement for something to be art has zero grasp on what art is actually.
Sure, but that's not what I said.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Hmm... I agree on a certain scale; I generally tend to feel that game creators that "need" more processing power before they can make a good game are in some sense being lazy, not just because it suggests that all other aspects of game creation are taking the back seat to chrome, but because every generation previous tends to make not only its best games but its most technically innovative ones when it's pushed past the outer limits of what the hardware is supposedly capable of doing... And frankly, I'm not entirely convinced we're there, yet. Do today's games really look all that much better from those made in 2010?

But on the other hand, I have to wonder if good graphics have to be a crutch or a burden, if that isn't to some degree more a problem of game design/business philosophy than an inescapable problem or a technical one. It's easy to post on your box that you're using the latest version of Unreal Tech; it's easy to wow trade show audiences with a particle-effect heavy sand storm or the pores on realistically shifting and light-reflecting skin. It's harder to make it clear in an advertisement or a screen shot or even a short demo that the game has an engaging plot, or deep, sympathetic characters, or even an innovative new interface. "Indie" games have the benefit that most of their business doesn't come from trade show buzz or million-dollar advertising campaigns, but from good reviews and word-of-mouth; in the current climate, I think most AAA- and even single-A game creators feel that if people don't start champing at the bit to buy a game long before the first reviews and word-of-mouth, they've already lost.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
"...flat and dry as a mummy's titts..."

That was so funny that I failed to laugh as my brain struggled to fully appreciate the hilarity of what was being said.
I still haven't laughed. I think I'm under shock.
 

Samantha Burt

New member
Jan 30, 2012
314
0
0
-|- said:
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who thinks photo-realism is a requirement for something to be art has zero grasp on what art is actually.
Sure, but that's not what I said.
If I've misunderstood, I apologise. Your wording seemed to imply that, and I'm struggling to find another interpretation. Would you kindly clarify? :)
 

Sacman

Don't Bend! Ascend!
May 15, 2008
22,661
0
0
:O...

I saw a nipple... Just Sayin...<.<

but honestly this episode didn't do a whole lot... it really just stuck to the obvious...
 

LazyAza

New member
May 28, 2008
716
0
0
Lol fucking Crytek and 2K just proving how little they understand about the true potential of the medium. Abe's Oddysee was one of the first games to emotionally effect me and it came out in the mid 90s and was predominately a sprite based super pixelated platformer. I thought the somewhat dated graphics would stop it from being as effective now but upon replaying it and its sequel last year I was proven wrong.
 

xPixelatedx

New member
Jan 19, 2011
1,316
0
0
Anoni Mus said:
blackrave said:
It is fairly simple for me
1.Story
2.Gameplay
3.Visual style
4.Animations
5.Controls
6.Graphics
Putting story over gameplay? Why even play games? Just grab a book or watch a movie since you must love cutscenes.

Yes, I don't get how someone can put story over gameplay, specially considering that story in games mostly suck.

Also, you missed sound and music, pretty important too.
If it makes you feel any better here is my list:

1.Gameplay
2.Visual style
3.Music/Sound
4.Controls
5.Animations
6.Story

Graphics aren't even on my list, because that doesn't even make any sense to me. Any game can look good or bad in any level of graphics, it all depends on how well it was crafted. Something can be poto-realistic but look like shit, and something can look like Mega Man 2 and look sweet. It's all subjective and circumstantial. I also agree with you on the story thing. I often get in arguments with my friend over this because story is his #1 to. I just think if a story is too big or too invasive it distracts from the GAME part of this VIDEO GAME, and would have probably made a better animated movie/book.

But then again all I need is "It's dangerous to go alone, take this!" to get my adrenaline going. That's all the story you need right there.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
I agree with the point that graphics do not make a game. If I were to list my all time favorite games, a good chuck of them would be PS1 titles. Many of them, did not have great graphics even at the time, but none of them have good graphics by today's standards. It was the story and the gameplay that sold me on them. Good graphics are nice, but not the only thing that you need.

I was gonna reply to the whole Chick Fil A thing with a long rant, but instead, I'll say this:

I have no problem with Gay Marriage and see no reason why it shouldn't be legal.
I have no problem with anything Dan Cathy said, nor do I care what he does with the money he earns.
Chick Fil A has better food and better service than any other fast-food restaurant out there.
Also, I know there were protestors at some of them last Friday, and at least some of the restaurants were offering them free lemonade, stating that they support Free Speech for the protestors and their President. I approve of this action.

Oh, and before anyone says, I am apologizing for the company:
I couldn't care less what Dan Cathy thinks about gay marriage! But, at least, he stands up for his beliefs. If you disagree, do what you must. Protest. Boycott. Complain. I don't care. That's your right. I'll just go buy a chicken sandwich. Not because I don't support gay marriage. But because I DO support Freedom of Speech!
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
The Heavy Rain comment was a low blow. Simply due to the fact that it is very difficult to actually get the game published that tests that line for sex and sexual themes without being dragged into the mainstream and being called pornography. At least despite failing it tried to actually be tasteful and tried to push the border for future developers to actually not be afraid to include sex in their game.
 

NaramSuen

New member
Jun 8, 2010
261
0
0
I have been listening to people prattle on about graphics since the days of the Atari 2600 and this is just more of the same. Clearly it was The Legend of Zelda's awesome graphics which captivated me and caused me to spend hours exploring Hyrule. Graphics are the extras which add to the game mechanics and should always be thought of as so.

On a related note of inappropriateness, I was cheering Jim on with chants of, "Amen!" and "Preach on Jim!" during the video.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
A very good job with this video, Jim. I have to agree. Out of most of the most memorable experiences I can think of, very few were "photo-realistic".

Also, I'm always amazed how many people fail to read between the lines. It's amazing people didn't get that you were trying to mock the Chick-Fil-A debate in that segment.

Nicolaus99 said:
-insert typical Republican rant here-
Fun fact, everyone....ever wondered how you can tell a Republican from a Democrat or Independent?

Count the number of times they say "liberal".

The Democrat/Independent will use the term rarely at best. But the Republican will spend his entire time arguing that the other guy is secretly an evil liberal shoving his evil liberal agenda down our throats. Even if the person in question is a fellow Republican. See: the 2012 primaries, where each Republican wasted their time trying to prove that their opponents were "secret liberals" in line with the Obama agenda.

Seriously. Try it some time. It really works.

Jimothy Sterling said:
A) The last point I made was said entirely to facilitate the "Thank God for me" joke. It's a fairly bog-standard technique called Hypocritical Humor.

B) I'm a centrist.

C) Fuck Chick-Fil-A in its arse with my big gay penis.
I about DIED when I read this post. Thanks for the best laugh I've had in a while, Jim! XD
 

faefrost

New member
Jun 2, 2010
1,280
0
0
snowfi6916 said:
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
I don't think the outrage about Chick Fil A is about the fact that their CEO (or whatever) is against gay marriage. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The problem is that he stated that he is using the money WE give him to support anti-gay marriage groups. Which pisses people who do support gay marriage and eat at Chick Fil A off, because they don't want their money going to something they don't support.

If you want to give money to those groups, use your own money, not the company money.
No he is not using money that "You gave him". You did not donate money to Dan Cathy or to Chik Fil A. You willingly purchased goods or services from him. This is called commerce. Once you engage in commerce the money is the merchants to do with as he pleases, and the goods are yours to do with as you please. You can no more question what he chooses to do with that money than your employer can question and evaluate your purchases using your weekly paycheck.

You can choose to not do business with this merchant. That is your free choice. But you have no legitimate right to question what he does with his legitimate earnings. Even implying so indicates a level of narcissistic entitlement that makes me weep for the future of our country.

we now return you to our regularly scheduled gaming rant.
 

-|-

New member
Aug 28, 2010
292
0
0
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who thinks photo-realism is a requirement for something to be art has zero grasp on what art is actually.
Sure, but that's not what I said.
If I've misunderstood, I apologise. Your wording seemed to imply that, and I'm struggling to find another interpretation. Would you kindly clarify? :)
What I mean is that it's not up to us to decide what artistic style they should use to convey the meaning they intend to convey. If they say they need photorealism then they need it.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
Jim managed to touch on both the first game that came to mind when I said "bullshit" to the notion that only through amazing graphics can emotion be conveyed (Final Fantasy 3 (6) ) and something that I've thought for quite a long while now, specifically and exactly as Jim said: the reason older games/less graphically-based games tend to be more engaging is because they don't use all the flashing lights and pretty colors to hold your attention, they have to use other things to engage and hook the audience in...namely: good stories and writing.
 

CarlsonAndPeeters

New member
Mar 18, 2009
686
0
0
I would argue that L.A. Noire PROVES that photorealism does not lead to better gameplay experiences. Team Bondi sunk tons of money into that facial technology so that you could tell if a person was lying in an interrogation, the result looked pretty damn realistic. HOWEVER, it didn't work as a gameplay device. It was too strict--person is avoiding eye contact, they're lying; holding your gaze, they're not. You could have accomplished that with any kind of graphical level. Good looking game that did not follow through on the game part.

Then to list games that work because their simplistic graphics enhance the game...I don't know, Limbo, Bastion, Journey, Shadow of the Colossus, Ico, Superbrothers, freaking Minecraft...
 

Kalikin

New member
Aug 28, 2010
68
0
0
I think the quest for photo-realism has a place in gaming, but in the end it comes down to what kind of experience a developer wants to create. Just as you say, we'd be far better off if they put more effort into weighing up what elements would convey the emotion they intend, instead of just hoping that graphical fidelity will pull them through. In the case of Crytek, I have to wonder if they won't be satisfied until you can see the fear in an enemy's eyes as you gun them down.
I'm not quite sure the comparison with books is really that apt, though - writing as a craft is completely different to making a game.
 

Shinsei-J

Prunus Girl is best girl!
Apr 28, 2011
1,607
0
0
Jim really loves FFIX it seems.
Other than that thought I agree with him on every point.
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
-|- said:
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Samantha Burt said:
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who thinks photo-realism is a requirement for something to be art has zero grasp on what art is actually.
Sure, but that's not what I said.
If I've misunderstood, I apologise. Your wording seemed to imply that, and I'm struggling to find another interpretation. Would you kindly clarify? :)
What I mean is that it's not up to us to decide what artistic style they should use to convey the meaning they intend to convey. If they say they need photorealism then they need it.
There's a big difference between "I want photorealism to convey emotions" and "You need photorealism to convey emotions."
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Mistilteinn said:
If someone wants to see realistic graphics, there are these things called "outside" and "life". One is a massive world map to explore, and the other is probably the longest running MMORPG in history. Maybe if certain developers tried them out outside of their jobs, they'd realize that not everything needs to look 'real' to convey emotion or keep the player invested in the world. Video games are a form of escapism, and real life is, well, real life. Let's try keep them separate, eh?
the loot is crap you get from looting your average person in the street and the respawn point of the hospital bed sucks
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Some of my biggest gaming tragedies (often bringing tears to my eyes as I shout the names of the fallen and weep for their deaths) have been in Dwarf Fortress.

I'll let that sink in.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
I'm generally pleased as punch to fallow jim like a drone until now. He's funny clever and original.
Jimmy,
Chick Fila is a nothing small ass nobody fast food chain. and you felt the need to shit all over religion because your ambiguously fat gay ass is offended.

I love yah to death Jim, but no one cares about Chick Fila. Chick Fila could be serving children in sandwiches and they still wouldn't matter. Your entitled to your own opinion, and God bless you for having it, but were you just being ironic at the end?

Just to be totally clear, your awesome just stop beating up on religion LOL. Pretty please.
 

RaziTheRed

New member
Jun 15, 2010
31
0
0
I realize the point of the video and I agree with Jim on most if not all the points he made. However, the thing that got my attention most in this video was the Minecraft reference because the footage he used was from some of my favorite filmmakers!
 

likalaruku

New member
Nov 29, 2008
4,291
0
0
I like a more cartoony style. Personally the more realistic they try to make games look, the further they slip into the uncanny valley. They look as unsettling as rotoscope animation. Besides, isn't the point of games to escape reality & not be reminded of it?

Yeah, if they want to tug at our heartstrings, maybe they should make character development a top priority & hire a professional writer to work on the story long before they even start working on the game.

Hmm...I think I'll replay Telltale's Back to the Future tomorrow...
 

5-0

New member
Apr 6, 2010
549
0
0
To be honest, I thought this point was so stupid it didn't need to be addressed. The person who said it clearly hadn't thought things through. You don't create emotion with graphics. You create it with great writing and storytelling. The ending to RDR's emotional punch wouldn't be diminished just by having more cartoon-like, stylised graphics. Great episode as usual.
 

jmarquiso

New member
Nov 21, 2009
513
0
0
-|- said:
Anyone who would tell a developer they are full of shit for wanting photo-realistic graphics is somebody that doesn't think games are art.
Art managed to not be photorealistic for a very long time, and when photography came around, other art worked on separating from it as much as possible.
 

Doclector

New member
Aug 22, 2009
5,010
0
0
Oh, I see what you did thar with the end bit and the religion and the thanking god. Clever.

I agree fully. How 2K even came out with that is beyond me, because some of their games have been the poster child for art design and writing over pure FOTOREALISEM! Look at bioshock, its graphics don't look anywhere near as impressive as they used to, but it's still great. The story's still awesome, and in fact, it still looks great. Sure, in terms of graphical quality, we've moved onto shinier things, but the design is fantastic.

That's another thing people keep forgetting. I can look out my window for a photorealistic city street. I cannot, however, look at a stunning art deco underwater dystopia, with both signs of its former glory, and its decay. I cannot look at towering mountains with ancient burial sites built into the sides of them, and a dragon circling the one of the peaks. I cannot switch my vision to colourful cel-shading, nor to the rough, cartoony, but appealing look of kingdoms of amular/WoW.

Like in film, I consider mimicking real life in a videogame to be a massive waste. Why settle for it when working with a medium that allows you to show more? Make something unique.

And then there's the fact that, seeming as we've never had a photorealistic videogame before, we don't know what our minds will do with such an optical illusion, and the societal issues of what happens when any image can be made realistically. Say, like generating a popular politician's image into a picture of a brothel, or replacing one person seen at a crime with another? But that's a whole other side of the issue to explore.
 

FoolKiller

New member
Feb 8, 2008
2,409
0
0
Hmm... I'm hoping not too many care what Crytek says. These are the idiots that create a game (Crysis) that requires such an advanced piece of hardware that it was its own running joke for a while.

And I was emotionally attached to many characters from the SNES era of games. The only one I'll disagree with is Heavy Rain... I got hooked into that one, but not because of graphics, just because I thought the writing and the scenario was provoking. They made players have to make choices that had significant consequences that you couldn't predict
 

irishmanwithagun

New member
Mar 6, 2012
50
0
0
What disturbs me is that as soon as devs catch wind that customers want to be able to emotionally invest in their games they immediately make up this bullshit excuse that they can't make emotionally rich games because the graphics technology hasn't developed far enough. Ignoring for a moment decades of emotionally rich games that supported themselves without photorealistic graphics or the graphical plateau that this generation's consoles have reached, this is like someone saying that they can only write an emotionally rich novel once the latest typewriter has come out, and then using the same excuse once they got said typewriter. Now that's just insane, you can't blame your own shortcomings as an artist on the current level of graphical technology when ten years ago Goichi Suda and Team Silent managed to (probably) cause suicide pacts by mining the technology they had for what it was worth.
If Neon Genesis Evangelion can send me into depression with a few crappy cells, if Silent Hill 2 can make me shit myself with PS2 graphics, if Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy can make me laugh with just INK ON A PAGE then (THEN send me into depression) I'm pretty sure game devs can make do with the graphics that they have and stop being such self-entitled little pussies.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
[quote="Jimothy Sterling" post="6.384276.15235416C) Fuck Chick-Fil-A in its arse with my big gay penis.[/quote]

*Dresses up as chick-fi-a worker*.

MhhhhhmmMMMMMMMmmmmm
 

Ritchian

Wait, what?
Jul 29, 2009
37
0
0
The idea that we need more realistic graphics in order to make 'better' or more emotionally moving games has been, to me, the most distressing attitude in game making for more than a decade. Don't get me wrong. Graphics are important, and innovating in visuals is a necessary thing for the games industry. But it takes far more than pretty graphics to make a good game. Visuals are just one ingredient in the formula.

If done right, any game can emotionally move a person. Photo realism or top-notch graphics are a tool, not an end. Older games may not have had more than a character sprite and occasional character portrait to work with in graphically depicting their characters, but there are many games from my youth that have moved me far more than some newer games. That's not to say that there aren't newer games with fancy, top-of-the-line graphics that have similar emotional resonance. But they have that effect not because of their graphics, but because of how they presented their subject matter as a whole. Writing, music, gameplay and everything else that goes into making a video game are as important as graphics will ever be.

Many times, great art can arise where an artist has to struggle against their limitations. The same can be said for video games. The tools available do not dictate the quality of the game or what kind of emotional resonance it will have on it's player. It's how the developer uses the tools that does so. I hope more game developers figure this out so that the industry can quit focusing all of it's attention on the old graphical arms race and put some of those resources into making better overall games.
 

ShadowKatt

New member
Mar 19, 2009
1,410
0
0
Alterego-X said:
I'll just leave this there from the previous topic on that issue:

Alterego-X said:
I think the quote was misconstructed as "we" won't care about games until they are photorealistic, while it was intended to talk about expanding the market. "We" might love abstract games until our face is blue, but that won't magically make them more accepted.

All the counterexamples about non-photorealistic emotional things are either tiny niches, or seen as childish.

There is western animation for children, and anime for otaku.
Garfield Comic strips in newspapers, and Superhero comics for nerds.
Cartoonish party games for casuals, and arthouse indie games for hardcore gamers.

Paintings themselves are made by and for conisseours, while the rest of us couldn't tell a Van Gogh from a Hitler. As soon as we invented photography, ordinary people started to use that everywhere from portraits to landscapes, simply becase photorealistic is seen as superior.

So yes, I could actually agree with him, that if gaming wants to be recognized in the mainstream as an art form, it needs photorealistic dramas, romances, epics, and mysteries, not even more 2D platformers that look like expressionist paintings.
I'm not saying that pursuing photrealism is a GOOD THING for gaming as an art form, or that any of these things that the people above me are wrong.

Yes, minimalistic games can be expressive, animated films can make us cry, it's all about technique, etc.

But does the public see it that way, too? The people who sneer at the omnopoteia of comic books, and at the "bug-eyed" anime characters? Because that's what a studio cares about. 2K couldn't give a shit about the artistic merit of Braid and Bioshock, if CoD sells more, and that is what will make more people to be more invested in gaming.

And for the normal people that we call "casual gamers", this might very well be the way to connect them to gaming beyond flashy childish party games.

Given how they prefer live action entertainment over books, animation, and every other medium, it very well might be true that more identifiable facial expressions are a part of the Lowest Common Denominator for them.
Edit: Ignore that. Apparently the quote button is at the TOP of the post now >.> what the hell.
 

RobfromtheGulag

New member
May 18, 2010
931
0
0
The message I took away was from this Jimquisition was that good graphics are not required to convey emotions. I don't know if anyone is going to disagree with this, even the 2K guy who made the statement.

I don't think good graphics detract from conveying emotions either though, by the same token. Games that come to mind are Silent Hill, Dragon Age, or Oblivion. They're going for the realistic look in these games, but they couldn't quite get it, and the result is the dead-eye syndrome that affects games to this day. Assuming they could perfectly tailor a face to a human's when a loved one dies or they fall in love or something, that'd be nice. Graphics are certainly not a crutch or a stand-in for story, but done well I think a game with realistic graphics would trump base graphics trying to convey the same scenario.
 

Captain Trek

New member
Jul 21, 2011
36
0
0
Could someone tell me what the name of game we briefly see from 2:20 to 2:25 is? I can't quite make out what Jim says...
 

-|-

New member
Aug 28, 2010
292
0
0
Denamic said:
-|- said:
What I mean is that it's not up to us to decide what artistic style they should use to convey the meaning they intend to convey. If they say they need photorealism then they need it.
There's a big difference between "I want photorealism to convey emotions" and "You need photorealism to convey emotions."
My view is that the gaming industry needs photo-realism as a stylistic choice open to developers. Also, a corollary of this is that this ability also implies that any graphical effect imaginable can be achieved.

"Recreating a Mission Impossible experience in gaming is easy; recreating emotions in Brokeback Mountain is going to be tough, or at least very sensitive in this country... it will be very hard to create very deep emotions like sadness or love, things that drive the movies," he said. "Until games are photorealistic, it'll be very hard to open up to new genres. We can really only focus on action and shooter titles; those are suitable for consoles now."

He continued, "To dramatically change the industry to where we can insert a whole range of emotions, I feel it will only happen when we reach the point that games are photorealistic; then we will have reached an endpoint and that might be the final console."
Is what the 2K actually guy said and I mostly agree with him apart from the final console bit.

I know that the escapist community is a bit reactionary and prefers to go from the headline rather than read the story, but jim is no better here. His faux reactionary "look at me" take on things has sunk to a new low. Yet, another rant about an opinion that doesn't actually exist that we can all agree with? Amazing Jim, truly amazing - really pushing the envelope this time.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
CriticKitten said:
Nicolaus99 said:
-insert typical Republican rant here-
Fun fact, everyone....ever wondered how you can tell a Republican from a Democrat or Independent?

Count the number of times they say "liberal".

The Democrat/Independent will use the term rarely at best. But the Republican will spend his entire time arguing that the other guy is secretly an evil liberal shoving his evil liberal agenda down our throats. Even if the person in question is a fellow Republican. See: the 2012 primaries, where each Republican wasted their time trying to prove that their opponents were "secret liberals" in line with the Obama agenda.

Seriously. Try it some time. It really works.
Facts must make you uncomfortable. A man goes to a religious publication, makes a religious statement there and you get butt hurt over it. Then Jim rags on him using self hypocritical humor which is kind of like talking sh_t while being subtly supportive, yet denying being supportive.

If you want to ID Democrats, Google up how many times the media says "Right Wing" or "Conservative" or "Republican" but never "Left Wing" or "Liberal" or "Democrat" or how when a Democrat is caught in some scandal they conveniently refrain from identifying their party affiliation; the latter has been dubbed the "Name That Party Game". The work has been done for you, watch dogs word count every single transcript. All the above is demonstrably true if you can bear to remove your blinders. Hey, tell us again how Bill Clinton was the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy to frame him for infidelity and lying under oath.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Once again I found myself agreeing with Jim... IT'S THE SEVENTH SIGN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quality of graphics dosen't equal quality of game.

A solid gold piece of shit is still a piece of shit!



But a diamond in the rough is STILL a diamond.

 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
-insert Republican rant here-
Aw, good attempt, bro.

But I'm a registered independent who has voted for both parties at some time or another. Whoops. Can't dismiss my opinion as just another radical liberal, I guess....unless you want to prove my original post true by spending the next several posts arguing about how I'm secretly an evil liberal with an evil liberal agenda. You should've taken Admiral Ackbar's advice, dear boy, and bowed out when you had the chance. Now you've started a political debate and have to somehow prove that my opinion is wrong (pro-tip: opinions generally cannot be wrong) without pointing out that I'm a dirty evil liberal, otherwise you've successfully proven my original point and thus refuted your own argument.

Feel free to try again, though. It always amuses me when someone tries to instantaneously dismiss another man's opinion by pointing to their political leanings, but when they find themselves on the defensive, that same guy will point out that every man has a right to an opinion.

Guess what: just as the Chick-Fil-A guy has a right to his opinion, Jim has a right to his opinion too. Don't like it? Too bad, the argument applies both ways. Find somewhere else to troll.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2020
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
I agree, as I am playing Secret of Mana and can't wait to play Secret of Evermore again right after I beat SOM again, I can't help but to wonder why I don't have this attachment to any current gen games.

I came to a half ass, probably wrong conclusion but here it is. This generation has been great and terrible, we have seen great games and terrible business practices. So if the games are so great (and they are), why do none of them make me smile like some SNES games, mostly from Squaresoft? I think it's that current gen games are great but only the first time through. In 20 years I doubt I will be playing any current gen game.

So yeah, pretty graphics aren't everything.

About the Chick-Fil-A thing. I think it's the homosexual side that is being pushy but I don't have a dog in this fight. I may not be seeing the whole picture because I have little interest in following it but what little I have seen makes the homosexual crowd look overly aggressive.

You know what I find amazing? Just how quickly the homosexual movement has grown. It's like one day it shows up everywhere and people won't shut up about it. The same people who didn't give two shits about it a week earlier. I think some people are tools for those pushing this movement.
 

Tharwen

Ep. VI: Return of the turret
May 7, 2009
9,145
0
0
cpt blackamar said:
pretty good episode, but I just have to say this just because.

Hatfilms Hatfilms Hatfilms oh my god Hatfilms were in this.
Oh my god me too oh my god oh my god Hatfilms
 

geizr

New member
Oct 9, 2008
850
0
0
It seems that a lot of the whining and complaining about what's wrong with the gaming industry is confined almost exclusively to the mainstream, triple-A content. This is not to say that there aren't problems with games outside that regime, but it always seems to sound like that particular regime has the highest concentration of offenses. Maybe it's time to move away from or at least de-emphasize triple-A gaming. Seriously, if all we ever do is ***** about it, then maybe it's just not worth bothering with anymore.
 

Faerillis

New member
Oct 29, 2009
116
0
0
TitanAura said:
I'm going to disagree with you on one thing, Jim. A religious statement has a place anywhere and everywhere regardless of whether anyone agrees with it or believes in it, including the speaker him/herself. As much as it grates on my nerves more than anything to have someone try to win an argument against me by throwing an "insert religious text here" quote at me and think that it trumps all other arguments because you can't prove a religious statement or opinion as being false.... I would rather have the freedom to do the same than suppress anyone's right to say otherwise. I believe Chick-fil-A has a right to express such an opinion even if doing so is a very very stupid thing to do indeed.
I believe he means Religious Statements have no place or value outside any place of worship or theological discussion. Nor should religion influence political opinions or issues because really, we don't live in the Middle Ages and it really shouldn't matter.
 

Tippy

New member
Jul 3, 2012
153
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
Super-realistic graphics tend to convey the complete opposite to an emotional connection from me. Heavy Rain was as uncanny valley as you can get, and L.A. Noire reached a whole nother level where everyone looked like real people wearing rubber man suits and hats.
Well, that just means we're almost there right? There's got to be an uncanny valley before we hit "true" photo-realism, there's got to be a night before the day.

But I generally agree that graphics have absolutely NOTHING to do with conveying emotions, the human brain is an amazing device that can "fill in" the missing visuals with our raw power of imagination to help convey the emotions. As Jim said, books are the perfect example. I've read some absolutely memorable pieces of writing that have driven me to tears (or inversely, punch the air in excitement/joy). The human mind can simply take WORDS and translate them into faces, emotions, etc that can tug at our hearts.

Hell, they say sex brings out the deepest emotions - and I've read some pieces of writing which literally had me breathing heavily, sometimes more intimate/emotional than I've even seen sex in MOVIES using actual people, let alone video games. (I hope I'm coming off as creepy, I hope I'm not the only one who has read some mind-blowing novels about intimate romance and relationship).

So whichever asshat said we need photo-realistic visuals to achieve that is talking out of his...well, ass.
 

Cain_Zeros

New member
Nov 13, 2009
1,494
0
0
I teared up watching an LP of Okami, and I'm man enough to admit it. If I can emotionally connect to a non-photorealistic game that I'm not even playing, I'd say there's no weight to the argument that photorealism is required for emotional connection at all.
 

PhiMed

New member
Nov 26, 2008
1,483
0
0
Frission said:
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.

"Oh no, I'll defend a guy on his free speech, by saying that someone else should not say something"

Oh wait, you forget the fact that he's using the money to pursue his own viewpoint.

Since you're not overtly pleasant, I can say without guilt that you should do your own damn research before running your mouth.

On topic: I liked the fact that you talked about books. You can make an engaging character with only the power of words.
Well, I don't know who this guy is, but I'm pretty sure he's not the mayor of a major population center who is threatening to punish Jim financially for his opinions.

So... your argument pretty much falls apart there, because that's what's happening to Dan Cathy. Right now. As we speak.

Freedom of speech protects you from the government, not other people. Other people can criticize you all they want.

I thought Dan Cathy was a HUGE asshole, until government officials started to state they would withhold building permits because Chick-Fil-A doesn't have "Chicago values" or "Boston values". Then he got my whole-hearted support.
 

Soak

New member
Sep 21, 2010
139
0
0
Welcome to the church of Jimquisition :)

Also, what's new?
I mean, that those companies made statements about photorealism is news to me, but wasn't unpredictable. That the "real", the memorable bonds and emotions with games, game-characters or atmospheres isn't necessarily defined by photorealistic images isn't new either. If you look at visual art it becomes clear immediatly, that the painting, or whatever image, doesn't have to be photorealistic to trigger certain emotions and reactions. Considering other art, like books, as already mentioned, there hasn't to be any images at all.
And why is that? (Now i come to the part where i think you (Jim) stepped a bit short, maybe thought about it, but never mentioned) Because, while humans are considered visual-recipient-animals, when it comes to the perception of arts, triggering emotions and such, the most important role lies within the imagination (or what you wanna call it). For example, Limbo becomes intense by imagining the dangers lurking within the atmospheric environment, similar to Bioshock, when you imagine the stories of Rapture (Bioshocks true protagonist. Also, i so hope Infinite will be just as good). And books again are the perfect example, considering, aside the potential writing style, it depends fully on your imagination (in a sense, those are the best "graphics" you'll ever get, as long as your brain-hardware supports it). And here's where i'm getting back to your line of arguments, as you pointed out the importants of creativity, i go along with that, as imagination and creativity will always go hand in hand.

Now, i have nothing against better graphics and why not build games around that, as long as the course games as a whole won't be dominated by that alone.

Also, though i think this is intended, the images of this presentation are kind of disturbing, wickedly put together :/
 

Raso719

New member
May 7, 2011
87
0
0
Meanwhile, in Japan, we have games that almost perfectly mimic the look of an anime like Bleach Soul Resurrection and the various Naruto games. But most importantly they don't abuse the hell out of the colors brown and grey. I'm sorry, but real life isn't a dull and gritty display of brown and grey. I cringe when I think about how people believe that a dark and brown world somehow appears more believable than, say, that flowery meadows by the shrine of Mara in Elder Scrolls IV.
 

Deathmageddon

New member
Nov 1, 2011
432
0
0
Jim, you would actually boycott a company because their christian owner expressed his own, personal views to a christian radio station? I am disappoint. Plus, doesn't that contradict the message of the video? Dafuq?
 

HalfTangible

New member
Apr 13, 2011
417
0
0
Loki_The_Good said:
HalfTangible said:
Dammit, I was perfectly ready to thank god for you and then you go and do that chick-fil-a crap AGAIN...

First of all Jim, 'i support traditional marriage' is a political opinion, not a religious one.

Second of all, you should at LEAST hate the food served somewhere before you cut out your own fat over it >.>
Name one reason an atheist (ie non religious reason) would give to deny same sex marriage that isn't an outright lie and I might buy that. Just to curb some of the easy lies, our world is drastically overpopulated so a couple not producing offspring isn't bad in fact this needs to happen more if we're ever to reach some sustainability. Adopted children tend to do better with gay parents then straight in every peer reviewed statistical study. This isn't because gay people are better parents but only those who really thought about having children and really want them have kids and so they are self selecting. This is also due to the stricter vetting procedure of adoption. In other words gay people don't accidentally have kids and lock them in a closet for 10 years because they both can't and wouldn't bother.

Also, homosexuality is most likely a common (roughly one in ten) genetic mutation like having a longer second toes. This can be shown many ways, one of which is that homosexual men also have higher predispositions towards other specific physical traits. In other words, it is not a choice. Therefore, politically, in a society that claims universal freedom and life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, denying some people the right to love is fundamentally against the founding principles of the country and, politically speaking, only has religious rational to make the division. Given the doctrine that calls for separation of church and state the reasons and many other religious based decisions are also against the fundamental principles of yours, and nearly every other first world country, most of whom no longer consider it an issue.
Excuse me sir, you seem to have misplaced this. The post I made stated only that supporting traditional marriage is a political opinion, and that you should try chicken sandwiches before calling them s*** (admittedly a bit hypocritical of me, though in my defense it WAS bad the one time I tried it like 10 years ago, but I digress). You seem to be responding to a post containing multiple religious talking points, including whether or not homosexuality is 'right', as well as multiple generalizations. You also seem to be making the assumption I will lie to you when I have yet to say anything that couldn't either be factually verified or an opinion.

But in non-sarcastic answer to the only thing in this hateball that actually had anything to do with what I said... ahem...

Name one reason an atheist (ie non religious reason) would give to deny same sex marriage that isn't an outright lie and I might buy that.
1) Who do you think you're kidding? Even if I DID tell you an argument atheists who don't support gay marriage use, you would deny it flat-out, denounce it as religious garbage (and/or conservative propoganda, depending on your mood), and then shout.

2) Counter-proposal.

How about I point out that many religious people are indifferent to - and in many cases genuinely support - gay marriage, and that many of those people (claim to) have the same faith as those who don't, showing it's separate from religious affiliation?

Oh! How about that many of the people who went to chik-fil-a are gay and in support of free speech, which they would NOT be if they thought this was a genuine hate cri- wait, sorry, talking point. Also irrelevant to this particular discussion.

... Ok, here's one. Marriage is a legal and social contract. Therefore anything related to allowing or not allowing a particular kind of marriage contract would fall under the law. (Actually PERFORMING it can fall under the church, but you can't force a priest/rabbi/whatever-its-called-in-whatever-religion to wed a couple anyway so it's irrelevant to this discussion) If a discussion falls under the law, it is political.

(But if you want one reason an atheist would have to oppose gay marriage, I'm against all relationships. Period. Love is nowhere near the wonderful thing people make it out to be. In fact, it's not good at all. It's awful. I can't even PRETEND I think you'll believe this.)
 

him over there

New member
Dec 17, 2011
1,728
0
0
Sure we don't need photo realism to tell our story, but an aesthetic should mimic the tone of a story. We wouldn't use a bright happy cartoon setting for a gritty tale established in the real world just like we wouldn't use the grey and brown ultra detailed and grim world aesthetic to tell a story about bunnies tickling each other.

We don't need photo realism to tell a story, but we need something close, even if it's just barely, to optimize the way we tell some specific types of stories. To limit ourselves technologically is to limit ourselves creatively. Plus the farther away from the uncanny valley we get the better.
 

Arcane Azmadi

New member
Jan 23, 2009
1,232
0
0
Why is Jim even needing to make this video? We've known for YEARS that "graphics =/= good game" even if developers have been too thick to get it. Why is "mainstream developers STILL retarded graphics whores" newsworthy at this juncture just because some meathead comes out with another baseless claim?
 

Porecomesis

New member
Jul 10, 2010
322
0
0
Having played Iji, Pandora's Tower and Bastion, I agree with what Jim's saying and disagree with Crytek and 2K.

Hell, I read fanfiction on a regular basis. It's not hard to find things more emotionally absorbing than Crysis or Call of Honourfield.
 

grumbel

New member
Oct 6, 2010
95
0
0
Two different issues get a bit mangled up here. Realistic graphics are of course not needed. However there is some truth to a piece of hardware being maxed out. When you look at games of the past, many of them only happened due to technical progress and more advanced technology, many were even the direct result of technology. Doom didn't start out with a design document and ideas on how to fight monsters in hell, it started out with technology that allowed to do first person 3D games really fast. It was the technology that drove the games design, not the other way around. Same is true for Populus, Starfox, Mario64, Final Fantasy VII, Assassins Creed and a heapload of other games. If it wouldn't be for having new technology to play with, those games would never have happened the way they did.

The real breakthrough titles that establish new genres and change the industry for years to come are those titles that happen early in a new console generation. Rarely do those titles come out late in the generation, because by then, everybody already has kind of settled into a type of genre and gameplay that they just repeat with slight variations. That's simply how the industry works and how it has worked for the last two decades, if new tech comes around people will experiment with new ways of using it and that will give rise to a lot of new ideas that never would have happened otherwise.
 
Apr 24, 2008
3,912
0
0
octafish said:
Graphics Shmaphics, current gen consoles are starved for RAM, bring on the next gen.
This was my first thought too.

Bring on next gen so we can have more physics objects and more animations, and that in turn will do an enormous favour for a games presentation and feel. Also more enemies on screen without them becoming retarded would be great too. Current gen consoles were showing their limitations in these regards almost as soon as they were birthed.
 

Headdrivehardscrew

New member
Aug 22, 2011
1,660
0
0
wackelpudding said:
I wouldn't say BioShock Infinite goes for a cartoony art style or something -- it's certainly not as (photo-)realistic as some of the Call of Honourfields but it goes for as realistic as its fantasy setting allows -- but this is an episode were I could've shouted "Amen!" every five seconds nonetheless. Good job!
While I liked what I saw so far, even though I really didn't want to see anything before actually playing the game and be surprised while playing it, I think the game has contracted a severe case of da Anime heads.

Just look at Elizabeth, that damsel-in-distress sidekick character:

http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Games/B/BioShock%20Infinite/Everything%20Else/Daily/2010-08-18/Screenshot%20zoom%20story/elizabeth_zoom1--article_image.jpg

Realistic? Those eyes would take up some serious real estate of her skullspace, making her brain roughly the size of that of a big dog, with her cerebellum being squeezed against the lower backside of her skull.

Also, staying with the character of Elizabeth, for I really hate Levine & folks for teasing us with a whole bunch of awesome (yet ridiculously unreal) characters that would look just fine if they popped up in anything from Fist of the North Star to Ninja Scroll - tell me you revise your opinion that her body proportions are anywhere near 'real', please. Come on, her head is bigger than her chest, and she's so skinny she'd have to have her skin stretched for months before some mad doctor could pop them silicone boobies in.

http://images.wikia.com/bioshock/images/b/bd/Bioshockinfinite_elizabeth_portrait.png

Granted, there are other images of her available, but some of those seem to come from FMV sequences, and I am not entirely certain about them having been produced in-house or if it's just another case of Deep Silver/Axis (Dead Island promo trailer) or Mythic/Blur Studio (Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning promo trailer) - it just remains to be seen.

They might still just pull a Digital Extremes/The Darkness II or Gearbox/Borderlands and revise and redefine the graphical aspects of the game, but none of what I've seen so far screams "REALITY".

In fact, if I were to bump into a person with the proportions Elizabeth features, I'd consider believing in Aliens, and I'd be very afraid I might snap her neck by sneezing at her. In short, I'd be a bit horrified.
 

Iron Criterion

New member
Feb 4, 2009
1,271
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
Yes but Chick-Fil-A is a fast food outlet. People go there for food, nothing more. Personally I refuse to eat anywhere that will use my money to fund causes I don't agree with. Especially a business that thinks homosexuality is immoral but not pumping trans fats, grease and misc junk in the bodies of an entire nation.
 

Iron Criterion

New member
Feb 4, 2009
1,271
0
0
Headdrivehardscrew said:
Come on, her head is bigger than her chest, and she's so skinny she'd have to have her skin stretched for months before some mad doctor could pop them silicone boobies in.
Whilst you are correct about everything else, I actually know a girl from college who has a similar bodily frame to Elizabeth, and she has no apparent trouble supporting tits of a similar size. And as my friend's breasts are natural, I imagine Elizabeth's anatomy is entirely possible (excluding eyes and head).
 

andersgeek

New member
Jul 6, 2010
126
0
0
Varya said:
Nah, BioShock Infinite has a conciously cartoony look. Take a look at the main girl, her anatomy isn't proper, just look at her eyes, and it isn't about fantasy, it's because a cartoony faces are easier to relate to, their expressions are more clear. And look at the art for that game in general, it's subtle, I'll give you, but it's colouring and texturing is conciously non-realistic. It fits the setting better, and photorealism would take away from the unique tone of the game
Headdrivehardscrew said:
While I liked what I saw so far, even though I really didn't want to see anything before actually playing the game and be surprised while playing it, I think the game has contracted a severe case of da Anime heads.

Just look at Elizabeth, that damsel-in-distress sidekick character:

[... pic snip...]

Realistic? Those eyes would take up some serious real estate of her skullspace, making her brain roughly the size of that of a big dog, with her cerebellum being squeezed against the lower backside of her skull.

Also, staying with the character of Elizabeth, for I really hate Levine & folks for teasing us with a whole bunch of awesome (yet ridiculously unreal) characters that would look just fine if they popped up in anything from Fist of the North Star to Ninja Scroll - tell me you revise your opinion that her body proportions are anywhere near 'real', please. Come on, her head is bigger than her chest, and she's so skinny she'd have to have her skin stretched for months before some mad doctor could pop them silicone boobies in.

[... pic snip...]

Granted, there are other images of her available, but some of those seem to come from FMV sequences, and I am not entirely certain about them having been produced in-house or if it's just another case of Deep Silver/Axis (Dead Island promo trailer) or Mythic/Blur Studio (Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning promo trailer) - it just remains to be seen.

They might still just pull a Digital Extremes/The Darkness II or Gearbox/Borderlands and revise and redefine the graphical aspects of the game, but none of what I've seen so far screams "REALITY".

In fact, if I were to bump into a person with the proportions Elizabeth features, I'd consider believing in Aliens, and I'd be very afraid I might snap her neck by sneezing at her. In short, I'd be a bit horrified.
I never said BioShock Infinite had a realistic (art) style per se. It has a more realistic style for me than something I would call "cartoony". It is, however, set in a fantasy setting and as such I consider some abnormalities [from "real" reality] as "normal".

Speaking of Elizabeth's anatomy which you both referred to:
Her eyes might be/look big and look anime-ish, but there are people [especially women] whose eyes are or at least appear this big. There are cases where the iris takes up freaking much space of the visible eye. So, yes, it looks odd, but it isn't too unrealistic.
Her body anatomy? While I'd like for her to look more like she wouldn't be blown away by wind speed of Beaufort 4 or 5, there are, again, women who have such proportions [which you might want to call unhealthy]. Then again, the corset she's wearing: Guess, what its purpose is? To squeeze her body into a "perfect" form. Fashion is crazy like that sometimes.
The biggest problem I have with Elizabeth's appearance is her neck. But, once more, such can be found in real life.
You could question that Irrational decided to put all these rather abnormal appearances into one person and you could call it exaggeration that they did, but it is a real possibility within their universe. For me, it doesn't make it "real" real, but also not cartoony.

And why do colourful textures and/or lighting make it cartoony? Is everything that's somewhat set in fantasy automatically cartoony? If so, I gotta adjust my world view.

One thing we all agree on, though, is that photo-realistic graphics wouldn't benefit Infinite. That's something.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
The only thing that kind of went unsaid is the real reason 2k made their ridiculous statement: It's a subtle plea to the console giants to hurry up and launch their new systems.

If 2k really believed in what they claim, they would be developing games for PC.
 

Headdrivehardscrew

New member
Aug 22, 2011
1,660
0
0
wackelpudding said:
One thing we all agree on, though, is that photo-realistic graphics wouldn't benefit Infinite. That's something.
You got it.

I get fistfuls, buckets, megatons of reality when I go outside, and I like reality as represented in movies sometimes. If people think they need to wrap up reality once more in video games, they're wrong.

I'm an Escapist. Capital E. I want my games to be... different. Palatable. Pleasing. Disturbing. Satisfying. Frustrating, if need be, but well put together. Like a cake. If I were to stuff raw eggs, a stick of butter, a bag of sugar and a bag of flour in my face, I wouldn't have cake.

I don't want photo-realism in games, for art needs to be man-made, it needs to be artificial, yet artisanal, not industrial. Yes, I am impressed by people who build photo-realistic pictures up from minute sputterings of an airbrush paintgun, I admire the patience of folks building photo-realistic images up pixel by pixel... that's art alright, but it's art mimicking reality, art enslaved by reality. I don't want that.

I have no issues with Elizabeth looking like a demented Barbie doll, as long as she's part of the vistas, the view, the experience that is, or might be Bioshock 3. I'm happy to get more Bioshock, but, alas, as with that Dark Knight supposedly rising, I fear we might be in for some severe letdowns and disappointments. I think art may very well repeat itself over and over again, especially these days, when we're all easily diagnosed with some form of ADD and in severe need of Adderall or Ritalin. As long as you don't get instructions from dogs or Satan himself, however, I think reality is harsh enough so I'd like art to be pure, unfiltered, real; a proper vent, freedom of the insanity of normalcy, a window, an escape route with a wunderloop - and not a melonfarming pressure cooker. I like LA Noire, but the game bit is sort of a nice-to-have, a value-added-content to the facial capturing/replay routines. I was stunned when I recognized folks in movies and on TV, folks whom I did not recognize by their facial features and their voice alone before LA Noire.

I still can't remember their names, though.

The first time I played Demon's Souls I thought they were crazy, insane, evil. Then I noticed the genius bit. It suddenly popped up, made a little dance on my hippocampus, and it really made my gaming life that much richer and more significant. It inspired me, it hooked me and I am still not done with Dark Souls. It's pretty much the perfect drug, but there just cannot be any perfection when humans are involved. We are imperfection at its peak, and we always need to struggle to get better... and skip Windows 8.
 

Varya

Elvish Ambassador
Nov 23, 2009
457
0
0
wackelpudding said:
Varya said:
Nah, BioShock Infinite has a conciously cartoony look. Take a look at the main girl, her anatomy isn't proper, just look at her eyes, and it isn't about fantasy, it's because a cartoony faces are easier to relate to, their expressions are more clear. And look at the art for that game in general, it's subtle, I'll give you, but it's colouring and texturing is conciously non-realistic. It fits the setting better, and photorealism would take away from the unique tone of the game
Headdrivehardscrew said:
While I liked what I saw so far, even though I really didn't want to see anything before actually playing the game and be surprised while playing it, I think the game has contracted a severe case of da Anime heads.

Just look at Elizabeth, that damsel-in-distress sidekick character:

[... pic snip...]

Realistic? Those eyes would take up some serious real estate of her skullspace, making her brain roughly the size of that of a big dog, with her cerebellum being squeezed against the lower backside of her skull.

Also, staying with the character of Elizabeth, for I really hate Levine & folks for teasing us with a whole bunch of awesome (yet ridiculously unreal) characters that would look just fine if they popped up in anything from Fist of the North Star to Ninja Scroll - tell me you revise your opinion that her body proportions are anywhere near 'real', please. Come on, her head is bigger than her chest, and she's so skinny she'd have to have her skin stretched for months before some mad doctor could pop them silicone boobies in.

[... pic snip...]

Granted, there are other images of her available, but some of those seem to come from FMV sequences, and I am not entirely certain about them having been produced in-house or if it's just another case of Deep Silver/Axis (Dead Island promo trailer) or Mythic/Blur Studio (Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning promo trailer) - it just remains to be seen.

They might still just pull a Digital Extremes/The Darkness II or Gearbox/Borderlands and revise and redefine the graphical aspects of the game, but none of what I've seen so far screams "REALITY".

In fact, if I were to bump into a person with the proportions Elizabeth features, I'd consider believing in Aliens, and I'd be very afraid I might snap her neck by sneezing at her. In short, I'd be a bit horrified.
I never said BioShock Infinite had a realistic (art) style per se. It has a more realistic style for me than something I would call "cartoony". It is, however, set in a fantasy setting and as such I consider some abnormalities [from "real" reality] as "normal".

Speaking of Elizabeth's anatomy which you both referred to:
Her eyes might be/look big and look anime-ish, but there are people [especially women] whose eyes are or at least appear this big. There are cases where the iris takes up freaking much space of the visible eye. So, yes, it looks odd, but it isn't too unrealistic.
Her body anatomy? While I'd like for her to look more like she wouldn't be blown away by wind speed of Beaufort 4 or 5, there are, again, women who have such proportions [which you might want to call unhealthy]. Then again, the corset she's wearing: Guess, what its purpose is? To squeeze her body into a "perfect" form. Fashion is crazy like that sometimes.
The biggest problem I have with Elizabeth's appearance is her neck. But, once more, such can be found in real life.
You could question that Irrational decided to put all these rather abnormal appearances into one person and you could call it exaggeration that they did, but it is a real possibility within their universe. For me, it doesn't make it "real" real, but also not cartoony.

And why do colourful textures and/or lighting make it cartoony? Is everything that's somewhat set in fantasy automatically cartoony? If so, I gotta adjust my world view.

One thing we all agree on, though, is that photo-realistic graphics wouldn't benefit Infinite. That's something.
Of, firstly, sorry for not editing down the quote, but I'm on my iPad so editing is a female dog.
Secondly, and more to the point, "cartoony" is maybe a matter of definition, but, yes, I'd still call it cartoony. But the main thing is, Bioshok departed from photorealism, not because of limitations, but because of artistic reasons. Take the eyes, no, it's not super exagerated, but a bit, just enough so that she appears to have big eyes, but "real" enough for us not to emidiately think of her as cartoony. Saying it is "normal for a fantasy-setting" assumes that fantasy can't be photorealistic, or that no other elements than the fantastic in Bioshock are unrealistic, and that just isn't the case.
Colours is definately a cartoony thing, simply because, in cartoons, colors are brighter and overall clearer to define, and also, not realistic. Colours in Bioshok is done in an unreal way. Like the eyes, not so that we emideately go "oh, that's fake" but just enogh to convey the tone clearer. We might even see it as more real, because we remember things clearer than they were, we think of water as blue, grass as green, when there are thousands of variations, but we translate it as green, so making the colours clearer translates the signals to our brain better. But again, the point of the matter, an artistic choice to step away from realism, made not because of limitatios of graphics but to fit the artdirection. Ergo, Bioshok is a perfect example of games embracing non-photorealism
 

andersgeek

New member
Jul 6, 2010
126
0
0
Varya said:
Ergo, Bioshok is a perfect example of games embracing non-photorealism
True.
And yes, apparently it's only the definition of the word "cartoony" that keeps clashing our views. Cartoons are an over-exaggeration for me, I guess. If for you it's already one or two steps away from reality [an exaggeration without "over-", which for me is merely a "touch" of fantasy], then, yes, Infinite is sporting a cartoony style.

I'm still not gonna call it "cartoony" when talking about it. ;)
 

Brad Gardner

New member
Jun 5, 2012
37
0
0
I hate this photo realistic bull myself. I personally need some extra degree of separation for my pallet. If I realistically cut off someone's head in a game, I think I'd be sick because personally can't separate myself.

I don't really understand this Chik Fele thing honestly. I prefer to stay ignorant about. However, what I glen from stuff and third hand information the owner gave money to a anti-same-gender-marriage cause, which personally seems to be an opinion of one person who as an American citizen has a right to do.

My stance I think we should illegalize marriage all together, for the some reason why we should illegalize tobacco and alcohol and pot, which is people abuse it and if one person abuse something no one should have it.

Yes, my opinion is irrational and kinda dumb, but I have the right to have it.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
"I think no religious statement has any place in something that isn?t a church or a religious topic." - Jim Sterling

Golly gee Jim. Maybe you should go and try to do some more of that actual Journalism you were talking about earlier. Do you even know where Dan Cathy made his statement concerning his personal opinion on gay marriage? Of course not. You're too busy stroking your outrage in defense of your liberal opinions. Here, I've done it for you since you were too busy to bother:

http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=38271

Here, I'll even reference some of your fellow liberals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/dan-cathy-chick-fil-a-president-anti-gay_n_1680984.html

He said it in an interview with "The Baptist Press: News With A Christian Perspective". A relevant place for one to speak his mind on religious opinion? Have some crow to go with that side fat you'll be scooping out and eating. Maybe you can open an episode with you stuffing some Chick Fil A into your maw.
That's funny because I thought it was just a joke about his catch-phrase "Thank God for me."

But, no, clearly Jim is part of the liberal agenda to destroy religion and family values and bring about communism.


Nicolaus99 said:
Hey, tell us again how Bill Clinton was the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy to frame him for infidelity and lying under oath.
It's funny because not one person in this thread said anything about Bill Clinton

You Republicans love conspiracies so much, you seem to think that everyone else does too.

Deathmageddon said:
Jim, you would actually boycott a company because their christian owner expressed his own, personal views to a christian radio station? I am disappoint. Plus, doesn't that contradict the message of the video? Dafuq?
The guy also gives lots of money to anti-gay causes, so if you buy stuff from there, you're giving him more money to give to anti-gay causes.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
The Plunk said:
Nicolaus99 said:
Countries with oil obviously have a monopoly on oil.

Chic-Fil-A obviously doesn't have a monopoly on fried chicken or whatever it is that they serve.
BS. Take your hypocrite outrage out on the oil companies; boycott THEM and demand they sell no oil sourced from those countries. And yes, that data is most certainly tracked. Round up your hippie friends and protest at their embassies for executing gays for, you know, being gay. Take it to your congressmen, pass laws against importing from them. If you think the USA isn't sitting on more than enough oil to see to itself you clearly don't know anything about the subject.

If you people are so morally outraged, don't just sit there and "I give a sh_t only when it is convenient and effortless for me to do so."
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Nicolaus99 said:
The Plunk said:
Nicolaus99 said:
Countries with oil obviously have a monopoly on oil.

Chic-Fil-A obviously doesn't have a monopoly on fried chicken or whatever it is that they serve.
BS. Take your hypocrite outrage out on the oil companies; boycott THEM and demand they sell no oil sourced from those countries. And yes, that data is most certainly tracked. Round up your hippie friends and protest at their embassies for executing gays for, you know, being gay. Take it to your congressmen, pass laws against importing from them. If you think the USA isn't sitting on more than enough oil to see to itself you clearly don't know anything about the subject.

If you people are so morally outraged, don't just sit there and "I give a sh_t only when it is convenient and effortless for me to do so."
I get it, you hate gay people.

I'm not going to continue arguing with someone who is so irrational and detached from reality that they hate people because a book written over 2000 years ago told them to. Welcome to my ignore list.
 

Do4600

New member
Oct 16, 2007
934
0
0
Damn, now I'm old. You made your point perfectly to me when you showed that bit from Final Fantasy 6. Well done.
 

CarlMin

New member
Jun 6, 2010
1,411
0
0
I don't really see where the problem is. In my opinion, graphics and gameplay walks hand in hand. Let's take the original Half Life as an example of a game that managed to set a new standard for storytelling, by creating a dynamic graphics engine which allowed the game to feature bigger more varied environments, and replacing the old cut scenes with continuously interactive characters and events. It introduced a whole new form of storytelling to the gaming world, one which games even today are modeled after.

Better hardware allows for innovation, both when it comes to gameplay and graphics, which in turns leads to better storytelling. Now that some game developers create shallow, generic games has nothing to do with some strange fixation with graphics, but more with the fact that the game developers are simply making bad games.
 

thesilentman

What this
Jun 14, 2012
4,513
0
0
Sgt. Sykes said:
Nah. I love Bastion, Portal or BGoE just as much as I love Crysis, AssCreed or Far Cry.

The thing is, you can make a simplistic-looking, but otherwise great game on old hardware.

You want the next, better Crysis? Can't do.

I fully agree graphics isn't everything. But the point is that games shouldn't RELY on graphics and good graphics shouldn't REQUIRED of ALL games. But it's still important in some games. And yes, Crysis was awesome.
Give this man a medal. Took the words right out of my mouth.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
What they might have meant by "this generation is over" is "it's time to release next generation consoles, which normally defines the end of the previous generation"
 

The_Lost_King

New member
Oct 7, 2011
1,506
0
0
The guy may be a manger of the restaurant but he is also a person who is allowed to be religious and have his own views. Other than that I totally agree with your episode Jim.
The Plunk said:
Nicolaus99 said:
The Plunk said:
Nicolaus99 said:
Countries with oil obviously have a monopoly on oil.

Chic-Fil-A obviously doesn't have a monopoly on fried chicken or whatever it is that they serve.
BS. Take your hypocrite outrage out on the oil companies; boycott THEM and demand they sell no oil sourced from those countries. And yes, that data is most certainly tracked. Round up your hippie friends and protest at their embassies for executing gays for, you know, being gay. Take it to your congressmen, pass laws against importing from them. If you think the USA isn't sitting on more than enough oil to see to itself you clearly don't know anything about the subject.

If you people are so morally outraged, don't just sit there and "I give a sh_t only when it is convenient and effortless for me to do so."
I get it, you hate gay people.

I'm not going to continue arguing with someone who is so irrational and detached from reality that they hate people because a book written over 2000 years ago told them to. Welcome to my ignore list.
He never said any where that he hates gays. He just pointed out how much of a hypocite you are. Plus people are allowed to have views. People can be against something. Our government doesn't allow Gay marriage why don't you just stop following their rules? There are so many people that don't like gay marriage and they have a right to think that way. It may be rediculous to think that way but they still have a right to. As a side note I have nothing against gay marriage, in fact I know and am friends with 2 gay people.
 

awdrifter

New member
Apr 1, 2011
125
0
0
While I definitely agree that photorealistic graphics is not needed to make good emotional games, having good graphics definitely help. I recently played Xenoblade and The Last Story (Wii games), in many cutscenes I can't help but think "wow, this scene would be so much impressive if the character models have better detail". Giving developers a wide range of tools is never a bad thing. If devs want to go cartoony or anime style, they can do it now. But if they want to go fully realistic, we're not quite there yet, especially with the character models and facial expressions. There's nothing wrong with trying to get past the uncanny valley, and see what the other side holds.
 

Xenowolf

New member
Feb 3, 2012
208
0
0
Tenmar said:
The Heavy Rain comment was a low blow. Simply due to the fact that it is very difficult to actually get the game published that tests that line for sex and sexual themes without being dragged into the mainstream and being called pornography. At least despite failing it tried to actually be tasteful and tried to push the border for future developers to actually not be afraid to include sex in their game.
Amen to that. What does he expect, for Quantic Dream to actually try to successfully release an AO-rated game?
 

sagitel

New member
Feb 25, 2012
472
0
0
i was going to say that its obvious that graphics doesnt make a game but i remembered some of my friend that asked how is the graphic every time i suggest a game to them. pathetic sociopaths.

also i cant believe jim didn't name to the moon.
 

Hiroshi Mishima

New member
Sep 25, 2008
407
0
0
I pretty much agree with everything Jim said. Games like Final Fantasy VI with the opera, or Grandia with Feena & Leen, and so on.. totally unrealistic looking games that were able to evoke powerful emotions. Hell, Mother 3 has me so friggin' angry during the first chapter I was ready to break someone's face open cause I could feel all the rage and anguish that Flint was going through.

I would like to say one thing though about Bioshock Infinite. If the female lead continues to look the way she does, I'll probably not want to play it. Why? Cause having her tits practically about to fall out everytime she leans over is distracting as fucking hell. It's poor character design and just looks unattractive and doesn't fit with the visual style the previous two games had going. I'm perfectly fine with them wanting to lean slightly more towards cartoony or maybe McGee's Alice-esque style graphics. But gods, reduce the size of her breasts and/or cover them up a bit more.

If there's one thing I DO get pretty uptight about insofar as realism and whatnot go, it's believable breast sizes. Few things are less attractive than a woman who looks like she's been crushed so hard in the waist all her mass has gone to the hips/chest, and yet I still see this popping up in games. If you gotta breast fetish, there's online sites for that, but leave it outta the games I might wanna play.

EDIT: By the way, I actually mirror Jim's sentiments about Heavy Rain. It was laughable at best, and actually reminded me more of cheesy sex scenes in bad movies. Or just sex scenes in movies in general, which are usually pretty shit, anyways. I don't think it made the game any better, that's for sure. Last time I fell to the ground with my girlfriend we both got hurt, so I can also attest to the lack of believability in a game that's trying to be believable. Regardless of the issues with sex and rating.