pretty good episode, but I just have to say this just because.
Hatfilms Hatfilms Hatfilms oh my god Hatfilms were in this.
Hatfilms Hatfilms Hatfilms oh my god Hatfilms were in this.
Jimquisition: Photorealistic Sociopathy
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
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.
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.)
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.)
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.Nicolaus99 said:
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.
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 gamewackelpudding said:
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 demoRedd the Sock said:
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.-|- 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...
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...
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...
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...
If you haven't done it already, I suggest you take a look at this Kickstarter project:karamazovnew said:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If I've misunderstood, I apologise. Your wording seemed to imply that, and I'm struggling to find another interpretation. Would you kindly clarify?-|- said:
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.