Jimquisition: Photorealistic Sociopathy

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!
 

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.
 

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."