The Big Cost of Small Places

OldNewNewOld

New member
Mar 2, 2011
1,494
0
0
I think you're blowing this out of proportion.

Yes, bigger worlds add bigger bills, but not that much bigger.
According to your explanation, one would think that the costs increase exponentially, jet it's not even linear. At best and at worst, it's logarithmic growth of cost.

You will have to create furniture for the game. Why not just make (while you're at it) 5 variations of the same furniture. I'm not saying 5 completely different models for the same furniture. 5 Variations. Add 5 different textures for those models and you have 25 different items for every furniture for the game.
That's a HUGE number of possible combinations.

Also, not everything needs to be extremely detailed. Instead of adding a overdetailed supporting column, go back to the roots of architecture.
The 3 different types of columns are enough for the whole game.
If you really want more, just add 2 basic wooden and that's it.

NPC's... really? Look at Skyrim. They basically use the same 2 models just add different hair and face expressions. It's not even close to expensive. And even if it is expensive, the good thing is, you can just use the same models and textures in other, newer games. Just small changes would be required.

Actually, Skyrim would be a great example that we, the player, aren't as you say. I haven't seen much people complain that Skyrim uses the same furniture or models over and over again.

And then there is "you're happy that the next console gen isn't jet here" part.
I'm actually disappointed that you think that the next gen. brings only better graphics.
The increase of power of the console will bring a lot more than just graphics. One of the biggest weakness of the current gen is the low memory. It prevents bigger worlds, better AI, less loaded NPC's...

I (and I assume that many other think like me) aren't waiting for the next gen. just because we want better graphics. I'm far from a graphics whore. I LOVE Skyward Sword and Okami because of the graphic and aesthetics. Maybe just a bit more and I would be happier than anyone. But I want the next gen because I want some challenging AI, bigger maps, worlds...

Also, remember the Wii? I was always saying that the Wii was the perfect console of this generation. Until developing better graphics gets a reasonable price, much time will need to pass. Same goes for the hardware. That's why the Wii and the developing for it were cheap.
Now Nintendo announced the WiiU. It should be have 50% more processing power than the PS3, but it will have a lot more memory.
This will allow more complex AI and worlds, but it won't be to expensive to develop for because the jump in the graphics department isn't as huge as the PS2 -> PS3 was.
 

Wolfram23

New member
Mar 23, 2004
4,095
0
0
After thinking it over, I disagree with Seamus. Ok, I concede that to make the worlds more lifelike is indeed very costly - no question.

Here's the thing. Add 4gb of RAM, a faster GPU (even 5770 quality) and maybe a better CPU that what they currently have. Guess what? You don't need to add more fine details to the game to get it looking good. You just enable Anti Aliasing and pump the resolution to 1920x1080. Maybe make higher res textures. And lets not forget 60 frames per second. That's it, and the game looks great. That's why I like PC gaming, I can play the same game as people on consoles but it looks way better - with the same detailing.

There might be some demand for more detailed worlds, sure, that would be awesome. But I think it is a flaw to think that better hardware automatically means more detailed worlds when there's plenty of graphic options that cost the dev little to nothing to implement and drastically improve the look of the game.
 

Roxor

New member
Nov 4, 2010
747
0
0
A lot of these problems could be mitigated through the use of procedural content. Don't build window frames multiple times. Design an algorithm for making them once, and let the computer figure out the specific geometry for a given window with as many steps as practical for the amount of detail needed at a given distance from the camera. When the window is far away just use a hole in the wall, get closer and add a basic frame consisting of a dozen polygons, add rounded edges when closer still, and tessellation-controlled detail when the player is right up against it.

Procedural texturing could quite easily eliminate the need to make multiple copies of an object with slightly different textures, thus reducing memory usage. Heck, implementing textures entirely through shaders would probably allow the use of hundreds of variants on an object in the same amount of memory as the raster textures for a single object would use. Not to mention that tessellation controlled by procedural textures could allow massive variation on a basic object though geometry alone.