How long until games are photorealistic?

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

How long until games are photorealistic?

They already are!
3
3%
5-10 years
33
33%
10-20 years
31
31%
20-30 years
12
12%
30-50 years
1
1%
50-100+ years
4
4%
Never / When otters fly
16
16%
 
Total votes: 100

User avatar
Rippy
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Can o' Duh

How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Rippy » Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:33 am UTC

I thought I'd put this up as a poll. Time to take bets on when games are going to be indistinguishable from reality.

I guess it's also necessary to define photorealistic. I would define it as being a game that, to the human eye, and from the perspective given to you by the game, is indistinguishable from a real image or video. By the perspective thing, I mean that you're not staring intently at a stalk of grass with binoculars to see that it's not real: you're playing the game as it should be played.

So, again, this is not "indistinguishable from reality" we're talking about here, this is the "damn hard to tell the difference" kind.

Lemme know if more options need to be included, and feel free to justify your prediction in a post. I'm gonna say 10-20 years because, although current-gen games look amazing, I think it's going to take a while to master things like facial expressions, and to get hardware good enough to render enough things simultaneously (i.e. depth-of-field issues)

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Amnesiasoft » Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:50 am UTC

I'm not going to actually vote, because I'm not sure on a time period, it could be "Larrabee" or it could be never. Basically though, we need raytracing. Raytracing lends itself perfectly to a large number of things that are done very hackishly* in regular rasterizers, like soft shadows, reflection, refraction.

* By hackishly, I mean not done remotely closely to how these things work in real life.

Jack Saladin
X is kiss
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jack Saladin » Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:52 am UTC

^Pretty much. Raytracing is the key to photorealism, but the hardware required won't be here for years, and it sure as hell won't be widely or cheaply available for even longer.

There are baby steps being made towards it though.

User avatar
lowbart
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:00 pm UTC
Location: northeastern USA
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby lowbart » Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:25 am UTC

Depends how good your photos are.
...a fish called the Henamo grunter, named because it makes grunting noises from its swim bladder.
v1nsai wrote:Yes, I'm Linux, how can I help you ma'am?

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby headprogrammingczar » Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:23 pm UTC

Would this make Lego Starwars photorealistic?
Image
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

User avatar
aion7
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:43 am UTC
Location: In a base with which you identify, killing dudes to whose team you belong

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby aion7 » Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:07 pm UTC

I don't care. Honestly, I was fine with Dreamcast graphics. I don't see why we would need anything better. Too many games are using near-photorealistic graphics as a crutch, and it's becoming almost necessary to have incredibly detailed graphics, forcing games to be shorter, or have worse gameplay. Also, I would much rather have graphics like Okami with a great style and amazing artwork than something indistinguishable from reality.
Spoiler:
Zeroignite wrote:And you have suddenly become awesome.

joshz wrote:Oh, you so win.

internets++ for aion7.

jerdak wrote:Nothing says hello like a coconut traveling near the speed of light.

User avatar
_Big_Mac_
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:30 pm UTC
Location: Poland

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby _Big_Mac_ » Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:35 pm UTC

Don't get too hyped on raytracing. It's just a rendering technique, neither better nor worse than rasterizing. Just different. There are drawbacks to it just as there are drawbacks to other methods. Here's a nice interview with a guy from nVidia http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=530 . Also, this: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/08/26 ... ollywood/1

Besides, rendering is just one of many problems with photorealistic graphics. Have you ever seen a really well animated face, one that's not in the uncanny valley? We have some fundamental problems in understanding and implementing body movement. We can have photorealistic cars or spaceships (not yet in games but in films), living things are harder.

PR non-biological entities in games - I'd say 5-10 years (PR means as realistic as today's movie CGI) or maybe even now (see youtube gameplay videos from Gran Turismo 5). I've no idea when we'll make PR living stuff but I'm convinced we'll see it sooner than flying otters.

User avatar
OmegaLord
LXIX
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:33 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby OmegaLord » Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:16 pm UTC

What if we make flying otters with magical science?
Also, 12 years. Singularity ftw.
So what do you guys know about *glances down at sheet* the kingdoms of orgasms
but I just don't see why someone would tape themselves together.
Bear Police wrote:I got Ready to Die today. Took me too long. Great record.

User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
Posts: 2995
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Narsil » Sun Sep 21, 2008 10:28 pm UTC

After playing Unreal Tournament 3, I don't really want anything better in terms of graphics from a game. This game is already too pretty to play. Usually I just wander around a level slack-jawed, not really playing.

I want to see that computing power being put towards more physics in games. There's no need for them to look better. Let's get to the point where a building in a game is made up brick by brick and can be dismantled just the same. This is what distracted me the most in a game like, say, Mercenaries 2. If I hit a concrete support beam for a parking garage overhang, that better crack, and if I hit it with a rocket, some shit better be coming down. Also, I think it's inexcusable in this day and age for a window, when shot, to not break. A lot of windows in games do this, but it should be every time.

tl;dr: moar physics!
Spoiler:
EsotericWombat wrote:MORE JUNK THAN YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR

Mother Superior wrote:What's he got that I dont?
*sees Narsil's sig*
Oh... that.

User avatar
aion7
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:43 am UTC
Location: In a base with which you identify, killing dudes to whose team you belong

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby aion7 » Sun Sep 21, 2008 10:47 pm UTC

I agree with Narsil, but think that the AI needs some serious work as well. 99% of games have enemies that run straight at you.
Spoiler:
Zeroignite wrote:And you have suddenly become awesome.

joshz wrote:Oh, you so win.

internets++ for aion7.

jerdak wrote:Nothing says hello like a coconut traveling near the speed of light.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jahoclave » Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:24 pm UTC

aion7 wrote:I agree with Narsil, but think that the AI needs some serious work as well. 99% of games have enemies that run straight at you.

Agreed, graphics can take a nice break for awhile. More physics, more ai, and, for the love of Shakespeare, more plot.

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby headprogrammingczar » Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:36 pm UTC

Jahoclave wrote:
aion7 wrote:I agree with Narsil, but think that the AI needs some serious work as well. 99% of games have enemies that run straight at you.

Agreed, graphics can take a nice break for awhile. More physics, more ai, and, for the love of Shakespeare, more plot.

Half-Life has all of those pretty much covered for now...
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jahoclave » Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:49 pm UTC

headprogrammingczar wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:
aion7 wrote:I agree with Narsil, but think that the AI needs some serious work as well. 99% of games have enemies that run straight at you.

Agreed, graphics can take a nice break for awhile. More physics, more ai, and, for the love of Shakespeare, more plot.

Half-Life has all of those pretty much covered for now...

Nah, I can not build a large enough particle accelerator which will then create a blackhole, that will then swallow up an entire solar system, thus destroying the alien threat.

I really want a shirt.

"Expect More from your Physics,
Play Reality."

User avatar
aion7
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:43 am UTC
Location: In a base with which you identify, killing dudes to whose team you belong

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby aion7 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:17 am UTC

I didn't notice any great AI in Half Life 2, but maybe that's just because I suck at it and couldn't even get to the gravity gun.

I noticed:
Manhacks - stand there shooting at you. Alternatively, run up and hit you.
Headcrabs - Jump at your face.
Zombies - slowly walk towards you. If (things nearby) {throw things}
Spoiler:
Zeroignite wrote:And you have suddenly become awesome.

joshz wrote:Oh, you so win.

internets++ for aion7.

jerdak wrote:Nothing says hello like a coconut traveling near the speed of light.

User avatar
Rippy
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Can o' Duh

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Rippy » Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:25 am UTC

Narsil wrote:After playing Unreal Tournament 3, I don't really want anything better in terms of graphics from a game. This game is already too pretty to play. Usually I just wander around a level slack-jawed, not really playing.

I want to see that computing power being put towards more physics in games. There's no need for them to look better. Let's get to the point where a building in a game is made up brick by brick and can be dismantled just the same. This is what distracted me the most in a game like, say, Mercenaries 2. If I hit a concrete support beam for a parking garage overhang, that better crack, and if I hit it with a rocket, some shit better be coming down. Also, I think it's inexcusable in this day and age for a window, when shot, to not break. A lot of windows in games do this, but it should be every time.

tl;dr: moar physics!

I agree, it's getting to the point where AI and destructability detract more from the realism than the graphics. I just really want it to be so that *everything* breaks. I don't know how this could work (apart from a few completely uninformed methods I've thought up), but I really just want everything to break into non-pre-rendered pieces if I hit it with something big.

How would that work? Would you just keep track of a bunch of small "particles" around which textures are rendered, which can be split apart? Or somehow cut a model up into pieces on the fly? It seems very processor-intensive. But I want it.

@Jahoclave: Yes, unfortunately game physics does not consider quantum mechanics at this time. For now you'll have to settle for building trebuchets in Garry's Mod.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jahoclave » Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:51 am UTC

Rippy wrote:
@Jahoclave: Yes, unfortunately game physics does not consider quantum mechanics at this time. For now you'll have to settle for building trebuchets in Garry's Mod.

Help! I'm trapped in a Newtonian Game World!

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Xeio » Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:23 am UTC

Rippy wrote:I agree, it's getting to the point where AI and destructability detract more from the realism than the graphics. I just really want it to be so that *everything* breaks. I don't know how this could work (apart from a few completely uninformed methods I've thought up), but I really just want everything to break into non-pre-rendered pieces if I hit it with something big.

How would that work? Would you just keep track of a bunch of small "particles" around which textures are rendered, which can be split apart? Or somehow cut a model up into pieces on the fly? It seems very processor-intensive. But I want it.

@Jahoclave: Yes, unfortunately game physics does not consider quantum mechanics at this time. For now you'll have to settle for building trebuchets in Garry's Mod.
I believe fracture is trying to have more scenery blow up in non-pre-rendered styles, though I don't know exactly to what extent this happens. The demo was quite cool though, with terrain deformation and such (I want to see the multiplayer...)

User avatar
Ishindri
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:52 pm UTC
Location: Maryland, USA

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Ishindri » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Xeio wrote:I believe fracture is trying to have more scenery blow up in non-pre-rendered styles, though I don't know exactly to what extent this happens. The demo was quite cool though, with terrain deformation and such (I want to see the multiplayer...)
A link please? That sounds quite cool.

As for the poll, I voted 10-20 years. Moore's Law isn't giving out for a while, though, so I might be surprised.
All is well. We are not like the others.

User avatar
fyrenwater
Posts: 564
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 2:26 am UTC
Location: SPAAAAAAAAAAAAACE
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby fyrenwater » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:17 am UTC

IMO, they already are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjO12QbT4XU

People and scenery need work, but those cars. HOLY CRAP, those cars. If I saw that footage, I wouldn't be able to tell if it was CGI or live action.
...It made more sense in my head.

User avatar
headprogrammingczar
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Beaming you up

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby headprogrammingczar » Mon Sep 22, 2008 12:15 pm UTC

The whole point of this topic is about people.
The AI in HL2 is very good. It is completely unscripted and programmed to find cover and flank. This unscripted behavior means if you start knocking cars around with the gravity gun, they will run out from behind it, but continue running away from you. When it stops moving, they get back behind it for cover. Play through Episode 2, with buddha mode on if you really aren't good at the game. You will not be disappointed.
Spoiler:
When you get to the town where they trap your car, watch the enemies run around trying to get an angle on you without entering the house.
<quintopia> You're not crazy. you're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Weeks> You're the goddamn headprogrammingspock!
<Cheese> I love you

User avatar
aion7
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:43 am UTC
Location: In a base with which you identify, killing dudes to whose team you belong

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby aion7 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 12:38 pm UTC

Heh. "Buddha". That's a funny word.

What about Red Faction Guerrilla for destructibility of everything?
Spoiler:
Zeroignite wrote:And you have suddenly become awesome.

joshz wrote:Oh, you so win.

internets++ for aion7.

jerdak wrote:Nothing says hello like a coconut traveling near the speed of light.

User avatar
Frimble
Posts: 480
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:57 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Frimble » Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:13 pm UTC

Never. Game designers won't even come close, there is no point in them trying.

Never mind the rendering problems, what about animation? The movements of people in computer games bear only a passing resemblance to the way real people move. In most games they just have everything moving to fast for you to see properly.

And facial expressions/skin texture? Even the CGI used in films hasn't and won't come close.
"Absolute precision buys the freedom to dream meaningfully." - Donal O' Shea: The Poincaré Conjecture.
"We need a reality check here. Roll a D20." - Algernon the Radish
"Should I marry W? Not unless she tells me what the other letters in her name are" Woody Allen.

User avatar
Zer088
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:13 pm UTC
Location: south florida

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Zer088 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:23 pm UTC

i think we've reached a plateau on what we can do visually in a real time rendering environment.
until commercially available graphic cards are 8x more powerful than our current top-o-the-line cards, we wont see much if any improvement (including game systems and SLI/Crossfire)

i would love to see a game that was all about the physics, even if it had no textures or plot, if you smash a wall it crumbles appropriately with any rebar, electrical wiring, and pluming all exposed. i think we'll see this before we believe what we see is real.
YaKKa Foob MoG. GRuG PubbaWuP ZiNK wattooM GaZoRK. CHuMBLE spuzz.
Image
John Kaim: Love is the most powerful catalyst in existence.

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5426
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Xanthir » Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:56 pm UTC

Frimble wrote:And facial expressions/skin texture? Even the CGI used in films hasn't and won't come close.

This is incorrect. I went to see Beowulf with no foreknowledge of what it was about. ("I wanna go watch a movie!" ::drives to the movie theatre:: "I don't know what any of these movies are! Ooh, that one has 3D glasses!" <--me)

I got at least an hour into the movie before I realized that some of the actors weren't real. It wasn't until the very end of the movie that I could finally accept that the *none* of the actors might be real. I still think Wieglaf (sp?) was real.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
Frimble
Posts: 480
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:57 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Frimble » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:12 pm UTC

Sometimes images are enhanced by computer. That's quite different to creating a realistic face from scratch.

For "The Force Unleashed" they (somehow) took 3d images of actors faces, shoulders and arms, and put them on the IG characters. It's possible they used something like this in the film, but I suspect they simply enhanced the images.

(I haven't seen that film.)
"Absolute precision buys the freedom to dream meaningfully." - Donal O' Shea: The Poincaré Conjecture.
"We need a reality check here. Roll a D20." - Algernon the Radish
"Should I marry W? Not unless she tells me what the other letters in her name are" Woody Allen.

User avatar
thecommabandit
Posts: 1884
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:25 pm UTC
Location: Manchester, UK
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby thecommabandit » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:21 pm UTC

I have a feeling it will never, ever be completely indistinguishable. I mean, did you see that advert for the Godfather game? That was some of the most realistic computer graphics I have ever seen, but there was still something just off about it, something that made you question whether it was real or not. A little tell in the way the model moved here, a tiny, tiny bit of aliasing there. If you're questioning whether something is real or not, it usually isn't (at least in this context).
Image

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Endless Mike » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:27 pm UTC

Xanthir wrote:
Frimble wrote:And facial expressions/skin texture? Even the CGI used in films hasn't and won't come close.

This is incorrect. I went to see Beowulf with no foreknowledge of what it was about. ("I wanna go watch a movie!" ::drives to the movie theatre:: "I don't know what any of these movies are! Ooh, that one has 3D glasses!" <--me)

I got at least an hour into the movie before I realized that some of the actors weren't real. It wasn't until the very end of the movie that I could finally accept that the *none* of the actors might be real. I still think Wieglaf (sp?) was real.

Huh? All the trailers looked like a video game to me. I wanted to press X to skip the cutscene.

I think this depends on whether we're talking stopped frames or in-game movement. Stopped frames might be fairly easy, but I swear making realistic animation must be impossible because even the best-animated, realistic-looking games still look stiff and fake. Games that AREN'T trying to look like reality tend to have much better animation, I"ve noticed.

User avatar
Edawan
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:06 pm UTC
Location: Paris, France

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Edawan » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:38 pm UTC

Endless Mike wrote:Games that AREN'T trying to look like reality tend to have much better animation, I"ve noticed.
It's just a perception.
Stylised looks call for stylised animation, and in itself, a cartoonish animation isn't "better" than a realistic animation, it's just a different style, and cartoon is by far easier to do than realism.

On topic : I think we're still at least 10 years away from photo-realism. A game like Crysis looks darn good, but it's still quite far from photo-realism.

And remember we're not debating the merits of photo-realism, just how far we are from it and what might be needed to achieve it.
We are nothing but the nerds they say we are.

User avatar
NathanielJ
Posts: 882
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:04 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby NathanielJ » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:45 pm UTC

Xanthir wrote:
Frimble wrote:And facial expressions/skin texture? Even the CGI used in films hasn't and won't come close.

This is incorrect. I went to see Beowulf with no foreknowledge of what it was about. ("I wanna go watch a movie!" ::drives to the movie theatre:: "I don't know what any of these movies are! Ooh, that one has 3D glasses!" <--me)

I got at least an hour into the movie before I realized that some of the actors weren't real. It wasn't until the very end of the movie that I could finally accept that the *none* of the actors might be real. I still think Wieglaf (sp?) was real.


Beowulf doesn't really count since the entire movie was motion-captured. The facial expressions and movements were those of real actors. The only "animation" really was that the actors were re-textured and the backgrounds/dragons/etc were added in. If we're talking about really animated movies, then the only contenders IMO are things like Pixar movies for Final Fantasy movies, none of which are photo-realistic. Final Fantasy: Advent Children is probably the closest that has been attained so far, but notice that it (as well as FF: The Spirits Within and the photo-realistic parts of WallE) heavily rely on barren landscapes. We are very good at animating things that look dead or mechanical, and we can do living stuff via motion-capture (such as Gollum or Beowulf) very well, but actually animating people on their own still comes of not quite right.
Homepage: http://www.njohnston.ca
Conway's Game of Life: http://www.conwaylife.com

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Endless Mike » Mon Sep 22, 2008 6:13 pm UTC

Edawan wrote:
Endless Mike wrote:Games that AREN'T trying to look like reality tend to have much better animation, I"ve noticed.
It's just a perception.
Stylised looks call for stylised animation, and in itself, a cartoonish animation isn't "better" than a realistic animation, it's just a different style, and cartoon is by far easier to do than realism.

This entire topic is about perception. Yes, it's easier to do, hence why it looks better. I'm not even claiming cartoonish. Something like, say, Okami (as was mentioned above), or even the Ratchet series. They look much better that Uncharted or even Soul Calibur which are trying to look realistic.

User avatar
Rippy
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Can o' Duh

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Rippy » Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:37 pm UTC

I'd just like to remind people that we're not talking about graphics completely indistinguishable from reality. We're talking graphics where you'd just really have to look closely to notice the difference. For what it's worth, I think it will be a VERY long time, if ever, before we can create a game that cannot in any way be distinguished from reality.

User avatar
Jebobek
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jebobek » Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:41 pm UTC

I'll consider a game realistic when its physics and world engine allows me to start digging or craft flying machines.

Like in elder scrolls 24 they make the engine and develop a huge plot, and the developers realize that no one is playing the game for the plot. People start using spells and explosives and mining picks to start carving an underground passage, involving tunnels and underground bases. And you can pour concrete to make some walls down there. And you dig a giant vertical shaft so you can lower stuff down, or turn it into a chimney. And you wind up drowning because you dug too far and went into a lake.

A boy would fall down the shaft and die. The behavior engine makes people scripted to look for the child. People find the entrance to your home and eventually break inside to look for him. They find him dead, find some parchments with your name on it, put a warrent out for you for manslaughter.

And the wind engine in the game lets you build hang gliders so you can jump off cliffs+bluffs and soar a mile to your destination. And there was no real instructions on building a glider, you used a binding spell to put poles together, and you attach cloth to the glider skeleton in such a manner that the wind catches it. The dev's had no idea that their engine would enable flight. You soar and land on top of a rock formation which is impossible to climb. You put down the peices of wood you carried with you and begin to build your fort only reachable by air.
Image

User avatar
Raiku
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:11 pm UTC
Location: Your Fridge
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Raiku » Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:47 pm UTC

Jebobek wrote:I'll consider a game realistic when its physics and world engine allows me to start digging or craft flying machines.

Like in elder scrolls 24 they make the engine and develop a huge plot, and the developers realize that no one is playing the game for the plot. People start using spells and explosives and mining picks to start carving an underground passage, involving tunnels and underground bases. And you can pour concrete to make some walls down there. And you dig a giant vertical shaft so you can lower stuff down, or turn it into a chimney. And you wind up drowning because you dug too far and went into a lake.

A boy would fall down the shaft and die. The behavior engine makes people scripted to look for the child. People find the entrance to your home and eventually break inside to look for him. They find him dead, find some parchments with your name on it, put a warrent out for you for manslaughter.

And the wind engine in the game lets you build hang gliders so you can jump off cliffs+bluffs and soar a mile to your destination. And there was no real instructions on building a glider, you used a binding spell to put poles together, and you attach cloth to the glider skeleton in such a manner that the wind catches it. The dev's had no idea that their engine would enable flight. You soar and land on top of a rock formation which is impossible to climb. You put down the peices of wood you carried with you and begin to build your fort only reachable by air.


If that happens now, think of the royalties you'll get...

I'd say in 20-30 years time-but I'm perfectly happy with graphics the way they are now-I'd prefer graphics like... well... Viva Piniata, more artisaitic, than realism.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby EvanED » Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:32 pm UTC

(Mostly off topic)

headprogrammingczar wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:
aion7 wrote:I agree with Narsil, but think that the AI needs some serious work as well. 99% of games have enemies that run straight at you.

Agreed, graphics can take a nice break for awhile. More physics, more ai, and, for the love of Shakespeare, more plot.

Half-Life has all of those pretty much covered for now...
I am a huge HL fan, but I don't think I agree all that much.

It's better than many games, but there are still issues. "Barriers" that shouldn't be impassable are. (Episode 2 is rather better about this, but a lot of that is the setting, and there are still slopes that shouldn't be too steep to climb that you can't climb.) Things that are made out of wood are untouched after a grenade or RPG go off next to them. NPCs push you out of the way instead of walking around you if you are in their way. NPCs don't suffer if you shoot them repeatedly. (I'm sure Magnusson is very glad at this design decision, as I have unloaded a number of clips into his face.) Not all windows are breakable.

Of course, HL has a fair bit of plot, and it's great. (I can't wait for Ep3 for that reason.)

HL's one of the better games out there, but there is a LONG time before I would consider things realistic.

aion7 wrote:I didn't notice any great AI in Half Life 2, but maybe that's just because I suck at it and couldn't even get to the gravity gun.

I noticed:
Manhacks - stand there shooting at you. Alternatively, run up and hit you.
Headcrabs - Jump at your face.
Zombies - slowly walk towards you. If (things nearby) {throw things}
Well, to be fair, you happened to choose almost three of the dumbest enemies in the game. Take zombies. Almost by definition, they won't try to flank you, they won't really anticipate, etc. Zombies win through numbers (and lack of pain reception), not brains. Manhacks don't shoot you, the only damage they deal is by hitting you, hence the charging. The other main enemy you've faced, the CPs, aren't exactly the cream of the crop, and of course are using a toned down AI.

Later on, once you start dealing more with the combine soldiers and especially elites, things get rather better. (The citidel chapter notwithstanding.)

That said, HL2 isn't the best game to look at for AI. A lot of people feel that the first Half Life has better AI, especially the assassins.

User avatar
PyroniusRex
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 5:08 am UTC
Contact:

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby PyroniusRex » Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:29 pm UTC

1: I'm fine without photo realisticness otherwise I would just be living my life with different controls.

2: If grpahics was what you ment well I'm fine with them not being perfect, kinda more fun that way.

3: I say 5-10 years 'cuz thats when I'll have a pet otter, flying license, and a plane.
(Favorite Quote)
Kit Fisto's Padawan: You can't defeat us all.
General Grievous: OF COURSE I CAN!!!
Image

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Yuri2356 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:46 pm UTC

Jebobek wrote:I'll consider a game realistic when its physics and world engine allows me to start digging or craft flying machines.

Like in elder scrolls 24 they make the engine and develop a huge plot, and the developers realize that no one is playing the game for the plot. People start using spells and explosives and mining picks to start carving an underground passage, involving tunnels and underground bases. And you can pour concrete to make some walls down there. And you dig a giant vertical shaft so you can lower stuff down, or turn it into a chimney. And you wind up drowning because you dug too far and went into a lake.

A boy would fall down the shaft and die. The behavior engine makes people scripted to look for the child. People find the entrance to your home and eventually break inside to look for him. They find him dead, find some parchments with your name on it, put a warrent out for you for manslaughter.

And the wind engine in the game lets you build hang gliders so you can jump off cliffs+bluffs and soar a mile to your destination. And there was no real instructions on building a glider, you used a binding spell to put poles together, and you attach cloth to the glider skeleton in such a manner that the wind catches it. The dev's had no idea that their engine would enable flight. You soar and land on top of a rock formation which is impossible to climb. You put down the peices of wood you carried with you and begin to build your fort only reachable by air.

So, Dwarf Fortress v0.5 then?

Klapaucius
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:00 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Klapaucius » Mon Sep 22, 2008 10:10 pm UTC

Someday there will be a photorealistic version of The Sims. You will be you, in your house, doing the things you do.
Then, you will notice a PC. You sit down, and examine it. Then you turn it on, and begin to play a photorealistic version of The Sims...


And humanity will have met its doom.
500%!

User avatar
Jebobek
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Jebobek » Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:09 pm UTC

Yuri2356 wrote:
Jebobek wrote:
Spoiler:
I'll consider a game realistic when its physics and world engine allows me to start digging or craft flying machines.

Like in elder scrolls 24 they make the engine and develop a huge plot, and the developers realize that no one is playing the game for the plot. People start using spells and explosives and mining picks to start carving an underground passage, involving tunnels and underground bases. And you can pour concrete to make some walls down there. And you dig a giant vertical shaft so you can lower stuff down, or turn it into a chimney. And you wind up drowning because you dug too far and went into a lake.

A boy would fall down the shaft and die. The behavior engine makes people scripted to look for the child. People find the entrance to your home and eventually break inside to look for him. They find him dead, find some parchments with your name on it, put a warrent out for you for manslaughter.

And the wind engine in the game lets you build hang gliders so you can jump off cliffs+bluffs and soar a mile to your destination. And there was no real instructions on building a glider, you used a binding spell to put poles together, and you attach cloth to the glider skeleton in such a manner that the wind catches it. The dev's had no idea that their engine would enable flight. You soar and land on top of a rock formation which is impossible to climb. You put down the peices of wood you carried with you and begin to build your fort only reachable by air
.

So, Dwarf Fortress v0.5 then?


Haha I know right? Kinda like Dwarf Fortress but is first/third person perspective and you're mostly by yourself? Oh man if theres any reason to stay alive its video games coming out.
Image

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Yuri2356 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:37 pm UTC

Jebobek wrote:
Yuri2356 wrote:
Jebobek wrote:
Spoiler:
I'll consider a game realistic when its physics and world engine allows me to start digging or craft flying machines.

Like in elder scrolls 24 they make the engine and develop a huge plot, and the developers realize that no one is playing the game for the plot. People start using spells and explosives and mining picks to start carving an underground passage, involving tunnels and underground bases. And you can pour concrete to make some walls down there. And you dig a giant vertical shaft so you can lower stuff down, or turn it into a chimney. And you wind up drowning because you dug too far and went into a lake.

A boy would fall down the shaft and die. The behavior engine makes people scripted to look for the child. People find the entrance to your home and eventually break inside to look for him. They find him dead, find some parchments with your name on it, put a warrent out for you for manslaughter.

And the wind engine in the game lets you build hang gliders so you can jump off cliffs+bluffs and soar a mile to your destination. And there was no real instructions on building a glider, you used a binding spell to put poles together, and you attach cloth to the glider skeleton in such a manner that the wind catches it. The dev's had no idea that their engine would enable flight. You soar and land on top of a rock formation which is impossible to climb. You put down the peices of wood you carried with you and begin to build your fort only reachable by air
.

So, Dwarf Fortress v0.5 then?


Haha I know right? Kinda like Dwarf Fortress but is first/third person perspective and you're mostly by yourself? Oh man if theres any reason to stay alive its video games coming out.

Yes, Adventure Mode in Dwarf Fortress v0.5.

User avatar
Mr. Beck
Commencing Countdown, Engines On
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: Albuquerque, NM.

Re: How long until games are photorealistic?

Postby Mr. Beck » Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:42 pm UTC

As for AI, nothing I have seen compares to the Hunters in HL2 Episode 2.
It's hard to explain just how it is unless you've played, but let me say that when I fought them, I felt dumber than the AI. I would be running from one around the back of a house, then find the other two had waited for me on the other side! Again, I can't rally explain- but none of their actions felt unplanned, yet practically none were scripted. Another time they cornered me in a bathroom by running into both doors simultaneously.
Not only that, but the way they behave feels malicious. Even if you somehow missed their introduction, I think that a player would feel that once they attacked, they would never stop until the victim was 100% dead- and then they would calmly saunter away.


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests