Where do graphics go from here?

YoungTrouble

Do you think game graphics will improve in the next ten years as much they did in the last ten?

dreamers75

here


http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-oculus-rift-interview

johnny_ultimate

I'm hoping several mainstream developers broaden their colour palettes to include colours other than brown and industrial grey.

If graphics stayed at their current level of technical fidelity, and instead designers focused on more original, offbeat and challenging art styles, well I wouldn't mind too much. It's all well and good having pretty but uninspired games like Crysis, but stuff like Rayman Origins, El Shaddai, Okami, Muramasa, Child of Eden, Journey etc... are the games that to me look genuinely stunning. More of that, less of the metallic super soldiers.

Magill

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I'm hoping several mainstream developers broaden their colour palettes to include colours other than brown and industrial grey.

If graphics stayed at their current level of technical fidelity, and instead designers focused on more original, offbeat and challenging art styles, well I wouldn't mind too much. It's all well and good having pretty but uninspired games like Crysis, but stuff like Rayman Origins, El Shaddai, Okami, Muramasa, Child of Eden, Journey etc... are the games that to me look genuinely stunning. More of that, less of the metallic super soldiers.

I mean... obviously there is a good broad range of colors this generation. Games like dark souls, metro, stalker and path of exile are examples of "brown/grey" coloured games that look pretty damn awesome imo. If every game was as colorful as some of those games you mentioned, i'd probably want to murder some kittens after a few months !!



As for where graphics are going... its just going to be constantly improving, i'd imagine the gap between the best looking games this generation and that of next generation will be huge i think. Resolutions will probably be much higher, at least on console where most games run at 720p (PS4 is expected to support up to 4k resolutions i think ?). Some of the tech demo's at E3 where pretty insane tbh.

johnny_ultimate

Magill wrote: »

I mean... obviously there is a good broad range of colors this generation. Games like dark souls, metro, stalker and path of exile are examples of "brown/grey" coloured games that look pretty damn awesome imo. If every game was as colorful as some of those games you mentioned, i'd probably want to murder some kittens after a few months !!

Not saying there aren't great 'brown / grey' games, just too many lazy ones A lot of games do tend to coalesce into over-similar styles, though, and it'd be great if the bigger games diversify a little bit.

Yeah technological advances are cool and all, but I guess my point is I'd rather more unusual or ambitious art stylings over 4K resolution and further steps into uncanny valley. Or more games like NA Loire which, despite its massive flaws, at the very least used graphic technology as more than just eye candy by making it an integral part of gameplay.

Magill

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Not saying there aren't great 'brown / grey' games, just too many lazy ones A lot of games do tend to coalesce into over-similar styles, though, and it'd be great if the bigger games diversify a little bit.

Yeah technological advances are cool and all, but I guess my point is I'd rather more unusual or ambitious art stylings over 4K resolution and further steps into uncanny valley. Or more games like NA Loire which, despite its massive flaws, at the very least used graphic technology as more than just eye candy by making it an integral part of gameplay.

Meh, there is plenty of diversity in the graphical department within gaming, its a lame argument imo, or at best, a weak one.

Improving the "eye candy" is hugely important, for many different reasons(Gameplay, story telling, immersion).

johnny_ultimate

Magill wrote: »

Meh, there is plenty of diversity in the graphical department within gaming, its a lame argument imo, or at best, a weak one.

Improving the "eye candy" is hugely important, for many different reasons(Gameplay, story telling, immersion).

Yes, I agree there is plenty of diversity, but I just tend to find many games at the 'cutting edge' technology wise only occasionally try anything truly revolutionary or unusual. Plenty of Wii games have been extremely visually engaging IMO despite their low resolution, while I've been left underwhelmed by technically 'technically superior' efforts like Crysis 2 or Skyrim. I guess all I'm trying to say is that it's not all about making resolutions higher and higher and higher. Without creative art design, all those wonderful engines are wasted, or their true potential untapped.

Again, I can only re-cite LA Noire IMO as a game of recent times that truly utilised improved tech in a forward-thinking, important way. Facial technology that actually determines the gameplay rather than just acting as 'eye candy'? Going forward, that is what we need so much more of, and I think it's a promising precedent. Now if someone made a better game out of such tech...

Eggy Baby!

This reminds me- I remember hearing a while back that an Australian company called Euclideon were pioneering infinite polygon technology, called Unlimited Detail, and the prospect of it seemed very promising. But I haven't heard from them since? Have they discontinued their research or what?

MitchKoobski

I don't really want 100% realistic graphics. I just want more colour. This whole grey/brownscale thing is annoying.

I also want more games to be 3D compatible. I used to say it was pointless until I got to play Motorstorm Apocalypse and Uncharted 3 during the week in full 3D. Had an eyegasm.

Magill

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yes, I agree there is plenty of diversity, but I just tend to find many games at the 'cutting edge' technology wise only occasionally try anything truly revolutionary or unusual. Plenty of Wii games have been extremely visually engaging IMO despite their low resolution, while I've been left underwhelmed by technically 'technically superior' efforts like Crysis 2 or Skyrim. I guess all I'm trying to say is that it's not all about making resolutions higher and higher and higher. Without creative art design, all those wonderful engines are wasted, or their true potential untapped.

I mean, this is it... there are plenty of different art styles in gaming like i've said. Being revolutionary in the graphic department is easier said than done, what can they really do that isn't just improving upon whats been done before. The idea behind L.A Noire isn't exactly a new idea, developers have been working on facial expressions for a long time, they were just never as detailed or integral in gameplay. The problem with basing a game around it is that most people can't even read facial expressions in real life, never mind in a computer game.

And yes, i know its not all about resolutions and graphical detail.. but that IS the thing that will improve most... which is what this thread asks.

OctavarIan

I'd like to see more effort put into the art & design side of things. This won't happen though without a similar upheaval in gameplay design, which won't happen while publishers need to make so much money.

I hate the way I sound these days but mainstream games have gotten so, so boring. Hopefully some of the fun and imagination from the indie gaming scene will trickle upwards over the next few years.

Kirby

There is no limit on progress because you can always make something look prettier, look more realistic, and do it with less resources.

Graphics will always get better.

danthefan

Personally I don't really need graphics to improve a whole lot from here, I'm happy enough with the way current games look tbh. As a gamer I'd be looking for good gameplay, new concepts and good game design more than better graphics.

_vti

I really couldnt give a crap about VR and 3D.

Detail levels, immersion and captivation are they way things should go.

norrie rugger

Better environmental physics would be higher on my list than graphics

o1s1n

_vti wrote: »

I really couldnt give a crap about VR and 3D.

Detail levels, immersion and captivation are they way things should go.

But virtual reality IS total immersion. That's the way it needs to go next. Imagine being able to walk around a 3D environment with full head tracking. It would be incredible.

By 'walking around' I don't necessarily mean walking around physically by the way - you could move in the environment by other means. But head tracking to the point where you cant see the edges of the screen and you're literally in the game is where I'd like to be with games in the next gen.

_vti

o1s1n wrote: »

But virtual reality IS total immersion. That's the way it needs to go next. Imagine being able to walk around a 3D environment with full head tracking. It would be incredible.

By 'walking around' I don't necessarily mean walking around physically by the way - you could move in the environment by other means. But head tracking to the point where you cant see the edges of the screen and you're literally in the game is where I'd like to be with games in the next gen.

VR isnt strictly immersion. Have you seen that VR BF3 thing that discovery show did before BF3s release?....it was just ****e!

Immersion doesnt need virtual reality measures, just a captivating gameplay/style/story with high level of lasting value.

Big Knox

_vti wrote: »

VR isnt strictly immersion. Have you seen that VR BF3 thing that discovery show did before BF3s release?....it was just ****e!

Immersion doesnt need virtual reality measures, just a captivating gameplay/style/story with high level of lasting value.

Sorry but he's right. Properly implemented VR is the ultimate immersion tool. Nothing else comes close and if we see it properly produced and backed by developers within the next few years it should bring gaming to the next level.

Canis Lupus

norrie rugger wrote: »

Better environmental physics would be higher on my list than graphics

Totally the same for me. Gfx are already very pretty but I'd love to see real physics in a game along with improved AI.

GTR63

The Oculus Rift VR sound interesting, but maybe it only really works well from the first person perspective. The Games industry needs a bit of a lift when I read on cvg friday that retail had its worst week since records began I wasn't at all shocked.

Magill

GTR63 wrote: »

The Oculus Rift VR sound interesting, but maybe it only really works well from the first person perspective. The Games industry needs a bit of a lift when I read on cvg friday that retail had its worst week since records began I wasn't at all shocked.

Im sure that's mostly due to online sales tho...

Reekwind

Graphics are good enough as they are. That isn't to say that they won't get better, or that this wouldn't be a Good Thing, but currently graphics engines are powerful enough tools that the constraints lie with developers, not technology. We've reached the point where almost anything short of photorealism can be represented in game... but developers are typically reluctant to take advantage of this

Partly that's due to the hardware limitations of consoles and partly it's due to the nature of the industry; either way it's disappointing that we escaped from 2D sprites, and went through that painfully early 3D period, just to see military shooters dominate

Downlinz

Have graphics really advanced much in the last 10 years? When I think of games 10 years old like Final Fantasy X or Gran Turismo 3 I don't think whats out today is planets away from it. HD is the big difference obviously.

RoverZT

Downlinz wrote: »

Have graphics really advanced much in the last 10 years? When I think of games 10 years old like Final Fantasy X or Gran Turismo 3 I don't think whats out today is planets away from it. HD is the big difference obviously.

That's true, been thinking that as well.

Things haven't changed that much.

FFX, Metal Gear Solid 2 are 10 years old and still look great.

I haven't been impressed with graphics for years.




11 years on and the above still almost looks a modern day game.

Overheal

Mmm... GT3 A-Spec.

That game was gorgeous. And is still gorgeous, I'm sure. Played that game to death.

PseudoFamous

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

This reminds me- I remember hearing a while back that an Australian company called Euclideon were pioneering infinite polygon technology, called Unlimited Detail, and the prospect of it seemed very promising. But I haven't heard from them since? Have they discontinued their research or what?

Its essentially bull****, IIRC. Its unusable in videogames due to only being able to render statics rather than moving objects, as everything is essentially voxels using euclideon's idea.

TheFairy

Graphics Smaphics just make good games. Fed up with part completed games sold out the door by the corporate machine!

satchmo

Saying graphics are good enough as they are is taking way too narrow a view of the role graphics play in games.

It's not just about the ooh-shiny factor (although that's still a primary concern - graphics sell games, whether you like it or not). A large part of graphics development in games these days is about feature development that allow certain gameplay elements to shine. Large parts of the gameplay of Uncharted 3 for example simply couldn't have been done with Uncharted 1's graphics engine - water simulation & rendering, volumetric lighting, and sand rendering are a few things that spring to mind that have a major impact on the game.

Beyond gameplay, you'd be very surprised how much tech goes into things you wouldn't necessarily even notice. Things like realistic tone mapping, colour grading, dynamic global illumination, physically-based lighting, etc. None of these were in the graphics engines of 10 years ago, and while you could probably play many of today's games just as well without any of these features, they all contribute a huge amount to the immersion factor and perceived quality level that you expect when you pay 50-odd euro for a game. These days, I don't expect to just have fun with my games, I also expect to have an experience. Graphics are an intrinsic part of this.

Lastly, one thing people often overlook is the collaboration that goes on in the graphics community. You might think Crysis 2 was uninspiring, and that they should have spent less time on the graphics and more on the gameplay. But there are a huge amount of games that have benefitted directly from the graphics research that the Crytek guys have shared. Some of these are most likely games that people would laud for concentrating less on graphics and more on gameplay... but these games could only concentrate less on graphics because someone else already did the work.

There is still a lot of work to do in realtime graphics. Higher quality anti-aliasing, proper volumetric effects, more sophisticated lighting models, better translucency, the list goes on. And these aren't being developed just for their own sake, or to make better screenshots. Every advance in graphics puts more control in the hands of the designers and artists, letting them concentrate less on what they can do within the constraints of the engine, and more about implementing whatever gameplay or artistic style they can imagine. And in the end that's what really matters, right?

Magill

satchmo wrote: »

Saying graphics are good enough as they are is taking way too narrow a view of the role graphics play in games.

It's not just about the ooh-shiny factor (although that's still a primary concern - graphics sell games, whether you like it or not). A large part of graphics development in games these days is about feature development that allow certain gameplay elements to shine. Large parts of the gameplay of Uncharted 3 for example simply couldn't have been done with Uncharted 1's graphics engine - water simulation & rendering, volumetric lighting, and sand rendering are a few things that spring to mind that have a major impact on the game.

Beyond gameplay, you'd be very surprised how much tech goes into things you wouldn't necessarily even notice. Things like realistic tone mapping, colour grading, dynamic global illumination, physically-based lighting, etc. None of these were in the graphics engines of 10 years ago, and while you could probably play many of today's games just as well without any of these features, they all contribute a huge amount to the immersion factor and perceived quality level that you expect when you pay 50-odd euro for a game. These days, I don't expect to just have fun with my games, I also expect to have an experience. Graphics are an intrinsic part of this.

Lastly, one thing people often overlook is the collaboration that goes on in the graphics community. You might think Crysis 2 was uninspiring, and that they should have spent less time on the graphics and more on the gameplay. But there are a huge amount of games that have benefitted directly from the graphics research that the Crytek guys have shared. Some of these are most likely games that people would laud for concentrating less on graphics and more on gameplay... but these games could only concentrate less on graphics because someone else already did the work.

There is still a lot of work to do in realtime graphics. Higher quality anti-aliasing, proper volumetric effects, more sophisticated lighting models, better translucency, the list goes on. And these aren't being developed just for their own sake, or to make better screenshots. Every advance in graphics puts more control in the hands of the designers and artists, letting them concentrate less on what they can do within the constraints of the engine, and more about implementing whatever gameplay or artistic style they can imagine. And in the end that's what really matters, right?

Exactly ! People overlook how important graphic tech is, especially these hipster gamers.

Mr.Saturn

I call the big HD developers just giving up and quietly reintroducing FMV games with a couple of modern trinkets e.g. Wing Commander III: Brown & Bloom edition.

Blazer

ATI are already working on VR and cards that are capable of supporting it.
By 2015 they plan to have a walk in room powered by ATI graphics which will apparently merge you within the game...think of Start Trek's holosuite but less advanced.
Someone was saying that the PS4 will support upto 4K resolutions.
Not a chance in hell..todays cards can barely support 2560x1600 at decent framerates so there's no miracle graphics chip available for Sony to do this.