I was reading an interview with the lead developer from Unreal 3 (http://gamesdomain.yahoo.com/preview/28441), while drooling over the screenshots, and they satrted talking over the future of graphics in games, and it got me thinking...
Basicly, in about 20 years time the theory is that we will be able to achieve perfect photo-realistic graphics which can't be bettered (or at least if they were then you wouldn't be able to notice any difference). So what happens from there? Throughout the history of gaming, games have strived to achieve the best graphics possible, and then suddenly all the graphics are perfect to the extent that they can't be pushed any further!
What do you think will happen then? I think the graphics will take a whole new direction, maybe it will become like art and will will have abstract and impressionist games. Maybe we'll go back to retro 80's games!
Damn! That looks fuckin amazing. Always been a fan of the Unreal games.
As for your question, I think computer graphics have their limits as far as realism goes, and the technology currently available can produce graphics almost impossible to tell the difference between real and computer generated images. Of course we're yet to see this in games, but the way I see it as the technology increases in power graphics will become more detailed and more realistic overall.
I don't see it going into any wierd abstract phases in particular. Perhaps 3D glasses and VR gear will make a come back for good. I'd say gamers will want to be more involved in the game once graphics get to their limit and VR style setups will be common place. It's just a matter of time.
MUGGUS
Come and annoy me more at
www.muggus69.tk STOUT ANGER!!!
thats what ive been thinking, tigs. people say that its going to happen so quickly...but how can you get all that power into a tiny little space so quickly? took long enough for arcade games to have gfx that people could understand without someone telling them or reading the cabinet
Well technolity is going faster every day, so eventually I'm seeing in within 20 years, computers running at speeds 5x faster then penium 4 at the price of Penium 2 & videocards running 3D games that dont even use faces in the graphics because they would have discovered a way to make graphics even better then this at top speed even on the smallest of videocards. I mean just 30 years ago hardly anyone had a computer or even a TV for that matter & now we have having all these new things being made everyday. BTW, Nice!I just got UnrealTournament 2004 for long ago & I gotta say, I am a HUGE fan of the game.
I also dont think people will think they reached the end of the graphics chain, because where we made get as good as it gets, not many people enjoy that because it may be TO realistic, which inturn we will be using cartoonlike graphics, expecially in TV shows, as you can see if you watch certain stations, they are already starting to do this, shows such as Jimmy Nutron that are all 3D, & shows like Futurama, that take what was extremly hard to draw, things like 3D spaceships, & work them into 3D, to keep the classic drawling look, while adding that 3D touch that people now'a'days long for.
Sure, CGI may look photorealistic, but unless they perfect animation, you'll always have a nagging feeling that something's a little off.
@awesomeanimator: One word: miniaturization. The Nintendo DS now packs equal or greater graphical power than the N64 in a small space. Ditto for the PSP. Personal computers now are more powerful than the room-filling vacuum tube supercomputers of yesterday.
"Omg. Where did they get the idea to not use army guys? Are they taking drugs?" --Tim Schafer on originality in videogames
well when we have perfect grapics there is still the matter of time before we got perfect programming. There is still alot of features missing in the program for todays games for it to be perfect.
The speed of processors is meant to double every 18 months, so in 20 years, I make that 24.5 terahertz in the average processor in 2024. But I don't think that will be true, because processors today are already reaching the physical limit on size. If they miniaturise processors much more, they are so small quantum stuff starts messing around with them and they stop working.
"...what if a "detailed" hand with 5 fingers is catching a bottle but the fingers pass right through it? Is this still realistic? Rather than to show each meticulous and tiny detail of a finger, it is more important to make the end action look more credible by working on the movement and functionality of the arms and the hand in relation to the object." - Shigeru Miyamoto
I think this shows the relative unimportance of photo-realism, because the game will only seem actually realistic if everything happens in a completely realistic way, which will require significant improvements in the basic physics programming of most games.
Talking purely graphically though, there can still be improvements even once photo-realism is achieved for example in terms of the number of objects on screen, the complexity of their animation etc.
More important for me is further development in AI aswell as the degree of interaction with your surroundings that is available.
It's not a case of perfect raytracing or anything like that, otherwise photorealism could only be acheived using a perfect simulation of reality, which would take as much storage as the scene itself would in the physical world... and that's just ridiculous. There will always be shortcuts, and as far as I can tell, the upper end of CG has already reached a 'better than photorealism' state. The trick now is to drop the quality and make everything dirty enough to seem real.
I play a game to escape from reality. I don't want to play a game that's really relistic. I want to see a cool, diffrent graphic style that isn't too relistic.
Fine Garbage since 2003.
CURRENT PROJECT:
-Paying off a massive amount of debt in college loans.
-Working in television.
Well, as others have pointed out we have already achieved photo realistic pre rendered graphics (look at most modern movies which use CGI). One thing that has not been perfected though is the animation of humans. We can create photo realistic CGI humans, but the animation is not flawless, and since we are so used to seeing other humans, any small flaw will be recognized. Thats why CGI actors have not replaced real actors yet (although I promise you that eventually, all movies and TV shows will be totally CGI). It is much easier to fool people with animation of other living creatures because we are not around these creatures all the time, and won't notice flaws (which is why movies often use large amounts of CGI for non human animals).
As for games, I am sure eventually we will be able to achieve perfect photo realistic graphics and animation in real time, probably within 20 years. It will even get to the point where you can have as many moving objects as you want in a scene with no drop in FPS at all. When this happens, the focus will shift towards creating a good "mood" in a level or scene, because the graphics can't get any better. For example, in movies you try to set up the lighting and the set to achieve a certain mood; the focus of game graphics will probably move towards that.
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
