View Full Version : Photo Realism: Closer Than We Think?
nUcLeAr_AtOmP6
12-08-2003, 11:08 PM
The achievement of photo realism will be, no doubt, a huge breathrough in gaming. Will PS3 bring us inches away from it, or will we achieve it with PS3? How real can we go?
julps31
12-08-2003, 11:43 PM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
bang ya leet
12-09-2003, 03:51 AM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
Most people seem to agree with me when i say it will more likely be Final Fantasy X Cut scene graphics rather then Spirits within
Chris Vercetti
12-09-2003, 10:00 PM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
Most people seem to agree with me when i say it will more likely be Final Fantasy X Cut scene graphics rather then Spirits within
Doom 3 and Half-life 2,far cry,stalker.All those look better than FFX cutscenes.I expect Spirits within type stuff.
We see photorealistic on the PS2 in games such as Ace Combat and GT4. Obviously, the PS3 will reach new boundres including this area. But I think gamers agree that movie-realistic graphics are not the goal. We still want that fantasy-world touch. Just compare the two Final Fantasy movies:
Spirits within and Advent Children.
The latter looks to outdue the first just by seeing the pics and trailer.
julps31
12-09-2003, 10:39 PM
Yeah, some games are already close to the FFX cutscene graphics, so I feel that if the if the next gen didn't advance like they are (1000x) that those in-game graphics would be similar to those cutscences but without all the environment details.
my guess it that it will be close to photo realism. Couple of games now look close so by then it should be photo or just real close
Omega Blue
12-10-2003, 08:08 PM
one game i can count on will be photo real will be the Ps3's GT but other then that i doubt it. i'd be close but not quite.
Don't forget Konami games, especially Silent Hill. That has the most realistic in-game graphics I ever saw. Zone of the Enders was impressive to.
Punisher
12-12-2003, 04:17 AM
If it did achieve picture like realism. .wouldnt some politician whine his @$$ off about killing, and running someone over watching the blood splat all over the windshield and hood in slow motion. . :twisted: which would be cool. .but I mean there would be some thing happen like that. .pretty sure. .
SantaClaus
12-13-2003, 04:43 AM
Photorealistic who?! Lol, I have already been tricked countless times by The Getaway, MGS2, Gran Turismo 3, and Ace Combat 4. The first time I saw those pics in mags I freaked like there was no tommorrow! If the upper class games on the ps3 fail to deliver another amazing feeling like that, I will be gravely disapointed......So in many ways photorealistic graphics have already been acheived.....if you mean actually technically-with a certain amount of poly's and all- well that could take a while, but the difference will be like the difference between audio quality on a cd and on a dvd..... a dvd has better quality but it is so close and cds are already so good that it is hard to tell the difference! So really, once you get to a certain graphical level- it doesn t need to get much better, your eyes won't be able to tell the difference anyway, especially considering that it will be running at 60fps......the future looks soooooooo sweeeeeeet!........... :wink:
Raiden
12-13-2003, 05:39 AM
If it did achieve picture like realism. .wouldnt some politician whine his @$$ off about killing, and running someone over watching the blood splat all over the windshield and hood in slow motion. . :twisted: which would be cool. .but I mean there would be some thing happen like that. .pretty sure. .
Good point but something you nead to think about. All the way back in the first MK days people ware freeking out about the killing in it. And people to this day still blame games for crime. So it wouldn't be anything new and I think you would agree with me on that. Just on the news today thare was somthing about games and killing. So really dude it's going to happen and the more it does the more people will want to play games and that's a fact. Just take a look at the GTA games. People on the news made a BIG deal out of the killing in it but did that stop the game from selling out??? NO. If anything it helped sales. I would say that 99.9% of gamers out thare own this game and games like it. So don't concern your self about it. It will happen but it's never going to stop development of these games.
Pumster
12-13-2003, 07:21 AM
After that "rendering in real-time" topic, it's hard to say what the PS3 will really be capable of. However, I'm with the guys that say the PS3 will achieve something along the lines of "FFX cut-scene"-quality graphics. (I'm talking basic model complexity, not so much everything that happens in those animations.) Personally, I'm hoping for more little things, such as more detailed facial features, clothes that move in the wind, stuff like that. Photorealism isn't as big a concern to me as achieving cartoony, FFX cut-scene quality graphics. If I wanted to look at real people, I'd get my ass of this damn chair and go outside.
As for violence in video games, it's a hard topic to discuss. It all boils down to what someone's mental state is when they watch a certain show or movie. Games are a little different because the gamer has to learn these skills, and, therefore, can learn how to do something illegal. For example, killing a man with a plastic bag. (Manhunt) In that sense, games are a little more in-depth then your typical R-Rated movie. Nevertheless, those with a normal mental state can play anything and just get "creeped out" by a violent scene. Others can look at it as a learning experience, or take note of a characters line or action and believe that it's proving his or her's stereotype. (Which they then use as a reason to commit a crime against a particular group or person.) However, I can see a reason to be concerned if Hitman RPG had you going to the store to buy very specific ingredients for an Anesthetic mixture.
Raiden
12-13-2003, 08:06 AM
After that "rendering in real-time" topic, it's hard to say what the PS3 will really be capable of. However, I'm with the guys that say the PS3 will achieve something along the lines of "FFX cut-scene"-quality graphics. (I'm talking basic model complexity, not so much everything that happens in those animations.) Personally, I'm hoping for more little things, such as more detailed facial features, clothes that move in the wind, stuff like that. Photorealism isn't as big a concern to me as achieving cartoony, FFX cut-scene quality graphics. If I wanted to look at real people, I'd get my ass of this damn chair and go outside.
As for violence in video games, it's a hard topic to discuss. It all boils down to what someone's mental state is when they watch a certain show or movie. Games are a little different because the gamer has to learn these skills, and, therefore, can learn how to do something illegal. For example, killing a man with a plastic bag. (Manhunt) In that sense, games are a little more in-depth then your typical R-Rated movie. Nevertheless, those with a normal mental state can play anything and just get "creeped out" by a violent scene. Others can look at it as a learning experience, or take note of a characters line or action and believe that it's proving his or her's stereotype. (Which they then use as a reason to commit a crime against a particular group or person.) However, I can see a reason to be concerned if Hitman RPG had you going to the store to buy very specific ingredients for an Anesthetic mixture.
I agree with you on some people shouldn't play violent games but at the same time games are not the only thing that promotes violence. It's not the gun that kills it's the one polling the trigger. So like I said some people shouldn't be playing violent games but than agian people like that shouldn't be doing anything becuase if you cant tell rite from wrong as in a game from real life your really fucked up and someone like that is going to luse it sooner are later do you know what I mean??? If a game can drive someone to do a crime are kill than that man are women should be in a MTH ware they cant hert anyone and I think you would agree with me.
SantaClaus
12-14-2003, 04:28 AM
No offense, but can we please stay on topic, I thinkt that we all already agree on violence in video games....... :wink:
Chris Vercetti
12-14-2003, 04:31 AM
Tell u,m santa!!!!!btw what are you getting me for christmas :?:
Raiden
12-14-2003, 08:50 AM
Sorry guy's I didn't mean to get off topic I just hate it when people blame games for violence and crime so again sorry. Anyway back to the topic.
InSaNeHbOy
12-14-2003, 10:25 AM
You got to factor in physics as well. I mean you may have graphics that look photo realistic, but if the hair doesn't flow right, clothes doesn't have certain creases in them, just little details like that will make photo realism hard to create.
Omega Blue
12-14-2003, 10:30 AM
yup they'd have to add ragdoll like physics to each peice of clothing and hair to a character. they can do it with curtains so it wouldn't surprize me if they do it with clothing next. in the HL2 souce engine wind is physically created and does effect the envioment as a whole plus add in physical clothing, curtains and hair. but that takes alot of power so im not completely expecting that anytime soon no matter what power the consoles harness i am always optimistic.
threepac3
12-14-2003, 11:30 AM
hahahah Movies and Games promote violance haha. News on tv does as well, did anyone see that lawyer get shot like five times while hiding behind tree. The news stations showed the whole thing uncut.
My point is that these ppl should take a look at other forms entertainment to bash about violance.
GodZeRo
12-14-2003, 03:55 PM
The physics ain't hard, thier's just alot of itterations to compute. Beyond today's hardware (in game). That's why I said before, if the ps3 can do hair, I'll be impressed! (that's a BIG impressed, not a little impressed)
Omega Blue
12-14-2003, 09:14 PM
Physics are hard, especially, convincing physics. when games start having alot of ragdoll NPC's being killed and falling or flying everywhere you can see major drops in FPS. or how in HL2 when you shoot a plank of wood and is splinters, your CPU is having to make sure it splinters right where it needs to and track the movements of each peice being shot off.
MysticWolf
12-18-2003, 01:06 PM
We cant get to real here now. I think there are limits, but PS3 will bring us really close. I mean real close.
DanM7890
01-05-2004, 05:42 AM
is it true there will be a picture taking thing on it to put your face in some of the games :?:
I think that you can already do that, but I can't remember which games you can do it in though.
deftblader
01-08-2004, 11:07 PM
Tony Hawk''s Underground.
jackaaron
02-02-2004, 05:49 PM
Where's the option to pick no, it won't. I mean, if you are saying photo-realistic, then I'm taking you literally. Even FF: Spirits Within in it's best moment didn't look photo-realistic. Photo realistic to me means...just like a photograph of someone that we take. That's not going to happen in none of the next generations (including Xbox 2). I think that's 2 or 3 generations away, could even be 4. Also, you have to think about how much computing power is being used. Developers keep making larger "worlds" as well. To have photo-realistic graphics with huge worlds where you can knock everything around, etc. is far beyond what we can play with right now. Even Pixar can't actually produce a MOVIE that looks like that, let alone something that can be interacted with. But, it's coming.
TEEDA
02-02-2004, 06:29 PM
http://www.gametrailers.com/gt_vault/t_onimusha3_gi.html
If you haven't seen this yet it is the most incredible Cg ever made . onimusha 3 ontro CG
http://www.best4gamers.com/jeux/onimusha3_ps2/97.jpg
http://www.best4gamers.com/jeux/onimusha3_ps2/98.jpg
I think ps3 will do closer than that in 3d real time , maybe even better .
http://www.best4gamers.com/jeux/onimusha3_ps2/105.jpg
julps31
02-02-2004, 06:49 PM
I would love that. Thats a beatifal movie. I doubt that their will be that much detail but the overall image and realism might come close.
NickSCFC
02-02-2004, 08:30 PM
Photo realism will not happen, especially in games. It's impossible and games developers will be stupid to even try it. PlayStation 3 will take us as far as games developers will go. There won't be a PlayStation 4
Still, everyone should be happy with what they see, alot of sports games on PS3 will look realistic in terms of shape and colour, but don't go expecting 3D eye lashes or anything stupid like that.
julps31
02-02-2004, 10:45 PM
Well I take that back I could really see a PS3 character model looking as good as those. I think that thats a good reference for what I think PS3 graphics will look like.
NickSCFC
02-02-2004, 10:50 PM
The middle image is close to what I expect from PS3. Games will never look as good as that bottom one though.
julps31
02-04-2004, 12:05 AM
Never look as good as the bottom? Why not? As fast as 3-d graphics have advanced it might not be to long till we see that level of detail in-game. You see how much better graphics have come over these past two generations(PS1 and PS2). Just imagine what will be cabable with the power of the PS3.
NickSCFC
02-04-2004, 01:53 PM
Because it would take years for games developers to create fully detailed "real" worlds. No games developer has the money or resources to make a game like that no matter how powerful the technology is.
jackaaron
02-04-2004, 03:09 PM
Above said:
"Photo realism will not happen, especially in games. It's impossible and games developers will be stupid to even try it. PlayStation 3 will take us as far as games developers will go. There won't be a PlayStation 4 "
I highly disagree. While it's possible, I guess, that Sony could go out of business, there will always be a next generation of video games. I'll tell you exactly why.
Video game software and hardware will continue to be made because they will always continue to shock us with their realism, yet escape from reality at the same time. The games themselves will become larger, and look more real from generation to generation, and we escape to that. At one point, it is my feeling (and this is very science fiction at this point, but so was traveling to the moon at one point) that we will make the biological crossover and be able to simulate all of the senses in a video game much the same way as the fictional holodeck on Star Trek Next Generation. In fact, this simulation will be so important to people, they will almost 'need' it.
NickSCFC
02-04-2004, 04:22 PM
I think the next generation of consoles will take video games as far as they need to go in terms of graphics technology. Developers will never find a shortage of power to run their games in consoles such as PlayStation 3 and there's only a certain point developers will go to regarding graphics engines.
As for the head f**k you just talked about, that's a long long way away.
Dreamcastmagic
02-14-2004, 05:05 AM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
Most people seem to agree with me when i say it will more likely be Final Fantasy X Cut scene graphics rather then Spirits within
Ya Spirt took years to get that kind of graphics and while it might be possable not on that system and maybe not even the gen after that well just have to wait and see... but if you ask me it will just match todays day top of the line PC games, specking of that any 1 played UT 04' that game is so good kicks some ass and is like the good old UT you missed with 03'
threepac3
02-15-2004, 11:03 AM
NickSCFC i really hate that you keep using the word "Never". Do you really think the technolgy that created ff spirits will always be out of game developers hands? I think your thinking interms of todays technolgy and can't see that technolgy grow in ways that non of us can ever prodict.
NO offense of course
NickSCFC
02-15-2004, 11:59 AM
Forget about technology. Developers can only create graphics as far as they are capable of. They are restrained by production costs and time. This is why 3D video games will never truly reach total photo realism. By this I mean things such organic environments, like perfectly recreating a section of a forest (each bit of tree bark perfectly recreated by polygons), it's too far for a developer to even bother with. However man made environments such as a bathroom in a house, there's a possibility that something like this could be recreated in a 3D game, because it's mainly flat edges and they only have to go into effort when recreating textures and shading.
Splitter
02-16-2004, 02:59 AM
My friend NickSCFC, NEVER (pun intended) say “never” in video gaming technology. Of course it’s impossible for a developer to model a forest by modeling the polygons one by one. But there will be tools that use clever hacks so good, that the end result will be the same.
Such tools exist even today
http://www.idvinc.com/html/speedtreert.htm
Download the demos and see for yourself (especially the “valley” one). They’re not perfect or photo-realistic but they’re essentially the first generation of such tools. If PS3 is as powerful as Sony says, imagine what kind of results such tools will give us.
julps31
02-16-2004, 05:57 AM
Its sounds to me like nick is thinking in terms of perfection instead of photo realism. Your thinking of every single detail is exactly what you would see in real life. Their is already photorealism in 3-d graphics (not necessarly in video games) and a forest can be photo realistic too. Just might not be exactly what you would see in real life down to every detail. With the technology developers could make a true to life forest. It just might not be perfect.
piggus35
02-16-2004, 08:28 AM
I think It will be close to photo realistic in some games and possibly photorealistic in others. Say they make a new Grand Theft Auto. Im sure Rockstar will be more concerned with the size of the city(s) than in tiny details. But I bet sony will pack so much detail in a Gran Turismo title that it will be extremly hard to tell the difference between the game and a real photo or race.
GT4 RULZ
02-16-2004, 08:35 AM
i sorta agree with u there piggus35 but when u think about if they are gonna put so much detail in the gt seris dont u think that they will hve less cars and tracks u they were to put some much detail :?
NickSCFC
02-16-2004, 11:31 AM
Its sounds to me like nick is thinking in terms of perfection instead of photo realism. Your thinking of every single detail is exactly what you would see in real life. Their is already photorealism in 3-d graphics (not necessarly in video games) and a forest can be photo realistic too. Just might not be exactly what you would see in real life down to every detail. With the technology developers could make a true to life forest. It just might not be perfect.
Well maybe you'd like to tell us what these photorealistic games are, because apart from Mad Dog McCree I have yet to see any.
Let us not speak of that terrible game...ok Nick? I still have nightmares about it... :cry:
julps31
02-16-2004, 06:54 PM
I wasn't saying that their was photo realistics games, I was saying that their are photorealistic 3-d graphics.Images or otherwise. Check out these cars.
http://www.suurland.com/portfolio_stills_peugeot307cc.htm
NickSCFC
02-16-2004, 08:53 PM
They look great, expect cars to look like that on a GT games on PS3. But don't expect the trees to look that realistic :D
julps31
02-16-2004, 09:00 PM
That would be nice if everything could look that real. Well we'll have to wait and see what PS3 brings to the table.
NickSCFC
02-16-2004, 09:14 PM
Like I said, it's much more easier to model cars than natural things such as trees.
young balla
03-27-2004, 12:50 PM
This is Ace Combat 5 and this looks photo realistic already. You cant even imagine what the ps3 could do at 4 times the power of the ps2.
http://www.the-magicbox.com/Mar04/ace51.jpg
http://www.the-magicbox.com/Mar04/ace53.jpg
http://www.the-magicbox.com/Mar04/ace58.jpg
http://www.the-magicbox.com/Mar04/ace519.jpg
http://www.the-magicbox.com/Mar04/ace510.jpg
oxygenuk
03-27-2004, 01:06 PM
i think i remember reading somehwere that the ps3 will be about 10 times better. so yea :wink: :twisted: 8)
mdfaizalj
03-27-2004, 01:30 PM
Yeah....i heard about it.....but...graphics wise..NO...mayb 3-4 times better...
Overall processing speed...yes...its possible...loading times maybe faster than the PS2..( some games load like 20 secs...way too long)...
UM...about those pics of Ace Combat 5...that is not gameplay pics...it's way too REAL...ahahha..
yeah i agree that the developers may have already unleashed about 80% of the PS2 hardware( remember JAK2?...n upcoming game God Of War...fantastic screenshots..)...impossible for those pics to be gameplay screenshots
çä§Ñ
03-28-2004, 11:55 PM
Forget about technology. Developers can only create graphics as far as they are capable of. They are restrained by production costs and time. This is why 3D video games will never truly reach total photo realism. By this I mean things such organic environments, like perfectly recreating a section of a forest (each bit of tree bark perfectly recreated by polygons), it's too far for a developer to even bother with. However man made environments such as a bathroom in a house, there's a possibility that something like this could be recreated in a 3D game, because it's mainly flat edges and they only have to go into effort when recreating textures and shading.
Forget about Technology? :lol: lol
Companies can be restrained by production costs and time, but why do you think they create new, faster, cheaper, more powerful machines? Technology is advancing pretty quickly these days and I do know we aren't going to have photo-realistic graphics on the PS3, but you know there's going to be a PS4. Remember the discussions about possible bio-technology being used on PS5 or PS6?
The Playstation and Playstation 2 are huge money makers for Sony and obviously PS3 will follow suit so I don't think Sony will stop there.
julps31
03-29-2004, 12:03 AM
Yeah....i heard about it.....but...graphics wise..NO...mayb 3-4 times better...
Overall processing speed...yes...its possible...loading times maybe faster than the PS2..( some games load like 20 secs...way too long)...
UM...about those pics of Ace Combat 5...that is not gameplay pics...it's way too REAL...ahahha..
yeah i agree that the developers may have already unleashed about 80% of the PS2 hardware( remember JAK2?...n upcoming game God Of War...fantastic screenshots..)...impossible for those pics to be gameplay screenshots
PS3 should be more than four times as powerful as the PS2 in almost every way. Remember Sony said that PS2 was 300 times as powerful as the PS1. So saying that it's only going to be four times as powerful is way to conservative.
NickSCFC
03-29-2004, 12:14 AM
UM...about those pics of Ace Combat 5...that is not gameplay pics...it's way too REAL...ahahha..
Actually they are but it looks no better than Ace Combat 4 (also on PS2). Looks impressive from distance but when you get closer to the ground the textures are really messy, the same will go for this new version.
KlawHammer
03-29-2004, 05:22 AM
Not just violence, but excessive violence with blood and human organs hanging on the outside of disemboweled people....anyway i think the PS3 will be close to photorealism at most.
Sk Manga
03-29-2004, 05:31 AM
UM...about those pics of Ace Combat 5...that is not gameplay pics...it's way too REAL...ahahha..
Actually they are but it looks no better than Ace Combat 4 (also on PS2). Looks impressive from distance but when you get closer to the ground the textures are really messy, the same will go for this new version.
yea the ground textures look messy but are a hell of alot bettr than any pc flight sim games ground textures
KlawHammer
03-30-2004, 04:31 AM
Oi, the pics are all gone...they finally found out you were stealing their bandwidth by remote-linking....tsk...tsk..tsk...
SunDevil
03-30-2004, 05:18 AM
Good Bye
brownbeaner2
03-30-2004, 05:54 AM
thats the way Sony raises the Hype of the ps3
personally i think its a genius way to get people to want to get the ps3 even more.
but of coarse i also believe that sony has something up their sleave that to me i feel will slip out soon and will blow Microsoft away
SunDevil
03-31-2004, 01:42 AM
Good Bye
KlawHammer
03-31-2004, 10:04 AM
I think we've discussed just about everything in this thread that could be discussed.......
ultimategamer2004
03-31-2004, 08:03 PM
It is likely that in very good games the ps3 will bring us very close to photo realism. I Hope.
NickSCFC
03-31-2004, 09:24 PM
What do graphics have to do with good games?
To a high percentage of people, everything.
NickSCFC
03-31-2004, 10:34 PM
Whores!
julps31
03-31-2004, 10:49 PM
So you wouldn't care if PS3 had current generation graphics? Well graphics can add in many ways to a well ballanced game. Realism (Metal Gear), atmosphere (Silent Hill), and can really pull you into the game if has a good story and good gameplay. I'm just saying why graphics matter, and I know that they aren't everything but they can really add to a good game and push it up another notch.
KlawHammer
04-01-2004, 06:43 AM
Exactly, graphics are one of the reasons people will purchase a PS3 after all...
Maybe Sony are hoping that that will be the case with a lot of people?
stanDarsh
04-01-2004, 11:19 AM
Maybe Sony are hoping that that will be the case with a lot of people?
Just hypothetically speaking. If the PS3, came out, and the graphics were very similar to the level youd expect to see on a PS2, yet its A.I. and physics engine were far superior to the PS2, would you bother to buy it? :wink:
It's human nature to progress, so I'd have to say no... :cry:
stanDarsh
04-01-2004, 11:54 AM
It's human nature to progress, so I'd have to say no... :cry:
Some people will also tell you, that it is also human nature to kill each other :P
I would never kill someone... Not unless they pissed me off... :lol:
Cartman (as far as I can remember), Southpark.
KlawHammer
04-03-2004, 07:59 AM
Dont get me started on running old ladies over with a 1971 dumpster truck.....
KingTalo
04-03-2004, 05:22 PM
Photo Realism : WHO CARES?!?!
some of the best games out there (with undisputedly excellent graphics) are (surprise) not photo realistic. You can make a beautiful game, but if you want every single game to look photo realistic you're living in a drab, uninspired world. In the end it's up to the artists, programmers, and designers to come up with an engaging and immersive world ragardless of the means they choose to accomplish it. If it's realistic then they can place you in a world that feels real (gta/max payne), if they want to go for something more lucid/cartoonish/acidtrip (ratchet/rez/jak) then by all means they can do that too, then there are the people in the middle who want to show you how dynamic their creativity is (timesplitters2). Before photo realism i want; physics (in everything, not just in the way people fall), intelligent A.I. (better yet an A.I. capable of everything i can do and one that can react to/counter any situation its in). But more than that i want Artists to work on games; too often games suffer because, even though they're pretty powerful under the hood, the design of the environment is just dull (ie; Halo, "look i'm in a corridor, now another corridor, now i'm in a room"). We will, no doubt, see games that are photorealistic; but, will they be any good? will the rest of the game be up to par? And further, the human eye can only perceive so much detail; will the 'photo realistic' game you play on your ps3 with your HDtv on 1080i contain so much detail per pixel that you may only play for half an hour because of the vertigo or strain on your eyes?
...4 pesos
ibrooklyn
04-03-2004, 05:25 PM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
Most people seem to agree with me when i say it will more likely be Final Fantasy X Cut scene graphics rather then Spirits within
Doom 3 and Half-life 2,far cry,stalker.All those look better than FFX cutscenes.I expect Spirits within type stuff.
are u serious?????? lmao DOOM 3 and Half Life 2 looke better than FFX cut scenes???? hahaha lmfao
ibrooklyn
04-03-2004, 05:33 PM
What do graphics have to do with good games?
actually A LOT......if u really wana make a GREAT game it has to be great from every point f view, from every ange
GAMEPLAY, STORYLINE, DESIGN, GRAPHIX and well everything else......can there be a good game with bad grahix? YES of course, BUT since WE ARE advancing technology wise and graphix wise why the hell not make games with amazing graphix?
hmm take SOCOM ONLINE for example, great gameplay, i mean one of the most addicting games on the PS2 now imagine that game with amazing vsuals....seals/terrorists look more like real people, environment feels like the real deal. trees, bushes grass w/e everything is real like, water acts like the real thing. U shoot the walls u see bullet holes that STAY there and look real, u see walls denting from RPGs, ground dents from frags and much much more, i mean its the little things that ADD to a great game.
Like watch some Full Spectrum Warrior videos and compare it to SOCOM.....u see so much stuff in FSW tha twas left out on socom and it makes u wonder. Plus FSW graphix are better than socoms graphix and it changes the game by so much.
Im not a big ANIME fan BUT ive seen APPLESEED trailer and imagine a game like that? with great story and graphix all together.....i mean we do have cell shaded/ 3D games or w/e BUT NOTHING COMES CLOSE TO APPLESEED
Omega Blue
04-03-2004, 06:53 PM
I think that it will bring us close to photo realism. Unless your talking literally looking real in photos cause where almost already their. Gran Turismo is basically photo realistic in some picture those cars can look real. In that case yes, otherwise we might be close to the final fantasy: The spirits within realism.
Most people seem to agree with me when i say it will more likely be Final Fantasy X Cut scene graphics rather then Spirits within
Doom 3 and Half-life 2,far cry,stalker.All those look better than FFX cutscenes.I expect Spirits within type stuff.
are u serious?????? lmao DOOM 3 and Half Life 2 looke better than FFX cut scenes???? hahaha lmfao
hehe i agree, c'mon Chris, dont tell me you were serious
Chris Verceti
04-03-2004, 08:05 PM
I'm pretty sure there will be a PS4 8)
shaudeus
04-04-2004, 07:24 PM
i think once the coders get some exp with writing engines on ps3 we will see some amazing things
ultimategamer2004
04-04-2004, 08:12 PM
What do graphics have to do with good games?
Good games=Good graphics
I mean the some developers who produe the very good games usually produce good graphics.
DoggySpew
04-04-2004, 08:27 PM
Good games=Good graphics
The most important part of a game is the gameplay, not graphics.
If the gameplay ain't right, then no matter how good the graphics are, the game still stinks. (for example, take Tetris. Low graphic quality, but still a good game.)
But one thing is for sure....
good gameplay = good game.
good gameplay + good graphics = fantastic game.
shaudeus
04-05-2004, 03:14 AM
I can agree with that one
UltimaGear
04-06-2004, 12:54 AM
I know you guys have seen the Metal Gear Solid 3 screenshots and that's on the PS2. The enviroment is damn near photo-realistic. Now imagine all the, the characters and everything on the PS3!!!!
Plus, are the Dark Sector graphics photo-realistic?
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 01:11 AM
What do graphics have to do with good games?
Good games=Good graphics
I mean the some developers who produe the very good games usually produce good graphics.
You should be banned for saying that. Very often good graphics are used to cover up a bad game, take the majority of EA titles for example.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 01:25 AM
yea and DOA extream beach volyball
i think great game=good graphics but good graphics does not = good game
u want photorelistic, look at the latest high res GT4 screens and video's. just think what GT5 is going to be like *drools*
:lol:
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 01:27 AM
But then there are plenty of racing games that play better than GT3 but just don't look as good, well, as realistic anyway.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 01:31 AM
But then there are plenty of racing games that play better than GT3 but just don't look as good, well, as realistic anyway.
Nick i know your not a big fan of GT's but just remember that that is your opinion, u shouldnt say that there is u should of said i prefere or something. then again i say thigns as facts when they r opinions all the time myself
but as for my opinion there is no racing game that comes close to GT3 in gameplay and only 1 in graphics (PGR2), sorry but sega GT2002 was just a crap attempt at racing sims but i woul still like to see more racing sims as there arnt enough if u ask me
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 01:35 AM
From what I've heard, GT4 handles slightly more realisticly than GT3. Apparently the cars feel more heavier around corners (like Ferarri F355 Challenge, which is currently the most realistic driving game around). But does realism make a game better? In this example, a driving game.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 01:40 AM
From what I've heard, GT4 handles slightly more realisticly than GT£. Apparently the cars feel more heavier around corners (like F355 Challenge which is currently the most realistic driving game around). But does realism make a game better? In this example, a driving game.
yes GT4 is as relistic as your gonna get, all the cars in game got around a course in a time with only a few miliseconds diffrence to their realworld counterparts
and im not going to try to explain to u why i, and a few other million people like GT's so much, its quite hard to explain but it has a lot of relection on u in the ral world, all il say is is that GT is more then just a racing game it goes beyond that, and i dont think you are the kind of person who would quite understand fully what it stands for. there is nothing wrong with that of course, every1 has their own interests and ........ its what makes life interesting after all
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 01:43 AM
By the way, I do actually own GT and GT3 :D
I just think it's a little too over hyped. If you'd played Ferarri F355 Challenge you'd understand why it is the most realistic driving game you can play.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 01:44 AM
By the way, I do actually own GT and GT3 :D
i know u do, your point?
shaudeus
04-06-2004, 04:20 AM
i should have kept my gt would be nice to have around
KlawHammer
04-06-2004, 11:19 AM
V8 Supercars Australia RaceDriver (or TOCA RaceDriver as you European people know it as) is the best you can get - even as good as GT3.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 02:05 PM
lets be careful about saying our opinions as facts as we all look stupid if we dont
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 02:11 PM
In a way, Ace Combat 5 is photo realistic. When you look at the screens, squint, and it looks like a photo. But when you get close to the ground you realise that what looked real from the sky is actually the messiest bunch of textures and polygons you've seen since Ridge Racer on PlayStation.
gaming ultima
04-06-2004, 02:14 PM
In a way, Ace Combat 5 is photo realistic. When you look at the screens, squint, and it looks like a photo. But when you get close to the ground you realise that what looked real from the sky is actually the messiest bunch of textures and polygons you've seen since Ridge Racer on PlayStation.yea lol
NickSCFC
04-06-2004, 02:19 PM
You're in for a beautiful looking game as long as you don't crash. On another note, Ace Combat 4/5 is one of the few games to use real clouds, by that I mean layered fog as opposed to most games where a picture of sky/clouds is used in the background.
Makaveli_786
04-25-2004, 07:54 PM
PS5 should hit photo realism considering PS6 and PS7 wont focus on graphic improvments but on bio technology.
Funny that people are still falling for that bio-tech crap.....
Makaveli_786
04-25-2004, 09:10 PM
Well after we conquer CGI-FFX quality graphics what are we going to do, make Playstations that jack you off with a mechanical arm(OUCH!)
Besides Sony announced a while back they paid some company to reserach biotech, or was that a rumor.
Omega Blue
04-25-2004, 09:38 PM
Funny that people are still falling for that bio-tech crap.....
well go back to 2 years ago and tell them by 2005/2006 we'll have 100+ GB/s data transfer rate in RAM. i bet you he'll laugh and piont at you.
Makaveli_786
04-25-2004, 09:44 PM
Funny that people are still falling for that bio-tech crap.....
well go back to 2 years ago and tell them by 2005/2006 we'll have 100+ GB/s data transfer rate in RAM. i bet you he'll laugh and piont at you.
Actually go back 20 years and tell them well have computers that dont take up the same space as a house but have more than 1hz of processing power :wink:
I suppose so. I just think that bio-tech is a little bit far-fetched. Although in 10-20 years, you never know.....
Omega Blue
04-25-2004, 09:50 PM
well i have no doubt that its more then 20 years away, but i know it will eventually happen.
Makaveli_786
04-25-2004, 09:52 PM
Playstation 6 is from 17-22 years away yet, damn theyve already invested in the project too so theyr serious about it!
Where did you find that out?
Makaveli_786
04-25-2004, 10:33 PM
Ill look for the link but it said they paid some dudes to start research, was kind of funny at first but man ive read hundreds of pages of info, you wouldnt believe some of the shit people believe.
jessy
04-30-2004, 01:54 AM
We see photorealistic on the PS2 in games such as Ace Combat and GT4. Obviously, the PS3 will reach new boundres including this area. But I think gamers agree that movie-realistic graphics are not the goal. We still want that fantasy-world touch. Just compare the two Final Fantasy movies:
Spirits within and Advent Children.
The latter looks to outdue the first just by seeing the pics and trailer.]
true, i think they r close to photorealistic...but lacking abit details.......
sure ps3 will be kicking ass.
Makaveli_786
05-01-2004, 03:33 PM
Man I dont want to push my luck but the way games like AC5 and GT4 look now on the PS2 is amazing, I cant imagine what they will look like on PS3, maybe the PS3 will bring us something like photo-realism even though ill have to stay skeptical until I see it myself
It does make you wonder doesn't it. But then, a few years back with the PS1 the graphical standard couldn't get any better to us. I never thought that I'd see anything better than Street Fighter 2 on the Mega Drive at the time.
GUNDAMSEED
05-06-2004, 09:07 PM
yeah GFX have come long way when i look back at FF3 and now see FF10 looks it just shows you how far we have gone . FF3 still better so better GFX don't make better games as so many people have said already .
KlawHammer
05-08-2004, 08:02 AM
That by now im sure, is fairly obvious now.
NickSCFC
06-28-2004, 02:44 AM
Remember that it's easier to recreate objects such as cars and buildings than organic objects such as people and trees.
I can't remember who said this, it was in a different thread. But they said that by the time that photo realistic graphics are achieved it will be the downfall in the computer industry, because there is bascally no point in going on. I'd have to disagree with this, simply because developers will be able to coujure up any thought in their head and recreate it for a game. We'll still be able to achieve things in computer games which will be impossible in real life.
KlawHammer
06-28-2004, 12:22 PM
Well yea, we'll finally be able to recreate The Matrix.
I can't remember who said this, it was in a different thread. But they said that by the time that photo realistic graphics are achieved it will be the downfall in the computer industry, because there is bascally no point in going on. I'd have to disagree with this, simply because developers will be able to coujure up any thought in their head and recreate it for a game. We'll still be able to achieve things in computer games which will be impossible in real life.
It would mean that graphical improvement would come to a standstill, but there's still the point that gameplay and various other factors in a game can be improved on.
Burn5000
08-07-2004, 11:12 PM
Remember that it's easier to recreate objects such as cars and buildings than organic objects such as people and trees.
Not really because you can scan a person or a tree with a 3D scanner.
NickSCFC
08-07-2004, 11:19 PM
Can I? I don't even have a f**king scanner!
cpiasminc
08-08-2004, 04:43 PM
Not really because you can scan a person or a tree with a 3D scanner.
I don't think there's any real 3d scanner big enough to scan a lot of trees. The biggest ones I've seen are about big enough to scan the majority of ordinary passenger vehicles. Although nothing quite as big as an oversize-load semi. Perhaps a Bonsai tree?
The real difficulty in modelling something like a person or a tree is in modelling the light behavior and surface properties. I mean, you can do some basic subsurface scattering on today's hardware, but it's very difficult to tune the parameters just right. Especially since there are multiple materials involved that cause subsurface scattering in the case of human skin (dead skin, living skin, blood, bone). In the case of a tree... oh, boy -- now you have the fact that each leaf exhibits partial translucency, and that the translucency is not bidirectional. But the technique used to perform subsurface scattering in realtime involves z-differencing, which means that you have to render backfaces into the z-buffer, and then go into a second pass redering front faces and comparing the two... Which means that if you want a translucent leaf, you have to model a leaf as having two surfaces and actual thickness.
oxygenuk
08-08-2004, 05:50 PM
eventually, ps6, 7 or 8 at the latest, we'll be doing stuff like what happens in the matrix, headsets that will make your brain think your inside a real world, but your actually in the game, thats what i think will happen for sure but thats about 20 - 30 years away (look at what gaming industry was like 20 years ago now look at it nowdays! ;) then ull probly have the same feeling as me if u think good and hard enough ;) )
Is it just me or do we tend to go round in circles at times? I don't know how many times people mention brain controlled games, I'm pretty sure that I'm one of the people that has mentioned it in the past.
Burn5000
08-11-2004, 02:25 AM
Can I? I don't even have a f**king scanner!
I'm not saying you can, I'm saying it can be done Mr. Pessimistic.
Burn5000
08-11-2004, 02:30 AM
Not really because you can scan a person or a tree with a 3D scanner.
I don't think there's any real 3d scanner big enough to scan a lot of trees. The biggest ones I've seen are about big enough to scan the majority of ordinary passenger vehicles. Although nothing quite as big as an oversize-load semi. Perhaps a Bonsai tree?
The real difficulty in modelling something like a person or a tree is in modelling the light behavior and surface properties. I mean, you can do some basic subsurface scattering on today's hardware, but it's very difficult to tune the parameters just right. Especially since there are multiple materials involved that cause subsurface scattering in the case of human skin (dead skin, living skin, blood, bone). In the case of a tree... oh, boy -- now you have the fact that each leaf exhibits partial translucency, and that the translucency is not bidirectional. But the technique used to perform subsurface scattering in realtime involves z-differencing, which means that you have to render backfaces into the z-buffer, and then go into a second pass redering front faces and comparing the two... Which means that if you want a translucent leaf, you have to model a leaf as having two surfaces and actual thickness.
Maybe the tree could be small but be scaled up in the 3d world. The technology for making a scanner big enough to scan a tree is out there. It's just no body cares for trees.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.