2K: New Genres Impossible Without Photorealism

[saintdane05]

Photorealism?

Got that.

Even with Quantic Dream and others pulling their way out of uncanny valley, it's not exactly necessary to elicit emotional response. Look at the Bioshock series - games that are cartoonish, styleized, and question the basic fundamentals that society is built on. I get the argument - that emotions can't be expressed properly without being subtle in the changes - but gamers do not need that amount of graphic fidelity to have their "Ghost" or their "Titanic".

What game is that from?

Oh, it's in the HTML.

Do you know anything about it? 'Cause I think my graphics whore self just shizzed.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

Yeah, he's wrong. Look at anything Pixar has ever done if you want proof.

 

[Tohron]

*cough*Toy Story*cough*

If movies can create immersion and compelling characters without photorealism, there's no reason games should spend hundreds of millions upgrading their graphics while the characters remain shallow and the stories remain ad-hoc.

You want people to be more immersed? Create interesting, believable characters, and make them act like sane individuals driven by actual motivations. At any rate, it costs a lot less then a Sisyphean pursuit of total photorealism.

EDIT: And the post above me cited the same general example. Seriously, are video game executives the only people this isn't obvious to?

 

[lacktheknack]

Hartmann claims that the problem revolves around empathy, or lack thereof. Speaking in an interview with GamesIndustry, he said that videogames are still inferior to movies in terms of conveying emotions, particularly the ones that drive characters and let the audience connect with the people on the screen.

Has this mug played Journey?

Or The Longest Journey?

Or Dreamfall?

Or The Binding Of Isaac?

Or Myst III? (No, it wasn't photorealistic. Some parts of it look downright silly today.)

Etc, etc. I don't believe this guy at all.

 

[Xanadu84]

Ill play devils advocate: Lack of photo realism eliminates our ability to create SOME new genres.

Maybe as many as 1% of the possibilities.

Sure, some games would be much more possible if they had additional realism, but seriously...to this day, people come up with incredibly powerful play experiences using 8 bit, never mind the range of technologies available today. Every play Passage? Sleep is Death? The Marriage? Hell, consider what kind of innovations to storytelling experience came along with Dungeons and Dragons with exactly 0 processing power. In fact, I say that most of the innovations in genres come from the indie scene, which is usually years behind the AAA industry in photo-realism.

Having photo realism would be cool. But in the mean time, there is more possible gameplay innovations out there using existing or outdated technology then there are atoms in the universe. I'm reminded of a (Probably wildly misremembered) story of a composer telling Bach while they were walking along a beach that the last of the great songs had been written, to which Bach said, "Of course. Oh look, here comes the last wave of the ocean"

 

[The Random One]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Seriously? Go play dys4ia, Mr. 2k guy, then come talk to me about emotions in games and photorealism.

Work with what you have, not with what you don't.

 

[Lunar Templar]

well, that's total bull shit, and know what?

my MOM, a non gamer agrees

Bullshit. it takes skilled writing and imagination to invoke emotion, and if you rely on graphics you lack both

more or less what she said

 

[sethisjimmy]

Completely disagree. The very reason animation and games stand out from live-action movies and tv is because they have the artistic freedom to create anything they want. They can make any type of character, that doesn't have to look like humans, or even resemble anything already existing.
The way we relate to characters is in the story and actions and gameplay of them, not solely the graphics. Why do so many people feel deep emotion about games like Majora's Mask or Silent Hill? It has nothing to do with graphical technology.
If a developer thinks the best way to convey his/her story is through realistic graphics, that's fine, but it's not the ONLY option.

 

[lacktheknack]

well, that's total bull shit, and know what?

my MOM, a non gamer agrees

Bullshit. it takes skilled writing and imagination to invoke emotion, and if you rely on graphics you lack both

more or less what she said

...OUCH. That's gotta burn a dev's pride.

 

[Doom972]

Photorealism doesn't make something more relateable. There are plenty of animated movies, graphic novels and paintings that prove it.

As long as characters are on either side of the uncanny valley and not within it, immersion is possible.

 

[Lunar Templar]

well, that's total bull shit, and know what?

my MOM, a non gamer agrees

Bullshit. it takes skilled writing and imagination to invoke emotion, and if you rely on graphics you lack both

more or less what she said

...OUCH. That's gotta burn a dev's pride.

yeah, pretty sad when even the non gamers can call BS on these kinda arguments, not that any dev would listen to her or us on these matters

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I think this guy both has a point and doesnt. Currently games are extremely bad at setting up things like facial expressions which are key. If they cant properly show emotions its really hard to create a serious game like he is talking about. A game kind of loses all emotional impact when you can see the protagonists blank emtionless face.

You don't need good visuals to covey emotion or to get players to identify with your characters. How many of you had tears welling up when Aeris died in FF7? You felt the loss that Cloud was experiencing because you identified with him.

You mean the chick who got shanked after joining me a whole two hours ago? Yea I didnt really give a shit about her when she died since she was barely even a character. She was never focused on, her character was never expanded, she was just a throw in who had no reason to be there and whos only purpose was to get shanked.

I think you weren't paying a lot of attention to the dialogue or story if you honestly believe that.

OT: Yeah that is complete and utter bullshit you do not need good graphics to convey emotion or create new genres unless you want a facial movement simulator.

 

[Jumendez-sama]

Graphics aren't the gateway to empathy, as many have said in this thread alone cartoons/anime and older/not as good looking games have been able to make people empathize with their characters. It's more an issue with structure; for while movies and stories in general are structured in a way that will make their audience more likely to empathize with their characters, it's near impossible for games to share that sort of structure. Players can pretty much do whatever they want; they can either walk into a cutscene and learn of the Protagonists past or they can turn the other way and shoot rockets in the sky to their hearts content. The freedom players have simply makes it hard for a story to truly take focus.

 

[Atmos Duality]

...Except they tried going for the "realistic approach" before in the 90s.
You might have heard of it? It was called "Full Motion Video" (FMV).

Only instead of jumping the Uncanny Valley by using "real actors" (*snicker*) you're creating the photo-realistic characters from scratch.

As everyone in this topic has already pointed out: Graphics mean nothing if they have no character, and characters require personality. Without good writing to create that personality and mechanical integration (y'know, that whole "game" thing) to get the player involved, all the photo-realistic graphics in the world will not matter.

Dead Horse Inbound: The Star Wars prequels had this very problem: Exceptional CGI (for the time) wasted on terrible writing and bland characters.

The reason we don't see more genres outside of action, violence and the occasional puzzle game is because the latter genres ARE PROVEN TO SELL STRONGLY.

I'd love to see a story-driven film-noire style Shadowrun game, where the dialog and characters take priority over shooting guns and punching things, but as long as this market continues to work as it has, that will not happen.

 

[Callate]

And yet people continue to read books. And attend puppet shows. And watch cartoons. None of which are exactly known for their photorealistic take on the human condition.

Also, about fifteen years ago, we essentially had photorealism in the form of the infamous era of FMV (Full Motion Video) games, most of which (not all!) were terrible... which might suggest there's more to the recipe of evoking emotion than visually relatable characters.

Don't get me wrong, photorealism, when it comes about, may be great. I do have to wonder if it will come at the cost of development time and money that might be better spent on other things, if evoking emotion is the desired effect.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Would rather just have good visual direction than just straight up fidelity.

 

[90sgamer]

As a 14 year-old who cried when Aeris died in 1997 [spoiler alert!] and a grown up who audibly cheered for Cratos in 2011, this man is full of shit. The technology to invoke emotions has been around since the inception of gaming.

 

[kitsuta]

When I hear someone say "Oh, games are as good as we can make them right now til technology gets better" I immediately think: 1. You're lying, 2. You're lazy.

Dingdingding. There's no better way to excuse yourself for doing a bad job than to throw up your hands and say "Gee willikers, guys, I'd really like to not make the same boring games over and over again, but my hands are tied until the technology gets better!"

This guy can't possibly be working in the games industry and not understand the difference between mechanical and theme genres. It sounds like he was just trying to rationalize the industry's love affair with non-innovation, and he did it pretty poorly.

It's not surprising that he can't justify it, though - it comes down to intellectual laziness and a paralyzing fear of risk. This essay [http://www.lostgarden.com/2011/11/plagiarism-as-moral-choice.html] from one of the Triple Town designers pretty much sums up my take on it, particularly if you include self-plagiarism, AKA, "oh this set of mechanics worked in our last game! Let's never try anything else!"

And that doesn't even begin to cover the part where he assumes photorealism is needed for emotion, even though comics, other games, and animated films/shows prove him wrong over and over. And over. And over.

Gee willikers.