Photo Realistic Graphics needed for emotional connection

[Vault101]

not too long ago there were some controversial remarks by the 2K president saying that essentially we need to achieve "photo-realistic" graphics in order to get an "emotional connection"

and obviously there was a backlash against this (with good reason) pointing out that graphics or visual style does not need to be "realistic" for us to get emotionally invested. This came down to the same "graphics vs aesthetics" thing that we have seen many times before...games like Journey, Borderlands (arguably) and even Beyond good and evil look great even though they are not trying to be "realistic" at all

but I feel like his statements may have been somewhat misunderstood

he may have been talking mainly about games that were "realistic" in the first place, about the "Uncanny Valley".

take a game like Mass Effect...its clear they aren't going for "ultra realistic" and actually as far as emotional connection goes many people got pretty.... emotionally connected

though there are things...like character models being "samey", the odd animations people go through (literally..like in patterns)or take the sex scenes which while they are tastefully presented...you still can't quite help but giggle at the way the character models "interact" with each other, and this isn't just for Mass Effect, "real" looking people in games often look "off" in some way or another and its distracting and gets in the way of our ability to take stuff seriously

granted some have it worse than others, but I feel generally looking back we'll all be laughing about how "creepy" characters used to be....

to get real emotional Drama like Broke-back mountain or Requiem for a Dream we need to be able to not be distracted by weird character models/animations

now granted that implies that "only realistic visuals can do serious stuff" which is not true at all...Anime blows that Idea right out of the water (because lets face it...Western Animation is still stuck in the kiddie pool)

I just think...even if this isn't what he meant at all people may have jumped to conclusions too quickly

 

[Pink Gregory]

There's only so much that motion capture can do, and that's as close to photorealistic as anything really needs to be; I think the backlash is there because many gamers are aware that graphics technology is at such a peak and at such a cost that continuing to try and push graphics in place of innovation is allocating the dev costs into the wrong areas, and gameplay is suffering for it, that and advanced graphics and good writing aren't always evident alongside each other, lawd knows that's the case.

Ah reckon that any further advancement in photorealism would be unnecessary, but then again, the uncanny valley never bothered me outside of gamebryo engine games; I'm always going to be aware that I'm playing a videogame, that what I'm experiencing isn't real, so why spend effort trying to appear real rather than using that effort to make things affecting in ways that don't require photorealism, like writing and gameplay?

Ultimately the uncanny valley effect is pretty much always going to happen when trying to portray humans in an un-stylised way, (using ME as an example, always appeared stylised to me), perhaps there are some things in the human face and expression that just can't be simulated by code or machine, because the details are so tiny that they appear in the subconscious.

In some ways, it seems to communicate that some developers are out of touch with what gamers look for in a game, although I can't speak for all gamers, and are just pushing at the nearest possible wall rather than open the door that is slightly further away, to use a bad analogy.

 

[Zhukov]

What he said was not true, but I can see where he was coming from.

If it had been me making that statement I would have phrased it as, "graphics that avoid the uncanny valley - one way or the other - would enhance emotional connection."

 

[General Twinkletoes]

to get real emotional Drama like Broke-back mountain or Requiem for a Dream we need to be able to not be distracted by weird character models/animations

This doesn't really make a difference though, this is just the uncanny valley. Untill we get 100% photorealistic, any attempt will have the effect you're talking about, where it's really offputting. Getting 100% right animations will take a while, to say the least. The less human a character is, the more the human characteristics stand out, and the less human characteristics like weird animations stand out.

So really, until we're about 10 years further at least, it'll be much easier to get emotional connections from less photo realistic characters. Uncanny valley is a *****. ATM, less human characters seem more human then our attempts at photorealism.

EDIT: Arg, I'm tired and missed about half your post.
But anyway, I don't think we should really try really character driven stories until we've got a lot better than we are now.
Everything above the edit is just sleepy rambling that probably don't make sense, so take that stuff with a grain of salt.

 

[bluesession]

You know whats really wrong with the line of thought "Foto Realism is NEEDED for X to happen"?
The NEEDED part.

The Idea that we NEED better graphics is what brought us the not so interesting 2000-2008 period. A time were little we saw in the realm of 2D games because we NEEDED better 3D graphics.
Those years of painfull visual torture of crappy graphics....

I agree with the Idea that fotorealism can give things to gaming (like emotional connection) but I also agree that Miyasaki's anime could also give things to gaming (like emotional connection).
Cell shaded can give things to gamming.

2D animation can give as much emotion to the viewer as the finest 3D graphics.

We don't really NEED better graphics, we could use them, but not NEED them.

If you wonder why I get so adamant about it is because I LOVE 2D and for a good chunk of my gaming history I was stuck with crappy 3D since "3D was the best!!!!!11!!" and then the poligon count wars started.

 

[Pink Gregory]

If you wonder why I get so adamant about it is because I LOVE 2D and for a good chunk of my gaming history I was stuck with crappy 3D since "3D was the best!!!!!11!!" and then the poligon count wars started.

Y'gotta admit, it's things like this (dev statements) that could be why 2D sprites seems to be making something of a comeback.

 

[darlarosa]

to get real emotional Drama like Broke-back mountain or Requiem for a Dream we need to be able to not be distracted by weird character models/animations

now granted that implies that "only realistic visuals can do serious stuff" which is not true at all...Anime blows that Idea right out of the water (because lets face it...Western Animation is still stuck in the kiddie pool)

I just think...even if this isn't what he meant at all people may have jumped to conclusions too quickly

Well realism does not equal emotional drama. How many movies do you see that make you connect to characters on the basis of their faces alone. The movies you mention do not evoke emotion solely because of the actors, though it helps by far, it is mostly a function of the writing. While graphical errors can be distraction usually it does not pull a person out of the story completely and ruin the emotional connection.
As you say anime is a prime example of how emotional impact can be found. In terms of western animation there are fewer but many examples. The Batman Animated Series has a number of very powerful episodes, but is very stylistic. There are two episodes that immediately come to mind Babydoll and The Grey Ghost, which do a fine job of capturing the emotions of it's audience. You can also look to more recent shows such as Adventure Time, which is drawn very simplistically but has a lot of heart and works to create characters and moments that the audience can relate to.

You are seemingly implying emotional connection="serious stuff" which is not true. Emotional connection will always be subjective, but it should not rely on photo realism but the skill of actors, voice actors, animators, artists, and writers.

The 2K presidents explanation was just too simplistic in my opinion

 

[pilouuuu]

I think that the most needed thing is better animation. A physics engine that makes the characters move realistically and stops the need for motion capture.

I also think that the facial animation in L.A. Noire is a perfect example of advancements of the technology that are totally worth it. I wish every game used that engine! The costs may be high, but as long as we don't have realistic voice made by the computer, we're going to need actors, so what's the big deal besides they lending their voices to the game that they also get their facial expressions captured?

Another thing that has more to do with the limitations of this current gen consoles are the low res textures. They're really off-putting and don't match the quality of the rest of the game. In Mass Effect some characters look really good like the Krogans, but then you speak to a less important character and the textures are so low-res up close.

Yes, graphical technology advancements are totally necessary and I don't think that technology is really good yet. But, I don't understand why, if the technology is not there yet, developers don't make more stylized games, using more cartoon like graphics instead of going for realistic. Curse of Monkey Island still looks fantastic. Rayman Origins will be a great looking games many years from now.

It's also true that games need much, much better stories. The level of the stories in games is mostly pathetic and even games with interesting characters like Mass Effect fall flat if we compare them to a good sci-fi book or a TV series like Star Trek Next Gen or a movie like Star Wars (not counting prequels). Developers still need to find a way to tell good stories, but using the possibilities games can give, making good use of interactivity, multiple paths, consequences of our actions, multiple endings.

It's also important for the gameplay to be enganging and not get in the way of the story. I like Mass Effect story, but the shooting part was probably the most boring thing and I probably would like to have skipped most of it. I think that Mass Effect 2 had some more variation, with the investigation quests and all that. What I mean is that developers don't need to wait for better technology to make better stories and gameplay, to make games that are not just violence, but that are storytelling devices in which your participation makes a difference and where the mechanics of the game are fun and make sense in the story told.

Also necessary is the need to improve A.I. Really, in all these years there hardly have been any improvement whatsoever in games. In fact if we think about it they've been getting worse. Fear had an interesting A.I., but compare it to other FPS games today and you see how the behaviour of enemies is unrealistic and predictable. In games like Skyrim the bad A.I. shows in NPCs blocking your path, soldiers repeating "arrow to the knee" phrases, etc. A living city should have NPCs interacting between them and overall behaving more realistically.

Well, what I mean with my post is that graphics are nowhere near as good as they should, but it's not necessary for them to be better yet, if only developers paid more attention to gameplay, story and A.I. instead and tried to use more creative visual styles instead of going for brown realistic which is simply dull. Make better games today with the graphics that can be made today.

I must also add that games like Planescape Torment are able to take us to a completely different world(s) by using tiny characters with almost no expression and text. The secret to that is a brilliant story and great characters.

I think that one of the worst things that happened to the gaming industry is the move to 3d graphics. While 3d graphics are great for some kind of stories they still don't look as good as 2d hand painted graphics can. Art direction makes the graphics, not polygons or special effects. Gaming needs to move beyond the decadent Michael Bay movie style and look into more special, artistic ways of expression, like some developers are well doing with games like Journey, Limbo or To The Moon, none of which has realistic graphics.

 

[Scrustle]

I think if that's what he meant it wouldn't have been hard for him to make it clear. It seemed pretty clear that's not what he was trying to say though. If he was then he severely lacks communication skills.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Movies near always have photorealism, but does that ensure emotional connections? I remember most movies don't really get there.
I remember some of the most memorable ones coming from Studio Ghibli, you know the guys who make hand drawn cartoons.

Photo realistic graphics are about sheer visual fidelity or rather rendering so detailed you can't distinguish it from reality.

But for an emotional connection it is all about presentation, and graphics are only a small part of that, it is much more about setting up a believable scene.
That is where ME3 especially had problems, their models/textures/animations were not good enough for a Hollywood style up your nose camera, but for some fucked up reason they went for it anyway... that is just a bad setup.

 

[DoPo]

but I feel like his statements may have been somewhat misunderstood

he may have been talking mainly about games that were "realistic" in the first place, about the "Uncanny Valley".

If he meant that, he's either an idiot or actually trolling. And by "trolling", I mean pushing the idea out there, despite knowing it's wrong, because that would benefit himself.

"Photorealism" is pretty hard to misuse. We know what the uncanny valley is, we know that things falling in there wouldn't quite work for actual emotional attachment, but we also know that we don't need photorealism for the same. A lapsus linguae would mean that either he doesn't know what he's talking about or he knows but it's a deliberate phrasing. I see no other way to look at it.

now granted that implies that "only realistic visuals can do serious stuff" which is not true at all...Anime blows that Idea right out of the water (because lets face it...Western Animation is still stuck in the kiddie pool)

And here you hit the nail to the head. Yes, precisely. Again, "photorealistic" isn't a term you casually toss instead of "not in the uncanny valley" it's pretty damn well known what it means. And since we don't need photorealism, then obviously what he says is stupid and deserves belling called out.

I just think...even if this isn't what he meant at all people may have jumped to conclusions too quickly

Well, the conclusion is simple: we already established that what he said was wrong, toss in the fact that it's not a casual mistake one should make and he is either an idiot and doesn't know what he's talking about, or he just does it to benefit himself, since more money would now go into delivering this photorealism. In either case, it's a bad thing to say.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I must admit that some videogame genres may benefit from it. Games like Heavy Rain or something similar.

But humankind has proven through the ages that it can form emotional connection with abstract things and it's no less true with videogames as with any other medium. Countless of people have been touched by WALL-E, plenty of people have cried over books and even abstract paintings can move people to tears. The statement that we need them is plain silly.

Photo-realism, when we achieve it, will be just another tool in the box to hopefully create something wonderful with. I'd already be happy if they'd pay a lot more attention to body language and facial animations.

(because lets face it...Western Animation is still stuck in the kiddie pool)

You need to watch Up! And if you have and you still come to that conclusion then I...don't actually know what to say.

to get real emotional Drama like Broke-back mountain or Requiem for a Dream we need to be able to not be distracted by weird character models/animations

I can see where you're getting at here. Yes in something like Mass Effect it is indeed distracting to see Shepard jog about while the world's going to hell around him. The Witcher 2 suffers from the same problem. Technically it looks brilliant, but good grief those faces of close are just dead. Same with Metro 2033. Games that present themselves with realistic graphics, basically.

Photo-realism would indeed help in those cases though frankly I'm already quite happy with what RAGE tried. An otherwise not very remarkable game (though I still enjoyed it despite it's technical bitching) but it really tried to make characters feel more alive and expressive through extensive use of body language, expressions and motions.

Other way around. The west has ups and down, while you rarely see an anime show going out of the norm.

With the insane wealth of anime out there that ain't true either.

It's funny how Valve doesn't use motion capture on their faces and yet they're on par with LA Noire.

Don't compare LA Noire with TF2, do so with Half Life 2. And yes, it's sort of funny to see how well HL2's characters hold up to this day. Alyx is still one of the most alive game characters I've ever seen.

 

[spartandude]

because books need high rez graphics to convey emotions

 

[Vault101]

(because lets face it...Western Animation is still stuck in the kiddie pool)

You need to watch Up! And if you have and you still come to that conclusion then I...don't actually know what to say.
.

Other way around. The west has ups and down, while you rarely see an anime show going out of the norm.
.

I have seen Up, and its a wonderful film...as is almost anything PIXAR does..hell Toy Story 3 almost made me and alot of other people cry..and Wall-e is one of my all-time favourite things ever

but that's not quite what I mean

the thing is PIXAR and Disney films always have "family" entertainment first and foremost as their target..I'm not saying is bad or that they need to change (hell no)

regardless of how good the films are western animation ALWAYS has to allow off the kids...where as Anime (while not perfect) is not afraid to put a "18+ only" outside their door

I have yet to see a mainstream western equivalent of Ghost in the Shell or Akira (animated..not like action)

or take Disney's Hunchback Notre dame....most people see it as a good but flawed film

it has dark themes....a hauntingly powerful score and a Villain with Depth..yet it appears to be suffocating under its "need" to appeal to kids (as the those fucking Gargoyles) if they were able to break free and make it a mature rated film then it could have been something truly amazing..rather than something that appeared rather confused as to what it wanted to be

Animation/Anime is a medium..not a genre...it shouldn't have to subscribe to any one target audience or subject matter

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

People overreacted because he used a blanket statement, that photo-realism was NEEDED to create an emotional connection largely ignoring that many games already do so without 'realistic graphics.'