Photo-Realistic Graphics: Out of Reach?

[DYin01]

Eventually, we'll be able to recreate the entire Earth on a hard disc with the right physics and everything. Think big. If you told someone in the Pong era how gaming is right now, he wouldn't believe you. Imagine what gaming will be like in 50, no 100 years.

 

[bodyklok]

I don't think they are out of reach, decades and decades away at the latest and at lest 6 years at the soonest but nothings impossible except something being impossible.

 

[stddgv11]

This may have been posted before, but the uncanny valley has pretty much already been passed. Watch this video and tell me what you think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLiX5d3rC6o

Next gen games with this level of animation and realism is the holy grail, to me, as far as getting people to really care about the characters on screen, because we are now making characters that look almost identical to the real thing, and most important of all the character in no longer stuck in the uncanny valley. She appears to have real emotions and facial expressions instead of giving off that freeky robot vibe that pretty much every other human/avatar tends to do in games that we currently play.

Graphics like these, put together with top notch storytelling could finally bring about David Jaffe's dream of having a game that can make you cry like a movie can.
And from what I understand this type of technology has already been used in a few games like GTA4. But in order to get the lifelike visuals displayed in the video above we would need another graphical hardware leap like we did from the Xbox to the Xbox 360

The only problem I see is the Wii. Because of the direction the Wii has taken and the success they have acheived with it. It's pretty much understood that the next Wii will be pretty much the same Wii we have today but with the ability to output in HD.

If MS and Sony follow Nintendo's lead, upping their graphics capability will cease to be of any importance like it has been in all the gens leading up to this one.

After seeing developers finally conquer the uncanny valley, It blows my mind when people say that graphics have reached the point of diminishing returns. We are on the cusp of having actual lifelike graphics if Sony and MS continue in the tradition of putting out bleeding edge hardware whenever they put out their next gen consoles.

Their may come a day when diminishing returns makes it so that the graphical differences are so small between old gen and next gen that it is pointless putting in the more expensive hardware. But that day has not come yet and I don't see it coming any time soon. At least not in the next 2 hardware generations.

 

[searanox]

We already did...

Well not that picture, but I think there are few games on the PS3 that render at 1080p with 60fps.(Wipeout HD being one)

Uh... yeah. And I can render a 100-polygon untextured, unlit object at 10,000 fps at 1080p with my computer (okay, I don't know for sure, but whatever). It's not the speed of the rendering, it's the detail of it. Ray-tracing is by far the most accurate way to simulate lighting and shadow, but in its most accurate forms it is also profoundly computationally expensive. The entire purpose of real-time 3D graphics is to provide a fairly convincing illusion that cuts enough corners that it can be done at a decent framerate. Modern real-time graphics are basically all about making compromises, and while you can get good results doing that (not even counting the AI/sound/etc. that takes extra CPU power), you can't get entirely accurate ones. Even though we have games that look photo-realistic in certain situations, it's still "fake" photo-realism.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

This is an example of photo-realistic graphics:

...We are *nowhere* near rendering that at 60fps at 1080p.

Quad-carding GX2?( A machine that can actually use it, is another case.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

the day that happens, we will be waiting for sequels to games to come out every five years. It takes long enough for games to come out now. Photo realistic graphics is just a step too far into the uncanny valley.

Also I imagine violent games would get banned far too easily with the graphics being too true to life don't you think? There would be MANY more Jack Thompsons around the corner spouting crap about how the games are 'true to life murder simulators' and other shite.

 

[Retrofraction]

I want to see a new game that uses cell shadding to the next level ( jet grind radio rocks!!!)

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

Actually, no...GPUs aren't really that great for ray tracing.

Shut up... Theres other threads you can be a big computer geek in ruining peoples fun..

 

[KaZZaP]

It may be possible but it wouldn't be good, in real life guns don't shoot flames when fired, not every bullet is a chaser, and bullets don't spark when they hit stuff.

 

[Theo Samaritan]

Actually, no...GPUs aren't really that great for ray tracing.

Technically, GPU's are better at ray tracing than they are the current method of shadows. However, the current method of shadows evolved because ray-tracing was a ***** to program for a long time. Companies don't want to go back.

EDIT: Of course, they still don't rival CPU's.

 

[JMeganSnow]

Who the heck cares? I don't want photo-realistic graphics any more than I really want photo-realistic paintings. Perfect photo-realism in a painting is just a display of extreme technical skill, it doesn't make it a good painting.

If the graphics are adequate to serve the game and provide the proper atmosphere, the rest doesn't matter. I can think of several older games that had much "better" graphics than the newer stuff simply because it was 100% appropriate given the construction of the gameplay and the atmosphere of the game. With the modern stuff, usually the best I get is a quick "oh, those reflections are neat" and never think about them again because apart from the interesting technical application everything is freakin' gray and brown and the fantastical panorama of awesome got thrown out the window.

 

[Anarchemitis]

This is an example of photo-realistic graphics:

...We are *nowhere* near rendering that at 60fps at 1080p.

We already did...

Well not that picture, but I think there are few games on the PS3 that render at 1080p with 60fps.(Wipeout HD being one)

Wipeout 3D Doesn't have Raytrace refractions and Light Caustics. Nor >32 Pass Depth-of-Field.

 

[disturbedpanda]

Just throwing it out there, but how much HD space would a photo-realistic game take up on your computer?

 

[742]

well... yeah... photo realistic... what type of photos? early black and white? i think thats doable, thousand megapixel? maybe not quite yet. but i think perhaps someday. at some point cameras will stop getting better and start just getting smaller, more efficient, and more durable instead. then maybe video games will catch up.

 

[Yog Sothoth]

I wouldn't ever want a game that was entirely photo realistic, it's just a meh idea to me. I much prefer the times that I would look to the sky in some of the higher end games like Oblivion or Fallout and marvel at how much the night sky looked like the same one that I was used to seeing, before looking back down and realizing... wow, I'm in a game. Same thing with playing GTAIV and looking over the skyline.

the question was not whether or not you'd want a game with photo-realistic graphics.... that is a personal preference, and many games have strived to reach that goal, such as CoD4 and the Forza and Gran Turismo franchises...

i simply want to know how many people think that it's possible....

 

[TheKaiserEcho]

This is an example of photo-realistic graphics:

...We are *nowhere* near rendering that at 60fps at 1080p.

We already did...

Well not that picture, but I think there are few games on the PS3 that render at 1080p with 60fps.(Wipeout HD being one)

Wipeout 3D Doesn't have Raytrace refractions and Light Caustics. Nor >32 Pass Depth-of-Field.

Well, if you want to be REALLY nit-picky, that's not really photo-real either, it's too perfect. Glasses should have finger smudges and such on them, there should be bubbles or foam on the wine, grunge on the dice and tile, moisture on and around the glasses, etc. Real isn't so much about ray tracing and reflections and such, what really kills the effect is when things are too perfect. Glass too clean, water too clear etc. Adding that stuff is what cranks the amount of power and space required for models and textures. Sure, we do have ways to simulate stuff, normal mapping etc. but it takes a great deal of computing power to get that kind of thing in there, as well as very nit-picky artists creating the content.