When graphics stop getting better

[JoshGod]

A higher focus on gameplay and story. This would be a very good thing. The problem is having a high graphical quality often results in long load times and/or smaller enviroments. I think we will reach a point where graphics can be of higher quality, but it would be unnecessary as you would need a microscope to benefit. From this point as i said gameplay and story will be the only real focus.
However the best graphics yet are as good as you would need them, however I'm sure someone would of said this throughout gamings history.

 

[Composer]

Nothing?

Seriously. Why would that effect gaming at all?

cooooost

OT: retro gaming becomes very mainstream

 

[WolfEdge]

That's like saying the movie industry is going to die when we can no longer improve picture quality, or that novels and stories will stop being produced when we fail to invent new words. Sweet Graphix can only take this medium so far.

 

[teebeeohh]

we start making better games instead of better looking games

 

[Warforger]

The year is 2025, and the Graphics and Capabilities of games are no longer able to improve, because its already photo-realistic down to the microscopic level, has models with BILLIONS of polygons, and has physics so good that a bullet striking a piece of cloth rips a hole in the cloth, deforms the bullet slightly, and causes its trajectory to alter a tiny bit.

What happens to games from that point on?

Lets also assume that there are enough automated tools to make producing such high quality games take as much effort as they currently do.

Motion controls have taken over and the government bans violent video games as they are far too realistic and thus can be used to train militia.

 

[Enigmers]

I'm hoping for more support for Indie games, and I'll also echo the "make games with better story/gameplay/original graphical style/atmosphere" train of thought.

 

[TiefBlau]

Virtual Reality.

That is all.

I agree. Why hire a story writer, when it's perhaps cheaper, quicker and more effective to put the person right into the game?

Who's to say you can't make the player live a story? That's like saying, "Why bother making a story when you can put the player right into the movie?" Isn't that the argument Roger Ebert made? You're ridiculous.
[hr]640[/hr]
OT: I personally welcome improvements in graphics. Obviously it's not everything, but anyone who knows anything about art knows that aesthetics plays a large role. There are too many games that look beautiful, but dwell in the uncanny valley with expressionless blank stares or vague smiles while they cry for the loss of their spouses. And you can't just stylize everything; realism plays a large role too. So yeah, I welcome improvement to the point at which the human eye can no longer tell the difference.

And at that point, ladies and gentlemen, you will have not only photoshop, but movieshop to worry about.

 

[TheMariner]

Once the graphics can no longer get any better, then we will try to make games that actually have compelling storylines again. It may just be my opinion, but it seems that the plots of games suffers greatly for the time and effort needed to produce the HD graphics.

Though I have moved up from my N64 and Gamecube to the Xbox 360, my favorite game remains Golden Sun (the GBA two-parter, not the DS sequel). This could simply be because it was the first game I played that blurred the line between good and evil in the antagonists but I think the plot unfolded well and was generally of a higher caliber than most current games.

There are of course exceptions to this gross generalization: Mass Effect, Red Dead Redemption, Assassin's Creed, and Namco's Tales of series being some specific examples I hold in high regard for both their narrative and visual quality.

Again, it's simply my opinion on the current state of gaming and I may simply be looking on older games through the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, but I think that the plots of games have suffered to make them visually appealing (I hesitate to say stunning because hardware is till holding photo-realism back).

TL,DR version: It is my hope that once graphics reach their peak, the games industry can shift its focus back to making compelling stories, which is what truly makes or breaks a game.

 

[Motiv_]

I, personally, will celebrate the day.

Games today worry too much about being better graphically, while not nearly enough about being better gameplay wise. It would also be nice to not have to buy a brand new 350$ graphics card every time a new game comes out.

 

[Anarchemitis]

Coders get different jobs.

More of the game budget is shifted towards the design and QAT departments.

 

[karm42yn]

Don't forget that better graphics are also more expensive graphics. Only because your graphic card can carry the load doesn't mean that the dev will always have the money to pay off 400 strong design team. We need more inteligent tools to do it more efficiently. Besides there's always a big market for totally nonrealistic, cartoonish or syntethic looking games. It will be supercool though with them VR contact lenses or spinal cord sockets

 

[Omega Pirate]

We enter the matrix, and being to make games in there.

 

[icame]

Nothing?

Seriously. Why would that effect gaming at all?

Becasue it would soon get boring nothing will change invation will be gone and just well gaming will all be the same

Of course because all innovation comes from graphics.

 

[Dys]

I say, we're already there.

Sure, you still see companies pushing the graphics envelope every year - and you still see a ton of hype about the newest Call of Duty game's new face-rendering tech - but honestly, is there really even any way to tell the difference between CoD 4, MW2, WaW, and BO? They all look almost perfect. And they're running on five-year-old hardware. When the next generation rolls around, with the hardware from 2013's computers, and developers start using it... where do they have to go?

I wouldn't really argue with the "we're already there" train of thought, as we seem to already have very little to gain from graphical advances, though that's probably due more to the artificially long life of the current console generation than anything. I will say, though, that the call of duty franchise was never especially pretty, sure when CoD2 first came out, and the xbox 360 was young and it was relatively higher, however compared to games like crysis and farcry 2, the sequels have been graphically mediocre. The call of duty franchise, though a staple of poor social philosophy, isn't overly concerned with superficial graphics at all. There was plenty of scope for them to piss money away on a new engine with destructible environments and such, but they never did.

 

[Mikeyfell]

gaming should not be about graphics

 

[FabiotheTurtle]

Virtual Reality.

That is all.

I agree. Why hire a story writer, when it's perhaps cheaper, quicker and more effective to put the person right into the game?

Who's to say you can't make the player live a story? That's like saying, "Why bother making a story when you can put the player right into the movie?" Isn't that the argument Roger Ebert made? You're ridiculous.
[hr]640[/hr]

That's not what I believe. Every game needs a decent story. Eg. Halo to an extent, Zelda: Majoras Mask, Banjo Kazooie was iffy, a lot of horror games focus on story. No I'm saying is that what the fatcats will think.

"Say, Gary, wouldn't it be quicker if we just put the player in the story rather than revolve it around something?"

"Why sir, that's true. Where are we going with this?"

"I have an idea. Notify the designers."

 

[someonehairy-ish]

The government steps in and bans sales of all games because people can't tell the difference between games and real life anymore?

WoW? Its already happened.

 

[Zer_]

The year is 2025, and the Graphics and Capabilities of games are no longer able to improve, because its already photo-realistic down to the microscopic level, has models with BILLIONS of polygons, and has physics so good that a bullet striking a piece of cloth rips a hole in the cloth, deforms the bullet slightly, and causes its trajectory to alter a tiny bit.

What happens to games from that point on?

Lets also assume that there are enough automated tools to make producing such high quality games take as much effort as they currently do.

There won't be polygons at that point. It'll be voxels.