Why did the grapics race end?

[SomeBritishDude]

Graphics are still improving, it's just becoming a lot more gradual.

For one thing, as many people have said, we're in the middle of a recession here. People say the gaming industry is recession proof but I've got for news for you: That's bull shit. People are not going to be concentrating on making graphics engines so awesome that they make your face melt. Especially when you have a a little white motion thingy sitting in the corner that costs WAY less to develop for and gets you twice as much.

Another thing is yes, we're simply starting to reach the limit, or at least the slowing point before the next big leap in graphics (I'm talk matrix stuff). As it is, we're at that time where games could be mistaken for movies or even real life. Asking developers to achieve more is just down right rediculous, or at least a bit ungratful. Graphics will continue to improve, in fact they are (compare something make last year like GTA4 to Farcry 2 and tell me you do not see the difference) but it's going to be very slow.

In fact, in the current climate I don't see there being a big improvement next generation either, at least, not the difference between say the PS2 and the PS3. Next generation is going to be about radical new experiments and ideas, and I'm certainly excited to see what happens. That is, if OnLive doesn't work.

 

[Souplex]

The graphics race didn't end, it took a breather in between console generations.

 

[Therumancer]

I think it's not over, but it's died down a lot. Largely because people just can't afford a couple hundred dollars for a graphics card, and then maybe a few hundred dollars on top of that for a monitor capable of exploiting said graphics card.

I think the PC gaming industry has gotten pounded nearly into extinction (though it's impossible for it to ever truely be killed) by consoles because they don't require constant hardware upgrades. It might only have the components of a cheap PC, but they will produce games for it for years that will look decent and you won't have to upgrade for.

The industry has decided that it's better to work with "older" systems instead of yelling "go pay the money for a hardware upgrade cheapskate" every five minutes. They eventually drove enough people away to make a catastrophic differance.

Also working with newer hardware invited problems, and I'm sure we have all had the experience of calling game tech support and being told to "contact your hardware manufacturer" with of course the manufacturer telling you to talk to the software producer
if you bother to call them. Given the millions of annoyed gamers created by bleeding edge tech and nobody willing to take responsibility for making it work properly.... well the results speak for themselves.

Repetitive, but that's what I think. Graphics are improving but much more slowly for this reason.

>>>----Therumancer--->

 

[Twilight_guy]

Graphics are getting to a point where there isn't much return in quality for each improvement. Yeah, It looks better, but comparing a PS3 to a PS2 is not a big of a difference as comparing a NES and a Super Nintendo. Not only that, but the cost of making those graphics is becoming really expensive. The race isn't over and it'll probably never end (until we have Matrix quality graphics) but its return as compared to cost is diminishing.

 

[Danny Ocean]

Why would you want to past the point where you can become immersed?

To drown, hilariously-avatared man; to drown.

Seriously though, the graphics race is far from over. Even Crysis isn't quite there, but when they make the super-duper-photorealistic-totally-real-engine-x and make it run on consoles (If they're still around by then), then we can probably sit back and focus on gameplay; but, for now, I want my gore!

 

[Anarchemitis]

I've heard many say "They can't get much better" why not?

Because there's no need to be better at this point.
Graphics development raced alot farther ahead of Story or Characterization development, or gameplay technologies.

Also they've reached their pinnacle for certain things until computers get faster.
Not that anything on this planet right now is slow be any regular standard.

 

[Pickel Surprise]

Because it was pointless to begin with? Graphics is such a pretentious facet of most games. While they aren't perfect, they have reached the point where they are pretty damn good and aren't going to get much better. Because of this, developers really ought to put more time into other aspects of their games as opposed to just trying to improve graphics.

Of course, graphics are important, but they are not the sole most important things about a game as a whole.

 

[Rajin Cajun]

Because it was pointless to begin with? Graphics is such a pretentious facet of most games. While they aren't perfect, they have reached the point where they are pretty damn good and aren't going to get much better. Because of this, developers really ought to put more time into other aspects of their games as opposed to just trying to improve graphics.

Of course, graphics are important, but they are not the sole most important things about a game as a whole.

Pretty much this. Even if one ignores the uncanny valley that gameplay has taken a backseat to graphics is saddening and truly pathetic but it is ultimately the consumers' fault especially console fanbois who were eating every morsel of crap that came out.

 

[Pain_Inflictor]

Three major reasons:

1) You can't make graphics much more realistic without falling so deep into the Uncanny Valley that nobody wants to play your game anymore. Oblivion and Fallout 3 both have major immersion-breaking issues that Morrowind managed to avoid, due almost entirely to the Uncanny Valley.

2) You may have noticed there's a recession going on. It's hard to sell high-end hardware when a big chunk of your customer base is either unemployed or scared for their jobs.

3) Even if the economy were booming, there's only so much money you can put into a game before it becomes way too much of a risk to spend the money to add more content/higher-end technology. Eventually developers just have to say "look, we can stay out of the Valley and make profit more likely. Two birds, one stone" and say graphics are good enough.

Number 3 reminds me of Duke Nukem: Forever. Also, I couldn't care less about the graphics, if it's fun to play and the graphics suck I'm fine with it.

 

[shmaller]

I think the better question is, "Why won't it end?". Graphics at this point can't get much better without falling into the uncanny valley. Besides, all this focus on graphics has basically been a three-way willy waving contest between corporations, while the players suffer. People have been focusing way too much on looks and not enough on actual gameplay.

An example I can think of off the top of my head would be Call of Duty 4 as one of this generation's only games to expertly combine beautiful visuals and a deep, compelling storyline. Most other games with good graphics have been the virtual equivalent of an eloquently decorated spoon.

So I say, forget about the graphics. Sprinkling chocolate chips and gold flakes on animal feces does not make it a wonderful experience to interact with.