The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I predict that in ten years time, photo-realism will be perfected. After all, with Moore’s Law stating that computing power doubles every 18 months we should see processing speeds of about 128 Gigabytes in a standard PC!
This raises two important questions for the gaming industry:
Firstly, imagine the cost of making a photo-realistic game; every single character, object and building has to be designed completely- without a single detail left out. I think this will lead to a number of important changes in the industry.
To begin with, middleware will become more important to the industry- and not just for use in 3D engines, physics and AI. Now developers may be forced to buy pre-made computer generated characters, simply because there is no way they can possibly make every single one of their game’s characters from scratch. And this doesn’t just apply to characters- also building, objects and textures will need to be bought “off the shelf” so-to-speak.
Also, imagine the cost of making a game like this! If we assume that the technology available to make games increases at the same speed as game complexity, the cost won’t be as high as you might imagine, but games will certainly cost more than they do now. This could easily lead to the end of the small scale development houses we see at the moment- instead all games may be made by far larger corporations.
The second question such an advance in technology raises is “how can games get any better”? After all, if you’ve generated photo-realistic graphics, you’ve hit a wall.
Well, to begin with, the way we interact with games will have to change. The limitations of the controller- a simple piece of plastic with buttons on- will hold gameplay back far more than anything else. After all, what’s the point in generating a perfectly crafter world if you can’t do anything with it?
Next, we can start to use other senses in gaming- not just seeing and hearing. Now, we could start to see rumble packs that cover your whole body- shaking as you bump into objects.
Maybe the biggest change would be transferring games from the simple 2d Television screen onto another media. Perhaps VR headsets will make a comeback? Or even more radically, maybe games will be played inside “capsules” that, as well as giving you a 3D view of everything, allow you to walk freely within the game, and could even begin to incorporate new sensations like smell. Such capsules would certainly make Arcades far more popular!
I can imagine that in several decades we will have direct brain interaction with games. So then we have perfect sights, sounds and smells of environments. No more limitations are imposed by controllers, and we are truly free to do anything….
But what then?
Sonic
This raises two important questions for the gaming industry:
Firstly, imagine the cost of making a photo-realistic game; every single character, object and building has to be designed completely- without a single detail left out. I think this will lead to a number of important changes in the industry.
To begin with, middleware will become more important to the industry- and not just for use in 3D engines, physics and AI. Now developers may be forced to buy pre-made computer generated characters, simply because there is no way they can possibly make every single one of their game’s characters from scratch. And this doesn’t just apply to characters- also building, objects and textures will need to be bought “off the shelf” so-to-speak.
Also, imagine the cost of making a game like this! If we assume that the technology available to make games increases at the same speed as game complexity, the cost won’t be as high as you might imagine, but games will certainly cost more than they do now. This could easily lead to the end of the small scale development houses we see at the moment- instead all games may be made by far larger corporations.
The second question such an advance in technology raises is “how can games get any better”? After all, if you’ve generated photo-realistic graphics, you’ve hit a wall.
Well, to begin with, the way we interact with games will have to change. The limitations of the controller- a simple piece of plastic with buttons on- will hold gameplay back far more than anything else. After all, what’s the point in generating a perfectly crafter world if you can’t do anything with it?
Next, we can start to use other senses in gaming- not just seeing and hearing. Now, we could start to see rumble packs that cover your whole body- shaking as you bump into objects.
Maybe the biggest change would be transferring games from the simple 2d Television screen onto another media. Perhaps VR headsets will make a comeback? Or even more radically, maybe games will be played inside “capsules” that, as well as giving you a 3D view of everything, allow you to walk freely within the game, and could even begin to incorporate new sensations like smell. Such capsules would certainly make Arcades far more popular!
I can imagine that in several decades we will have direct brain interaction with games. So then we have perfect sights, sounds and smells of environments. No more limitations are imposed by controllers, and we are truly free to do anything….
But what then?
Sonic
Page:
But Sonic, bedroom coders are still out there. They may not necessarily be making games, but look at Counter Strike the mod for Half-Life. It initially wasn't made by any huge company, and the fact that it is shareware (freely downloadable) shows that the big publishers are not controlling everything. And also for almost every game you can think of on the PC there are varying sizes of communities of level creators, mod creators, etc. all making their own games / levels based on what is available to them.
Now I certainly don't see one man teams coming up with all new games alone, but if it become too expensive to use the revolutionary new technology, then why wouldn't certain developers go off, and just use the old technology to create games?
This can be seen even now with the GBA. One of the reasons it has so much support is that developers know how to use the hardware. They've worked on the Snes, and previous Game Boys, and so they know what they can do with it. Development costs are also lower than with any next gen consoles.
And anyway, haven't we seen many great games designers leave their old development company, to start another one? These are often smaller than the big companies they break away from. One reason they often break away is that the company can be scared to make risky games which may not be sure fire hits. The games designer then wants to leave because they can no longer create the kind of games they want to.
And didn't Valve (Half-Life developers) go out and look for the best amateur Quake level designers for Half-Life? There is still a huge number of gamers out there, maybe not making their own games, but certainly out there creating anything they can with existing software.
Now I certainly don't see one man teams coming up with all new games alone, but if it become too expensive to use the revolutionary new technology, then why wouldn't certain developers go off, and just use the old technology to create games?
This can be seen even now with the GBA. One of the reasons it has so much support is that developers know how to use the hardware. They've worked on the Snes, and previous Game Boys, and so they know what they can do with it. Development costs are also lower than with any next gen consoles.
And anyway, haven't we seen many great games designers leave their old development company, to start another one? These are often smaller than the big companies they break away from. One reason they often break away is that the company can be scared to make risky games which may not be sure fire hits. The games designer then wants to leave because they can no longer create the kind of games they want to.
And didn't Valve (Half-Life developers) go out and look for the best amateur Quake level designers for Half-Life? There is still a huge number of gamers out there, maybe not making their own games, but certainly out there creating anything they can with existing software.
Actually while I was waiting for a prostitute to get in the car I watched purple SPANK pusher bloke murder 6 people with an Uzi outside my lockup in Shoreside Vail. The bandit killed the pro as well! Still, he got what was coming to him.
You do see other people robbing normal people on the street though, which is a step in the right direction. We will get there one day...
Example:
Liberty City is all in all a pretty convincing city. It's not perfect though. It just doesn't have that city atmosphere and viewed from above the traffic systems just aren't in place. You don't get traffic jams, clear sections, or less traffic at night. All these things could do with improving. Another thing is: You seem to be the only person comitting crimes! You never see the police "bust" someone else, or have to dodge out of the way of a high speed car chase. To simulate this (or Artificial Life for those in the know) you need huge amounts of memory and processing power. It's not just what the graphics are, it's what they do as well.
Liberty City is all in all a pretty convincing city. It's not perfect though. It just doesn't have that city atmosphere and viewed from above the traffic systems just aren't in place. You don't get traffic jams, clear sections, or less traffic at night. All these things could do with improving. Another thing is: You seem to be the only person comitting crimes! You never see the police "bust" someone else, or have to dodge out of the way of a high speed car chase. To simulate this (or Artificial Life for those in the know) you need huge amounts of memory and processing power. It's not just what the graphics are, it's what they do as well.
The Game wrote:
To say that photo-realistic thingys will change the
> course of the industry is lunacy! It just isn't as big as '3D' or Dolby Sound
> 5.1 etc...
Oh, I agree that not all games will go towards photorealism, but that fact is that simulation games like GT3, and games that are "realistic" like GTA3, will become more and more graphically advanced until they become photo-realistic... the whole poeint of these games is to immerse you in the game.
Other genres and graphical styles, like cell shading, will also continue to have their place, but photo-realism will ceratinly be evident in most games.
Oh, and as for smaller developers shunnig new technology if development costs sky-rocket, Sibs, this simply won't happen. Believe it or not, the changes I envisage are taking place slowly:
First bedroom coding died- if you want to make a game you need several people working on it.
Then the small 6-people teams have died as games simply get more complex.
Then small developers of less than 50 people are now being bought up by big publishers... it's hard to find a developer that isn't owned by a big publisher now!
And after a few years there will probably only be big publishers.... we're not far from it!
Sonic
To say that photo-realistic thingys will change the
> course of the industry is lunacy! It just isn't as big as '3D' or Dolby Sound
> 5.1 etc...
Oh, I agree that not all games will go towards photorealism, but that fact is that simulation games like GT3, and games that are "realistic" like GTA3, will become more and more graphically advanced until they become photo-realistic... the whole poeint of these games is to immerse you in the game.
Other genres and graphical styles, like cell shading, will also continue to have their place, but photo-realism will ceratinly be evident in most games.
Oh, and as for smaller developers shunnig new technology if development costs sky-rocket, Sibs, this simply won't happen. Believe it or not, the changes I envisage are taking place slowly:
First bedroom coding died- if you want to make a game you need several people working on it.
Then the small 6-people teams have died as games simply get more complex.
Then small developers of less than 50 people are now being bought up by big publishers... it's hard to find a developer that isn't owned by a big publisher now!
And after a few years there will probably only be big publishers.... we're not far from it!
Sonic
Sibs wrote:
> Does that have something to do with this topic? Oh, and are you trying
> to tell us something about yourself here? Reversal of genders, and 'link up'
> games... hmmm...
;-)
heh, no, but it's pretty much a fact of life that there are many people who wish to experiment with gender roles. How many times have you heard a bloke say that they would love to be *that* woman, just so they could stand by the mirror and stare at their breasts....etc....
Mind you, what kind of a rating would 'link up' games get? That's another problem with realistic games, and a whole other topic....
> Does that have something to do with this topic? Oh, and are you trying
> to tell us something about yourself here? Reversal of genders, and 'link up'
> games... hmmm...
;-)
heh, no, but it's pretty much a fact of life that there are many people who wish to experiment with gender roles. How many times have you heard a bloke say that they would love to be *that* woman, just so they could stand by the mirror and stare at their breasts....etc....
Mind you, what kind of a rating would 'link up' games get? That's another problem with realistic games, and a whole other topic....
pb wrote:
This, of
> course, could also lead to some interesing gender issues if male and female
> roles could be reversed or experienced in gaming, imagine the possibilities for
> 'link up' games then! If you think it all sounds a bit perverse, you'd be
> surprised how well it would sell in the right environment and with a little bit
> of foresight, it could also have great social implications for many people.
Yes...
I like the tagline by the way. ("xxxxxxxxxxXxxxxxxxxx" for all of you too lazy to find it...)
Does that have something to do with this topic? Oh, and are you trying to tell us something about yourself here? Reversal of genders, and 'link up' games... hmmm...
;-)
This, of
> course, could also lead to some interesing gender issues if male and female
> roles could be reversed or experienced in gaming, imagine the possibilities for
> 'link up' games then! If you think it all sounds a bit perverse, you'd be
> surprised how well it would sell in the right environment and with a little bit
> of foresight, it could also have great social implications for many people.
Yes...
I like the tagline by the way. ("xxxxxxxxxxXxxxxxxxxx" for all of you too lazy to find it...)
Does that have something to do with this topic? Oh, and are you trying to tell us something about yourself here? Reversal of genders, and 'link up' games... hmmm...
;-)
hm. With new and greater technology, many new kinds of game art become possible, allowing for totally new experiences for those wanting to escape the real world and disappear into something far more abstract or less photo-realistic.
Photo-realism is important, as games become more realistic, then more real life situations can be simulated and experienced. This leads to new experiences for the end user who perhaps has never had to fight a fire, rescue hostages etc, but then if every game became so photorealistic that you couldn't tell them apart, it would be very boring.
Staring at a screen, however flat or clear, will not take the place of real life, so more emphasis will be on the input devices, both visually and tactile. These will enhance or totally alter the gaming environment. Don't just think of this in logical terms though, games can be anything but logical at times, so why not controllers and viewing devices as well? Experience life as a rabbit, from their point of view, or from a five legged martian with no arms? Anything could be possible eventually.
This, of course, could also lead to some interesing gender issues if male and female roles could be reversed or experienced in gaming, imagine the possibilities for 'link up' games then! If you think it all sounds a bit perverse, you'd be surprised how well it would sell in the right environment and with a little bit of foresight, it could also have great social implications for many people.
Photo-realism is important, as games become more realistic, then more real life situations can be simulated and experienced. This leads to new experiences for the end user who perhaps has never had to fight a fire, rescue hostages etc, but then if every game became so photorealistic that you couldn't tell them apart, it would be very boring.
Staring at a screen, however flat or clear, will not take the place of real life, so more emphasis will be on the input devices, both visually and tactile. These will enhance or totally alter the gaming environment. Don't just think of this in logical terms though, games can be anything but logical at times, so why not controllers and viewing devices as well? Experience life as a rabbit, from their point of view, or from a five legged martian with no arms? Anything could be possible eventually.
This, of course, could also lead to some interesing gender issues if male and female roles could be reversed or experienced in gaming, imagine the possibilities for 'link up' games then! If you think it all sounds a bit perverse, you'd be surprised how well it would sell in the right environment and with a little bit of foresight, it could also have great social implications for many people.
The Game wrote:
In my view, the next major advancement will come with the creation
> of a new genre, or maybe a certain type of 'physics' idea that comes in, like
> lower gravity forces, or maybe realistic games, like controlling a space
> station, or running a city.
Lower gravity forces? You can actually tamper with them already in game engines. You can mess with it in the Half Life engine and in mods for it (particularly fun in a game of Team Fortress Classic!) so you can make everyone jump really high and far, or even no gravity, so you just fly...
And running a city or space station...???
You ever heard of a little game called SimCity? No? Ah, just a thought...
In my view, the next major advancement will come with the creation
> of a new genre, or maybe a certain type of 'physics' idea that comes in, like
> lower gravity forces, or maybe realistic games, like controlling a space
> station, or running a city.
Lower gravity forces? You can actually tamper with them already in game engines. You can mess with it in the Half Life engine and in mods for it (particularly fun in a game of Team Fortress Classic!) so you can make everyone jump really high and far, or even no gravity, so you just fly...
And running a city or space station...???
You ever heard of a little game called SimCity? No? Ah, just a thought...
Photo-Realism, as Turbonutter kinda said, is only a small part of gaming. There are some games (Crazy-Taxi, Jet Set, Mario) That will NEVER use photo-thingy-ma-jiggies!
To say that photo-realistic thingys will change the course of the industry is lunacy! It just isn't as big as '3D' or Dolby Sound 5.1 etc...
In my view, the next major advancement will come with the creation of a new genre, or maybe a certain type of 'physics' idea that comes in, like lower gravity forces, or maybe realistic games, like controlling a space station, or running a city.
Photo-Realistic whateveryou'reonabout just isn't big enough to effect the industry in such a way... it simply doesn't encompass all of the genres...!
Great thought, all the same.
To say that photo-realistic thingys will change the course of the industry is lunacy! It just isn't as big as '3D' or Dolby Sound 5.1 etc...
In my view, the next major advancement will come with the creation of a new genre, or maybe a certain type of 'physics' idea that comes in, like lower gravity forces, or maybe realistic games, like controlling a space station, or running a city.
Photo-Realistic whateveryou'reonabout just isn't big enough to effect the industry in such a way... it simply doesn't encompass all of the genres...!
Great thought, all the same.
Page: