The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Posted here on behalf of neilc - as Newbie's can't post here in Prime - and it's worthy.
-----
So, when will gaming end?? What will it reach and what will be achieved? Whatever it is, I’m sure it won’t be seen in my lifetime…(cue space age sound effects, an epic soundtrack, a starlit sky and general space cheesiness).
If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
There is no reason to suggest why games would never reach such a stage (if there is, then someone please tell me and let me correct myself!). But if actual photo-realism is reached, will any sequential games still have the same appeal or market? Is it possible to improve upon photo-realism? Most new games and consoles will sell themselves upon their graphical merit; alongside the improved game play elements. If such a graphical plateau is reached, will programmers have to rely merely upon game play merit to produce the next big seller? I for one hope so. Can anyone imagine game packaging that doesn’t boast the latest graphical trick?
When a gaming platform can generate life like graphics and environments, will governments begin to lay down more restrictions upon programmers?? Take Goldeneye on the N64, the aim of the game was to act as James Bond and to utilise his license to kill. Once graphics are of a high enough standard to convince a human that they are experiencing a real event, what is to say that a game (that can replicate real life) such as a first person shooter will be legal? Obviously murder is illegal, possessing a handgun, let alone an M-16 machine gun is illegal, so surely the seemingly life like reality created by programmers would be unsuitable. If actions such as murder are illegal (and feasible within a game environment), why should an artificial reality that allows people to commit life like crimes be legal?
If all game genres reach a life like standard, then most could be banned, e.g. even racing simulations, do you have a license to drive that ‘life like’ F1 car? I don’t think so! Surely if we reach this stage, then games are going to end up back where they started and programmers will degrade graphics to so low a level so that a game will be considered legal AND fun to play.
Enough with the contemplating, I’m off to play the ‘School Day Simulator 2’ and finish my I.T. homework before I get a detention (has anyone beaten the third homework for Mr.Debney yet?)
neilc
-----
So, when will gaming end?? What will it reach and what will be achieved? Whatever it is, I’m sure it won’t be seen in my lifetime…(cue space age sound effects, an epic soundtrack, a starlit sky and general space cheesiness).
If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
There is no reason to suggest why games would never reach such a stage (if there is, then someone please tell me and let me correct myself!). But if actual photo-realism is reached, will any sequential games still have the same appeal or market? Is it possible to improve upon photo-realism? Most new games and consoles will sell themselves upon their graphical merit; alongside the improved game play elements. If such a graphical plateau is reached, will programmers have to rely merely upon game play merit to produce the next big seller? I for one hope so. Can anyone imagine game packaging that doesn’t boast the latest graphical trick?
When a gaming platform can generate life like graphics and environments, will governments begin to lay down more restrictions upon programmers?? Take Goldeneye on the N64, the aim of the game was to act as James Bond and to utilise his license to kill. Once graphics are of a high enough standard to convince a human that they are experiencing a real event, what is to say that a game (that can replicate real life) such as a first person shooter will be legal? Obviously murder is illegal, possessing a handgun, let alone an M-16 machine gun is illegal, so surely the seemingly life like reality created by programmers would be unsuitable. If actions such as murder are illegal (and feasible within a game environment), why should an artificial reality that allows people to commit life like crimes be legal?
If all game genres reach a life like standard, then most could be banned, e.g. even racing simulations, do you have a license to drive that ‘life like’ F1 car? I don’t think so! Surely if we reach this stage, then games are going to end up back where they started and programmers will degrade graphics to so low a level so that a game will be considered legal AND fun to play.
Enough with the contemplating, I’m off to play the ‘School Day Simulator 2’ and finish my I.T. homework before I get a detention (has anyone beaten the third homework for Mr.Debney yet?)
neilc
This is the second time in a week that this guy has got a post on Prime, put there because it was spotted by a good poster and it was thought to be worthy.
School Day Simulator 2. :D
Still, I'll agree that it is a very good post, and worthy of a GAD.
School Day Simulator 2. :D
Still, I'll agree that it is a very good post, and worthy of a GAD.
Great post. Surely worthy of a GAD?
I think eventually, we will become really immersed in game play, I know virtual reality has become a laughing stock, but I reckon there will come a point when we can throw on a "cybersuit" (do a search for "teledildonics", kids, this technology will spread to gaming soon), plug our Cortex into a highpowered PC, and compete in "Unreal Tournament 2050", our bodies will be convinced, but our minds will know it's only a game.
As for killing being a crime in a photo-realistic virtual-reality game. No. I don't think so. Why is it illegal to "kill" a peice of AI driven code? Even if you "kill" a real person who is hooked into the system in the same way that you are, they can just re-spawn, n'est 'pas? However, you are probably right to say the the Government will not see it that way!
I think eventually, we will become really immersed in game play, I know virtual reality has become a laughing stock, but I reckon there will come a point when we can throw on a "cybersuit" (do a search for "teledildonics", kids, this technology will spread to gaming soon), plug our Cortex into a highpowered PC, and compete in "Unreal Tournament 2050", our bodies will be convinced, but our minds will know it's only a game.
As for killing being a crime in a photo-realistic virtual-reality game. No. I don't think so. Why is it illegal to "kill" a peice of AI driven code? Even if you "kill" a real person who is hooked into the system in the same way that you are, they can just re-spawn, n'est 'pas? However, you are probably right to say the the Government will not see it that way!
neilc wrote:
> If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
Just wondering what you mean by this? Do you mean that the graphics are so good that the human maybe thinks he is watching TV or something, or do you mean that the brain really thinks that what is happening is actually real. In other words, are you refering to games whereby the human truely thinks he/she is running around with the gun, rather than controlling a number of pixels (no matter how realistic they are) on a screen?
In my opinion, the prospect of true to life graphics on a computer screen, would be far more likely than the more 'matrix' like effect. In fact, I would say that technology for such machines would be available in possibly a decade or so. With current rates of advancement, and no reason to suggest that the technological advancements will cease, this could become a reality. In fact, there is every possiblility that as time progresses, new (and better) technologies will come to light allowing for even faster technology growth than we currently see.
As for the matrix effect, I actually wrote a reply to another guy's topic a few days ago which would have gone well here. Basically, to get this effect, I imagine you would require a computer which was fast enought to compete with the human brain. In other words, it must be able to cope with the constant demand from your brain for response to all senses such as touch, sight and hearing. If it is not quick enough with any of these, the experience will be lost and the sense of 'escapism' (or whatever you want to call it) would be lost.
Needless to say, you would need a damn fast computer and a program/game which was impecibly designed. If either of them falter, your brain you pick up on it and the experience is lost. There have been suggestions of such computers in 20 years but I'll believe it when I see it. I read that the worlds fastest supercomputers currently have the processing power of the nervous system of a snail. We have a long way to go.
Would be kinda cool though wouldn't it. Grand Prix games would rock!
Lula's sexy empire here I come.
*cough* did I type that out loud?
> If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
Just wondering what you mean by this? Do you mean that the graphics are so good that the human maybe thinks he is watching TV or something, or do you mean that the brain really thinks that what is happening is actually real. In other words, are you refering to games whereby the human truely thinks he/she is running around with the gun, rather than controlling a number of pixels (no matter how realistic they are) on a screen?
In my opinion, the prospect of true to life graphics on a computer screen, would be far more likely than the more 'matrix' like effect. In fact, I would say that technology for such machines would be available in possibly a decade or so. With current rates of advancement, and no reason to suggest that the technological advancements will cease, this could become a reality. In fact, there is every possiblility that as time progresses, new (and better) technologies will come to light allowing for even faster technology growth than we currently see.
As for the matrix effect, I actually wrote a reply to another guy's topic a few days ago which would have gone well here. Basically, to get this effect, I imagine you would require a computer which was fast enought to compete with the human brain. In other words, it must be able to cope with the constant demand from your brain for response to all senses such as touch, sight and hearing. If it is not quick enough with any of these, the experience will be lost and the sense of 'escapism' (or whatever you want to call it) would be lost.
Needless to say, you would need a damn fast computer and a program/game which was impecibly designed. If either of them falter, your brain you pick up on it and the experience is lost. There have been suggestions of such computers in 20 years but I'll believe it when I see it. I read that the worlds fastest supercomputers currently have the processing power of the nervous system of a snail. We have a long way to go.
Would be kinda cool though wouldn't it. Grand Prix games would rock!
Lula's sexy empire here I come.
*cough* did I type that out loud?
Posted here on behalf of neilc - as Newbie's can't post here in Prime - and it's worthy.
-----
So, when will gaming end?? What will it reach and what will be achieved? Whatever it is, I’m sure it won’t be seen in my lifetime…(cue space age sound effects, an epic soundtrack, a starlit sky and general space cheesiness).
If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
There is no reason to suggest why games would never reach such a stage (if there is, then someone please tell me and let me correct myself!). But if actual photo-realism is reached, will any sequential games still have the same appeal or market? Is it possible to improve upon photo-realism? Most new games and consoles will sell themselves upon their graphical merit; alongside the improved game play elements. If such a graphical plateau is reached, will programmers have to rely merely upon game play merit to produce the next big seller? I for one hope so. Can anyone imagine game packaging that doesn’t boast the latest graphical trick?
When a gaming platform can generate life like graphics and environments, will governments begin to lay down more restrictions upon programmers?? Take Goldeneye on the N64, the aim of the game was to act as James Bond and to utilise his license to kill. Once graphics are of a high enough standard to convince a human that they are experiencing a real event, what is to say that a game (that can replicate real life) such as a first person shooter will be legal? Obviously murder is illegal, possessing a handgun, let alone an M-16 machine gun is illegal, so surely the seemingly life like reality created by programmers would be unsuitable. If actions such as murder are illegal (and feasible within a game environment), why should an artificial reality that allows people to commit life like crimes be legal?
If all game genres reach a life like standard, then most could be banned, e.g. even racing simulations, do you have a license to drive that ‘life like’ F1 car? I don’t think so! Surely if we reach this stage, then games are going to end up back where they started and programmers will degrade graphics to so low a level so that a game will be considered legal AND fun to play.
Enough with the contemplating, I’m off to play the ‘School Day Simulator 2’ and finish my I.T. homework before I get a detention (has anyone beaten the third homework for Mr.Debney yet?)
neilc
-----
So, when will gaming end?? What will it reach and what will be achieved? Whatever it is, I’m sure it won’t be seen in my lifetime…(cue space age sound effects, an epic soundtrack, a starlit sky and general space cheesiness).
If graphics, sound and game interaction are said to improve with every next generation of games or consoles, will a gaming experience ever become so realistic as to be indistinguishable from life off a computer? Could a human being ever be tricked into believing they are having a real life experience, when they are actually experiencing a virtual reality created by a computer?
There is no reason to suggest why games would never reach such a stage (if there is, then someone please tell me and let me correct myself!). But if actual photo-realism is reached, will any sequential games still have the same appeal or market? Is it possible to improve upon photo-realism? Most new games and consoles will sell themselves upon their graphical merit; alongside the improved game play elements. If such a graphical plateau is reached, will programmers have to rely merely upon game play merit to produce the next big seller? I for one hope so. Can anyone imagine game packaging that doesn’t boast the latest graphical trick?
When a gaming platform can generate life like graphics and environments, will governments begin to lay down more restrictions upon programmers?? Take Goldeneye on the N64, the aim of the game was to act as James Bond and to utilise his license to kill. Once graphics are of a high enough standard to convince a human that they are experiencing a real event, what is to say that a game (that can replicate real life) such as a first person shooter will be legal? Obviously murder is illegal, possessing a handgun, let alone an M-16 machine gun is illegal, so surely the seemingly life like reality created by programmers would be unsuitable. If actions such as murder are illegal (and feasible within a game environment), why should an artificial reality that allows people to commit life like crimes be legal?
If all game genres reach a life like standard, then most could be banned, e.g. even racing simulations, do you have a license to drive that ‘life like’ F1 car? I don’t think so! Surely if we reach this stage, then games are going to end up back where they started and programmers will degrade graphics to so low a level so that a game will be considered legal AND fun to play.
Enough with the contemplating, I’m off to play the ‘School Day Simulator 2’ and finish my I.T. homework before I get a detention (has anyone beaten the third homework for Mr.Debney yet?)
neilc