The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
The next-gen consoles have taken gaming about as far as it can go in terms of advances. Photo-realism is possible if a developer chooses to do so, as is realistic sound via X Box's 5.1 Surround chip and simulated surround on the Gamecube and Playstation 2. If you want immersion then turn up the volume, switch off the lights, draw the curtains and stare at the screen because that's about as good as it gets right now. You're shut out the outside world in terms of images and sounds and concentrate on the new images and sounds provided by the game.
Gamer's have,and still do, demand developers give them a realistic experience in certain styles of game. We don't really want to be Jak or Daxter, but an undercover cop like Max Payne or the pilot of an X Wing ala Rogue Leader ? Yes please ! In many cases, like Max Payne, realism equals a BBFC age rating and copious blood, violence and taboo subject. In terms of immersion the gamer is still really outside the game. But are we prepared for what total immersion could mean ?
The old VR style helmets are perhaps a sign of the future because they effectively "lock out" the outside world by making sure a gamer's field of vision does not leave the gameworld , and the only sound that is heard is again from the game world. But thats still not immersion, really. For true immersion you, the gamer, would have to truly believe you were part of a game. You'd want to fell the gun recoil in your hand, the wind as it blows, the hard ground beneath you feet, the impact of the bullets as the bad guys hit you......"er hang on" you're probably thinking once you read that last one. The ability to touch and feel is one that lets us know what is around us is real, if that could be replicated in games then immersion would become believable. It's not as completely daft as it sounds. Everything you feel is just nerves being stimulated by a kind of charge - surely some sort of technology could replicate that ? Even in dreams we can have the feeling of disorientation - that brief minute where we're not quite sure this is a dream........and that sudden coming awake. The way in which we wake from a dream is again caused by a process that could also be used to bring gamers out of a game - a new "game over".
Of course this would perhaps take things to far, the chances of people being unable to distinguish games from reality would increase, and maybe also the kind of games people would play. It's easy to kill people in GTA3 because thy're cartoons, realy, but a photorealistic immersive GTA game...... The knowledge that you'd feel an impact (obviously reduced) from a shot would completely change how shooting games would play in many cases. There could be a fear of being hit...and all of a sudden a game is generating emotions that are real. If you the world is believeable alongside its characters then its quite possible you'd care about them. Some could say this is sad, that caring for what would basically be pixels is a bit sad, but would it be different to the emotions people display for celebrities ? In most cases fans will never see their idol yet still like, care and display emotions towards them, when for the most part that celebrity is nothing more than an image on the screen, like a game character. Maybe the kind of experiences that make a brilliant game would be changed, for instance witnessing events in games or finding new areas which offered unique sounds and views, or new characters.
Maybe, just maybe, the reason why there is so little innovation nowadays is because the current form of gaming can no longer be taken much further.
Gamer's have,and still do, demand developers give them a realistic experience in certain styles of game. We don't really want to be Jak or Daxter, but an undercover cop like Max Payne or the pilot of an X Wing ala Rogue Leader ? Yes please ! In many cases, like Max Payne, realism equals a BBFC age rating and copious blood, violence and taboo subject. In terms of immersion the gamer is still really outside the game. But are we prepared for what total immersion could mean ?
The old VR style helmets are perhaps a sign of the future because they effectively "lock out" the outside world by making sure a gamer's field of vision does not leave the gameworld , and the only sound that is heard is again from the game world. But thats still not immersion, really. For true immersion you, the gamer, would have to truly believe you were part of a game. You'd want to fell the gun recoil in your hand, the wind as it blows, the hard ground beneath you feet, the impact of the bullets as the bad guys hit you......"er hang on" you're probably thinking once you read that last one. The ability to touch and feel is one that lets us know what is around us is real, if that could be replicated in games then immersion would become believable. It's not as completely daft as it sounds. Everything you feel is just nerves being stimulated by a kind of charge - surely some sort of technology could replicate that ? Even in dreams we can have the feeling of disorientation - that brief minute where we're not quite sure this is a dream........and that sudden coming awake. The way in which we wake from a dream is again caused by a process that could also be used to bring gamers out of a game - a new "game over".
Of course this would perhaps take things to far, the chances of people being unable to distinguish games from reality would increase, and maybe also the kind of games people would play. It's easy to kill people in GTA3 because thy're cartoons, realy, but a photorealistic immersive GTA game...... The knowledge that you'd feel an impact (obviously reduced) from a shot would completely change how shooting games would play in many cases. There could be a fear of being hit...and all of a sudden a game is generating emotions that are real. If you the world is believeable alongside its characters then its quite possible you'd care about them. Some could say this is sad, that caring for what would basically be pixels is a bit sad, but would it be different to the emotions people display for celebrities ? In most cases fans will never see their idol yet still like, care and display emotions towards them, when for the most part that celebrity is nothing more than an image on the screen, like a game character. Maybe the kind of experiences that make a brilliant game would be changed, for instance witnessing events in games or finding new areas which offered unique sounds and views, or new characters.
Maybe, just maybe, the reason why there is so little innovation nowadays is because the current form of gaming can no longer be taken much further.
I dont know if any of you played shenmue but they were a few characters in there that were the most photo realistic ive seen, max paynes cool but his face hardly moves and although it did look bloody cool I wouldnt say the characters in mgs2 were photo realistic.
We were on about phote realistic graphics - like in MGS2 and MAx Payne. Ace Combat e.t.c - not really photo generated, in most cases its easier for a developer to start graphics from scratch than convert them from a photo image.
Theres only really Nintendo thats steering away from realism though - mainly. In Pc and console FPS games its now common for enemies you shoot to be differently affected depending on where you hit them - Soldier Of Fortune and its sequel even have the enemies lying injured on the goround and let gamers - if they choose - inflict further damage. Some of the most succesful console games - Gran Turismo 3 for example, and Medal of Honour: AA only work because of realism, as does Max Payne to a point, and MGS2. Gaming for fun has basically left the PC, it's realism realism realism and I can only see Microsoft leading the consoles down this road, along with thier willing accomlice Sony of course....
There's nothing wrong with "realistic graphics", but gameplay should always be "unrealistic" - that's where the fun is.
To be honest, that's not the kind of realism in games I'm after.
All I want in terms of realism is more interactivity with surroundings, and consistancy amongst the physics.
I just want to be able to sit down and play for 10 minutes if I want to, I don't want to have to get into my cyber suit so I can feel it when someone shoots me.
It's wrong to look to the future of gaming for realism, as realism isn't always fun. For me the answer is to look towards what is fun, and it it means throwing realism out of the window, then so be it.
All I want in terms of realism is more interactivity with surroundings, and consistancy amongst the physics.
I just want to be able to sit down and play for 10 minutes if I want to, I don't want to have to get into my cyber suit so I can feel it when someone shoots me.
It's wrong to look to the future of gaming for realism, as realism isn't always fun. For me the answer is to look towards what is fun, and it it means throwing realism out of the window, then so be it.
Protoss wrote:
Its still at least 50 years off I
> think until it reaches that stage.
Most of the actual technology exists, its just that no ones tied it all together yet.
Its still at least 50 years off I
> think until it reaches that stage.
Most of the actual technology exists, its just that no ones tied it all together yet.
It sounds like you want Star Trek's holodeck's to become reality.
A small room which displays photonetic forcefields that can look, sound and even taste like the real thing.
Though that's many years ahead of our technology. If we could produce forcefields like that, we'd have no need for electric fences, barbed wire or cheese wire! (ignore that last one)
A small room which displays photonetic forcefields that can look, sound and even taste like the real thing.
Though that's many years ahead of our technology. If we could produce forcefields like that, we'd have no need for electric fences, barbed wire or cheese wire! (ignore that last one)
Yeah...imagine a photorealistic Sims? It would be the same as real life.
I think it would get to a point where some things would have to be banned. We play games to escape reality, not enter it. I mentioned the idea of a photorealistic GTA in another topic; would the Government let games be released where you can gun down cops and beeat in grannys? Todays games are easily distiquishable from real life, and GTA3 does not give me the urge to go on a crime spree, but it may get to a point where companies are banned from making these games. Imagine young children been brought up on these games.
Its still at least 50 years off I think until it reaches that stage.
I think it would get to a point where some things would have to be banned. We play games to escape reality, not enter it. I mentioned the idea of a photorealistic GTA in another topic; would the Government let games be released where you can gun down cops and beeat in grannys? Todays games are easily distiquishable from real life, and GTA3 does not give me the urge to go on a crime spree, but it may get to a point where companies are banned from making these games. Imagine young children been brought up on these games.
Its still at least 50 years off I think until it reaches that stage.
The next-gen consoles have taken gaming about as far as it can go in terms of advances. Photo-realism is possible if a developer chooses to do so, as is realistic sound via X Box's 5.1 Surround chip and simulated surround on the Gamecube and Playstation 2. If you want immersion then turn up the volume, switch off the lights, draw the curtains and stare at the screen because that's about as good as it gets right now. You're shut out the outside world in terms of images and sounds and concentrate on the new images and sounds provided by the game.
Gamer's have,and still do, demand developers give them a realistic experience in certain styles of game. We don't really want to be Jak or Daxter, but an undercover cop like Max Payne or the pilot of an X Wing ala Rogue Leader ? Yes please ! In many cases, like Max Payne, realism equals a BBFC age rating and copious blood, violence and taboo subject. In terms of immersion the gamer is still really outside the game. But are we prepared for what total immersion could mean ?
The old VR style helmets are perhaps a sign of the future because they effectively "lock out" the outside world by making sure a gamer's field of vision does not leave the gameworld , and the only sound that is heard is again from the game world. But thats still not immersion, really. For true immersion you, the gamer, would have to truly believe you were part of a game. You'd want to fell the gun recoil in your hand, the wind as it blows, the hard ground beneath you feet, the impact of the bullets as the bad guys hit you......"er hang on" you're probably thinking once you read that last one. The ability to touch and feel is one that lets us know what is around us is real, if that could be replicated in games then immersion would become believable. It's not as completely daft as it sounds. Everything you feel is just nerves being stimulated by a kind of charge - surely some sort of technology could replicate that ? Even in dreams we can have the feeling of disorientation - that brief minute where we're not quite sure this is a dream........and that sudden coming awake. The way in which we wake from a dream is again caused by a process that could also be used to bring gamers out of a game - a new "game over".
Of course this would perhaps take things to far, the chances of people being unable to distinguish games from reality would increase, and maybe also the kind of games people would play. It's easy to kill people in GTA3 because thy're cartoons, realy, but a photorealistic immersive GTA game...... The knowledge that you'd feel an impact (obviously reduced) from a shot would completely change how shooting games would play in many cases. There could be a fear of being hit...and all of a sudden a game is generating emotions that are real. If you the world is believeable alongside its characters then its quite possible you'd care about them. Some could say this is sad, that caring for what would basically be pixels is a bit sad, but would it be different to the emotions people display for celebrities ? In most cases fans will never see their idol yet still like, care and display emotions towards them, when for the most part that celebrity is nothing more than an image on the screen, like a game character. Maybe the kind of experiences that make a brilliant game would be changed, for instance witnessing events in games or finding new areas which offered unique sounds and views, or new characters.
Maybe, just maybe, the reason why there is so little innovation nowadays is because the current form of gaming can no longer be taken much further.
Gamer's have,and still do, demand developers give them a realistic experience in certain styles of game. We don't really want to be Jak or Daxter, but an undercover cop like Max Payne or the pilot of an X Wing ala Rogue Leader ? Yes please ! In many cases, like Max Payne, realism equals a BBFC age rating and copious blood, violence and taboo subject. In terms of immersion the gamer is still really outside the game. But are we prepared for what total immersion could mean ?
The old VR style helmets are perhaps a sign of the future because they effectively "lock out" the outside world by making sure a gamer's field of vision does not leave the gameworld , and the only sound that is heard is again from the game world. But thats still not immersion, really. For true immersion you, the gamer, would have to truly believe you were part of a game. You'd want to fell the gun recoil in your hand, the wind as it blows, the hard ground beneath you feet, the impact of the bullets as the bad guys hit you......"er hang on" you're probably thinking once you read that last one. The ability to touch and feel is one that lets us know what is around us is real, if that could be replicated in games then immersion would become believable. It's not as completely daft as it sounds. Everything you feel is just nerves being stimulated by a kind of charge - surely some sort of technology could replicate that ? Even in dreams we can have the feeling of disorientation - that brief minute where we're not quite sure this is a dream........and that sudden coming awake. The way in which we wake from a dream is again caused by a process that could also be used to bring gamers out of a game - a new "game over".
Of course this would perhaps take things to far, the chances of people being unable to distinguish games from reality would increase, and maybe also the kind of games people would play. It's easy to kill people in GTA3 because thy're cartoons, realy, but a photorealistic immersive GTA game...... The knowledge that you'd feel an impact (obviously reduced) from a shot would completely change how shooting games would play in many cases. There could be a fear of being hit...and all of a sudden a game is generating emotions that are real. If you the world is believeable alongside its characters then its quite possible you'd care about them. Some could say this is sad, that caring for what would basically be pixels is a bit sad, but would it be different to the emotions people display for celebrities ? In most cases fans will never see their idol yet still like, care and display emotions towards them, when for the most part that celebrity is nothing more than an image on the screen, like a game character. Maybe the kind of experiences that make a brilliant game would be changed, for instance witnessing events in games or finding new areas which offered unique sounds and views, or new characters.
Maybe, just maybe, the reason why there is so little innovation nowadays is because the current form of gaming can no longer be taken much further.