The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
There's tonnes of ways to make a game realistic.
Photo realistic graphics was the most obvious one.
Animation and sound turned out to be pretty important too.
But that was never enough.
The most important thing was bringing a world to life.
Some games attempt this through tokenistic features like the odd birds and insects. Others use AI and simulation to create full societies and eco systems so as to immerse the player in a seemingly realistic world.
Still, as try as they might, there's still always one thing that lets them down. One small feature always makes everything look so static and artificial - a lack of wind.
Now before some smartarse comes up and points out wind in golf games, etc, I'm not talking about the simulated "effect" on ONE sinlge object, I'm talking about a wind as part of an artificial eco-system.
Play any realistic game. You'll see all these lovely trees and vegetation that look realistic, but look more like plastic models of trees rather than real trees, because they don't move naturally.
Now this isn't a rant, moaning at devellopers.
Wind is obviously VERY hard to model and animate, but if a develloper did pull it off, it would be very impressive.
Infact, wind would be the ace card that could make the new Zelda look fantastic! Cel Shaded games specialise in animation, and seeing Link's clothes, the grass, leaves, etc blowing in what could range from a mild breeze to a strong torrent with randomly varying directions could REALLY bring the game to life.
Wind is one of the reasons that the world looks so "random" and unpredictable- stops things from staying still.
Game worlds look very artificial without it.
Having said that, as impressive as wind effects might be, they might not be worth the processing power if it's at the expense of more important elements of the game.
Perhaps the sort of luxury we won't be needing until the next generation of consoles atleast...
Photo realistic graphics was the most obvious one.
Animation and sound turned out to be pretty important too.
But that was never enough.
The most important thing was bringing a world to life.
Some games attempt this through tokenistic features like the odd birds and insects. Others use AI and simulation to create full societies and eco systems so as to immerse the player in a seemingly realistic world.
Still, as try as they might, there's still always one thing that lets them down. One small feature always makes everything look so static and artificial - a lack of wind.
Now before some smartarse comes up and points out wind in golf games, etc, I'm not talking about the simulated "effect" on ONE sinlge object, I'm talking about a wind as part of an artificial eco-system.
Play any realistic game. You'll see all these lovely trees and vegetation that look realistic, but look more like plastic models of trees rather than real trees, because they don't move naturally.
Now this isn't a rant, moaning at devellopers.
Wind is obviously VERY hard to model and animate, but if a develloper did pull it off, it would be very impressive.
Infact, wind would be the ace card that could make the new Zelda look fantastic! Cel Shaded games specialise in animation, and seeing Link's clothes, the grass, leaves, etc blowing in what could range from a mild breeze to a strong torrent with randomly varying directions could REALLY bring the game to life.
Wind is one of the reasons that the world looks so "random" and unpredictable- stops things from staying still.
Game worlds look very artificial without it.
Having said that, as impressive as wind effects might be, they might not be worth the processing power if it's at the expense of more important elements of the game.
Perhaps the sort of luxury we won't be needing until the next generation of consoles atleast...
Page:
Sniper you ponce!
You knew EXACTLY what I meant! :-D
Alright then Mr Pedantic: When will we start seeing some wind effects?
You knew EXACTLY what I meant! :-D
Alright then Mr Pedantic: When will we start seeing some wind effects?
wind is invisible......
There's tonnes of ways to make a game realistic.
Photo realistic graphics was the most obvious one.
Animation and sound turned out to be pretty important too.
But that was never enough.
The most important thing was bringing a world to life.
Some games attempt this through tokenistic features like the odd birds and insects. Others use AI and simulation to create full societies and eco systems so as to immerse the player in a seemingly realistic world.
Still, as try as they might, there's still always one thing that lets them down. One small feature always makes everything look so static and artificial - a lack of wind.
Now before some smartarse comes up and points out wind in golf games, etc, I'm not talking about the simulated "effect" on ONE sinlge object, I'm talking about a wind as part of an artificial eco-system.
Play any realistic game. You'll see all these lovely trees and vegetation that look realistic, but look more like plastic models of trees rather than real trees, because they don't move naturally.
Now this isn't a rant, moaning at devellopers.
Wind is obviously VERY hard to model and animate, but if a develloper did pull it off, it would be very impressive.
Infact, wind would be the ace card that could make the new Zelda look fantastic! Cel Shaded games specialise in animation, and seeing Link's clothes, the grass, leaves, etc blowing in what could range from a mild breeze to a strong torrent with randomly varying directions could REALLY bring the game to life.
Wind is one of the reasons that the world looks so "random" and unpredictable- stops things from staying still.
Game worlds look very artificial without it.
Having said that, as impressive as wind effects might be, they might not be worth the processing power if it's at the expense of more important elements of the game.
Perhaps the sort of luxury we won't be needing until the next generation of consoles atleast...
Photo realistic graphics was the most obvious one.
Animation and sound turned out to be pretty important too.
But that was never enough.
The most important thing was bringing a world to life.
Some games attempt this through tokenistic features like the odd birds and insects. Others use AI and simulation to create full societies and eco systems so as to immerse the player in a seemingly realistic world.
Still, as try as they might, there's still always one thing that lets them down. One small feature always makes everything look so static and artificial - a lack of wind.
Now before some smartarse comes up and points out wind in golf games, etc, I'm not talking about the simulated "effect" on ONE sinlge object, I'm talking about a wind as part of an artificial eco-system.
Play any realistic game. You'll see all these lovely trees and vegetation that look realistic, but look more like plastic models of trees rather than real trees, because they don't move naturally.
Now this isn't a rant, moaning at devellopers.
Wind is obviously VERY hard to model and animate, but if a develloper did pull it off, it would be very impressive.
Infact, wind would be the ace card that could make the new Zelda look fantastic! Cel Shaded games specialise in animation, and seeing Link's clothes, the grass, leaves, etc blowing in what could range from a mild breeze to a strong torrent with randomly varying directions could REALLY bring the game to life.
Wind is one of the reasons that the world looks so "random" and unpredictable- stops things from staying still.
Game worlds look very artificial without it.
Having said that, as impressive as wind effects might be, they might not be worth the processing power if it's at the expense of more important elements of the game.
Perhaps the sort of luxury we won't be needing until the next generation of consoles atleast...
Page: