Do we realy NEED better graphics after this gen?

Im just thinking that by the end of this gen we wil most probably see the CGI graphics they have promissed us for years and the graphical leap will be much less next gen then it was from last gen to this gen.

So my thoughts are that games should focus more on massive changing worlds, seemless changes, physics, large diversity of textures and mashes etc.

Because detailed textures and charracter models are a given now and is among the things any games MUST have now.

No don't bring up Oblivion again. Sure its big, but not seemless, lots of repetative textures, mashes and sounds.

I never really thought too much into graphics.  PS3's cell will really shine with better AI processing, sound processing, all the issues that aren't as evident as graphic yet play a big part of the game.

When Killzone was shown, everyone thought "great graphics" but I knew that it's not the graphics that was great, it was the individual AI action and speech.  Though can't say it is for real but that is the plan. 

I love graphics. I find graphics more innovative than Wiimote.

Im just thinking that by the end of this gen we wil most probably see the CGI graphics they have promissed us for years and the graphical leap will be much less next gen then it was from last gen to this gen.

So my thoughts are that games should focus more on massive changing worlds, seemless changes, physics, large diversity of textures and mashes etc.

Because detailed textures and charracter models are a given now and is among the things any games MUST have now.

No don't bring up Oblivion again. Sure its big, but not seemless, lots of repetative textures, mashes and sounds.

trasherhead

CGI improves too and it will take a lot of time or won't happen at all that animation would be that fluid in games as seen in CGI movies.

I personally think we hit our peak with the SNES. We realy didn't need better graphics after that.

Have we ever really NEEDED better graphics? No, not really.

Do you WANT better graphics and can we BENEFIT? Thats a yes on at least one count. 

im impressed with the graphics of this gen and i wouldnt mind if they stayed that way for many years.

gears of war,crysis,mgs4,lair and mass effect are beautiful games

Of course. CGI keeps getting better. TarmacChris

Yeah, the jump between Toy Story and Meet the Robinsons was huge :roll:

Seriously, Jurassic Park came out in 1993. It looks great. Games will eventually (soon) hit a realism barrier. 

[QUOTE="TarmacChris"]Of course. CGI keeps getting better. Boba_Fett_3710

Yeah, the jump between Toy Story and Meet the Robinsons was huge :roll:

Seriously, Jurassic Park came out in 1993. It looks great. Games will eventually (soon) hit a realism barrier. 

Que? Did you just compare Pixar to a yucky Disney animated flick? (Meet the Robinsons was made by Disney not Pixar. Disney distributes Pixar's films but Pixar is the one who makes them.)

Cars definetly looks better then Toy Story. Pixar has improved its animation greatly with every film. Its the competitors that suck.

Yes, we need more.... MORE.....MORE

MORE!!

Of course. Crysis is already showing the way for consoles of the next generation. It's basically all guns a blazing until we hit photo realism.Danm_999

I personally think we hit our peak with the SNES. We realy didn't need better graphics after that.

 

Bread_or_Decide

Ocarina of Time is not a 2D game, it defined what 3D action adventures should be, we still needed 3D games i mean Mass Effect in 2D?

We're nowhere close. 1080p sets don't even have a high enough resolution to trick the eye into believing they're looking at reality rather than an image on a set. There have been some articles published on the subject, display technology won't even be to the point where a high-end set could display an image indisguishable from real life until 2034, and the graphics technology required to render real time lifelike graphics at those resolutions is quite a few generations off.

We have a long ways to go when it comes to making human characters who look realistic without hitting the uncanny divide - that means more powerful AI, more powerful motion systems, more powerful graphics and physics hardware. We need to improve interface systems - the Wii simplifies them, but this is a step in the wrong direction - we need something more precise than a mouse, more comfortable than dual  analog, and more accurate than motion sensitivity - probably an evolution of dual-analog controls mixed with haptics (improved force feedback and touch sensitivity - fully analog buttons of the future)

 We have a *looooooooong* ways to go with graphics technology. We're not going to lay down and stop just because we migh reach Toy Story graphics (barely and not really) a generation later than we were supposed to. I don't think we'll really see a Toy Story the game that looks as good as the movie until the eight generation of consoles (PS4, Xbox 720, Nintendo Poo). Just look at Crysis, hardware has only advanced about 18 months since the PS3 and Xbox 360 were slated to come out as high-mid PCs, and Crysis is noticeably better. But it's not photoreal - it looks CGI, things will keep making those leaps, and ultimately it's going to be our TV sets and sound systems that are going to have to upgrade every generation now too.

Yes, we most certainly need better graphics.  Let's look at the term: "video" game.  It implies an audio/ visual experience.  As the art - of gaming - evolves, much like film, we should expect larger budgets, greater scope and visual effects than were possible before. 

That's what separates the old "King Kong" movie from the new one.  Without the auditory/ visual experience, we might as well be reading a book.  Don't get me wrong, I love to read, but I don't understand the point of investing in gaming for a sub-par experience.  Coincidentally, this is why I have an aversion to the Wii.  Graphics do matter.  Think old King Kong and new. Rent the two and compare if you need to understand my analogy better. While Faye Ray was kinda hot, that's about all the movie has going for itself.  It has none of the compassion, engrossing storyline or atmosphere (generated signifigantly by CGI) of the most recent remake (there were a few more iterations of Kong over the years, but let's not talk about them). 

Graphics do matter.  Death to the Wii. 

Cheers,

-C 

You could say this about every-gen.

I'd say give it another 20 years and we will have reached the limit of graphics. 

However i don't think we will get ffx fmv quality in-game graphics this year,not even killzone 2 or crysis looks as good as those fmv's.

OMFG!

Did she really just ask that!

After all the crap with the Wii right now, and the fact that many people asked the same question last gen, because they actually thought graphics were about as good as they were going to get and we didn't need better graphics to really enjoy games or that better graphics couldn't offer anything to improve the gaming experience, blah blah blah!

I cannot believe she just asked that!

 

OMFG!

Did she really just ask that!

After all the crap with the Wii right now, and the fact that many people asked the same question last gen, because they actually thought graphics were about as good as they were going to get and we didn't need better graphics to really enjoy games or that better graphics couldn't offer anything to improve the gaming experience, blah blah blah!

I cannot believe she just asked that!

 

freeload

Im guessing that your one of those how will take graphics over story and gameplay anyday.

Im just thinking that by the end of this gen we wil most probably see the CGI graphics they have promissed us for years and the graphical leap will be much less next gen then it was from last gen to this gen.

So my thoughts are that games should focus more on massive changing worlds, seemless changes, physics, large diversity of textures and mashes etc.

Because detailed textures and charracter models are a given now and is among the things any games MUST have now.

No don't bring up Oblivion again. Sure its big, but not seemless, lots of repetative textures, mashes and sounds.

trasherhead

They may max out how good a character model can look, but thats not enough. I won't be satisfied until I can have 200,000 perfectly rendered CGI-cutscene looking character models, with individual AI, textures, flying past eachother at 2000 miles per hour at 60 FPS without missing a beat, while huge explosions and flashing lighting effects strobe all around them. Getting to where game graphics mimic reality will take several more generations (if it ever happens), and getting to where games surpass reality is where we need to be going. 100% photorealistic graphics, thousands of people in a huge deathmatch moving at the pace of the Unreal Tournament games. 

YES!

/thread 

Depends on your defintion of "need."

Anyhow, with that being said, I would have to say "yes," if only for fact that progession of CG movie technology shows that graphics have, can and will improve.

Also, progression and change has always been one of the constants in the business - I do not why things would, all of the sudden, after 40 years in the gaming business, change?

My only problem with it is how will devolopers/publishers be able to handle rising cost of devolopment? Where will this lead to? More expensive games? Lower quanity of games? Lower amount of length?

Depends on your defintion of "need."

Anyhow, with that being said, I would have to say "yes," if only for fact that progession of CG movie technology shows that graphics have, can and will improve.

Also, progression and change has always been one of the constants in the business - I do not why things would, all of the sudden, after 40 years in the gaming business, change?

My only problem with it is how will devolopers/publishers be able to handle rising cost of devolopment? Where will this lead to? More expensive games? Lower quanity of games? Lower amount of length?