when will we start to see better graphics and ray tracing ?

[garyfl]

yeah some of your points are interesting, gameplay is what immerses me, like some crappy ai's you get like in farcry and stalker, hiding in a bush but still getting pot shotted.its just not realistic, i could actually deal with todays graphics if games really did hadle like real life.

even things like in gta, when your in a helicoptor and you get so high and the view distance goes way out and you see empty roads and floating lights and lego buildings, it just COULD be so much better.

things like sound too. youl be in a bunker and right next to you you can hear grass rustling in the wind, which in real life terms, if your in a building undergroud, you CANNOT hear the outside. sound itself hasnt really undergone any development. we need immersive realistic 3d sound.

must admit though! tesselation has played a HUGE part for me, it adds such a deeper depth to realism, objects dont appear polygonated and have a more rounded rugged loook to them. its greatly improved water too.

 

[silversurfer]

immersion is not realism

I think I would be scared of a photo realistic first person shooter

Perception does not require realism, ie. people will believe anything in the moment
If you can give someone brief confirmation even a second or less that their worst fear is apparent, you offically have a scary game even if 5 seconds later its obvious it was a cartoon or whatever

Photo realism might help but its not really about that, you want an unfocused feeling that overwhelms their person suddenly and completely if possible

I thought Doom was pretty scary, only a few games since have done as well in a similar way

tesselation has played a HUGE part for me

dx11? in which game would that be. Polygons are definitly the future I reckon


Ps3 can do realtime raytracing. Ive seen at least one demo of it though not exactly a game it was pretty impressive use of all those seperate processing units it has. Not sure if it was one machine or several linked but its certainly possible

Keifer 32 core intel chips were scheduled long ago to be released round about now. I guess there is not enough money in the game to make it worth their while just yet but I can imagine home computers becoming super scaled at some point and bringing seemingly impossible calculations into real time

 

[Naffa]

I hadn't heard of ray tracing until now. After reading some of these posts, I started having a scout around YouTube, and found this:

 

[Alex74]

I hadn't heard of ray tracing until now. After reading some of these posts, I started having a scout around YouTube, and found this:

 

[barmyllama]

According to Nvidia we won't see ray tracing for at least ten years.

Click here

 

[Worthy]

I doubt we will for a very long time (if ever), it's not worth it because development time and costs would sky rocket.

This. I don't think we'll progress much further graphically. Not at the same speed it's rocketed in the past decade anyways.

 

[Naffa]

Note the number of CPU cores there, just for that

Yeah, that was what one of the ''s was for.

 

[NZXT30]

soon hopefully

 

[arknor]

I think its costs that are holding back these things rather than dev talent.

not when some games companies spend upto 4x the games costs to make on advertising :S

why do this? i could go make a thread on every gaming forum about the game with some fairly detailed info and get exposure where it matters for peanuts

 

[Rroff]

I don't think its as far off as people think.

Depends on the level of raytracing complexity used... but for simple lighting with limited radiosity and no caustics, etc. you can get 60fps @ 640x480 with fairly low end (75MHz) but specialized hardware. I had a play with similiar purely done in software and it struggled to manage 5fps at 640x480 on a quad core CPU.

One of the video game development forums I hang out on some people have been playing with a "hacked" up "fake" raytracing solution that can do 16-30fps at 800x600 with reflections, refraction, etc. as well - does well enough for video game use.

 

[Shamikebab]

not when some games companies spend upto 4x the games costs to make on advertising :S

why do this? i could go make a thread on every gaming forum about the game with some fairly detailed info and get exposure where it matters for peanuts

Really? And what percentage of the massive game sellers (COD, GTA, Wii Fit etc) populate a forum?

 

[arknor]

your question makes no sense....

i imagine that if you go back about 10 years or so they'd be saying similar things about "the next 5-10 years".

not really but in the last 5 years not much has really changed imo.

 

[bifday2k]

Saw this on Science of the Movies the other day, they certainly are getting a lot closer to real life likeness's these days, you can only just tell its not real if you look hard enough, or u know its not real, just glancing at it looks proper real.

http://gl.ict.usc.edu/Research/DigitalEmily/

 

[npjnpj]

I think it'll be a long, long time.

The last one or two years I've been wondering where the graphic development has gone, it seems to have slowed down to a crawl.

Several years back, every new game released a month or two after the previous jaw-dropper showed rapid graphical advancements.

I don't really see much of a difference between a now ageing game like Crysis and, say, Metro 2033 (just name one example at random, although it's not really applicaple because of different gaming environments, I know).

So, if I could see the rapid development of a few years ago, I'd say photorealistic graphics wouldn't be that far away, but now? I don't think so.

Probably got to do with friggin' consoles holding everything back again. Why can't they give those things decent processing power?

 

['Wes]

I think it's more of a challenge to balance good detail with good performance, which Crysis showed quite poorly. Far Cry 2 created a graphically successful environment but at a cost of a decent storyline.

It seems numerous game companies can't get the balance right and it would cost more to keep attempting to get that balance.

 

[arknor]

Probably got to do with friggin' consoles holding everything back again. Why can't they give those things decent processing power?

yea not a lot has really changed since pixel shaders added water and shiny surfaces....

games need moar parralax mapping , tesselation whatever make surfaces have depth ffs even high res photo realistic textures add little without the deception of depth

 

[orderoftheflame]

Ray tracing wont be anywhere close within the next decade.

 

[BunnyKillBot]

Who cares? What makes you think ray tracing and photo realism are necessary for a good gaming experience. We have seen enough brown-muddy 'realism' games to last a lifetime. Would team fortress 2 be better ray traced?

The more 'realistic' games get, the more we will see the uncanny valley emerge.

 

[Clarkson]

Probably got to do with friggin' consoles holding everything back again. Why can't they give those things decent processing power?

Not disputing the power of a very high end PC here, but in the case of the PS3 its not necessarily the consoles fault

Uncharted 2 showed what could be done if developers took better advantage of the PS3's combined CPU/GPU power. But as of yet it seems that only naughty dog have been able to do this, and other developers fail. So the problems aren't just on PC for 'under-achieving' developers.

And before any flame fest is started, I don't want to get into an arguement about PC smashing consoles or crysis smashing Uncharted or blah blah...but I think anybody sensible will admit (regardless of whether PC games can still do better than Uncharted), that the game is a great effort/achievement for a console so far.

So I think Devs are slacking in more than one area really.

 

[ubersonic]

The Amiga had ray tracing software in 1987 (Sculpt 3d ***), it kinda shows how slowly technology does move hehe

Edit: why the hell does the language filter keep blocking that? lol, wonder if they will ever fix it...