Advertisement
Epic expects photo-realism in a decade News
Xbox 360 News by Games Industry.biz
Epic's Tim Sweeney reckons games achieving graphical realism is not only "inevitable", but will happen in the next 10 to 15 years.
"We're only about a factor of a thousand off from achieving all that in real-time without sacrifices," Sweeney told Gamasutra. "So we'll certainly see that happen in our lifetimes; it's just a result of Moore's Law. Probably 10-15 years for that stuff, which isn't far at all."
To Sweeney, graphical realism consists of "completely realistic lighting with real-time radiosity, perfectly anti-aliased graphics, and movie-quality static scenes and motion". That paltry task can be tackled simply by sheer brute force computing power, said Sweeney. The real challenge, he argued, will be replicating realistic human intelligence and behaviour.
"A state-of-the-art game like the latest Half-Life expansion from Valve, Gears of War, or Bungie's stuff is extraordinarily unrealistic compared to a human actor in a human movie, just because of the really fine nuances of human behavior," he said.
"We simulate character facial animation using tens of bones and facial controls, but in the body, you have thousands. It turns out we've evolved to recognise those things with extraordinary detail, so we're far short of being able to simulate that."
Epic Games' Unreal Engine 3 continues to power the majority of this generation's games, and the studio has been equally successful with the Gears of War series on PC and Xbox 360.
Head over to our Gears of War 2 review to see what it's all about.
Advertisement
Are you excited about Gears of War 2 on Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Thanks!
Related Games
Gears of War
Gears of War 2
Latest Features
-
Gears of War Interview [104]
-
Gears of War Interview [27]
-
Gears of War Review [235]
-
Gears of War Review [815]
-
Gears of War First Impressions [125]
Latest Videos
Gears of War - Top 5 achievements [3] 21 October, 2008
Gears of War - Annex mode [1] 10 April, 2007
Latest News
-
Next Gears may be on next-gen consoles [54]
-
The Rock to play Fenix in Gears film? [65]
-
Gears film "looking incredibly good" [43]
-
Epic reveals 10-year plan for Gears [117]
-
Wiseman wants to film Gears trilogy [72]
Latest Screenshots
3 May, 2007 [4]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
0
"It will make games look alike even more. "
That would be awesome, maybe by then we can drop the "oooh it looks so good" dated shit, and focus on the gameplay/plot. It's something like the movie industry, up until a dacade or two ago ppl used special effects and tech thresholds to measure movies, now, it's a given... nobody cares about that. So, it will be good. The next step. |
|
RedSparrows
26/05/09 @ 10:54
0
I hope not, I don't cope well with ultra realistic gore. I don't wanna play a WW2 game and see if 'photorealistic' wounds ;(
|
|
0
To Sweeney, graphical realism consists of "completely realistic lighting with real-time radiosity, perfectly anti-aliased graphics, and movie-quality static scenes and motion". That paltry task can be tackled simply by sheer brute force computing power, said Sweeney. The real challenge, he argued, will be replicating realistic human intelligence and behaviour.
Nope, the real challenge will be securing investment to pay for the army of already underpaid artists you'll need, whilst trying not to forget about the actual gameplay.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 12:01
|
|
0
Graphics are no longer the important part of a game to me - nowadays I'm much more interested in innovation/experimentation in control systems, online features and physics/environments...
As Nintendo have shown, winning the graphics arms race doesn't automatically mean your console will sell best. (Having said all that I do lurrrrrve playing Crysis because it's so damn pretty...)
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 12:09
|
|
makeamazing
26/05/09 @ 12:08
0
If you just look at games 10-20 years ago, the move forward has been amazing. So even though I dont want to accelerate to my old age, I cant wait to see what computers can do in that time.
|
|
0
Do all films look the same? No. It's all photo realistic, but art direction sets them apart.
Same with games, and just because it is possible won't automatically mean you'll see more stylized approaches disappear. Exactly. Nothing wrong with photo-realism as such. Realistic graphics don't mean a game can't have artistic value, just as stylisation per se doesn't mean anything one way or the other. Complaining about photo-realism as one goal in graphics technology is rather narrow-minded - apart from the fact that, artistic debate aside, it's technically fascinating. Although I agree that I wish we'd make similarly quick progress in other areas like NPC interaction. |
|
kangarootoo
26/05/09 @ 12:57
0
"Nope, the real challenge will be securing investment to pay for the army of already underpaid artists you'll need, whilst trying not to forget about the actual gameplay."
Hehehe, spot on. He never actually mention photo-realistic in the entire interview. He was referring to visual fidelity, including things like lighting but also referring to realism in animation. EG just boiled that down to "photo-realism", resulting in understandable posts like; "Yay! It's photo-realistic! Oh No! It's still running at 20 fps!" and "Photo-realism is a nice enough target, but I still like it when my games look like something you don't see in the real world. Good luck to them though." I'm sure Tim is aware of those sorts of issues. The full gamasutra interview is ten large pages long. |
|
BadBoyBonner
26/05/09 @ 13:03
0
After looking at these images
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6751/... http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1004/0004... That come from a game engine that came out in 2007 IMO its more than reasonable to expect photo realism isn't more than 15 years away. Arguably at times Cryengine2 already looks photo-realistic (depending on how you have your brightness/contrast/gama set) with everything else set to max. More so if you're running the CCC 2.21 tweaks - so what you'll be able to run on a PC in 10 years time is mind boggling. |
|
PearOfAnguish
26/05/09 @ 13:11
0
The full gamasutra interview is ten large pages long.
And really interesting, most of it is discussing the early days of Epic when they were making shareware. |
|
kangarootoo
26/05/09 @ 13:46
0
"but I hope he realizes that the least important part of achieving visual fidelity is the screen resolution... "
He certainly seems to. And BadBoyBonner, undeniably impressive as those screens are, moving human characters are far harder to make seem realistic than static environments. |
|
BadBoyBonner
26/05/09 @ 14:09
0
Kanga
In my defence they're not static and all vegetation can be moved - one of the the games USP's Obviously the more realistic a human/animal looks the more prominent any animation that's less than perfect is. The facial mo-cap in Heavy Rain will no doubt be industry standard within a few years - Heavenly Sword didn't do bad in that department either! Obviously building animations of such quality procedurally with perfect lip-synch is where we are heading. Like Tim said it's all about the tools - then all you need is a slider for angrier etc - heck - eventually it will be able to guess from the tone/volume/speed etc on how it should look 90~% of the time. Looking at what Valve managed with the facial animation in Source - I wouldn't be surprised if they aren't feverishly working on an update along those lines as we speak. EDIT - and for all those that are curious - only thing I could find with any decent amount of human animation in Crysis (don't forget to click the HQ button) Not too bad but the animation is some way short of the graphics. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3cozt_... And the person who filmed this seems to have brightness way too high as obviously when they jump out of the plane is the dead of night - I am sure moonlight would not provide that level of illumination - hence the game telling you to engage night vision.
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 15:18
|
|
kangarootoo
26/05/09 @ 14:18
0
"Looking at what Valve managed with the facial animation in Source"
Yeah, I was surprised to see Tim using HL2 as an example in the way he did, as I thought the facial nuances in HL2 were extraordinarily life life, and really it was the usual stuff like textures and polys that made it look less than real. I take your point on the trees and vegetation. It was clearly a stunning couple of scenes. I was just making specific ref to humanoid movement as that was the focus of Tim's comments. Whether humanoid realism is key to a great game experience is a different matter and on that we might agree. For example, I found the environments in Oblivion to be very immersive (not the most realistic pixel for pixel, but rich and vast). The awkward humanoids common in Bethesda's games by comparison look mildly ridiculous, but I find they have less of an effect on my overall absorbtion than the rolling hills and blue sky so on (same with STALKER as it happens).
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 15:22
|
|
kangarootoo
26/05/09 @ 14:20
0
P.s. maybe that is why I found FO3 less absorbing, as the landscapes just weren't as appealing as those of OBl.
|
|
0
"It's interesting how an ancient game like Prince of Persia managed to produce more convincingly animated humans 20 years ago than most modern games do now. With a three colour sprite."
Part of the secret is that PoP was in 2D and thus less complex. IMO technology can be considered at least as much of a hindrance to gaming's progress as a benefactor. Before developers had actually mastered to make convincing 2D worlds, they moved on to the even more complex 3D worlds. Leading amongst others to the camera issues that still haven't been solved today. Increased screen resolution is just such a hindrance. Developers couldn't make convincing SD graphics but moved on to HD resolutions anyway, leading to an excessive amount of the consoles' powers being directed to pushing lots of pixels while they aren't required for increased graphical fidelity at all. It's like an infant that's not even able to hold his balance while walking moving on to trying to ride a bicycle without the training wheels attached... |
|
BadBoyBonner
26/05/09 @ 14:57
0
Domovoi
Prince of Persia was Rotoscoped like a lot of early Disney footage (with exactly the same animation repeated in several Disney moves) For Prince of Persia "Fortunately, some white pajamas, a camcorder and a little brother who was willing to knock himself around a bit in the name of entertainment gave Mechner enough to create the game's ground-breaking animations through the process of "rotoscoping," which involves drawing over each frame of a live-action video sequence in order to create realistic animated movement. It may not look like much now, but 18 years ago that kind of smooth, flowing animation was absolutely jaw-dropping. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vie... Here's part of the original reference video used to create the animations with the "actual prince" ! lol http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/22330 |
|
0
How about we get some gameplay in there rather than banging on about graphics?
Or at least some sodding colours. Desaturation != realism. I'm sort of guessing the list of employee benefits for epic run as "health insurance, pension scheme, free dental care and 1 pair grey-lensed glasses mandatory clothing for all artists". |
|
BadBoyBonner
26/05/09 @ 15:00
0
Disney recycled rotoscoped animations that appear in many different films
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzyLZYYb2qk Edit and some comparison images http://www.hemmy.net/2006/04/26/disney-a...
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 16:01
|
|
BadBoyBonner
26/05/09 @ 15:17
0
I think you're looking through rose tinted glasses.
PoP doesn't stand up very well - great for it's time - but hardly much to get excited about these days. I'd say the characters in many games such Heavy Rain and Heavenly Sword are much more impressive and fully 3D. |
|
0
The thing with old games is that they are a lot further away from realistic therefore your imagination does much more work so it seems more realistic.
At some point though unless middleware progresses massively were going to see generational splits with most companies producing games far from the top end in graphical terms, with only a couple of companies producing games that still stress or push the hardware. |
|
hiddenranbir
26/05/09 @ 18:04
0
This is why games are shorter and with less 'stuff'. Too much time spent on TEXTURES.
Why not use all this state of the art, high RAM, multi core time to make game worlds more fulfilling, perpetually going about its worldly grind.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 26/05/09 @ 19:06
|
|
0
"The thing with old games is that they are a lot further away from realistic therefore your imagination does much more work so it seems more realistic."
The paradox of increased realism: The more unreality approaches reality, the more it sticks out. On the one hand it's incredible that developers are stupid enough to keep trying to approach it (probably explained by the lack of creativity). On the other hand, apparently there's a huge market for those failed results. |
|
AphoticCosmos
26/05/09 @ 21:52
0
Meh, now that we're approaching this kind of graphic realism, the question must be asked - is it actually wanted/needed? If we're basically just playing another iteration of real life, then we're losing some of the escape factor of videogames. Even with the best-looking graphics in games today, like Crysis Warhead, Gears of War and such, we can still distinguish it from reality subconsciously because it's on a whole different level of detail from the real world.
That said, I'd love to see Half-life 3 or whatever be photo-realistic [if 2 took 7 years, and it's taking them bloody ages to do an episode, I can only guess at the horrible wait time for HL3 :( ] |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
