Realistic games? Waste of time.
Author
Hi, I just got this idea, I thought is worth sharing. Most 3D engines right now have one goal: make the graphics as realistic as possible. If technology develops as fast as it does now, in a couple of years 3D accelerators will be able to render enormous amounts of polygons, and this goal will be achieved. Although it will take a lot more time to design games and produce content for them, it''s still possible. But there is one little question... Why bother? A good game should take a player to its own world, a world different then the real world. Great graphics are necessary for this, no doubt, but why the hell do they try to make it look as close to the real thing as possible?! Try watching cartoons that are generated by 3D programs, they don''t require real time rendering, and the graphics kick ass, but they suck compared to the hand-drawn cartoons. So why not make the games FUN, and make technology support the game play, not the opposite, where game play supports technology? The first example that comes to my mind is Starcraft. Blizzard could make it 3D, and it would probably be pretty darn good, but why? If anyone has something to say about this, I''d really wanna see the responces.
Hey man, u''r right.. I don''t have much too say on this subject tho, but i do agree.
Later-
Nathan S.
Dira Interactive
Later-
Nathan S.
Dira Interactive
With the exception of simulators, I agree that visual realisim is not as important as some designers seem to think. Would tetris _gameplay_ benifit from alpha-transparent, motion-blurred, dynamically lighted 3d graphics? Not appreciably.
There are so many interesting visual asthetics that could be explored in games. Photorealism is just one. You mention cartoons. What about a game that looks like claymation, or how about some monty-python animations? Although I never really played the game, I like the way parapa the rappa was done. Those little 2d guys, in a 3d world!
How about a game set in a cubist painting, like the recent chilli peppers music video?
- genovov
Edited by - genovov on 2/25/00 1:37:17 PM
There are so many interesting visual asthetics that could be explored in games. Photorealism is just one. You mention cartoons. What about a game that looks like claymation, or how about some monty-python animations? Although I never really played the game, I like the way parapa the rappa was done. Those little 2d guys, in a 3d world!
How about a game set in a cubist painting, like the recent chilli peppers music video?
- genovov
Edited by - genovov on 2/25/00 1:37:17 PM
The reason why everyone tries to make graphics as realistic as possible is that it is really hard to do at interactive speed right now, and if you succeed you really show that you''re good at what you''re doing.
When we come to the point where it is not hard to do anymore, I think we''re going to see more creative minds, that instead try to capture the feel of cartoons etc.
When we come to the point where it is not hard to do anymore, I think we''re going to see more creative minds, that instead try to capture the feel of cartoons etc.
But being good at doing semi-realistic graphics at interactive speeds doesn''t mean you''ll make a good game. I see your point though.
I think it would be really cool to see a game that not only had cartoon graphics, but cartoon physics! Like you can run off a cliff and fall only when you look down. Or pull an anvil out of nowhere, and drop it on your opponent, who then has to stick his thumb in his mouth and blow to re-inflate!
That would be fun!
- genovov
I think it would be really cool to see a game that not only had cartoon graphics, but cartoon physics! Like you can run off a cliff and fall only when you look down. Or pull an anvil out of nowhere, and drop it on your opponent, who then has to stick his thumb in his mouth and blow to re-inflate!
That would be fun!
- genovov
Oooh, I think EXACTLY like you! I always thought "If games are your own little world, then why does it have to be realistic?" I mean, someday I wanna even write a game with it''s own physics! And cartoon games are my personal goal. (Perhaps because I''m young and my Siblings keep the tube on Nickelodeon 24/7.) I mean, my "Dream Game" is about five cartoon Christmas lights! I also think humour is something missing from most games. (Or at least platformers, the only thing I play.) Heehee, think Pinky and the Brain Humour/Weirdness + Video Game . Whoah, I''m on a pointless rant again. Bye.
--BugSquash
Taeloid!
--BugSquash
Taeloid!
Kill,
I definately agree with the "why not make the games FUN" bit and you''re probably right about 3D accelerators being able to render ultra realistic graphics in the future. But the future of computergames can take an alternate path like Virtual Reailty. If games reach this level of technology, the gamer wold rather be immersed in a game where the surroundings are realistic rather than seemingly realistic. Imagine being in the middle of a intergalactical war or even being James Bond. Even if games don''t reach Virtual Reality, commercialism will point the finger at spectacular game visuals every time. After all, its hard to market the gameplay without the player actually playing the game, or taking someones word for it, while graphics catches the eye immediately. I agree with what you said about making games fun, but people like to see things that look good...
I definately agree with the "why not make the games FUN" bit and you''re probably right about 3D accelerators being able to render ultra realistic graphics in the future. But the future of computergames can take an alternate path like Virtual Reailty. If games reach this level of technology, the gamer wold rather be immersed in a game where the surroundings are realistic rather than seemingly realistic. Imagine being in the middle of a intergalactical war or even being James Bond. Even if games don''t reach Virtual Reality, commercialism will point the finger at spectacular game visuals every time. After all, its hard to market the gameplay without the player actually playing the game, or taking someones word for it, while graphics catches the eye immediately. I agree with what you said about making games fun, but people like to see things that look good...
Only one application of a extermely realistic graphics engine: Eye-Candy.
. This doesn''t mean it shouldn''t be a goal woth achieving to me. In-engine cut-scenes would be a good use, saving memory, allowing for higher resolutions, and allowing for different characters to appear in the same or nearly the same scene depending on the situation. Also some games that lend themselves toward the "artsy" side and could benefit from a highly souped up engine.
. Still, I do have to agree that other types of rendering should be pursued. For example, many people want to accelerate 2D, especially alpha-blending, but can''t do it with DirectDraw. An engine that did this, plus possibly vector shape rendering, would be widely embraced.
Those are just a few of my ideas. How about everyone else?
. This doesn''t mean it shouldn''t be a goal woth achieving to me. In-engine cut-scenes would be a good use, saving memory, allowing for higher resolutions, and allowing for different characters to appear in the same or nearly the same scene depending on the situation. Also some games that lend themselves toward the "artsy" side and could benefit from a highly souped up engine.
. Still, I do have to agree that other types of rendering should be pursued. For example, many people want to accelerate 2D, especially alpha-blending, but can''t do it with DirectDraw. An engine that did this, plus possibly vector shape rendering, would be widely embraced.
Those are just a few of my ideas. How about everyone else?
oh man, what i wouldn''t give for 2d accelerated alpha blending.
i could do it with d3d but all i want is alpha blending and i gotta init all that crap just to get it. bleh.
i could do it with d3d but all i want is alpha blending and i gotta init all that crap just to get it. bleh.
Yay! Finaly some people agree with me.
I''m in the process of making an engine that draws cartoon characters over a 3D frame. The character is drawn by hand, not the computer so you can get effects like Bart Simpson''s hair. (Or Lisa''s for that matter)
When I was talking to some other programmers at my work about it, they were asking me, "Why do you want to do that? There''s engines out there already." I tried to explain that it''d make the game different and give it a different feel but they''re morons, they thought I was wasting my time.
E:cb woof!
I''m in the process of making an engine that draws cartoon characters over a 3D frame. The character is drawn by hand, not the computer so you can get effects like Bart Simpson''s hair. (Or Lisa''s for that matter)
When I was talking to some other programmers at my work about it, they were asking me, "Why do you want to do that? There''s engines out there already." I tried to explain that it''d make the game different and give it a different feel but they''re morons, they thought I was wasting my time.
E:cb woof!
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
