How long before games look photo-realistic?

[Ohji]

Computer games have definitely come a long way from the CGA Sierra adventures I used to play. As amazing as today's games look, I feel that there is still a noticeable "flatness" and blockiness to environments and characters.

I admit to knowing almost nothing about the CPU/GPU requirements of creating a given level of image quality in a game, so I wonder if any of you out there know how far away we are technology-wise to having more real-world looking graphics. The things I notice most are 1) textures applied to rocks, floors or walls that look sort of flat (i.e. the ground has a green/brown pattern instead of actual blades of grass, plants, or little divots in the soil) and 2) being able to see the polygons that make up characters, trees, etc.

Whenever I watch a Pixar movie, I find myself wishing we could have graphics like that in modern games -- I know Pixar-level graphics are eons away, but I wonder if R600 or G80 will be enough to provide a significant improvement in depth and smoothness in computer games.

Any thoughts?

 

[blackrain]

I would also like to know the same thing

 

[allies]

Well, from the Crytek video I saw, it's getting pretty darn close. DX10 is gonna be sweet for computer games.

 

[MX2]

Give it 2 - 5 to become truly photo realistic and optimized I would think

 

[0roo0roo]

i think longer. the closer u get, the harder it is to gain just that much more. we are very good at spotting when things don't quite look right... uncanny valley and all that

 

[diablo900t]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i think longer. the closer u get, the harder it is to gain just that much more. we are very good at spotting when things don't quite look right... uncanny valley and all that

Along with this I think the more realistic something is (i.e. take a game like Madden on the 360) the more apt we are to notice the imperfections in its performance (animations). When you've got something like a Pixar movie thats been so refined, you have x number of scenes to work with, whereas a game you may have thousands of animations per model, so there's going to be some recycling going on.

 

[Ohji]

Originally posted by: allies
Well, from the Crytek video I saw, it's getting pretty darn close. DX10 is gonna be sweet for computer games.

Wow. I just downloaded that vid -- hadn't seen it before. Sadly, I've heard not to expect any DirectX 10 games until about a year after its release, so I guess we're 18+ months away from seeing anything like that available in stores...

 

[Sunrise089]

I think a long time. Look at the fairly low quality difference between a game like FEAR and Half Life 2, and the huge increase in system demands. I think that's a trend we will see continue.

 

[Stu L Tissimus]

We won't see photorealistic graphics for a long time. We'll have to wait until there are video cards on the market that can do real-time raytracing functions. The chip architecture required to do this is entirely different from what we have now.

(Raytracing is, basically, a simulation of the way that light works in real life. It's what mod teams and such use when they're showing off renders.)

 

[bamacre]

We are a LONG ways away from "photo-realistic" gaming. Not just from hardware requirements, but from a developer's POV as well. What kind of rigs do you think were used to develop the movie Final Fantasy? An 8-cpu system just for the chick's hair.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: diablo900t

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i think longer. the closer u get, the harder it is to gain just that much more. we are very good at spotting when things don't quite look right... uncanny valley and all that

Along with this I think the more realistic something is (i.e. take a game like Madden on the 360) the more apt we are to notice the imperfections in its performance (animations). When you've got something like a Pixar movie thats been so refined, you have x number of scenes to work with, whereas a game you may have thousands of animations per model, so there's going to be some recycling going on.

yea pretty much, art/design budgets are only gonna grow so far, they've already gotten huge with todays complex games. cg movies already cheat by only designing/rendering the bits seen from the camera angle decided before hand..not an option for games.

 

[Budarow]

We're talking 10 more years (based on some estimates of some big shot game developers) at today's rate of HP increases (i.e., 2x every 12-15 months), but I think 3 more FULL generations (not "refreshes") and the games should look pretty darn impressive.

 

[MNOB07]

dedicated physics processing (AGEIA PhysX Processor, PPUs) would be a good step forward:

http://www.flowlines.info/rndreel.html