View Full Version : Photorealism vs Functional Graphics
I love photorealistic games, especially simulators. I've been dreaming of a photorealistic Thief-universe, where I would be pushed in the very first mission and hearing the door lock behind me and left to do whatever I could do in that world.
I never thought I would ever say this but ... I don't think a photorealistic environment would work. It would be too hard to see what kind of tool/button/lever works and which one is just for show. You would look for details which are exactly that... details. In all Thief games, you could see when something could be used because the graphics weren't good/realistic enough to lure you into the illusion that it was part of the environment. That made it easy... you simply found it and used it. If it's photorealistic, the chances for missing things would just increase, or not ?
I believe the technology is available (ie. Crysis) but not mainstream enough to make that as an "entry-level setup" with future highend-gear as medium/high options.... thinking of 3x 280's .... hmmmm.
Any thoughts?
Photorealism, though cool in it's own right, would create a need to build usable things to look different than the unusable, and I would hope it wouldn't increase the use of things like loot-glint and other sparkly or shiny effects or any "look-at-me!" devices from a distance. I don't know how hi-res textures can get and how hi-poly the terrain can get before lines-of-sight suffer, which is fine on the streets and inside buildings, but hurts our desire for rooftop action and City vistas.
Or they might not have to. In the spirit of being a thief and being confronted with a set of levers, I might as well try them. If nothing happens, fine. But I believe we would start to think differently. It would make the game slower = good. We would be more careful, explore deeper and longer. It --ahum-- might also mean that maps created for T4, won't have to be bigger than f.ex "Life of the Party" to give us the same impression of a large environment, or even bigger. In T2, you saw a hallway and you swiftly ran passed it without too much questions about the wall itself. With photorealistic walls... you will look for every square centimeter/inch just because you can. But I would probably do the very same thing in a church... knowing... somewhere here is a small button and when I find it, I'll get to the cellar. It would make me happy, knowing for the adventure that awaits me.
I think the vast rooftops are actually within the technological boundaries. The CryTec engine could pull of quite a lot of polygons on (in that time) a good system consisting of a Quad-cpu @ 3Ghz + 8800GTX and 4Gb highspeed ram. And it has been bypassed already with greater technology and better to come. I'm pretty confident that it will be able to do it. I'm just not sure what kind of engine they'll use. I heared the one from Tomb Raider and that should be above par than the T3-engine.
ZylonBane
08-16-2009, 06:58 PM
By the standards of the day when Thief came out, it WAS photorealistic. Most of the game's brush textures were created from photographic sources. That's why it had such a realistic, gritty aesthetic, as opposed to the stylized Disneyland aesthetic of Deadly Shadows.
This thread is a bunch of hand-wringing over nothing. Modern games have no problem communicating to the player what's usable and what isn't. Look at Half-Life 2 for an example-- that game trains the player pretty quickly what things are usable and what aren't. And it's smart enough not to litter the levels with things that look like they could be usable, but aren't.
More console and child's game trappings creating a nightmare vision of a spoiled Thief again.
ZylonBane
08-16-2009, 07:35 PM
more console and child's game trappings creating a nightmare vision of a spoiled thief again.
YOU SPEAKY tHE ENGLISH?!?
Zwhaaaabaggh?!!?!?!?
Yes. Informally I like to speak it.
lol
ZylonBane
08-16-2009, 08:08 PM
Yes. Informally I like to speak it.
Try doing so in complete sentences then, and knock off the half-assed Oracle of Delphi routine.
Wow! I'm flattered to have gotten such attention from you in all these years, and with veiled compliments, too.:eek:
Thief 4 has really made people tense! Alas, I gotta be me.
Get.
In.
By the standards of the day when Thief came out, it WAS photorealistic. Most of the game's brush textures were created from photographic sources. That's why it had such a realistic, gritty aesthetic, as opposed to the stylized Disneyland aesthetic of Deadly Shadows.
True, Deadly Shadows did have an "animated" style which ultimately failed. Nonetheless, T1/T2 did not have photo-realistic graphics. Photo-realistic graphics were not possible at that time in gaming. As much as I deeply love the graphics until this day, as they were the best artistically and technically possible for their time, they were not "photo-realistic", at least in regard to it's objective relationship.
More console and child's game trappings creating a nightmare vision of a spoiled Thief again.
YOU SPEAKY tHE ENGLISH?!?
Zylonbane, I do respect your opinion and agree with you most of the time. However, I recommend that you reserve your antagonization for those who are deserving of it. I mean seriously, don't you think jtr7 deserves more respect given all that he has given towards the betterment of THIEF? Surly you can direct your discontent in better ways (or at better targets ;)).
HungryHungryHippogriff
08-17-2009, 06:47 PM
I'd rather have a game's graphics shoot for stylized than photorealistic. This especially applies to Thief, where fan missions are such a huge part of it. Consider that, after ten years, people are still making fan missions for Thief 1 and 2. They are able to do that because those games are stylized enough that anyone can make a beautiful-looking structure without having to spend a thousand polygons per column.
In my opinion, Thief 4's graphics should only be as realistic as they need to be. They should feel free to be exaggerated, gritty, and, overall, not too up-tight over photorealism. Photorealism's just a fad in games, and it will pass, just like it did in painted art. Consider instead what applies best to Thief and the Thief experience. It's not about looking pretty, it's about exploring sprawling levels, taking multiple possible paths to the same destination and doing it all while trying to remain undetected.
I hope it takes me to another world that is very familiar but not really, surreal, otherworldy, and somehow feels like a parallel dimension, with anachronisms from several centuries, and a blend of fantasy, sci-fi, steampunk, with grittiness, all to create both a very tense atmosphere as well as a desire to steep in it, and affects the way I play the game just for the tension and pleasure of being in that universe, with a healthy sense of intelligent absurdity and appreciation for the arts, and all before the soundtrack heightens it to a level that forever makes an unbeatable experience in long-term memory...and spoils me again...
ToMegaTherion
08-18-2009, 05:54 AM
I generally like my fantasy games to be more artistic than realistic.
Davehall380
08-18-2009, 06:28 AM
Im not to concerned by graphics, though I would have to put preference over getting the sound and lighting right. If these things are put first, and the graphics second, im sure the game will be a success. A preference for graphics first might sell copies of the games but loses out to what is integral to the series.
P.S can everyone please, please, please stop the one-up manship on these forums? This is not a competition to see who has the most knowledge of thief/played the most/a reasonable claim to BEING garrett
I think that the average gamer isn't ready for true photorealistic visuals, because the entire, and I mean the entire world wont be 100% interactive. As a result, the uninteractive items become empty meshes once again and the whole "simulation" loses its grip on immersion. So, it's safer to keep our brains believe that we're living a believable gameworld where nothing sticks out as "exceptional photorealistic".
On another wish-list thread, I wrote that I'd love to have a remake of T1 and 2 with just updated graphics and 5.1 audio. Beside the audio-part, it's not a smart thing. Because I would simply keep comparing each and every spot/event with what I know of the original games. It just won't add.
But I keep myself telling this.... maybe some brilliant man/woman is sitting there at EM with such visual ideas that we taffers haven't thought of yet, they implement it and during the first review somewhere, it reads : "Taffers, sit down, because what you're about to read, will please you ! As simple as it sounds, but this graphics [to be filled out] is just mindblowing. It's unbelievable that noone else have thought of it. This alone is worth for all those hardcore players to go buy Thi4f!"
Hmmm, I make no sense.
imperialreign
08-18-2009, 05:22 PM
TBH, Thief wouldn't be Thief with photorealisitic textures . . .
Thing is - it would hurt the atmosphere and "tone" of the series' steampunk worlds by having such crisp, clean textures . . .
I mean, that brownish-red spot on those metal panels in the Hammerite church . . . is that rust, or blood? Y'know? I don't think such super-HD textures would contribute to the dark, foreboding, archaic and veiled atmosphere that Thief thrives on . . .
Sure, better quality textures are a must - but I for one would prefer T4 to not have that over-polished, glossy, candy-coated look and feel that the majority of modern FPS games have acquired - from CoD to Crysis and just about everything in between . . . except, maybe, STALKER.
Let the imagination fill in and the experience will be better.
And please! Somebody in the entertainment industry do something about the illusion-breaking inner glow that CG often has. Ambient light doesn't look like it's shining on surfaces, it looks like light is emitted by every pixel that isn't total or near black. Do something about the incorrect specular highlights that make so many textures look greasy, sweaty, and glossy, when they should look dusty and dry. It's one of those subliminal things that makes it seem a bit off, and fake looking. Frankly, most of the bump-mapping in some newer games is exaggerated to really show it off, while making surfaces look decrepit, pitted, crumbly, and ancient when it's not supposed to be as in a maintained or rich part of town. Subtlety is much more effective for most elements. The Hammerites wouldn't allow such aging and disrepair when good craft and the work of their hands is their highest form of worship. Keep the rot in the abandoned and neglected parts of The City, and the occasional areas that are due for repairs or replacement. The older titles had metals that were polished and smooth when it wasn't meant to be weathered and old, and they represented alloys that weren't cast-iron for most things.
ZylonBane
08-18-2009, 05:44 PM
Thing is - it would hurt the atmosphere and "tone" of the series' steampunk worlds by having such crisp, clean textures . .
Right, because in the real world, everything is crisp and clean. :scratch:
imperialreign
08-18-2009, 06:24 PM
Right, because in the real world, everything is crisp and clean. :scratch:
naw - what I meant was that the general "tone" of a game has a tendancy to define it's overall atmosphere and "feel" - and many times that visual tone plays hand-in-hand with the setting . . .
look at STALKER, for example, it has it's own style of visuals that really depict a lonely and decrepit atmosphere . . . a visual style that works perfectly for the game's setting and "tone."
Try not to read too far into things, Zylon, it's always lead to a lot of disagreements . . . if memory serves me correctly.
DarknessFalls
08-18-2009, 06:33 PM
And please! Somebody in the entertainment industry do something about the illusion-breaking inner glow that CG often has. Ambient light doesn't look like it's shining on surfaces, it looks like light is emitted by every pixel that isn't total or near black. Do something about the incorrect specular highlights that make so many textures look greasy, sweaty, and glossy, when they should look dusty and dry. It's one of those subliminal things that makes it seem a bit off, and fake looking.
Yeah, what is the deal with the inner-glow I'm seeing in games these days? Characters have a glowing outline around them and it's driving me nuts. I think the first time I saw it in a game was, ack, Thief 3. And now I feel like I'm possibly seeing it all over the place. Not sure if that's the glow you're referring to, but it seems nothing can be in shadows these days without a glowing outline surrounding it. We don't need training wheels whilst playing our video games.
And that glossy look to characters is bad, too. Dear EM... FIX IT!! ;)
Herr_Garrett
08-18-2009, 09:49 PM
Yeah, what is the deal with the inner-glow I'm seeing in games these days? Characters have a glowing outline around them and it's driving me nuts. I think the first time I saw it in a game was, ack, Thief 3. And now I feel like I'm possibly seeing it all over the place. Not sure if that's the glow you're referring to, but it seems nothing can be in shadows these days without a glowing outline surrounding it. We don't need training wheels whilst playing our video games.
And that glossy look to characters is bad, too. Dear EM... FIX IT!! ;)
I rather think jtr7 is referring to the fact that "modern" games (like Oblivion) look as if everything was built of LEGO bricks and then poured oil onto it.
Yeah. I don't know where DF's comment came from. I thought I was more specific. I also don't think if I had been understood that there was any call for snottiness.
Just make the textures dull and muted, grimy and dusty, except when it actually would be glossy and moist and have a sheen that reflects the light--an increase in light absorption, and broader specular highlights (a specific term I used before) on bricks, plasters, dirt, most rocks, and old metals.
Just make the textures dull and muted, grimy and dusty, except when it actually would be glossy and moist and have a sheen that reflects the light--an increase in light absorption, and broader specular highlights (a specific term I used before) on bricks, plasters, dirt, most rocks, and old metals.
Yeah, make it more realistic...:poke:
Photo-surrealistic, perhaps?...;)
Yep. Or make it an intentional and bold removal from reality, instead of looking like passing off a weak illusion (not that that was the design philosophy).
DarknessFalls
08-21-2009, 08:56 AM
Yeah. I don't know where DF's comment came from. I thought I was more specific. I also don't think if I had been understood that there was any call for snottiness.
Huh, not sure where that came from. I wasn't being snotty to you; I'm annoyed by games where objects or characters are unnaturally highlighted for my viewing pleasure, as if I need help in seeing them in shadows. You seemed to be commenting on multiple things, I thought I sucessfully knew what you were talking about with the inner-glow thing, but I guess not. I've apparently noticed something you haven't, or you don't care about the thing I'm talking about. Either way, you misunderstood me. I was being just as snotty to the industry as you were: Jtr7wrote: "And please! Somebody in the entertainment industry do something about the illusion-breaking inner glow that CG often has." If I get time some day, I'll try to post screenshots of what I'm talking about.
imperialreign
08-21-2009, 02:08 PM
surreal - that's what I was trying to spit out earlier . . .
The City, IMHO, should continue to have a very surreal look to it.
darkmagicasorseer
08-22-2009, 10:05 AM
Photorealistic is great but a labor to the developers thou, and may burn my rig if I played it 24/7... due to the huge demand in performance.
Hecateus
08-23-2009, 05:40 PM
'Photo-Surrealism' Painterly reality. These phrases pretty much sum up the look and feel of the mission briefings and movies we fell in love with. And those biased our thoughts of the in game graphics. The trick is to trick our brains into subconsciously fill in the details instead of consciously critique the details.
Yes! \o/
A bit more Dadaism and oddity would do nicely, too. Things that don't seem quite right but are a matter of fact in that world.
imperialreign
08-23-2009, 06:31 PM
They shoudl hire Dave McKean as a visual director :p
niiiice avatar imperialreign, very subtle, had to look twice before I realised it was there :thumb:
Davehall380
08-24-2009, 05:52 AM
Just make sure that annoying blue mist doesnt make a re-appearanc and im fine. Sod Constantine, Karras and Gamal, what about this strange, magical, all encompassing blue mist that seems to have permeated every noc and cranny?????
Herr_Garrett
08-24-2009, 10:01 AM
Just make sure that annoying blue mist doesnt make a re-appearanc and im fine. Sod Constantine, Karras and Gamal, what about this strange, magical, all encompassing blue mist that seems to have permeated every noc and cranny?????
A variation of Necrotic Mutox, specifically created by Karras as a "failsafe", that should his plans go awry, something should remain and bother generation of taffers endlessly, thus ensuring that Garrett would always be annoyed by this haunting reminder of... thingummy.
Did I just write that? :lol:
Anyway, you know the evil mastermind behind all this. It's called My-crow-soft, probably one of the Ancient Ones, who acts through his lesser emissary know as Ex-box.
Secondary
08-24-2009, 10:30 AM
well in a game like Thief you dont want photo realism, becauase there is a certain style to how the City looks, and how Garret looks for that matter. this style can look pretty real but you would want that lingering unreality to be noticable, if only just a little.
imperialreign
08-24-2009, 02:28 PM
niiiice avatar imperialreign, very subtle, had to look twice before I realised it was there :thumb:
thanks! blending in is what taffing is all about :p
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.