graphics coming of age
Beck
64's. We had tiny blocks of graphics which you could just make out an image
from. Jet Set Willy was made up of 50 or so pixels, and text adventure
games showed large blocks of colour which would vaguely resemble a cave,
field or shed.
Over the years, some of us have seen graphics go through various transitions
from 2D with 3 colours, to 3D with millions of colours.
But the changes occured gradually. One of the biggest noticable changes for
me, were the Sega Saturns Polygoned characters in the like of Virtua Cop and
Virtua Fighter. These are what prbably kicked off the excellently textured
models that we see in games today.
Sometimes I think to myself, "how can graphics improve, surely one day we
will reach the maximum and there can be no improvements". But things are
always changing, not due to just the graphics, but the programming skills.
Its all okay having up to date graphics chips in the consoles, but if you
have not got the skills of the programmers to utilise these graphics, it
will always be pointless.
The latest improvement I see in graphics is the use of light and shadow.
Take Splinter Cell for example, they used light and shade to an excellent
degree which gave the game special ambience. Some may disagree with that,
but its a personal thing as to what people see great in games.
With the next generation of consoles now in early development I wonder what
we can expect to see in the way of improvements. Greater use of light and
shade? More detailed environments?
To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of console
graphics?
Neil Hopkins
<beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of console
>graphics?
>
>
Realisticly rendered faces is probably the next big step - looking at
the Half Life 2 trailers gives a good indication of the possibilities.
--
Anya : "I provide much needed sarcasm"
Xbox live : neil hopkins
Note that there is an exclusive spam filter on this email address.
Let me know via this group if you want to be added to my whitelist.
Gorf
news:c083uc$7c6$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
Personally, I would like to see a more realistic simulation of everyday
physics in games. Think the Havok2 engine used in Max Payne 2 etc... but
also for the game characters as opposed to pre-modelled animations that are
used to day.
--
Jesus Saves! Passes to Moses, he shoot's... HE SCORES!!!
Nathan
> Sometimes I think to myself, "how can graphics improve, surely one day
> we will reach the maximum and there can be no improvements". But
> things are always changing, not due to just the graphics, but the
> programming skills. Its all okay having up to date graphics chips in
> the consoles, but if you have not got the skills of the programmers to
> utilise these graphics, it will always be pointless.
Well that's the thing. You could make a computer with enough graphical
power to be photorealistic, but how do you model photorealism?
I think at a peak, without going into the realms of 3d or holograms or
something (so just improving 3d cards basically) we could get a level of
gaming to be comparable to say, Final Fantasy: The Spirits within. No
loss in framerate and more polygons than you can shake a stick at.
Seeing as the big budget EA type games are more often than not
'photorealistic', in so far as they have real people (rather than monkeys
in balls) this is probably something people will try and attain.
But like you say, it's pointless. FF:TSW to me was pretty soul-less. I
think that certainly we have peaked with this method of displaying
graphics.
> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
> console graphics?
The next generation of consoles I think will basically just push more
polygons. This *will* make a difference as worlds will just have a
smoother framerate but can be much more detailed. I think lighting will
feature yes but with the above points in minds, it's just more of the
same. I'm not sure what technologies are being developed but the
generation *after* the next generation? There's only so much a TV can
display and it will get to the point where it seems pointless to just
keep adding polygons and lighting.
I'm curious to see what would happen after that point. Theoretically (I
don't know if I have this right) it could get to the point where there
are more polygons than there are pixels on screen, thus meaning that
you're only limited by what you model. So beyond that? Perhaps they'll
make use of more gimmicky stuff. One almost thinks that to develop
things further you would have to remove the constraits of the television.
Make a screen that wraps around you perhaps, make use of peripheral
vision.
Perhaps it'll just plug directly into our brains, and polygons will be
irrelevant as it's more about forcing hallucinations :)
--
Nathan.
Bow to the Cow!
Beck
Neil Hopkins wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:02:52 +0000 (UTC), "Beck"
> <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
>> console graphics?
>>
>>
>
> Realisticly rendered faces is probably the next big step - looking at
> the Half Life 2 trailers gives a good indication of the possibilities.
But how realistic do you want them? In years to come maybe there will be a
blurred line between the look of a videogame and the look of a movie and
characters will really look like people. I am not sure I would want that.
Part of the attraction of games for me is that I know that it is not real
and thats a kind of escapism. I can put myself into this fake world and
play the game. I am not sure I would enjoy a game as much if it looked
extremely real.
Nathan
> I can put myself into this fake world and
> play the game. I am not sure I would enjoy a game as much if it looked
> extremely real.
Furthermore what I consider to be some of the "best" graphics have been
things like Rez, or Jet Set Radio.
Still polygon pushing helps. (Apart from the framerate drops) Jet Set
Radio Future looked, generally, better than the first one simply because
you could see the whole town sprawling ahead of you. Also Rez would suck
with slow framerate because of the way it plays.
Beck
Nathan wrote:
> I'm curious to see what would happen after that point. Theoretically
> (I don't know if I have this right) it could get to the point where
> there are more polygons than there are pixels on screen, thus meaning
> that you're only limited by what you model. So beyond that? Perhaps
> they'll make use of more gimmicky stuff. One almost thinks that to
> develop things further you would have to remove the constraits of the
> television. Make a screen that wraps around you perhaps, make use of
> peripheral vision.
>
> Perhaps it'll just plug directly into our brains, and polygons will be
> irrelevant as it's more about forcing hallucinations :)
Isnt there some new gaming toy in Japan which is steered by a persons
emotions? I remember seeing about it a few weeks back. They were saying
that they put sensors on a persons head, around the temple, and somehow they
were controlling the game using their brain. It all seems far too sci fi
for me and possibly a bit dangerous?
Beck
Do you mean realistic physics like when a person is downed for example? I
would agree with that. Some of the games I see with hilarious deaths,
Soldier of Fortune 2 probably had the funniest deaths I have seen.
Nathan
> It all seems far too sci fi
> for me and possibly a bit dangerous?
it wouldn't be dangerous I don't think. Sensors would just pick up, uh,
impulses or something. It's not like it's wiring directly to your brain.
I actually think it sounds like a bit of genius. It couldn't work alone by
controlling it with your brain I imagine - but it could affect things.
Imagine you were playing animal crossing and it could sense you were sad,
so it would try and cheer you up. Or if an animal did something and it
realised that had pissed you off and so the animal acted all cagey until it
decided you two were 'cool' with each other again. It's probably not that
advanced though. But then it could work on a similar technology to those
lie dectector tests, that sort of thing.
hehe where can I get one?
deKay
2004 14:06:53 GMT, sefini jorgo geanyet des mani yeof do uk.games.video.misc,
yawatina tan reek esk neil_h...@hotmail.com (Neil Hopkins) fornis do
marikano es bono tan el:
>Realisticly rendered faces is probably the next big step - looking at
>the Half Life 2 trailers gives a good indication of the possibilities.
BUT PS2 EMOTION ENGINE DOES THIS!!!!1111one </Sony>
deKay
--
+ Lofi Gaming - www.lofi-gaming.org.uk
|- ugvm Magazine - www.ugvm.org.uk
|- My computer runs at 3.5MHz and I'm proud of that
|- HENSHIN-A-GOGO, BABY!
David Beamish
>
> it wouldn't be dangerous I don't think. Sensors would just pick up,
> uh, impulses or something. It's not like it's wiring directly to your
> brain.
>
> I actually think it sounds like a bit of genius. It couldn't work
> alone by controlling it with your brain I imagine - but it could
> affect things. Imagine you were playing animal crossing and it could
> sense you were sad, so it would try and cheer you up. Or if an animal
> did something and it realised that had pissed you off and so the
> animal acted all cagey until it decided you two were 'cool' with each
> other again. It's probably not that advanced though. But then it
> could work on a similar technology to those lie dectector tests, that
> sort of thing.
>
> hehe where can I get one?
>
the last one i saw was a while ago now but it basically showed you all
these mad chilled out images etc when you were calm, so the point of hte
"game"was to calm yourself down.. and it was jsut a hat not a spinal
implant..
Beck
I cannot find the article that I was reading, but have found a similar one
here...
http://www.attention.com/start/prod_det.jsp
They are using that very technology to help children with attention deficit
disorder. Fascinating stuff
Beck
SjT wrote:
> Baron Von "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> sayed:
>
>> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
>> console graphics?
>
> I'm still waiting for Virtual reality headsets, i can't wait to play a
> game like Halo in one of those.. It would probably kill me, but hey!
> it would be worth it :D
I thought VR headsets came and went about 10 years ago
Ken
>
>
> Nathan wrote:
>
>
> Isnt there some new gaming toy in Japan which is steered by a persons
> emotions? I remember seeing about it a few weeks back. They were saying
If there was, either they were lying, or (more problaby) it was being
mis-reported. Simply not possible within reasonable prediction - not least
because there is so much variation between one person and another (in a
mesurement sense); let alone how different people respond when they do
well/badly at a game.
> that they put sensors on a persons head, around the temple, and somehow
they
> were controlling the game using their brain. It all seems far too sci fi
You *can* use certain simple brain patterns, via a sensing headcap, as a
very simple control mechanism, but these would be very very unsophisticated
(for example - very very exicited = forward, very sleepy or bored = back).
Look at it this way; for games like Rainbow 6, they can't even get simple
voice commands to be reliable. "Thought controls" are very very much more
complicated (even before you glue the necessary electrodes to your scalp).
I know that Sony were looking at measuring Galvanic Skin Response and heart
rate (this has been used for many years for the Polygraph "lie detector"
test) through gaming pads a few years ago - and I don't know how far they've
got - but, again, this is very difficult to do without requiring the gamer
to hook themselves up to all sorts of extra equipment, and even then will be
very unreliable (the Polygraph is notoriously unreliable and insensitve).
This sort of thing (eye-movements is another) may be coming, but don't
expect it to be commercially available for 20 years.
Nathan
> I thought VR headsets came and went about 10 years ago
true, but then at the time 3d graphics for games weren't up to much. With
the rather flat lifeless images I can imagine they were a bit pants. But
considering the kind of images you get now I'm surprised that someone isn't
trying to revive it a bit. Probably because it'd make you sick or
something.
Shining Chibi
<beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
I think the main difference will be in resolution. Compare 640x480 PC
games to say the same game running in 1280x1024. HUGE difference. Of
course the TVs will have to change as well for this to happen.
--
My hand is glowing and roaring. It is telling me to defeat you!
SURE WIN... SHINING FINGER!
Beck
3D in movies was a big flop aswell. They tried it in that Jaws movie, and
maybe a few others, but it never took off.
Beck
Not a possibility then. The games industry cannot possibly force TV
manufacturers to change their systems. What is the resolution of a standard
TV? is the resolution different for widescreen and hdtv? What about those
rediculously priced Plasma TV's ?
Ken
Moving from 2d to 3D in the Saturn/PS/N64 age required much bigger
programming teams, but had a profound effect on gameplay (e.g. proper
Racing/FPS/3D platformers). This generation of consoles has been (IMHO)
markedly less impressive, because, graphics-wise, we're reaching the law of
diminishing returns, and increases in graphical performance don't really
change, too much, the way we play games. In simple terms, the better the
graphics capabilities of a system, the more resources will be needed to take
advantage of it. You need bigger and bigger teams to make smaller and
smaller advances in graphical quality. Consequently, either gamplay suffers,
because the game can't be properly developed, or the developer has to put so
much money into the game that they can't afford to lose out; and innovation
suffers.
Dave
There are a lot of new plasmas and LCDs with higher res (1024x1024,
1280x1024). What needs to happen is a transition to high def tele like in
the US. Then we can have 1920x1080 which would be nice.
>
>
Beck
Ken wrote:
> Moving from 2d to 3D in the Saturn/PS/N64 age required much bigger
> programming teams, but had a profound effect on gameplay (e.g. proper
> Racing/FPS/3D platformers). This generation of consoles has been
> (IMHO) markedly less impressive, because, graphics-wise, we're
> reaching the law of diminishing returns, and increases in graphical
> performance don't really change, too much, the way we play games. In
> simple terms, the better the graphics capabilities of a system, the
> more resources will be needed to take advantage of it. You need
> bigger and bigger teams to make smaller and smaller advances in
> graphical quality. Consequently, either gamplay suffers, because the
> game can't be properly developed, or the developer has to put so much
> money into the game that they can't afford to lose out; and
> innovation suffers.
So what do you think is the next big thing in regards to gaming?
Beck
SjT wrote:
> Baron Von "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> sayed:
>
>>> I'm still waiting for Virtual reality headsets, i can't wait to
>>> play a game like Halo in one of those.. It would probably kill me,
>>> but hey! it would be worth it :D
>>
>> I thought VR headsets came and went about 10 years ago
>
> Yeah, very basic graphics and the power required was not up to scratch
> so the update rate was very poor. There is alot of calculations to be
> made around the edges of the display i beleive (is it peripheral
> vision?) so even todays consoles are not powerful enough to produce
> such games (I don't know about pc's)
>
> I'm guessing that in 5 years or so this is the big step that gaming
> will take, whether people will want to buy into it is another issue,
> after all the consequences could be quite horrific i.e. seizures etc.
>
> But imagine a game whereby you have no menu's, just corridors that you
> walk down to change options, i.e. a room with a machine on the wall
> that you can turn the lever to set which game you want to play, and
> then you walk into a lift and you are transported into that world.
>
> Imagine online games where you are actually standing neck to neck with
> your friends as you compete and talk all in real time, the simplest
> things would just become mind-blowing, such as being able to look over
> the edge of the aircraft you are flying at the ground below. My brain
> was fooled by the early flying vr aces games in the arcades, i hate to
> think what it would be like with photorealitic graphics.
>
> All scary stuff (But ultimately exciting)
Yes seizures can be a problem, but only if that person is prone to them. A
game is not going to cause people to have seizures in itself, only in those
predesposed(sp?) to them. Perhaps a genetic tendency to epilepsy. But, if
a game is being directly influenced by the brain, maybe this will change and
we will see more people developing epilepsy as a direct result.
OJLim
> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
> console graphics?
>
Fantastic looking grass. Flower and Fauna. This is the one area which I
reckon games lack in totally; although the grass in Farcry is supposed to
be impressive if you have the computer to handle it, and Harvest Moon on
the Gamecube is pretty lush.
But I'm waiting for a game where you can walk through a fat field and the
grass will react as if you were really in a field. Or running through a
crop field on a farm. That would be great. It doesn't have to look like
*real* grass (I mean, like others said, what's the point), it just has to
react like it. The little shrubs in Zelda: TWW were a step in the right
direction, but I want MORE.
On another point, I saw that Virtua Racing preview for the PS2 in Edge.
The screenshots look great.
-OJ
Dr. Boggis
OJLim <oj...@lineone.net> wrote:
> "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
>
> > To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
> > console graphics?
> >
>
> Fantastic looking grass. Flower and Fauna. This is the one area which I
> reckon games lack in totally; although the grass in Farcry is supposed to
> be impressive if you have the computer to handle it, and Harvest Moon on
> the Gamecube is pretty lush.
Better than the trees in ICO?
--
-Take out Ron to reply-
Votre mčre était un hamster et votre pčre a senti des baies de sureau
OJLim
> But imagine a game whereby you have no menu's, just corridors that you
> walk down to change options, i.e. a room with a machine on the wall
> that you can turn the lever to set which game you want to play, and
> then you walk into a lift and you are transported into that world.
>
Black & White was kinda like that actually. Well, the with the option
rooms. To be honest, it sounds more like hassle than amazing. I'd rather
press pause and change options on a basic options screen than going into a
room, pulling a lever and then going into a lift.
-OJ
chris@ukaskew
> console graphics?
Back to basics hopefully. I think we've reached a point where its almost
pointless to go any further in many ways.
It will never happen but I would like to see a range of consoles similar to
what we have now and then the makers of these consoles say "enough is
enough", then finally once developers have got to grips with them they can
truely concentrate on ground breaking gameplay. The other positive of this
is the cost of making a game. Draw a line somewhere and costs will gradually
come down, if we carry on at the pace things are going only EA and a few
other "studios" are going to be left, and the only games released will be
safe hits, such as FIFA and Harry Potter.
For the good of gaming I think things need to slow down soon, we are moving
into photo-realistic territory at an alarming rate and therefore more and
more developers are playing it safe with regards to content and gameplay
mechanics.
I for one spend virtually all my time on Tokyo Bus Guide for the DC and a
string of 2D GC games (Star Soldier,
Mr Driller, Castle of Shikigami II etc), none of which remotely push any
graphical boundaries, but sadly with the relative demise of the GC and also
the complete failure of games such as the Hudson Good Price series (which
initially sold in low thousands) appears to prove I'm in a minority.
Chris.
--
www.ukaskew.com
UK Askew - The View Askewniverse in the UK
...
www.secombe.myby.co.uk/gcimport.htm
Gamecube Import Controls/Translations etc
Nathan
> I for one spend virtually all my time on Tokyo Bus Guide for the DC
> and a string of 2D GC games (Star Soldier,
> Mr Driller, Castle of Shikigami II etc), none of which remotely push
> any graphical boundaries, but sadly with the relative demise of the GC
> and also the complete failure of games such as the Hudson Good Price
> series (which initially sold in low thousands) appears to prove I'm in
> a minority.
Games like these are great but there's still a LOT to be said for 3d games.
2d racers, unless micromachines top down stuff are simply Not As Good in
2d. Also, FPS wouldn't work any other way, so graphical advances are often
welcome.
But drawing on points you made, to an extent it'd be nice if Sony Nintendo
and Microsoft all decided to not bother with another system. As you say,
with a new console there is an excuse to basically rehash gameplay because
it has graphics to justify it. I'm not entirely complaining as for
example, I think F-Zero GX is better than F-Zero X but essentially it's
just the same with nicer graphics.
If the consoles just stopped evolving for a while, then EA simply could not
find an excuse for just sticking a new number on the end of the same games.
They would be forced to include new gameplay as people would start to
realise they are just playing the same game repeatedly.
Currently, i don't see any problem with my consoles technically. This
wasn't the case before with the N64, Saturn and PSX. Textures weren't very
crisp and framerates weren't great. However with the current range of
systems, the graphics are still fine and *most* games seem to have a solid
framerate, so I see no real point in creating new consoles currently, but
it's inevitable. I'll buy the new ones, and so it goes.
OJLim
> In article <Xns948AB319ED2F5sm...@130.133.1.17>,
> OJLim <oj...@lineone.net> wrote:
>
>> "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
>>
>> > To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
>> > console graphics?
>> >
>>
>> Fantastic looking grass. Flower and Fauna. This is the one area
>> which I reckon games lack in totally; although the grass in Farcry is
>> supposed to be impressive if you have the computer to handle it, and
>> Harvest Moon on the Gamecube is pretty lush.
>
> Better than the trees in ICO?
>
From what I have seen in videos and screenshots, they're look as good as,
although I'll wait until I see the game in motion myself before making any
concrete judgements.
The trees in Ico are great though.
-OJ
OJLim
> chris@ukaskew lifts a finger, and a mouse is there:
>
>> I for one spend virtually all my time on Tokyo Bus Guide for the DC
>> and a string of 2D GC games (Star Soldier,
>> Mr Driller, Castle of Shikigami II etc), none of which remotely push
>> any graphical boundaries, but sadly with the relative demise of the
>> GC and also the complete failure of games such as the Hudson Good
>> Price series (which initially sold in low thousands) appears to prove
>> I'm in a minority.
>
> Games like these are great but there's still a LOT to be said for 3d
> games. 2d racers, unless micromachines top down stuff are simply Not
> As Good in 2d. Also, FPS wouldn't work any other way, so graphical
> advances are often welcome.
>
> But drawing on points you made, to an extent it'd be nice if Sony
> Nintendo and Microsoft all decided to not bother with another system.
Well, it's nice that Sony don't seem to be bothered about the releasing
the PS3 for another couple of years. Of course, Microsoft and Nintendo
will do likewise; nobody wants to release another Dreamcast. I think
it's better for us anyway, at least we can guarantee our consoles to be
supported for the considerable future. It's great news for all those
people who bought a GC for 70 quid, or whatever it was.
>
> Currently, i don't see any problem with my consoles technically. This
> wasn't the case before with the N64, Saturn and PSX. Textures weren't
> very crisp and framerates weren't great. However with the current
> range of systems, the graphics are still fine and *most* games seem to
> have a solid framerate, so I see no real point in creating new
> consoles currently, but it's inevitable.
Bah, the PS2 is chugging along a bit though. Newer games are just having
stupid loading times. Konami can't even put a referee on the pitch for
Winning Eleven/PES because it would slow the game down too much.
Probably the same reason why the game isn't in widescreen. Bah.
-OJ
rich a
amusing to write:
> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of
> console graphics?
I expect to see a shitload of buzzwords along the lines of "mega realistic
MORGS NURBS FLORGS ORBS SHRUBS" which mean nothing but "looks like it did
on the Gamecube, but in a slightly higher resolution".
--
Lots of love, Rich
crapola - http://www.brushtastic.f2s.com
gamertag - sausagelord / ph33r my shite gaming skillz!!!
Chris
beck...@removebtopenworld.com says...
> To my question.. what would you expect in the next generation of console
> graphics?
More polygons, more complex lighting/reflections, more supersampling,
larger play areas.
Graphics nowadays are pretty good, the things which need work IMO are
AI, physics, and design, but you can bet they'll some a poor second to
flashier visuals.
Chris
James Sutherland
news:eedf20pg85hp1rh02...@4ax.com:
> I think the main difference will be in resolution. Compare 640x480 PC
> games to say the same game running in 1280x1024. HUGE difference.
Compare the Final Fantasy Spirits Within DVD playing on a TV to any PC game
running at 1280x1024. There's plenty of room for improvement in graphics
without needing higher resolutions. High resolutions are only needed
because of the nasty hard edges you get on most real-time graphics these
days. Better antialiasing and blurring effects can solve that (and will
look better anyway).
Beck
Also time to get larger density dvd discs to hold these great new features
:)
Toby Newman
> The trees in Ico are great though.
>
> -OJ
I remember showing a mate GTA2 on my PC/TNT2 and he said "Wow these
trees are amazing, definitely the best trees I've ever seen!"
He then ran around underneath them for several minutes.
Toby
Toby Newman
POP:SOT brought further gameplay using the 4th dimension: Time. Next,
games will take advantage of the 5th dimension, and the fun will be in
grabbing your controller before it slips out of existence.
I'm going to set a reminder in my Palm to re-visit this thread in 20
years time. To find the thread, I'm going to search for the string:
ugvm2004ugvm2024
See you in the future!
Toby
DBSnappa
But then you're just paying shed loads for what is effectively a big
monitor, as TV transmissions aren't going to change anytime soon, are they?
My 36 WS makes a lot of cable channels look crap now and I know this is to
do with allocated bandwidth; but with the fragmentation of the TV industry,
surely this will increase.
--
DBSnappa
ICQ 109045511
GamerTag DBSnappa
No god is a philosopher or seeker of wisdom, for he is wise already. Neither
do the ignorant seek after wisdom. For herein lies the evil of ignorance;
that he who is neither good nor wise is nevertheless satisfied with himself.
DBSnappa
> Baron Von "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> sayed:
>
>>> I'm still waiting for Virtual reality headsets, i can't wait to play a
>>> game like Halo in one of those.. It would probably kill me, but hey!
>>> it would be worth it :D
>>
>>I thought VR headsets came and went about 10 years ago
>
> Yeah, very basic graphics and the power required was not up to scratch
> so the update rate was very poor. There is alot of calculations to be
> made around the edges of the display i beleive (is it peripheral
> vision?) so even todays consoles are not powerful enough to produce
> such games (I don't know about pc's)
>
> I'm guessing that in 5 years or so this is the big step that gaming
> will take, whether people will want to buy into it is another issue,
> after all the consequences could be quite horrific i.e. seizures etc.
Well, more likely consequences are going to be disorientation and nausea,
which is off-putting enough.
>
> But imagine a game whereby you have no menu's, just corridors that you
> walk down to change options, i.e. a room with a machine on the wall
> that you can turn the lever to set which game you want to play, and
> then you walk into a lift and you are transported into that world.
All of a sudden, a lot of gamers are going to not want the exercise! Really
though, movement? How will that be handled? Are we talking haptic interfaces
for walking/running/jumping, or are we talking Trekkie style Holo-Deck where
you have to 'be' the character and do the movements. If it's the former,
then you are going to have to have huge peripherals or you will completely
ruin immersion; if it's the latter, then side effects, knowing what a bunch
of lazy unfit bunch most gamers are will be at the minimum exhaustion and
the maximum fatal respiratory problems. How real do you want it?
Or do you go down the implant/dream route like the matrix?
>
> Imagine online games where you are actually standing neck to neck with
> your friends as you compete and talk all in real time, the simplest
> things would just become mind-blowing, such as being able to look over
> the edge of the aircraft you are flying at the ground below. My brain
> was fooled by the early flying vr aces games in the arcades, i hate to
> think what it would be like with photorealitic graphics.
>
> All scary stuff (But ultimately exciting)
>
And implausible in the near future, unfortunately
DBSnappa
> Beck lifts a finger, and a mouse is there:
>
>> It all seems far too sci fi for me and possibly a bit dangerous?
>
> it wouldn't be dangerous I don't think. Sensors would just pick up,
> uh, impulses or something. It's not like it's wiring directly to your
> brain.
>
> I actually think it sounds like a bit of genius. It couldn't work
> alone by controlling it with your brain I imagine - but it could affect
> things. Imagine you were playing animal crossing and it could sense
> you were sad, so it would try and cheer you up. Or if an animal did
> something and it realised that had pissed you off and so the animal
> acted all cagey until it decided you two were 'cool' with each other
> again. It's probably not that advanced though. But then it could work
> on a similar technology to those lie dectector tests, that sort of
> thing.
>
> hehe where can I get one?
>
Most people are incapable of recognising these behaviour patterns in their
fellow man; and you expect a game to be able to do this. What happens when
you fell horny? Does it relieve the pressure, 'Here, let me soften that for
you...', or does it throw a bucket of cold water over you?
Beck
SjT wrote:
> Baron Von goo...@asktoby.com (Toby Newman) sayed:
>
>> I'm going to set a reminder in my Palm to re-visit this thread in 20
>> years time. To find the thread, I'm going to search for the string:
>>
>> ugvm2004ugvm2024
>
> I shall predict that you're reading this from a nuclear bunker then :D
With his xbox 10 , ps20 and GC 4
Nathan
> Most people are incapable of recognising these behaviour patterns in
> their fellow man; and you expect a game to be able to do this. What
> happens when you fell horny? Does it relieve the pressure, 'Here, let
> me soften that for you...', or does it throw a bucket of cold water
> over you?
>
I never said I thought it was all working accurately. And I never said it
had to be accurate. But it would be interesting to try and interpret, I
don't know, heart rate or something like that to change the way people in
the game are reacting to you. Bit like that John McEnroe quiz show they
had on BBC1 for a bit, where you had to keep your heart rate down otherwise
you'd lose.
Ken
The two big things this generation have been online play, and surround
sound.
Bearing in mind that most people will have DD5.1 decoders, I don't expect
that standard to change for the next gen (I see the phantom has 7.1 sound,
but a 7.1 decoder would be prohibitively expensive). Online gaming can
continue to improve, with better stats management, more communities
(improvements to the XBlive "friends" list), persistent universes, but these
won't bring wholesale changes in what is played.
In my opinion, the console industry is faced with a problem in justifying to
punters a brand new console, which is capable of better graphics, but which
only has EA-style games-by-numbers, and franchise updates. This generation
has been sorely plagued by these problems. Though the PS2 is now looking
creaky, and the GC doesn't have HDD or (good) online support, the XB could
keep on going well into the next generation (especially if the XB doesn't
have an HDD).
The success of the eyetoy, and the PSX, hint at one way to go. Novel input
devices can change the dimensions of gaming, and can open up games to a
wider range of people. It wouldn't take *all that* much to modify a camera
to read different inputs (such as smiling/frowning), eye movements, or
ambient light conditions; similarly, microphones are already starting to be
used in more interesting ways (eg. SOCOM/R6/Manhunt). Having a camera opens
up online videophone possibilities (admittedly with difficult ethical
issues), and the ability to map yourself into the game (again, some ethical
problems that early versions of Perfect Dark encountered). It's possible
that support for higher resolution or larger (plasma etc.) TVs will be
included to drive the TV market, but it's not going to make all that much of
a difference, not least because most people, at least at the start of the
generation, will have these things. Finally, to take us further away from
gaming, DVD capabilities (demonstrated by the PS2 and XB) will be extended
to other home entertainments; digital recording, premimum downloads, audio
downloads, DVD recording, etc.
None of this is new - which is why all of this is much more likely than a
thought-reading hat, or VR goggles (both of which still have considerable
practical problems). What we won't see is great leaps forward, because
no-one is willing to take the risk.
All in all, I expect to see the current trend for big-budget no-brainers to
continue, at an increasing rate. The success of toss like MOH:RS and The
Matrix, and the commercial failure of BG&E, PoP:SoT, and Ico has seen to
that.
OJLim
Okay, so here are the nominations for Best Trees in video games so far:
Ico
GTA2
Harvest Moon: AWL (presuming it will from screenshots)
I would also like to add:
Animal Crossing (You can shake them and they make tree noises! The ones
with bee hives are shit though).
Zelda: The Wind Waker (mmm, cel-shaded Tree).
Shenmue II (the catch-a-leaf tree is awesome. Those falling leaves!)
Metal Gear Solid 3 (if you've seen the video preview, you'll know what I
mean. I almost cried with joy at tree-land. And it's not even finished
yet).
If anyone has any more, go ahead and list them. Then we can have a vote
for BEST TREE IN A VIDEO GAME EV3R. Maybe.
-OJ
James Sutherland
news:Xns948B992985913sm...@130.133.1.17:
> If anyone has any more, go ahead and list them. Then we can have a
> vote for BEST TREE IN A VIDEO GAME EV3R. Maybe.
3D Deathchase.
Ken
"Nathan" <id...@checkthis.com> wrote in message
news:Xns948B8935...@130.133.1.17...
I worked on a project examining the measurement of these sorts of things for
use on commercial flightdecks.
Heart Rate Variability (ie. how much your heart rate changes) can be used as
a measure of mental workload (essentially, how stressed you are). It's
better than absolute heart rate, which varies considerably between
indiviuduals, and with the respiratory requirements of the body. However,
it's really only useful for very VERY stressful things - like flying a
fighter jet (and I know of studies that have looked precisely at this),
rather than doing more mundane things like flaying a Jumbo. Be interesting
to compare that with gaming.
Galvanic Skin Response (ie. skin conductivity) changes are what the lie
detector test relies on; it's based on some simple stuff like when you lie
you get nervous, which means your palms get sweaty, your heart beats faster
etc. (not quite sure about the technical details). For detecting whether
someone is lying or not, it's rubbish - which is why it's very popular in
the states - not least because one gets sweaty palms for all sorts of
reasons, but it can give you some rough idea about stress and cognitive
arousal. Again, it would be interesting to see this sort of thing used in
games.
Peripheral Arterial Tone (PAT) is another potential measure, which relates
to the amount of blood in your fingers (which, in turn, relates to the
parasympathetic nervous system, which relates to the sympathetic nervous
system, which relates again to your levels of stress). Basically, you put a
cup on your finger that measures the blood flow to your fingertips with a
bright light (hence "peripheral arterial tone"). A reasonably good measure,
but for use in gaming you'd have to make sure you didn't attach it to your
thumb, index or middle fingers.
Finally, you can learn a lot about someone's state of "stress" by their eye
movements. Very rapid and frequent eye movements ("saccades") indicate that
the individual is quickly collecting a lot of information around them (=
high level of stress), whereas slow and infrequent saccades mean that the
individual is probably thinking quite hard (and is not gathering new
information = low levels of stress). How true this is remains to be seen,
but I suspect that eye movements for a fast-moving driving/shooting game are
markedly different to those for a slow-moving adventure/puzzler. With some
clever software, it *might* be possible to use something like an eyetoy for
this.
As I said in another post, I'm aware that Sony, several years ago, were
working on controllers that detect these sorts of things, but there's always
going to be a design tradeoff - the better the measure, generally the more
intrusive it is, and the more difficult it is to calibrate - even before you
decide precisely what you're going to do with it all. Bearing in mind that
I'm not sure of any games that use any easily-accessible performance
measures scores to adapt themselves (e.g. if you shoot 10 enemies dead in 10
seconds, it's clearly too easy, so you could provide a more difficult
challenge next time), I'm not sure why they should go to all this expense
and hassle to derive these measures that are both unreliable, expensive (for
the consumer), difficult to implement, and, above all, risky.
I'd *love* to work at developing it, though!
DBSnappa
> Baron Von DBSnappa <DavidJremov...@hotmail.com> sayed:
>
>>What happens when you fell horny?
>
> Depends how high the fall is from, but i imagine if you landed
> front-side down it could possibly snap the poor blighter.
>
Mohh Omlo etc ;o))
DBSnappa
> Baron Von Nathan <id...@checkthis.com> sayed:
>
>>the game are reacting to you. Bit like that John McEnroe quiz show
>>they had on BBC1 for a bit, where you had to keep your heart rate down
>>otherwise you'd lose.
>
> Yeah that was good that!
>
> Besides, its easier to monitor someones moods etc by science than what
> it is by human telepathy so i think its totally viable.
>
> Have you never watched the lie detectors on Ricki Lake Snappa? :)))))
>
There will have to be enormous serendipitous convergence before I watch
Ricki Lake. SOmething akin to Hell freezing over, an invite to the Pope's
wedding and Boggis being shit at driving games all at the same time!
Nathan
> I'm not sure why they should go to all this expense
> and hassle to derive these measures that are both unreliable,
> expensive (for the consumer), difficult to implement, and, above all,
> risky.
>
> I'd *love* to work at developing it, though!
>
Course. But then this thread is based on speculation, and what you might
like to see so it's all fun to dream!
I think if we're talking something like Animal crossing, say, utilising
these technologies then it'd be great because it wouldn't *have* to be
accurate. The great thing about animal crossing was when you'd do
something, or say something in a letter and the animal would react
accordingly. Of course, if this happened often it would be fairly random
but there was still a nice feeling there. If they could take it a bit
further making more of a variation in their reactions then it'd add a bit
of spice to the game.
(you know, with all these dating sims in Japan I'm surprised they're not
pioneering such technology :P )
OJLim
No doubt by that time, all three will have merged into one company
SonyMicrosoftNintendo battling against AOLTimeWarner (who would buy up EA,
or something).
Well, if happened for films and music, then why not?
-OJ
Dr. Boggis
DBSnappa <DavidJremov...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> There will have to be enormous serendipitous convergence before I watch
> Ricki Lake. SOmething akin to Hell freezing over, an invite to the Pope's
> wedding and Boggis being shit at driving games all at the same time!
Mohh! :-D
Dr. Boggis
OJLim <oj...@lineone.net> wrote:
> Okay, so here are the nominations for Best Trees in video games so far:
>
> Ico
> GTA2
> Harvest Moon: AWL (presuming it will from screenshots)
> If anyone has any more, go ahead and list them. Then we can have a vote
> for BEST TREE IN A VIDEO GAME EV3R. Maybe.
Bushido Blade had pretty cool trees, but I may be looking through rose-tinted
specs.
Beck
Not as silly as it sounds. Time Warner have already announced they are
going into games development
OJLim
> Not as silly as it sounds. Time Warner have already announced they are
> going into games development
>
See, I know everything. How much money on Arnie being a future (and
terribly unpopular) US President?
-OJ
Dr. Boggis
OJLim <oj...@lineone.net> wrote:
They'd have to change the Constitution first, as you have to be *born* in the US
to become President. As for his popularity, Arnie's approval ratings are pretty
good, "64 percent approve of the way he is doing his job and 58 percent approve
specifically of his handling of budget issues" according to this report:
http://tinyurl.com/2jn7y
He hasn't had a chance to fuck much up yet though, it must be said.
Pessimist
> If anyone has any more, go ahead and list them. Then we can have a vote
> for BEST TREE IN A VIDEO GAME EV3R. Maybe.
>
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
-P
Grumpy Willis
> Beck lifts a finger, and a mouse is there:
>
> > I can put myself into this fake world and
> > play the game. I am not sure I would enjoy a game as much if it looked
> > extremely real.
>
> Furthermore what I consider to be some of the "best" graphics have been
> things like Rez, or Jet Set Radio.
>
Rez - just what I was going to say.
As graphics capeability increases then we can only hope that more artistic
graphics designers will get in on the act (as opposed to the predominant
realism freaks).
Personally I couldn't give a toss if someones face looks life like or not,
i'd rather see some intelligent thought go into the visual process than
simply texture / polygon pushing and pandering to the graphics card makers.
> Still polygon pushing helps. (Apart from the framerate drops) Jet Set
> Radio Future looked, generally, better than the first one simply because
> you could see the whole town sprawling ahead of you. Also Rez would suck
> with slow framerate because of the way it plays.
>
I never noticed frame rate problems. Do you mean the DC version?
When the floating cubes formed that running man shape, I nearly came in my
pants I was that impressed.
Nathan
> Also Rez would suck
>> with slow framerate because of the way it plays.
>>
>
> I never noticed frame rate problems. Do you mean the DC version?
No, notice the "would suck". All I mean is that it still takes a certain
amount of processing power to realise an artistic idea, so I'm all for
increased 3D capabilities.
> When the floating cubes formed that running man shape, I nearly came
> in my pants I was that impressed.
I agree, but this is certainly relevant, because this might not have been
so impressive on, say, the PS1 because it wouldn't be so many cubes.
But think about an even better processing power than what we have. Think
fantasia. What about all the cubes making one man, but them all splitting
up, and then each cube dividing into the same number of cubes, and each
resulting group of cubes then forming another mang.
My point being raw power does make a difference, each generation certainly
has benefitted from extra power, and this certainly doesn't mean "more
realism"
What we have seen with the current generation is more effects rather than
simply more polygons. Mario Sunshine had some great water refraction
effects when you sprayed your hose (ooer) and I guess this sort of stuff is
what has impressed me about the current generation of graphics. Perhaps
this is what the next generation will really offer, are these 'photoshop'
type effects that happen on the fly.
Toby Newman
> In article <Xns948BC1AD8FF9Esm...@130.133.1.17>,
> OJLim <oj...@lineone.net> wrote:
>
> > "Beck" <beck...@removebtopenworld.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Not as silly as it sounds. Time Warner have already announced they are
> > > going into games development
> > >
> >
> > See, I know everything. How much money on Arnie being a future (and
> > terribly unpopular) US President?
> >
>
> They'd have to change the Constitution first, as you have to be *born* in the US
> to become President. As for his popularity, Arnie's approval ratings are pretty
> good, "64 percent approve of the way he is doing his job and 58 percent approve
> specifically of his handling of budget issues" according to this report:
> http://tinyurl.com/2jn7y
>
> He hasn't had a chance to fuck much up yet though, it must be said.
They do change the constitution though, don't they? 5th amendments
etc. Personally I'd love Arnie to be president, just because it would
crack me up.
Of course, in 2024 when I read this thread again I'll be cursing him
for causing judgement day and sending me underground.
Toby
Toby Newman
> What we have seen with the current generation is more effects rather than
> simply more polygons. Mario Sunshine had some great water refraction
> effects when you sprayed your hose (ooer) and I guess this sort of stuff is
> what has impressed me about the current generation of graphics. Perhaps
> this is what the next generation will really offer, are these 'photoshop'
> type effects that happen on the fly.
More dust and grime would be nice, like the pebbles in the wind in
Panzer Dragoon Orta. Anti-aliasing to remove the hard polygon edges,
irregular polygon edges (i.e. everthing is made of organic shapes
rather than lots of triangles/spheres) and furry surfaces. This would
all make the realistic/abstract scenes much more convincing.
Toby
Toby Newman
> microphones are already starting to be
> used in more interesting ways (eg. SOCOM/R6/Manhunt).
& Mr Driller/Seaman!
> Having a camera opens
> up online videophone possibilities (admittedly with difficult ethical
> issues),
Issues? What like getting noody?
> and the ability to map yourself into the game (again, some ethical
> problems that early versions of Perfect Dark encountered).
Elaborate?
Toby
Ken
"Toby Newman" <goo...@asktoby.com> wrote in message
news:25a29397.04021...@posting.google.com...
> "Ken" <k.cat...@n05p4m.ich.ucl.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:<c0ana6$hom$1...@uns-a.ucl.ac.uk>...
>
> > microphones are already starting to be
> > used in more interesting ways (eg. SOCOM/R6/Manhunt).
>
> & Mr Driller/Seaman!
>
> > Having a camera opens
> > up online videophone possibilities (admittedly with difficult ethical
> > issues),
>
> Issues? What like getting noody?
in particuarly privacy, but also there would be concerns that it would be
used for things of an explicit, or even deviant, nature. Aside from the
morals involved, this isn't the sort of publicity that Sony would really
care for.
> > and the ability to map yourself into the game (again, some ethical
> > problems that early versions of Perfect Dark encountered).
>
> Elaborate?
Perfect Dark reportedly had a system whereby you could hook up a gameboy
camera, take a photo of your face, and superimpose it onto a character model
in the game, thereby allowing you and your friends to shoot look-alikes of
one another. It wasn't in the final version, because, as you can imagine,
certain "games are evil" elements in the USA were taking issue with this;
not least because ISTR Columbine and a sequence of other high-school
shootings occurred around about this time.
The Reverend Bob
pointless meandering on Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:44:09 +0000 (UTC):
>Not as silly as it sounds. Time Warner have already announced they are
>going into games development
Bye-bye videogames industry then. Again. And again it will be due to
Time Warner.
Seriously, Time Warner poison every fucking thing they touch. As i
wrote in a thread entitled 'Games industry about to collapse' some
time ago:
"The reason the videogames industry collapsed the first-time around
was due to rampant mismanagement (the same thing destroying the music
industry currently - not a bad thing, if the major labels go bye-bye
we may have a resurgence similar to that seen in the movies by the
collapse of the studio system), and the industry still has nightmares
about that [1].
I seriously doubt that the industry as a whole would be prepared to
let that happen to it a second time. Of course, if it does collapse
then it will simply re-emerge refocused and even stronger just as it
did the last time.
[1] - After Atari were bought up by Time-Warner. The dot-com collapse
occurred after Time-Warner merged with AOL and Time-Warner are a key
player in the music industry. IIRC Time-Warner's antecedents were
instrumental in the collapse of the studio system. Maybe there's a
common thread here? ;-)"
Time-Warner moving back in as a major player. Not good. Not good at
all...
--
contact: rev...@hotmail.com
"That was the explanantion for the Gotterdamerung;
not suicidal murderers in high places, but simply the logic of the system."
- Antarctica: A Novel, Kim Stanley Robinson