# What will happen when video game graphics get to the point where they can't get any better?



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

Well when games look so much like real life and can't get any better we will be able to use the same hardware forever with out upgrading and gaming will get much cheaper. since the hardware will no longer need to be upgraded it will get cheaper and cheaper hence making gaming cheaper since theres no need for better hardware since the graphics cannot look any better.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 6, 2018)

Games aren't just graphics.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> Games aren't just graphics.


Yes i guess but theres going to be a point where the graphics cannot look any better so no new hardware will ever be needed again.


----------



## Nisem0n0 (Apr 6, 2018)

More focus on perfecting VR?


----------



## Reploid (Apr 6, 2018)

I'll start to wait while gameplay gonna become just as good; it'll keep my busy.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 6, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Yes i guess but theres going to be a point where the graphics cannot look any better so no new hardware will ever be needed again.


People and devs may want bigger worlds and more things on the screen at once, that older hardware can't handle.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

Nisem0n0 said:


> More focus on perfecting VR?


It is going to be a problem since how are company's going to want to sell phones and pcs if the specs have no need to get better since they are already can produce graphics  and speed that cannot get any better.


----------



## PabloMK7 (Apr 6, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Yes i guess but theres going to be a point where the graphics cannot look any better so no new hardware will ever be needed again.


What about virtual reality? Once the human brain is known how it really works then would it be possible to be immersed into the game?  I don't think a GTX 1080 will be able to do that, so new more powerful hardware will still be coming out for a long time.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> People and devs may want bigger worlds and more things on the screen at once, that older hardware can't handle.


The worlds can only be so big with out the game taking a very long time to make.


----------



## Hanafuda (Apr 6, 2018)

I don't know. If that ever happens, I'll still be playing RC Pro Am 2, so I won't notice.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

PabloMK7 said:


> What about virtual reality? Once the human brain is known how it really works then would it be possible to be immersed into the game?  I don't think a GTX 1080 will be able to do that, so new more powerful hardware will still be coming out for a long time.


Not every thing is possible just because things are going to get better doesn't mean all scfi stuff is going to come true.


----------



## Issac (Apr 6, 2018)

Graphics is only one part of it all. Then there is physics, particle systems (smoke)... there will always be stuff to improve. They'll want to render volumetric physically correct clouds that blocks the sunlight just like real life, and make shadows look life like...
sure that's part of graphics, but there can always be more precise.


----------



## The Catboy (Apr 6, 2018)

Maybe they will start focusing on making complete games instead of barely finished crap that's only there to push micro-transactions.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

also it can't get better then 8k


----------



## JiveTheTurkey (Apr 6, 2018)

Then the next step is to hook our brains up into the game.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

JiveTheTurkey said:


> Then the next step is to hook our brains up into the game.


That would be unsafe so i don't think that would happen.


----------



## KingVamp (Apr 6, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> It is going to be a problem since how are company's going to want to sell phones and pcs if the specs have no need to get better since they are already can produce graphics  and speed that cannot get any better.


If hardware were to become perfect, they would have to eventually focus on selling software and cosmetic stuff. 



SoslanVanWieren said:


> The worlds can only be so big with out the game taking a very long time to make.


Do have a point, but they will push it as far as they can. Using software tricks on top of their skills if they have to. Such as using and approving procedural generation.


----------



## PabloMK7 (Apr 6, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Not every thing is possible just because things are going to get better doesn't mean all scfi stuff is going to come true.


What I said was an example. What I mean is things may happen in the future and we can't know until that happens. Nobody knows if more things are possible in the future and if that would need new and more powerful hardware.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 6, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> If hardware were to become perfect, they would have to eventually focus on selling software and cosmetic stuff.
> 
> 
> Do have a point, but they will push it as far as they can. Using software tricks on top of their skills if they have to. Such as using and approving procedural generation.





PabloMK7 said:


> What I said was an example. What I mean is things may happen in the future and we can't know until that happens. Nobody knows if more things are possible in the future and if that would need new and more powerful hardware.


science already proves some things just aren't possible.


----------



## Veho (Apr 6, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Yes i guess but theres going to be a point where the graphics cannot look any better so no new hardware will ever be needed again.


Hardware handles more than just graphics.


----------



## Deleted User (Apr 6, 2018)

I don't play games for realism (in fact, I play games for the exact opposite), so I don't see myself stopping, if the case you described were to ever happen.

That said, I doubt that the video game market is going to stagnate because we've reach the peak of graphics technology.  It's like saying that art has stagnated because the canvases and supplies have become so perfected, plentiful, and easy to come by.  Heck, modern-day computers are already capable of expressing a wide range of styles and emotions; you only have to look around to see the variety in the gaming market today.

And, like others before me have said, it's not just graphics.  Think of all the calculations a computer has to do 60 times per second in order to present us with a realistic game world, which has to do more with the CPU than anything else AFAIK.  There's still a lot of work to be done, as far as that's concerned.


----------



## tomx86 (Apr 6, 2018)

VR MMO or something like the MATRIX, but if you die you just lose everything and need to start the game from scratch.


----------



## ThoD (Apr 6, 2018)

Even if graphics reach a peak point that can't be surpassed, there will still be better hardware, as instead of focusing on graphics, the focus will shift to the engine and physics instead, requiring more and more processing power, until we reach a point where we can simulate an entire planet sized map to perfect real-life degree and we are FAR from it considering Minecraft is still a thing that's getting new releases


----------



## Flame (Apr 6, 2018)

the day graphics card reach they peak is the day the world will have big economy problems. playing games will be least of our problems.


----------



## Lukerz (Apr 6, 2018)

Nintindo will rule the world.


----------



## Taleweaver (Apr 7, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Well when games look so much like real life and can't get any better we will be able to use the same hardware forever with out upgrading and gaming will get much cheaper. since the hardware will no longer need to be upgraded it will get cheaper and cheaper hence making gaming cheaper since theres no need for better hardware since the graphics cannot look any better.


In addition to what has been said already: graphics aren't the same as aesthetics. Many games (mostly indie's but quite some AAA titles as well) just go for a style that fits the mood of the theme rather than try to be the most realistic possible. It's sort of how some movies and about aa gazzilion photos are still in black and white, even though color movies/photos aren't exactly new.

The prediction is certainly true, but i don't really see how large studios are still struggling with inferior graphics. Or where the audience still want better graphics, for that matter.
*takes a look at titles like portal, ori and the blind forest or cuphead*


----------



## Depravo (Apr 7, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Well when games look so much like real life and can't get any better we will be able to use the same hardware forever with out upgrading and gaming will get much cheaper. since the hardware will no longer need to be upgraded it will get cheaper and cheaper hence making gaming cheaper since theres no need for better hardware since the graphics cannot look any better.


Did artists stop painting when cameras were invented?


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 8, 2018)

I do like better technology but i also hate it because i fear it will take over every thing.


----------



## Deleted User (Apr 8, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> I do like better technology but i also hate it because i fear it will take over every thing.


People have literally been saying this for centuries.


----------



## Sonic Angel Knight (Apr 8, 2018)

People will try to make games look realistically life like i guess, but then others will try too do something new like skull girls & cup head, or whatever. Personally, pixel graphics is still my favorite even if games could look much better or impressive with hand drawn graphics or even 3D renders. But the gameplay is what matters to people more when they play a game rather than it's look.


----------



## GeorgeKuwanay (Apr 8, 2018)

I don't think it will come into that but who knows if it happens. Video cards is also being used to more complex calculations rather than only on gaming.


----------



## Deleted User (Apr 8, 2018)

In all seriousness, once the graphics issue gets solved, the next thing will be determining what the true max framerate the human eye can perceive is. Once that is figured out, then monitors and games will strive to hit that as frequently as possible. Then, game design should get better, and "pretty but empty" games will cease to exist.

Then, we might start focusing on bringing this all into a VR world. From there, we turn into Ready Player One.


----------



## Taleweaver (Apr 8, 2018)

B_E_P_I_S_M_A_N said:


> People have literally been saying this for centuries.


Yes... And the critics were right then as well. What they fail to mention,however, is that "everything" just contains what they know as work. New work gets created as well.

On the games front, the really isn't a problem aside the luxurious "too many games" problem (shovelware, in other words)


----------



## ThoD (Apr 8, 2018)

blujay said:


> In all seriousness, once the graphics issue gets solved, the next thing will be determining what the true max framerate the human eye can perceive is. Once that is figured out, then monitors and games will strive to hit that as frequently as possible. Then, game design should get better, and "pretty but empty" games will cease to exist.
> 
> Then, we might start focusing on bringing this all into a VR world. From there, we turn into Ready Player One.


It HAS been figured out since the 1970s, the human eye in theory can perceive up to 3000 frames, but in reality it's about 700-1000. The 3000 was proven and is in actual medical books. But as long as you got retards believing that they can only see 30 frames, then the day framerates get up to 500+ won't come anytime soon... Also, "pretty but empty" will always be there for as long as people buy AAA games like that (eg: Assassin's Creed or generally "open world" games with nothing to do because collectibles are NOT real content).


----------



## Deleted User (Apr 9, 2018)

ThoD said:


> It HAS been figured out since the 1970s, the human eye in theory can perceive up to 3000 frames, but in reality it's about 700-1000. The 3000 was proven and is in actual medical books. But as long as you got retards believing that they can only see 30 frames, then the day framerates get up to 500+ won't come anytime soon... Also, "pretty but empty" will always be there for as long as people buy AAA games like that (eg: Assassin's Creed or generally "open world" games with nothing to do because collectibles are NOT real content).


About the PBE always existing, I personally believe you are wrong. When it gets to the point that everybody is creating games with the same level of graphics, then the only deciding factor will be content.


----------



## raystriker (Apr 9, 2018)

We'll probably try to make it like Westworld. But a VR experience like in SAO will probably be more feasible.


----------



## ThoD (Apr 9, 2018)

blujay said:


> About the PBE always existing, I personally believe you are wrong. When it gets to the point that everybody is creating games with the same level of graphics, then the only deciding factor will be content.


Not really, the deciding factor will be effort, because those graphics aren't gonna make themselves, so others will put everything only in graphics and game size, while others will focus on content too.


----------



## CMDreamer (Apr 9, 2018)

I think gaming industry will still be creating an "enhanced/remastered/whatever" editions of the very same games over and over between console editions, because buyers keep believeing that good graphics define good games. Which is totally wrong.

As long as consumers buy that crap called "new editions", gaming industry will keep selling the same crap over and over.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Apr 9, 2018)

Ultimately even beyond graphics I can imagine a hardware/software AI that creates the games interactively based on user input. 

I think eventually (eventually possibly hundreds of years from now) we will have AI advanced enough you could say something like "I want an adventure like Simon Belmont in Castlevania!!!" and the AI will create an entire world and NPC's with realistic reactions and an entire adventure for you to explore. 

At this point in time I think premade games as we know them would be more along the lines of "I wrote this script for this wild RPG, I created a bunch of personality profiles and AI assisted world generation based on my creative input!" 

Basically I see no reason why given enough storage and CPU and GPU power why AI could not create infinite worlds for us to explore like a holodeck on Star Trek. Even if we never develop 3D solid holograms and all that the tech would still work great for 2D displays or 3D VR goggles.


----------



## XXXTORTELLINI (Apr 9, 2018)

You have to think about better resolutions, bigger screens, and bigger worlds. These will all have an effect on older hardware.


----------



## CitizenSnips (Apr 9, 2018)

I believe there will always be new technologies and innovations that future games will take advantage of, there's always growth and expansion in the world of technology and I don't think it will cease until humanity does.


----------



## AdenTheThird (Apr 13, 2018)

I was wondering about that! I imagine it being a 360 Degree VR experience, but it's hard to say...


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Apr 13, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> Well when games look so much like real life and can't get any better we will be able to use the same hardware forever with out upgrading and gaming will get much cheaper. since the hardware will no longer need to be upgraded it will get cheaper and cheaper hence making gaming cheaper since theres no need for better hardware since the graphics cannot look any better.


But they don't necessarily have to look like real life, they can look BETTER than real life, or just different.
So I don't think that's what will hold back graphics from improving. At some point the development costs for creating such a game wlll become so high that it's no longer profitable to continue increasing the graphics fidelity.


----------



## migles (Apr 13, 2018)

they will be forced to actually make good games


----------



## cvskid (Apr 13, 2018)

Still waiting on hair physics to become better if anything.


----------



## Jayenkai (Apr 13, 2018)

Manic Miner was definitely the pinnacle of graphics.  Everything since has just been playing catchup.


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 13, 2018)

games won't ever excalty feel like real life as they aren't movies it looks like real life at first but if you compare it you will notice the differences.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Apr 13, 2018)

SoslanVanWieren said:


> games won't ever excalty feel like real life as they aren't movies it looks like real life at first but if you compare it you will notice the differences.


Some of them are basically interactive movies, also a lot of the same techniques are used in games like motion capture so there's no reason they can't look and feel like real life besides graphics power.


----------



## KingBlank (Apr 13, 2018)

It is entirely possible that one day video games will reach realtime photorealism, however I don't think that there is technically an upper limit to graphics, You can always raise the resolution and render distance. We are not even 1% of the way to the potential heights of graphics technology.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Apr 13, 2018)

They'll always get better. The question is whether the bump will be enough, noticeable, or even worth the effort after a certain point. There's only so many polygons a model can be made out of where adding more will not grant any respectable benefit, only so many effects that can be applied before it becomes a mess or too cluttered, etc. Take for instance you're in the city looking down a road for a good mile, and you can see everyone walking on that road. At some point, the people way out at the end only occupy 1 or 2 pixels of your screen. What would be the point of that?


----------



## Ryccardo (Apr 13, 2018)

DiscostewSM said:


> They'll always get better. The question is whether the bump will be enough, noticeable, or even worth the effort after a certain point. [...]  What would be the point of that?


ePenis, although that reasoning is mainly in the vocal minority stereotype of PC gaming


----------



## SoslanVanWieren (Apr 13, 2018)

DiscostewSM said:


> They'll always get better. The question is whether the bump will be enough, noticeable, or even worth the effort after a certain point. There's only so many polygons a model can be made out of where adding more will not grant any respectable benefit, only so many effects that can be applied before it becomes a mess or too cluttered, etc. Take for instance you're in the city looking down a road for a good mile, and you can see everyone walking on that road. At some point, the people way out at the end only occupy 1 or 2 pixels of your screen. What would be the point of that?


The problem with bigger worlds in video games is unless its randomly generated like mine craft it cannot be really huge or other wise it would take forever to develop the game. Also the whole map isn't loaded in at once so you don't need better hardware to get a bigger map.


----------



## Roamin64 (Apr 28, 2018)

Well , for one , once the graphics reach a certain quality , the next step is AI. I'm not talking about a character's AI in a game , but rather AI from objects.  Just think about how many hair a human head as... Now draw each and every hair independently, every piece of grass, leaves in trees , etc. have them flow in the wind , stepped on the grass , etc..  So once the main graphics of a game can no longer be improved , the rest of the game will. Improvement can pretty much never stop until you can't tell no more if what you are seeing was drawn or filmed.


----------



## Lmaokernel (Apr 28, 2018)

Gameplay will be important again.
But seriously I think the technology will always need to be better no matter how perfect graphics get. There's always room for improvement and games even on the most powerful consoles still push that power to the limits of the device. 

Sent from my toaster running rebug


----------



## HaloEliteLegend (May 1, 2018)

I wouldn't count on you seeing that in your lifetime. There is always more real-time lighting to be had, more physics to be simulated, more pixels to be pushed, more rays to be traced, more everything. Keep in mind that the graphical techniques we see in games today are just approximations to allow for the game to run smoothly in real-time. Those approximations would eventually be replaced with far more accurate simulations (example: replacing screen-space ambient occlusion and voxel-based lighting with ray-traced lights and shadows; even then, you can keep gradually increasing the samples up to ludicrous amounts). You could take graphics all the way to the point where each individual leaf is its own physically simulated body that can react to everything else around it. There will always be something new to push. Sure, we may reach a point of diminishing returns, but there is still a lot further we could take real-time graphics in the future. I think the real application for this kind of hyper-realism is virtual reality, if it hasn't died off by the next generational graphics leap. Until real-time rendering can match a Pixar render farm, there is a practically infinite ceiling to go.


----------



## RHOPKINS13 (May 2, 2018)

I doubt that's happening anytime soon but if it did I suppose cellphones will have graphic chips with the equivalent of a GTX 1080 Ti embedded in them. The Desktop would only be for PC-building enthusiasts, as laptops will be available with graphic cards that are just as good as their desktop counterparts (yay!)

And with the latest GTX XX graphics card from NVidia, with ray tracing technology and an 8K 120hz monitor, the latest-gen games will have graphics so realistic we'll complain about how pixelated today's Blu-Ray movies were. Unreal Engine 10 will make you question which memories you have that are real, which ones were from dreams, and which ones were from a memorable video game conquest.

But what I look forward to most of all? Developers shifting their focus away from graphics and actually working on making good games. When I was a kid we didn't need DLC to feel like we got the full game experience. I feel more content after sitting down and playing some good ol' Yoshi's Island or Donkey Kong Country 2 from the Super Nintendo days than any of today's top-selling must-have games.


----------



## YugamiSekai (May 2, 2018)

By then games would take 20+ years to complete...


----------



## DaTank45 (May 2, 2018)

People will try to have sex with them. I feel like all technology leads to this. Someone creates and shows off virtual reality and the next persons says “ it’s amazing but, how do we screw it?”


----------



## KiiWii (May 2, 2018)

Raytracing for lighting and effects is the next step currently, then after that the other posters here are right, its all about absolute realism in simulation:

Advanced particle simulation (realistic properties of materials: wood splinter, stone crumble etc)

Breast physics.....

Wifi fleshlight....


----------



## Taleweaver (May 4, 2018)

KiiWii said:


> Raytracing for lighting and effects is the next step currently, then after that the other posters here are right, its all about absolute realism in simulation:
> 
> Advanced particle simulation (realistic properties of materials: wood splinter, stone crumble etc)
> 
> ...


Yup...I _always_* wanted to play a VR game where I can thrust my actual dick onto a virtual girl (with perfectly wobbling breasts*) so hard that the virtual bed splinters and the stone floor crumbles in the most realistic way possible. 

The future's going to be awesome. 

(by the way...this'll lead to these typical kinds of conversations with women:
Women: "don't you think this kind of graphic fidelity is high enough?"
Men: "We can always add MORE detail!"
Women: "our eyes can't even perceive one tenth of the details displayed!"
Men: "Yeah, well...that's not really an excuse, is it?"
Women: "it's only used in these sex simulation games anyway..."
Men: ...
Men: "THERE ARE OTHER USES AS WELL!!!"



)





*okay: never before reading this post, but time-space tends to bend this way when thoughts of sex are involved
**that is: the pornographic-perfect kind of wobbling. Not the way _actual _female breasts wobble when having sex.


----------



## dimmidice (May 4, 2018)

perfect Physics and perfect hitboxes hopefully.


----------



## ThoD (May 4, 2018)

dimmidice said:


> perfect Physics and perfect hitboxes hopefully.


Screw better hitboxes, I like them being all wonky in some games, gives them a good challenge, otherwise Plesioth in the old MH games would be a joke Make all hitboxes really tight in games and you take most challenge out of it, so only way you can balance the difficulty would be to make the bosses spammy with AoE attacks:/


----------



## dimmidice (May 4, 2018)

ThoD said:


> Screw better hitboxes, I like them being all wonky in some games, gives them a good challenge, otherwise Plesioth in the old MH games would be a joke Make all hitboxes really tight in games and you take most challenge out of it, so only way you can balance the difficulty would be to make the bosses spammy with AoE attacks:/


Wacky hitboxes don't make it challenging, they make it annoying. There's tons of ways to make fights challenging yet not frustrating (unless you can't do it i guess)


----------



## ThoD (May 4, 2018)

dimmidice said:


> Wacky hitboxes don't make it challenging, they make it annoying. There's tons of ways to make fights challenging yet not frustrating (unless you can't do it i guess)


Most games with tight hitboxes have to resort to scummy bosses/enemies to balance the difficulty and end up being bad games overall because of it. If you take the half a minute that's needed to learn the wacky hitboxes, then they aren't annoying and you just adjust your playstyle accordingly, simple.


----------



## dimmidice (May 4, 2018)

ThoD said:


> Most games with tight hitboxes have to resort to scummy bosses/enemies to balance the difficulty and end up being bad games overall because of it. If you take the half a minute that's needed to learn the wacky hitboxes, then they aren't annoying and you just adjust your playstyle accordingly, simple.


So bosses with hitboxes that don't work are OK, but other kinds of difficulties are scummy. Makes no sense.


----------



## ThoD (May 4, 2018)

dimmidice said:


> So bosses with hitboxes that don't work are OK, but other kinds of difficulties are scummy. Makes no sense.


When did I say ANYTHING CLOSE to that?:/ It's one thing for hitboxes to not be extremely tight and a whole different for them to be completely non-working/broken (not as in OP, actually broken). Let's see ways to make bosses hard you can have in games:
-TONS of HP or hitting incredibly hard (one shot scumminess or sponge-bosses that make you wonder why you are wasting your time on the game)
-Dirty status moves that make the fight broken and not fun at all (some status is fine but when you got status-spam it's not fun)
-Hitboxes not being incredibly tight (not a bad way and makes you play a bit more carefully than letting you get away with button-mashing)
-Incredibly complicated AI and movement patterns (too hard and time consuming to code for even one boss, let alone for an entire game, so unless it's a huge budge one, all the bosses will play exactly the same making it boring)

So there you have it, not having incredibly tight hitboxes is the best way besides incredibly advanced and complicated AI to raise the difficulty. If you got a way to increase difficulty WITHOUT buffing stats to ridiculous degrees or giving the bosses scummy status-inflicting moves, then let me know. Remember, games are supposed to be FUN, not annoying


----------



## Catastrophic (May 4, 2018)

We'll start making games in 4D graphics. Everything will be displayed in tesseracts using quantum programming.


----------



## Taleweaver (May 5, 2018)

dimmidice said:


> perfect Physics and perfect hitboxes hopefully.


Coming to you on a game server in 2028:

Player: OMG!!! Playerunknown's battleground: return of the apocalypse is SO HYPER REALISTIC! It's like I'm playing in my own back yard...if my back yard overviewed a massive black hole that's the center of a hurricane containing sharks! 
Player: ...and if back yards were affordable in these economical times

<meanwhile, about a parsec or so away>

Player 2: <*aims*>
Player 2: <*fires*>

Player 1: OUCH! I'm hit in the low end of my left...antebrachium muscle? Damnit! now I can't use this arm to steady my aim with my right hand anymore! 
Player: ...better hide behind this chest-high wall until it heals itself.


----------



## Xzi (May 5, 2018)

We've already reached the point of diminishing returns on graphics, which is why PS4 Pro and XB1X aren't selling like they're a whole new generation.  It's also why the market has become much more saturated with indie games.  High-end graphics take a lot more time and investment to create, and very often don't see profit high enough to make up for that.


----------

