CryEngine 3 Trailer Shows What Next Gen Consoles Could Be Like
- Thread starter luke_c
- Start date
- Views 9,301
- Replies 76
If they wanted to make it look realistic, they should remove the lense fog and stuff, first person shooters are to be played like if you are looking out of a new pair of eyes, not like controlling a robot with cameras as eyes.
If anyone know what i mean?
If anyone know what i mean?
All I could think when I saw the video with a highly realistic videogame toad, was "Finally, a Battletoads sequel."
and then I watched the video and didn't give a shit the entire time because I was waiting for the battletoads trailer to play.
and then I watched the video and didn't give a shit the entire time because I was waiting for the battletoads trailer to play.
I agree completely. Hyper realistic graphics don't impress me at all. Especially if the game is a shooter.
I have to admit, that trailer was breathtaking and it is indeed admirable how games have progressed, but as you say, I prefer my games to be unrealistic.
Life as it is is realistic enough. I want to escape into an unrealistic world, not hop into yet another realistic one.
Okay, a few things.
I find it just baffling that people in this day and age will complain about their graphics being too good. Ten or twenty years from now, if someone saw this video, they would be fucking blown away. Have we become so entitled as gamers that we'll complain when technology advances?
Second, how can you not like your games looking realistic? Admittedly for a game like Mario you wouldn't want them, but if it's something trying to portray itself as realistic, then you want it to look realistic. If I'm in a game where humans are supposed to look like humans, I want them to look like humans. Not a mess of polygons. I think everybody equates everything to CoD nowadays but what about a game like Mass Effect? It's fantastical and sci-fi but they still try to make it look realistic. If it didn't look that way it'd be rather stupid.
Graphics are important to games, as much as anything else. It helps convey a story, set a scene, bring atmosphere and mood. No matter how much people will go "GRAPHICS DON'T MATTER", they really do.
It just annoys me that in this day and age, people can see impressive things like this and just complain about it being too good or say they don't care because they want the march of technology to halt for some retarded reason.
I find it just baffling that people in this day and age will complain about their graphics being too good. Ten or twenty years from now, if someone saw this video, they would be fucking blown away. Have we become so entitled as gamers that we'll complain when technology advances?
Second, how can you not like your games looking realistic? Admittedly for a game like Mario you wouldn't want them, but if it's something trying to portray itself as realistic, then you want it to look realistic. If I'm in a game where humans are supposed to look like humans, I want them to look like humans. Not a mess of polygons. I think everybody equates everything to CoD nowadays but what about a game like Mass Effect? It's fantastical and sci-fi but they still try to make it look realistic. If it didn't look that way it'd be rather stupid.
Graphics are important to games, as much as anything else. It helps convey a story, set a scene, bring atmosphere and mood. No matter how much people will go "GRAPHICS DON'T MATTER", they really do.
It just annoys me that in this day and age, people can see impressive things like this and just complain about it being too good or say they don't care because they want the march of technology to halt for some retarded reason.
There seems to be a lot of confusion about this showing off what playstation or xbox has to offer
This is not, it's simply what CryEngine3 is capable of if it had the specs to back it up.
Every console will be different to what is shown here.
This is not, it's simply what CryEngine3 is capable of if it had the specs to back it up.
Every console will be different to what is shown here.
Fixed*
As for the thread, it not "graphics didn't matter", just that graphics got so well that it less distracting (lost some pull it use to have?) towards other things that makes a game.Even if people want tech to slow down a bit, it only because of money. Not even the systems, but the price of games. I was kind of hoping that some games will go down in price due to the possibility of easing development.
Plus tbh, we need more well 3d cel-shaded games.
If you really think the Wii U will be pumping out next gen graphics then your expectations are wrong.
Also, there's something called "indie games". They're cheaper and not as graphically impressive but help balance out the AAA games industry.
I don't know. For me the PS3 was graphically advanced enough, anymore than that...well I'm not sure I want to shell out the extra money. I think we've reached a point now where graphics can only become so much better before it kinda becomes pointless. I mean every generation since the start of 8 bit gaming we've had quite a leap in graphics and processing speed etc...but now I feel like the leap(in graphics anyway) is getting smaller and smaller and before long, to the naked eye it won't look like much of a leap but more of a step. Not really worth all the costs IMO, developers tend to struggle with the costs for developing games and turning them into a hit as it is...
I don't get it.
The world can still be unrealistic even if the graphics are fucking incredible.
I hope this means more beautiful games instead of just explosions.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,484
- Trophies
- 2
- Location
- Sacramento, California
- Website
- lazerlight.x10.mx
- XP
- 5,469
- Country
It's a simple question of "what will this tech offer me in gameplay?" The advancements of the past involving graphics were much more important because many actually altered methods of gameplay from what we were used to. An example is a racing game on the NES and F-Zero on the SNES. Graphically better, but more importantly, the graphic capability allowed a difference in gameplay. The move into the 3rd dimension from the 2nd dimension needs no explanation.
This Cryengine tech has simply taken what is already done, and made it look better and/or allowed for more eye-candy to happen. That is not important enough by itself when it comes to games nowadays. Perhaps it can do something involving gameplay, but that didn't seem to have a focus in the video.
This Cryengine tech has simply taken what is already done, and made it look better and/or allowed for more eye-candy to happen. That is not important enough by itself when it comes to games nowadays. Perhaps it can do something involving gameplay, but that didn't seem to have a focus in the video.
What I worry about is how this engine will affect game budgets. Games are already becoming more and more expensive to produce. This has made companies less willing to take risks (less new IPs, more sequels, more homogenization across genres, etc) because they think if it's not pushing high end AAA graphics they'll lose a good part of the audience. (See how many smaller companies like Cave and Treasure have largely yielded the mainstream console market to bigger companies).
Seeing it push a lot of power is nice, but it would have been nice too to see how it makes creating these sorts of visuals easier/cheaper/faster. The real time rendering, vegetation/fabric integration goes to that end, but I still worry that game budgets will inflate faster than they should.
Seeing it push a lot of power is nice, but it would have been nice too to see how it makes creating these sorts of visuals easier/cheaper/faster. The real time rendering, vegetation/fabric integration goes to that end, but I still worry that game budgets will inflate faster than they should.
There was an episode of Extra Credits about this but I've already linked to too many Extra Credits videos already.
Needless to say, we'll have indie games to help balance out the AAA budget games.
Plus I think licensing out an engine is a bit easier than building a new one from scratch. It's why so many developers use like Unreal Engine 3 currently. I mean games will still be higher budget but another thing this generation of gaming brings is a way to let lower budget, independently developed games shine via digital distribution. Also digital distribution means you can cut out the costs of physical distribution and finding a publisher possibly.
I do realize many games have taken to digital distribution, both of the developers I named that yielded the console market (Cave and Treasure) have both made games for iOS and XBLA (and frustratingly a lot of cave titles are Japan only Xbox 360 releases). I agree that it will help out balance things, but it's still a small portion of the industry.
Licensing of an engine does help reduce costs, but there are many additional problems that can arise. For example often in development you can find that your tools are really well suited to doing X, but not quite Y, and while building Y from scratch would be easier than doing X, you're now stuck trying to tweak X into Y. It's why you see many genres get homogenized because the tools taper design decisions down fewer avenues.
Indie games have certainly come on strong, but it has been an increasingly difficult field.Just finding out proper pricing has been difficult for many. Heck, it's hard enough just to get noticed depending on where your target market is. If you are noticeable digital still aren't growing at a huge rate, even if you're a big name company. While that works out if you're a small company the year over year growth is still rather tiny. I certainly think it's the future, but digital distribution also faces some possible obstacles (like bandwidth caps from ISPs becoming more commonplace) or consumer rights issues like the ability to resell digital property. But that opens the whole can of worms of what is a game worth? What are you buying? What rights do you have when you make that purchase? etc.
I just think that scene needs to stabilize more before I'd be comfortable saying it will shoulder the market.
Anyway I'm digressing from the topic--and am now wondering if sourcing my points just makes me look like a pretentious douche. It sounded like a good idea at the time! Also served as a good diversion from these textbooks.
Licensing of an engine does help reduce costs, but there are many additional problems that can arise. For example often in development you can find that your tools are really well suited to doing X, but not quite Y, and while building Y from scratch would be easier than doing X, you're now stuck trying to tweak X into Y. It's why you see many genres get homogenized because the tools taper design decisions down fewer avenues.
Indie games have certainly come on strong, but it has been an increasingly difficult field.Just finding out proper pricing has been difficult for many. Heck, it's hard enough just to get noticed depending on where your target market is. If you are noticeable digital still aren't growing at a huge rate, even if you're a big name company. While that works out if you're a small company the year over year growth is still rather tiny. I certainly think it's the future, but digital distribution also faces some possible obstacles (like bandwidth caps from ISPs becoming more commonplace) or consumer rights issues like the ability to resell digital property. But that opens the whole can of worms of what is a game worth? What are you buying? What rights do you have when you make that purchase? etc.
I just think that scene needs to stabilize more before I'd be comfortable saying it will shoulder the market.
Anyway I'm digressing from the topic--and am now wondering if sourcing my points just makes me look like a pretentious douche. It sounded like a good idea at the time! Also served as a good diversion from these textbooks.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 1,167
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 29
- Location
- Vortex World
- Website
- Visit site
- XP
- 499
- Country
+1And with this we need to stop improving graphics and just get this all into VR
Oculus Rift + this = MY LIFE IS FUCKING COMPLETE. Or maybe when we get to true VR, like .hack, or Matrix, or Sword Art Online, I dunno.
The engine looks fucking beautiful, I wonder what would happen if they tried something surreal(Not sure if correct term) with this kind of engine, for example, Alan Wake, or Catherine or Amnesia or Gravity Daze.
I am sure there are better examples of what I am trying to say. but these were the first to pop into my mind.
It adds atmosphere and environment. People severely underestimate how much graphics impact the gameplay, and the better they are, the more of an impact they have.
Look at some of the games of yesteryear and their modern counterparts. I think American McGee's Alice is a great example. With his limited tech, he crafted a pretty dark Wonderland, but it still wasn't as broad as it could have been. Over a decade later, he makes Madness Returns, which utilizes modern technology to make a dark, sweeping version of Wonderland that really makes you feel. It's one of the reasons I loved the game.
Or Half Life. Admittedly the setting change is one big thing but do you think City 17 and the diverse locales of Half Life 2 would be possible with GoldSrc? Source was also able to incorporate cutting edge physics into our games to give us one of the most memorable weapons in years (the Gravity Gun). That's not even counting the advanced animation of the time. I mean this game came out in 2004. I mean the PS3 and Xbox 360 weren't even out yet. 8 years later and the game still looks good.
Environment is a huge part of narrative games, and you can't craft a good environment without good graphics. Better graphics open up better narrative options. That's not even counting being able to incorporate more advanced physics and even larger scales. Like a game like GTA IV wouldn't be possible if it wasn't for the tech it used. Or Just Cause 2 is a great example. It's a fucking massive area to play in, it's basically an entire goddamn country, and there's no fog, no loading times between different cities. It's massive and it feels it. And that's what makes the game great.
People severely underestimate the importance of graphics in today's gaming since it seems to be very "nonconformist" to act like graphics don't matter, but they do. I think not cheering on a constant advance in our technology is just stupid. We should praise continued progressive in our games, not want it to halt.
As per production costs though, which is a very valid point, not all games need these high end graphics to create environments and such. Games can still be very moving and atmospheric with lower graphics, depending on the art. But some games need to look realistic and cutting edge to have their atmosphere work, and that's where graphics like these come in.
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
- Portal
-
- Portal
- No one is chatting at the moment.
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I wonder if I could recommend that to some emulation devs that perhaps the sound could use some smoothing out to simulate those old TVs -
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I think a few of the early systems could benefit from that, at least up to the 8 bit generation, by the 16 bit generation I think TVs had gotten a lot better in almost every way
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
it says it only works for the original R4, R4i Gold (r4ids.cn), R4iDSN (r4idsn.com) and Acekard R.P.G. -
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Just give it a try, but honestly if you have a 3DS you can play DS games without a card just off the internal SD card
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
