| Page 1 of 4 |
|
|
 Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 10:18 Post subject: What's Next? |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 10:20 Post subject: |
|
|
UE3 for the win 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 10:23 Post subject: |
|
|
I think it's only going to get better, photorealistic textures etc. better ligntning and physics.
Maybe animations will be hostory some day and will be like a free movement system or something. things will just get better and better, but my main concern is that the better gfx,physics and so on gets us shorter games and more eyecandy and moving stuff instead of long games which are replayable for years.
If they do both all the pretty stuff + gameplay, it will be heaven
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 10:29 Post subject: |
|
|
the key to making really film/video/lifelike gaming experiences is now all in the effects. probably most importantly is blur and softness, because thats what you get in real life and film. instead of having each frame being static, things have to blur like the gun in this crysis screenie:
http://www.firingsquad.com/media/hirez.asp?file=/media/galleries/e3_crysis/01.jpg
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 11:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Believe me it will get better.
Gameing will grow each year. FOr not long ago, gameing for for geeks and nerds, but today and years to game it will be compared to TV, and its more accepted nowdays to be a gamer that it was just a few years ago.
What would you rather spend your evening with? with a interesteing immersive game or just some lame quiz show on tv? i think gameing will takeover TV in the future. (in terms of what ppl will use thier sparetime on)
See how much monney they spend on makeing new blockbuster movies? that will be games soon to come!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 11:04 Post subject: |
|
|
As much as I love games, I also love TV-series and movies and have a passion for both.
In the 90s, Hollywood thought TV-shows were going to take over movies, but they were wrong. Same goes with people thinking that movies were taking over for books, but books are anything but dead. I think you are wrong in respects to games taking over TV.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IcedFreon
Posts: 1035
Location: THE PILLOW FORT OF ISOLATION
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 11:12 Post subject: |
|
|
that top pic if from SC4 and was said not to be ingame footage but concept art. read it in pcgamer a couple months ago.
Intel Core i7-3770K @ 3.50 GHz
Asrock Z77 Extreme 4
EVGA GeForce GTX 670 FTW 2GB
8GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 11:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Uhm, no. I remember seeing that IN GAME from a video on GameSpot during E3.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poullou
Posts: 1746
Location: Internet Express
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 13:28 Post subject: |
|
|
2015:
'Watch the new Lost series made by Ubisoft-Paramount Pictures! '
'Starred: Nvidia and AmTi cards'
Ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς - Μολὼν λαβέ
Today is a gift. That's why it's called the present.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 13:40 Post subject: |
|
|
soon there would be emotions like you could see tears and things like that
bleeding if some one shot you you will see the blood drooping from you
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 15:08 Post subject: |
|
|
Right now the current boom is in physics. Creating something better than Havok is on top of the list and that's why we see physx cards popping everywhere. The second priority is in animation. We have reached a good plateau for visuals and there's nothing much we can do besides post processing effects such as motion blur, bloom and depth of field. These visual effects already exist and will be within the next-gen games this season (sept-dec 06). So, we have good visuals yet we lack good animation; it is still not realistic enough and the uncanny valley is quite close. Animation tends to go toward a more "random" way and one of these outputs is procedural animation (for reference check Spore). These 2 top elements both go with another. Procedural animation with a top notch physics engine will produce extremely realistic movement. The problem animation in games is that when you go too fast it doesn't look human-fast but more like jerky-too-quick and on the opposite, going slower looks like lag or something. The temporary solution for that was slowing down rapid movements (see bullet-time) but now with the new breed of animators and with procedural animation combined with near-perfect physics a rapid movement looks just natural. Add motion blur and dof to it and you've got the perfect on screen visuals.
Next-Gen games are practically limitless with polygons and textures yet that's not where the money is. You can slam over 500 000poly on screen on xbox360 or even use 2048 textures yet there is no need for such a thing. We use less poly and 1024 textures to give place to better physics, animation and post-processing effects. The amount of poly doesn't matter anymore because we have awesome textures;
With normal map now in full production in every next-gen and current-gen games we can simply bake hi-res into mid-res and don't even need the poly (see Gears of Wars). Upcoming in textures will be some sort of better normal map where it fakes the shape as well. In other words, when looking sideways at a normal mapped object you see it's flat even though the texture indicates it's not. Next-Gen textures will show the cavities as if it was real 3d. We will also see procedural textures.
So, technically speaking that is the future of gaming. From a non-technical point of view, I see it as more online and episodic content (such as the case with Steam), less rpg games unless they find an efficient way to create them in less than 3 years. More hybrid genres (action-rpg, fps-rts, race-action, etc.) and more focus on the artistic side of games. Developers are getting more than annoyed with ever going boring franchises and sequels after sequels. The indie developers are doing a big impact and are slowly reflecting on the big companies and so I think we will see more original games coming (Portal, Spore, Okami, etc.). Major game studios are now willing to invest in more independent-styled game and original concepts because they all have a flagship game. Ubisoft is working on SC Double Agent because it will be a certain money-maker and with that flood of money coming they can afford to spend some on other original concepts. As for smaller companies there is now some light with content delivery systems like Steam, it eliminates the publisher thus eliminating alot of restrictions, constraints and other major costs.
From where I stand, the future of gaming is very bright. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 15:12 Post subject: |
|
|
Malveous, an excellent post. I enjoyed reading it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 15:17 Post subject: |
|
|
Malveous: Yeah, great. Do you work with this kind of stuff?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 15:22 Post subject: |
|
|
Animation: Motion Capture (see Rb6 Vegas)
Polys/Textures: Real Displacement Mapping (note Real, not Virtual)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 17:18 Post subject: |
|
|
The new Quantic "Fahrenheit" Dream game will feature life-like emotions and Assassin's Creed has some of the best (if not the best) animations to date according to the mag I read (OPM2,has the first ingame screens that were scanned and posted all over the net  ).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudolph
Posts: 603
Location: Germany
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 26th Jul 2006 23:12 Post subject: |
|
|
Just think of the cost to make the game tho thats going to be a major part of it all.
dust.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Posts: 3074
Location: San Diego, CA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 00:21 Post subject: |
|
|
i think some advanced VR will eventually come back into play
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 02:27 Post subject: |
|
|
nice post malveous.
the immediate future looks great. However, it still incorporates the same ancient ergonomics as of 20-30 years ago. This goes for the visual output [2D screen] & the control input [move fingers/ waggle thumbs etc]. As for the latter, hopefully the Wii will help move things along a bit.
I'll only be truly satisfied that we've taken "the next step" when I look into a monitor or other visual device and see true depth, pure 3D. Hopefully within our lifetime. Next step up from that would be direct neuronal connection but I doubt we'll be around to see that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
werdercanuck
Posts: 1562
Location: Pot Capital of Canada (BC)
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 03:30 Post subject: |
|
|
USB fleshlight 
1F U C4N R34D 7H1S, U R34LLY N33D 70 G37 L41D
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 03:54 Post subject: |
|
|
and to think ill be stuck playing madden on pc......I hope they atleast add the combine on current gen
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 06:28 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks alot for the feedback.
I am actually working in the game industry, deelix.
Parallax_ motion capture is indeed a nice feature as it recreates an almost authentic movement however it weights alot within the game budget and that's where procedural animation will overtake. A full set of procedural animation for 1 character will weight around 220kb as the full set of motion capture for 1 character will weight over 30mb multiply it by the amount of character in the game and on screen and you will see why procedural is a key solution to next-gen game development. Finally, real displacement mapping will come indeed in next-gen games although I expect to see Parallax Mapping first (no pun intended with your nick).
The costs are indeed going pretty high for next-gen games and this factor explains the lack of RPGs. The cost of a next-gen game is too high for a long term development hence why FPS are at the top of the market; easy, quick and generates alot of money. There is however a counter balance to that point. The constantly dropping cost of mass production mixed with the constantly dropping cost of next-gen hardware creates a small pool of money. If you add to that the fact that gamers keep on expanding and playing a game is now part of the normal life of Joe Everyone the major studios are willing to be spending more on games since they are making more profit. For a 10millions US game you can expect around 10times the profit on the long run. With computers now being almost in every house and with gaming consoles taking the shape of a living room component games are doing quite good indeed.
Studios around the world are currently expanding for the money-recipee is now known;
Get a powerful licence and exploit it to the max while on the side you get another team to actually develop and create original concepts. Your flagship licence provides money for your minor development and that is until your minor development team uncovers a gold mine; a new game concept, genre or style and with it you make a very big game which you will exploit to the max. So now you have 2 flahship games; the licenced one and the new concept and on the side you have a new team working on research and development until they find a new concept, genre or style which you will then exploit and also eventually start selling licence for your first original game and so on and so on.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudolph
Posts: 603
Location: Germany
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 10:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the explanation Malveous, but I am still not sure. I think motion capture gives the best possible animations, despite the cost. So maybe it will be used by companies that can afford it, while procedural will be used by everyone else. Don't know for sure, just guessing
Rudolph: Ageia PhysX is shit. Wait for ATI/nVIDIA to incorporate their physics solution on their cards (at least one of them has confirmed to use Havok FX).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rudolph
Posts: 603
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 13:45 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh! I totally forgot! You're right! Yeah, HavokFX is much better and will be better supported. (DX10 and so on.)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheDuck
Posts: 148
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 18:01 Post subject: Re: What's Next? |
|
|
First:
| SirSmokesAlot wrote: | I remember back in the day playing Blake Stone ((1993, 13 years ago)) and thinking to myself that it couldnt possibly get much better..
|
Then:
| SirSmokesAlot wrote: |
in 5-10 years what can we expect to see? I HIGHLY doubt you can get 3D graphics to look much better then this here. |
You're making the same mistake now as with Blake Stone then heh, it's good to read yourself sometimes 
I am sure we will see a lot better 3d in the future.
As for the motion scripting - procedural is time consuming and doesnt look "real" and the only reason motion-capture is expensive are the tools required for it, these as time passes will get cheaper and every game studio will have them - cheap and quick and realistic. And the size, 30mb is like nothing for a next-gen game. Later in future we might see fully realistic body engines then can provide you with motion animations just by describing what you want to do, adapting in the realtime to a given vitual-world (every move you do would be 100% unique).
| werdercanuck wrote: | | USB fleshlight |
Haha   - I hope it wouldnt get hacked over the internet to make an electric shock to your dick.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 18:29 Post subject: |
|
|
Rudolph, as Parallax_ said, PhysX isn't so good and comes with a high price. Its requirements are high and it simply bottlenecks in your pci slot.
HavokFX on ATI cards will be a very good addition though. I am stating ATI simply because ATI did just merge with AMD and also because ATI is not putting their Crossfire on the center stage. ( on a sidenote, NVIDIA's response to the merger was something like: "well we are the only ones who have not been bought! We're the first in that race." My response to them: Who cares?)
NVIDIA releases cards that are good but would be better on SLI and that has a negative impact on the gamers because it means spending twice the money plus you need a motherboard that will be taking it.
ATI is working on his HavokFX card but is making sure the single card will contain two gpu (1 gpu and 1 ppu). I personally think both company will soon drop SLI and Crossfire just like 3DFX did; it does not appeal to the regular customer and it has no future possibility.
Merging two gpu into one card is a good exit out of the useless 2 cards battle.
Finally, Motion Capture is a very good way to recreate movement yet the costs in equipment are indeed curently very high (to either rent the capture studio and its staff or to have the equipment yourself) and the cost in space too. 30mb is alot right now considering our only output is DVD. If we go HD DVD or Blu-Ray we have a problem; it won't be mainstream on PC for a while so we can forget multiplatform or PC Porting. The other solution would be Multi DVD yet this is another cost factor (since you have to press twice).
As for the "body engine" that will do "motion animations just by describing what you want to do" that is the exact purpose of procedural animation; to recreate "every move you do would be unique". The problem with motion capture are its current and next limit. You will always be limitted by what you capture and the more you capture the more money it costs so your producer will be willing to capture the strict minimum. On the other hand, procedural animation is indeed time consuming yet once completed and mixed with a good physics engine you have unique realistic movement. So you create a "procedural engine" and that same engine can be reused in all of your upcoming games and all of these games will have unique movement. Time consuming? It is but in the long run it will be an excellent tool.
Think about it, you have your procedural engine developed already, you have licenced the next-gen version of Source that comes with the next-gen version of Havok and you integrate your procedural engine within Source and right there you have the perfect combination; good engine, good physics, good animations. What's left? Good models, good features and good story. But that's not all because at the same time, your other team is developing a completely different game with the Unreal 5 engine. They use the same procedural engine as your first team and create completely unique animation and that is in no time! As a producer you just got your first wet dream because you just savec a shitload of money on animation and its development.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheDuck
Posts: 148
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 20:03 Post subject: |
|
|
You're kinda wrong about what body engine is, none of the games up to date have this, literally NONE. All games have already ready-to-use motion scripts, either captured with motion-caputre equip or created in some 3d application, they are just 'played' for the situation model is in. They might look unique but they are not, if you encounter some wall you can be sure the model will react 100% same to it, maybe up to 5 different reactions used randomly. This is procedural motion you are talking about. The body engine I was speaking about uses ZERO preencoded movements, it's creating move motion according to what you do, so its kind of AI for your movements and like I already said - NONE of the games have it, maybe in the future. For now the only true realtime motion for models is a rag-doll effect, but its not 'movement', from tech point of view just flying points with physics aplied.
Oh and by the way - Microsoft dropped the idea of Physics Card support for DX 10. Ageia guys are very angry...  MS will add it later next year with some update when ATI and NVidia will have it finally sorted.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cohen
Posts: 7155
Location: Rapture
|
| Posted: Thu, 27th Jul 2006 20:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Games still lack the "100%" freedom concept and always will. When you walk out of your hosue in real life there is no limit to what you can do in the world.. If developers manage to create a game with even 50% of freedom you have in real life then that game will change everything.
An example of this is grand theft auto 3. The game was a massive success when it hit, sold millions world wide and completely flattenned the gaming industry. The reason for this IMO was the amount of freedom. I meen it was litterally like walking out of your house, thinking damn i could steal something, il go drag a dude out of a car and drive off, hell if i want i could run that mofo over, done that, man im getting bored, i think il go buy a gun and go on a killign spree, and when i get bored of that hell ima go find some gangsters to work for, do a couple of mob hits, hell it had so much freedom you could probably do 90% of what you can as a real criminal. Each isntallment of the game bought new things to the table, vice citie's bikes, san andreas and its BMX's.
The game rocked, and you had almost no limits on being a criminal. Another good example of freedom is Farenheit. Well, a failed attempt IMHO. It seemed good at first, having alot of decisions to make, routes to take.. but it fast got boring and you soon realise you havent really changed much and the story is quite written down just with sidetracks and different ways to get to the same stuff. If you had the option to kill everyone in the diner then nick a car outside and bez off at 90MPH it would have been alot better freedom of choice.
just my 2 cents
troll detected by SiN
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 4 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
