Do Videogames Need More Graphical Grit? 105
Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial discussing whether some recent videogames, such as Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, look "too sterile and perfect" . The author explains: "The animation is fine but the world Snake runs through is too sharp edged. There's no dirt and grime in the graphics because they're perfect versions of what was seen in the original game. Somehow, these better graphics have detracted somewhat from my opinion of the newer game." He continues: "DOOM 3, for as great as it looks, suffers from a lack of grit in still shots. I'm hoping the final game will not have the plastic look of the current pictures. Even the highly polished Quake III Arena didn't come across as being plastic to me." Do other gamers share this perception of graphical sterility in some recent games?
True (Score:2, Insightful)
double edged sword (Score:4, Insightful)
IANAGD (game developer), but I say lay the groundwork, focus on gameplay and come back to throw these details in with some market testing. Time and processor speed permitting.
Half-life 2 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Games need a dirt filter (Score:3, Insightful)
Notice how it's usually real-time 3D that looks a little too pristine. Pre-rendered stuff tends to look much more realistic (look at Resident Evil and Resident Evil 0 on the GameCube to see what I mean - the backgrounds are gorgeous and realistically dirty where applicable). I'm not saying that it's only 3D games that do this; it's even rare in 2D games where dirt can be represented as easily as swapping the colors on a sprite. It's a matter of developers not paying attention to the same details (by accident, by design, or by force) that some other gamers might.
In my opinion what should be a nice short term goal for game graphic engine developers would be for real-time rendered grime to adhere to character models in a believable fashion. A game character shouldn't look like he just had his outfit dry cleaned if he's just been in the middle of a mudslide.
my .02 (Score:2, Insightful)
Blame Direct X (Score:5, Insightful)
Reflections are rarely perfect. What a lot of these new games need to take the edge off is a blurred reflection.
Here's a test render I did a while back comparing hard & soft reflections: Chrome_Soft_test.jpg [chromecow.com]
Much like chrome was a craze back in the early days of pre-rendered CGI, these hard reflections in real-time graphics are about to jump the shark.
This sounds like... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think we have the technology nescicary to handle the data that would be required at the speeds that would be required, but nobody is focusing on things like smoothly increasing the resolution of a texture as it gets closer to the camera, or making it so that the edge of an object isn't a perfectly straight line, or simple curve. We could probably even work it such that an object changes from a large flat texture mapped surface to a complex object when you get close enough to know the difference with todays hardware. That's the kind of stuff that I want to see. Any engine writers out there listening?
Something else that bothers me is intersections of objects. They're all too perfect. Look at those railings in the screenshot you linked? The connections aren't mechanically believable. Sure, it would take the guy creating the scene way longer to have complex intersections, but it would add so much more realism. What I've seen of Doom 3 looks like the people there care about this kind of thing, so there's some hope, but I don't think that many developers have the same patience when it comes to setting release dates.
It's not about grit (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not saying every game should be cell shaded, but developers should more often utilize the limitless possiblities of style in modern games.
Re:S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, I think it looks pretty good compared to the current crop of games.
- The people throw shadows.
- There's a leaf floating in one of the barrels (look carefully).
- There's random crap lying around down below. (I think this is really important to have).
On the other hand, there are some problems:
- Shadows may be too crisp. Is everything under a spotlight? Either soften the shadows or (preferably) throw multiple shadows. There can't just be one bright light in that scene.
- The people should throw shadows onto themselves.
- The railings, among other things, appear as if they are held together by superglue. How about rivets? Screws?
- The flying debris resulting from the gunshot doesn't appear to have broken off anything. It just magically spawned there. Also the flash of light from that doesn't seem to throw a shadow.
- The pattern of rust on the platform the soldier is kneeling on is duplicated in the platform directly below.
- Do doorframes exist in videogames? Electrical outlets?
- Mortar lines in brick walls are not carried all the way around.
- The background should be just slightly out of focus.
- Et cetera ad nauseum.
I realize it's easy to say these things from the comfort of my non-game-developer chair. But I'd be surprised if I didn't see these things happen as technology catches up. It's the little things (and there are a lot of them) that will make all the difference.
My guess is that this sort of thing will move into the procedural realm. Developers will license libraries that do nothing but generate nice-looking world geometry procedurally, as well as textures, physics, etc., and plug into the rest of the game engine. When you upgrade to the Geforce42, you'll be able to display 2x the screws in metal structures and 3x the litter on the street.
Grit is nice but not necessary (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:double edged sword (Score:1, Insightful)
Time and processor speed NEVER permit...
Re:Half-life 2 (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Grit is nice but not necessary (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes! (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't really have a solution, as the advances in lighting and level design, not to mention the increased amount of art that can be packed into a CD nowadays have taken care of all my ideas, apart from having an artist draw every single wall uniquely to start out with (ridiculously time consuming). Well, maybe have something like Diablo's random level generator, where a key is stored that is used to generate consistent (within the game) dungeons, but basically uses the same elements. Use it to modify certain parts of the panel, like maybe a few pixel wide micro-scratches or discolorations that you really only notice on a subconcious level.
Oh, and I'm sure someone's mentioned this already, but stop making everything look like plastic! Even plastic doesn't gleam like that, as there's dirt that settles on it (and settles in an uneven way). Materials might actually have whatever index of refraction your physics engine is set to, but if there's 50% dust, or 25% wear, that part isn't going to gleam like it was just polished yesterday. And I don't think sewers get polished very often.
Now that I'm rolling, do game publishers only work in brand-new office buildings? For those of you who are in a building a few years old, look down at the ground next time you walk around (no, not just to avoid eye contact, but actually pay attention to the ground). Notice how the carpet/tile is more worn in high-traffic areas? How next to the water cooler it's a little bit darker, due to splatter over the years? How the edges of wide hallways look like they were installed yesterday? How there are always marks on the walls in stairwells? And how even door handles start to show wear after a few years? It's the little things that we see but don't process that really make things look real - the wrinkles in people's faces. We just need "wrinkles" in our textures.
Re: Uhhhhhhhh that's convoluted (Score:1, Insightful)
A game like Mario is cartoony. Even Mario Sunshine with its ultra cool water effects and slick graphics is still designed to be a cartoony game, and therefore no one is going to be bothered by how clean it look.
The problem is with games that attempt to mimic reality. 3D artists work hard to re-create real-world environments and objects, but the problem is that artists have to conciously remind themselves that the world isn't brand new. It's become easy to model and render something in 3D and have it look perfect. Like it's just been manufactured. But real life isn't like that. Real-life objects have scratches, dust, dirt, aging, rusting, fading....
Just check out a game like Silent Hill 2 and 3 as examples of graphics where the artists were concious about how to model and texture the world to look like it was aged. (Of course, they aged it beyond "normal", but it's still a great example).
There's no need for "dirt filters". It's up to the texture artists and the art directors that over-see the overall look of a game to remember to include such details as age, dirt, dust, scratches, etc.....
RB
Re:Games need a dirt filter (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree with you that this thing doesn't apply to video games - everything's either scripted or such basic movement that nobody really cares enough to get freaked out by their closeness to humans (though they can freak us out for other reasons such as jumping out from hiding, etc., but that's all by design).