Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

The Future of Videogame Aesthetics 359

daniil writes "Here's another look at the 'Realism vs Style' debate. David Hayward, a level designer involved with UT2004 mod Alien Swarm, among others, has written an interesting essay on the aesthetics of videogames, suggesting that, similar to other art forms, the peak of realism in computer games might also be a plateau that acts as precursor to wider experimentation: "We've come a long way since the flint-carved figures of early 3D games, but there's still progress to make before we're producing the game equivalent of sixteenth century marbles. Though it makes for a myopic obsession when compared to the vastness of the picture plane, photo-realism is nonetheless a worthwhile technological achievement to aim for, because it is through this that games will attain the sensation of a lucid dream.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Future of Videogame Aesthetics

Comments Filter:
  • by rovingeyes ( 575063 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:07AM (#13781840)
    Photo-realism is of course very important. It can get you immersed in a game. But what about gameplay? For e.g. photo-realism took a new standard in games like Doom3. But a hour in to the game, I lost interest and realized I also list my $50. Every game in a genre is the same. How about re-inventing the gameplay? How about actually concentrating on virtual reality?
  • Waxing Intellectual (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Shkuey ( 609361 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:08AM (#13781851)
    This guy reminds me of the scene in Mallrats where they're trying to have an intellectual discussion about superman's baby. He's over thinking and over analyzing something that really just isn't that deep. I think he may just like to use big words or see himself in print. I really don't suggest anyone read this unless they've got insomnia.
  • by jkind ( 922585 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:10AM (#13781874) Homepage
    A long winded story but here goes: Went up to a yard sale at a neighbours place a few days ago. Her son, probably 14 or 15, comes over to me and *immediately* starts describing to me a scene in Grant Theft Auto (not sure what version). At first I just listened along, agreeing with him, as I had played games like that previously. But after a while I realized he was talking about BEING (hard to describe what I mean) in the scene. He was talking about characters like Sanchez and police officers like they had really spoken to him. It was a tad creepy. "Sanchez was looking at me like I had done something wrong, but then I could tell by his expression that what I said had really upset him". I came home and immediately tried to look up what kind of condition the boy might have to no avail. It was like he was living the video game, and that people in the real world should understand because they're watching in on it too (game as reality). I'm going to try and chat with his mom about his video gaming habits. At the very least he's spent one too many hours in the game. Anyway I was always against the anti-video gaming nuts since they were blaming Columbine on video gaming (at least it was mentioned as a contributing factor along with marilyn manson and the kitchen sing), but this is the first time I've seen a real scary example of kids being absorbed by the medium.
  • by SpasticThinker ( 892651 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:11AM (#13781882)
    Exactly what I was thinking. Perfect, amazing graphics are good, but if that's all you aim for as a developer, you're missing the point. My dreams may look awesome, but it is always the content that determines the quality and "realism".
  • by Sockatume ( 732728 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:11AM (#13781886)
    Discussing whether photorealism's a good or bad obsession for the industry needs fairly complicated language to be perfectly honest. Heck, just stating the problem calls for a four-syllable word. I'm sure he could've stated it in simpler terms but it's hard to be succinct (clear and precise while brief) in that case.
  • by Evil W1zard ( 832703 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:17AM (#13781930) Journal
    I 100% agree with your statement. While visually the game may be amazing it still won't be worth playing if the gameplay itself is poor. How many video games have we seem come out that have taken extraordinary efforts to make them look graphically superb, but then you play it and it is just boring.

    Visual stimulation is nice, but if the game itself is crap I'm not gonna buy it... Thats why I loved Fable. It was a great concept (character grows as you play it and the world around you is effected by your actions) and it was visually pleasing, but I believe they made the game with gameplay weighing heavier than graphics... Additionally you need to consider the market you are trying to sell to as well. If you make a game that has unbelievably great visuals, but requires a high end video card and massive amount of PC power then you wind up not being able to sell the game to a large part of your targeted audience who don't have the PC to play it...
  • by AlltheCoolNamesGone ( 838035 ) * on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:18AM (#13781938)
    Aesthetics are important, but they should never override gameplay.
    I worry about the fate of the up and coming generation console falling on there faces because all they have been touting have been the aesthetics.
    I think it'll also be interesting to see when we reach the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_Valley [slashdot.org]"> Uncanny Valley in video games and how video game developers proceed from there as far as photo realism goes.
  • by Ceriel Nosforit ( 682174 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:19AM (#13781949)
    Something is deeply wrong. - A slashdotter expressing himself eloquently? Appearing learned while at it?
    A sign of the apocalypse for sure.


    On topic, I think many games already express a specific style, even if it often is more subtle. This is unavoidable as long as different people take notice of different things; different people express themselves differently. This is unavoidable as no man is objective in perception.
    Conways law [catb.org] is satisfied.

    A quick comparison between the releases of gamehouses should show this. It's often striking how varied models of humans can be. Faces especially.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:25AM (#13781995)
    I hate "debates" like this. I really do. They all make the exact same mistake. They assume that the games industry is some kind of ultra-homogenised body, that's going to inevitably move in one direction, and one direction only, with regard to aesthetics. This is simply not true. Looking at my games-shelves, I can see any number of styles represented. There's the ultra-realism (yes, realism is a style too) of Doom 3, Resident Evil 4 and Farcry. There's the comic-book look of Guilty Gear X and most of the first-party Nintendo titles. There's the exaggerated, "epic" style of Halo 2 and Final Fantasy X. And there's the deliberately retro look of Disgaea. To cut a long story short, developers are *always* going to know that there's a market for titles which look "different", so we're never going to see a move towards a single consistent style.

    That said, there *is* the related (but slightly different) issue of stylistic trends and bandwagons.

    What I'm talking about here is where a particular visual style is successful in one or two games, so a big section of the industry starts shovelling out games that use that style, until it's been done to death and the industry moves on to something else (often swinging too far the other way and abandoning the look in question completely).

    On a technological rather than stylistic level, look at what happened with the use of full motion video in games when CD-ROMs appeared on the scene. We had a rush of games with vast amounts of FMV, some of which were awful (Rebel Assault, Night Trap, Sewer Shark, to name but a few) and some which were decent (Wing Commanders III and IV, Privateer: The Darkening, Terra Nova), then suddenly, there was a huge backlash (which persists, unfairly, to this day) and FMV vanished almost entirely. Actually, now that I think about it, I'm sure the costs involved made this a relief for a lot of developers, but... erm... let's ignore that for now.

    Moving back to the present, I think cel shading is going to be the next victim of this backlash. It was fun the first few times we saw it done and it's produced some cool-looking games, but now that Nintendo have pretty much based an entire generation of games, many of them highly mediocre, that rely on it exclusively, I think the market's thoroughly sick of it and it's going to vanish off the radar soon. Who knows what the next big trend will be...

    Photo-realism, while just another style, will, I think be immune to the trend-swing for a while longer. For one thing, it remains the "default" style that people are accustomed to. For another thing, it's as much a technical aspiration as it is a style for the time being. Until we actually get there, I don't see any kind of market backlash against photorealism happening.
  • Style for me (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RedNovember ( 887384 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:29AM (#13782016)

    If you want to frame the debate as style vs. realism (which is incorrect), give me style any day. If I wanted realism, I'd get a life.

    Seriously though, the point of videogames is as escapist fare, like movies. Sure there are movies about ordinary people doing ordinary things, but they are only critically acclaimed, not popular. Some of the most fun video games are unrealistic or just flat out absurd. (see Katamari Damacy [namco.com])

    Besides, a good style is a form of visual branding. People don't forget the earliest Mario [emuverse.com] games, partly because everyone remembers what they looked like.

  • by cluke ( 30394 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:36AM (#13782062)
    While it may be true that the boy spends too much time playing GTA, using the first person to describe what happens in a videogame to a character you control is not unusual, I'd say.

    E.g. "The ghost killed me just the second after the power pill ran out!"

    That wouldn't be considered delusional. I think it's just the violent subject matter is freaking you out.
  • Realism is overrated (Score:2, Interesting)

    by realmolo ( 574068 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:37AM (#13782068)
    Personally, I like my videogames to look pretty cartoon-y. It's just a neater look, artistically.

    Which brings me to my big idea. "Cartoon-Strike". Counter-Strike, but everything looks something like a G.I. Joe cartoon. Well, better than G.I. Joe, but you get the idea. Flat shading, bright colors, low detail. I'm suprised it hasn't been done yet.

    I'm just tired of realism. It's boring.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:40AM (#13782088)
    I've never seen that kind of condition, but I can believe it can occur. Just like that guy from STTNG who got addicted to the holodeck. I have often wondered what will happen when simulations become indistinguishable from reality. Which would you prefer to live in?

    Steve
  • by xtieburn ( 906792 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @11:42AM (#13782102)
    You realise that lucid dreaming is basically another name for dreams you can control. Believe me they are very worth 'playing'
  • by xtracto ( 837672 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:05PM (#13782241) Journal
    When I was younger (at the end of secondary school) I used to have "pornographic" dreams where I did it with some woman. As a 15 year old virgin boy (back then) I found it really awesome and they were the kind of dreams were I didnt want to wake up.

    So, it is my humble opinion that [and I am still *eagerly* waiting for it] that the genere that really needs to be exploited is the adult genere. Of course at first it will look terrible for the society (as when the porno movie industry started) but I am SURE there is a real market there waiting to be cashed.

    I know a lot of jokes will arise from this, but at least, I enjoyed a lot playing the "larry" games back in the old days, although they were pixel based, but they actually had some "mature" content.

    After watching at the "hot coffee" mod videos, I told, WTF, why not do a complete game about that, of course, first it would need to be done by an independent studio but I can bet my ass that it would get a lot of money (if it was commercialized).

    Or better yet why not start an OpenSource project for an Adult Game?! (interesting what are going to be the implications of having a sourceforge download link, and how do you make sure kids wont download it =oP).

    Anyway, THIS, is the place were "realistic graphics" could have a deffinite effect, and certainly the more realistic the better it would be.

  • by orac2 ( 88688 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:14PM (#13782308)
    a post-modern abstractist style FPS

    Actually, it's already been done. At a show called INSTALL.EXE a few years back at the Eyebeam Gallery [eyebeam.org] in NYC, they had a number of abstract interactive installations (to call them 'games' might be stretching the term a bit) based on the source for Wolfenstein-3D and Quake. Here's a review. [findarticles.com]
  • Re:What else then?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rowan_u ( 859287 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:17PM (#13782346)
    Nausea is not necessarily caused by realism. For instance, I remember being horrendously sick while playing the original Descent game. However, I really liked the game, and forged onward despite the sickness. As I became more accustomed to the graphics the nausea disappeared. Also, try changing a rabid FPS gamer's inversion settings, and watch hilarity ensue. The sickness can be caused by other changing controls as well.

    Another cause for nausea in 3d games is the changing of a commonly used physical constant within the game world. For instance the nausea problem in Half-Life 2 that you mentioned was probably caused by Valve changing the default FOV to 75 degrees. Most other 3d games use a field of view closer to 90 degrees.
  • by thesandtiger ( 819476 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:29PM (#13782424)
    I want an engine that'll let me choose how things get rendered, much as can be done with various products like Max or Poser or whatever.

    If I want to cel-render everything so it looks like a cartoon, let me do that. If I want things to look hyper-realistic, let me do that. If I want things to look as if they are made of stained glass, let me do that.

    Give me a palette of variables and let me experiment. Let me export those variables so that I can share my settings with other people, and they with me.

    A perfect example of a game that could really benefit from on-the-fly changes to the rendering would be City of Heroes. I would *love* to see the game done in a XIII/Zelda: Wind Walker style - but, alas, the developers chose to present it in that "pseudo-reality" style that's become boring to me. There have also been a number of games that I think I might have otherwise enjoyed, but I was just bored to death with the visuals.

    Video games are interactive. So let me interact with the renderer.
  • by davew2040 ( 300953 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:33PM (#13782455) Journal
    Keep in mind that there's nothing that states that photorealism has to be the same old thing that the average homosapien can witness in his or her daily routine or with a few hours sitting on an airplane. The fact that Yet Another Jungle Commando Game can look as realistic as ever doesn't mean that better games can't take a photorealistic rendering approach and make something that is genuinely visually interesting. In a fantasty game, clever use of surreal lighting effects can make a light source be a little less like an exposed light bulb and a little more like an aurora borealis; in a sci-fi game, clothing surface properties can make the world seem just a little different than anything you've ever seen in real life. Even when none of the techniques applied technically reach beyond photorealistic rendering, the result can be so much more than any photo you'll see.

    It's really up to the artists to take the capacity for photorealism and run with it, creating something that brings the player out of their reality and into a new one. They've failed if they take photorealism and fill it with parking garages and cubicles and crates and things that people play games to get away from.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:33PM (#13782459)
    Marked as funny, but when I was 'into' lucid dreaming, there were a few occasions where I didn't know whether I was lucid, or simply dreaming that I was lucid (I'm talking once I'd woken and recalled the dreams, not whilst actually in them). I know it doesn't really sound like it makes sense, but hopefully anybody who has experienced multiple lucid dreams knows what I mean. OTOH, maybe it was a lucid dream after all, just simply not at the same level of lucidity as the ones where you have complete control - realising that it's a dream, but at the same time not being lucid enough to realise that since it's a dream you can control it.

    To anybody who hasn't experienced lucid dreams, especially the people who are sceptics or people who don't even know what they are, you really, REALLY have to have one. IMO, they are literally the best experience you will ever have. You can do anything you can in real life and you can do anything you can't do in real life, and if you are lucid enough, they will be just as vivid, clear and real as life itself. How can you possibly beat something which includes everything? As far as your body is concerned, you are awake. Your muscles will receive the same signals as they do when awake, but your body has released a hormone which paralyses you, so you don't try to carry your dreams out. This means motor skills can be trained, muscles can be trained, dream sex is physically the same as real sex (except you don't ejaculate), etc. They can be used to overcome fears (you can take on your fears knowing you can stop it at any time, and no harm can possibly come to you), etc. etc. At the risk of sounding obsessed, lucid dreams PWN J00 477.
  • by ZachPruckowski ( 918562 ) <zachary.pruckowski@gmail.com> on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:35PM (#13782478)
    I think that the idea is sort of rediculous. Video games by necessity are unrealistic, and the graphics are realistic. It'd drive people insane in a FPS if they shot a fully detailed human in the hand, and the hand didn't fall off/become useless. I mean, they can get away with it now, but realistic gameplay and realistic graphics go hand in hand.

    Then there is fantasy. How realistic can you make a Chimera (sp?) look?

    As one poster mentioned GTA, I'll bring it up here. The basic psychologic principle for why we can play violent video games and not be affected by them is because we know they aren't real. However, if the brain can't tell real from video game, it could affect us unconsciously. I have no problem understanding that it is encouraged that I shoot people up in GTA, but discouraged on campus. But if there becomes less and less of a distinction, there could be people who have a problem with it, especially people who already have some violence issues.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:48PM (#13782569)
    lucid dreaming:

    has anyone actually done this? I've heard a number of times that you can and how sweet it is. So I did a little research on it several years back. What I learned as the first step was to go around randomly asking myself "Hey - am I dreaming now?" to build the habit of assesing the possibility so that you would eventually ask yourself and the answer would be "Why, yes!"

    So eventually it was. I woke up right away. The stuff I had read listed a number of ways to try not to wake up, but it wasn't like I realized and then woke up. Realizing was the same as waking up. As soon as I knew I was dreaming I was just lying in bed imagining stuff with my eyes closed. It wasn't magically awsome.

    But if there's anyone out there living the super awsome second life it'd be neat to hear about it...
  • by Rakshasa Taisab ( 244699 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @01:14PM (#13782780) Homepage
    I've had numerous lucid dreams and i've found that there's really two changes of states in your mind, when you become aware of the dream and when you "wake" up. Once you become aware of the dream (not entirely the same as being aware you're dreaming) you need to kinda flow along, avoid thinking that it is a dream. It's really is awesome, especially when you have some cool/pleasurable dream, totally different from just imagining things while awake. Too bad they tend to last only a short while.

    It often happens when I've been up late into the night and bright lights wake me up before I'm done sleeping.
  • Interesting topic (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Chitlenz ( 184283 ) <.moc.zneltihc. .ta. .zneltihc.> on Thursday October 13, 2005 @01:20PM (#13782830) Homepage
    I'll postulate that by the time we have true, full screen photorealistic graphics running at 60fps, laser technology will have evolved enough to 'paint' over your vision (similar to the eye controls used by fighter pilots) with enough density to remove the screen as a disbelief problem. This, btw, is technology that's close to working, but then so is 60 fps visualization at real-like resolutions. The real problems to date, as someone noted above, have been the physics engines with regards to character motion and interaction, and the limited range of motions that currently are programmed into the capture for each model.

    The current reasoning is, we'll put someone in a rubber suit full of sensors and make them execute every motion that they could possibly do as a charater, which leaves the billions of other motion possibilites unexplored. A real breakthrough is very close, where we can code out the lives of bots to give them some sense of place (that seems to be what's missing in Uncanny Valley) by allowing for more random movement and activity paths. I think this will be the real breakthrough, since suspension of disbelief is about more than just resolution.

    Meandering back to the topic though, I think the 'style vs real' debate is overblown, since by very nature if you can do real, you can do anything (on a screen). Obviously real wins every times, its just noone can do it yet.

    -chitlenz

  • Language issues (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Seska ( 253960 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @01:25PM (#13782877)
    It's also not really clear to what extent the teenager believed he was the primary character. It might have been a linguistic convention, where he just avoided having to say, "My character in GTA..." It might have reflected humanity's tendency to anthropomorphize everything. It might have reflected a healthy level of immersion and suspension of disbelief, and he was trying to convey the emotional impact of the situation.

    What it almost definitely does not mean is that he was confusing his own sense of self with that of the character.
  • Nethack dreams (Score:3, Interesting)

    by leoboiko ( 462141 ) <leoboiko @ g m a i l .com> on Thursday October 13, 2005 @01:33PM (#13782956) Homepage
    Most of the dedicate nethack players I've met seem to have dreamt with ascii at least once. From my experience, nethack and tetris are the most dream-prone games.

    In my nightmares, I was once chased by a giant yellow lowercase 'c'...
  • by MrSteveSD ( 801820 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @03:17PM (#13783980)
    Well, if the only form of violence is that you can shoot or throw grenades at people, that's fine for me. I live in the UK and we never have guns or grenades in real life. So if I find myself with a machine gun and a bazooka, I'll know it's ok to kill everyone.

    What I wouldn't like to see is realistic knifing and killing with bare hands. I think that would be far too horrible, even to experience in a game. Anyway, combat studies have shown that soldiers are very reluctant to actually kill during combat. Perhaps this will occur in video games. The more reallistic they become, the more uneasy we will become doing bad things.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2005 @03:30PM (#13784094)
    It was a quirk of translation during the postwar occupation. The US consuls wanted anti-obscenity laws, and it got written as "don't show genitals".

"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines." -- Bertrand Russell

Working...