Support NeoGAF

[samusx]

So graphicaly what do you think will improve the most with next gen systems? I think it will be textures. They seem to be doing great things with art in games lately. And ways to wrap textures around models to make them looks smooth is cool.

I personally want the next gen systems to have higher poly character and world models. I am liking the more rounded faces in games late this gen, but the smooth faces and then box legs and arms are not going over well with me.

 

[cvxfreak]

I want games that look like REmake and Zero, except in full 3D and even better looking.

Basically.

 

[GhaleonEB]

This is what I want.

 

[BeOnEdge]

better skin texture. fucking DOA games piss me the hell off. why are the characters textured like dolls??? same with most other games. i want real skin.

 

[GhaleonEB]

better skin texture. fucking DOA games piss me the hell off. why are the characters textured like dolls???

Because that is what Team Ninja plays with. Itagaki in particular. How else to explain it?

 

[SolidSnakex]

 

[BeOnEdge]

Because that is what Team Ninja plays with. Itagaki in particular. How else to explain it?

errrr...NO. the only game with some sort of DECENT skin is silent hill. but i want it to go FURTHER. i want freckles, hairy arms, blemishes, scars, imperfections....i mean you can still have a stunning hot chick too but give her some TEXTURE!!!

 

[op_ivy]

after watching the forza video and playing countless hours of pgr2/rsc2.... what i want in next gen graphics(gameplay?) is fully and realistically damagable vehicles AND environments.

sure, some of these current gen games have crash damage, but for the most part, its pretty weak. i want xna saleen s7 demo level of damage... and i want the environments to be affected as well! if i slam into a wooden fence, the car should smash through it goddamnit! some recent games have had at least a taste of this in certain road side objects not being static (rsc2), but nowhere near enough or to the extent i'm hoping for.

 

[funcojoe]

Awesome looking tree's! LOL

 

[hobbitx]

This is what I want.

Tis' what I want to see too, man do I love that pic.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It's that Itagaki goes for an anime look with the DoA characters, they don't want them to be realistic for some reason. You'll get much more realistic fighting game character with VF5.

I can't wait to see what Team Silent will do next gen.

 

[BeOnEdge]

reiko nagase is anime like too BUT she looks more REAL than the DOA characters. in her CG she has some skin texture. more perfected but its there.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

This generation was about a 10x boost from last, but that's not realistic this time. I just want more of everything we have seen, bigger & better. Faster framerates, higher res textures, more polygons etc. Mostly I want more of the little details, like grass, and skin textures, to look better.

 

[doncale]

http://www.gametrailers.com/gt_vault/t_phantasystar_uv_e3_2k4.html
(fast forward 1/3 of the way in)

 

[disabledHeliocentric]

Things need to be dynamic, shifting, more animated, more subtly animated...

 

[gofreak]

Things need to be dynamic, shifting, more animated, more subtly animated...

Agreed, detail, detail, detail - in everything.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

I've read that the next big thing will be something called reverse kinetics.

Anyone know what this is all about?

 

[TTP]

This is what I want.

Spot on. Idem here.

 

[Phoenix]

So long as the game is fun (i.e all of the time wasn't spent making it look good and you end up with beautiful crap), I tend to be a happy camper. To be honest I don't want games to look more and more like reality - I live in the real world, give me something I haven't seen yet.

 

[doncale]

probably not possible

however...

probably possible

 

[TTP]

I've read that the next big thing will be something called reverse kinetics.

Anyone know what this is all about?

u mean inverse kinematics?

If that's it, well, it's more or less what you find in ragdoll physics, or in the way Yorda's arm moves when you drag here around or something like that.

Do a google for more.

 

[Phoenix]

I've read that the next big thing will be something called reverse kinetics.

Anyone know what this is all about?

That would be reverse kinematics and its not really a next big thing its just the opposite approach used by most animation. Forward kinematics is the way most things are modelled, a shoulder joint moves force through to the elbow joint to the wrist joing to the finger joints. Reverse kinematics (I-K -> inverse kinematics) is the opposite where interaction with the fingers drives forces back up the animation chain. This tends to be more physics driven animation than modelled animation. Reverse kinematics is useful for things like hair and results from interactions with an environment, ragdoll, explosions ,etc. IK is cool, but in the end you end up having to have a more modelled forward kinematics in order to have things look right. The folks at Georgia Tech had some nice demoes 3 GDCs ago where they showed an entire animation system that was based entirely on IK - no artist involved in the animation at all. The problem is that its really hard to make things look natural or 'the way you want them to' if you depend entirely on an IK chain.

 

[mashoutposse]

Unreal 3 engine @ 60fps.

 

[White Man]

I don't want anyone to slag on image quality. It may just be a symptom of looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses, but none of the current gen consoles consistently match the image quality of the Dreamcast. Well, maybe the GC. But the PS2? Jeez. Superior image quality next gen or bust.

 

[Phoenix]

I don't want anyone to slag on image quality. It may just be a symptom of looking at the past with rose-tinted glasses, but none of the current gen consoles consistently match the image quality of the Dreamcast. Well, maybe the GC. But the PS2? Jeez. Superior image quality next gen or bust.

I think that is more a function of art and available video/texture memory than anything else. If you look at the few Dreamcast games that were on other next generation platforms, they're pretty much the same 'quality' wise. The image rasterization process is pretty much the same on very non pixel/fragment shading video processor.

 

[BeOnEdge]

none of that LOD and depth of field shit unless nessecary. if i look down the block, stuff still looks clear. not blurry. that PSP demo with the flat shaded buildings is how clear games should look next gen.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Well, the last time I read about it was in a "What do you want in Elder Scrolls 4?" topic about a year ago . I remembered reverse kine-something, so kinetic came to me first :\.

Anyway, i'll look it up now. Sounds interesting.

 

[doncale]

hopes for nextgen Zelda after the new Gamecube Zelda of 2005.

http://www.continuum2.com/movies/Zelda_GBC_commercial.wmv
(right click, save as. don't just click link!)

 

[u_neek]

ARe there any videos of that in-game Silent Hill 3 goodness in motion?

 

[Fafalada]

none of that LOD and depth of field shit unless nessecary. if i look down the block, stuff still looks clear.

Not really - what your eyes focus on looks clear, the rest is blurry, it's just that the way our eyes work, the blurry stuff stays in the corners of our vision.
Anyway people constantly talk about "photo "-realism - and every camera has depth of field, which is why games simulate it. Moreover because cinema direction usually exagerates things like that for dramatic effect - and most of us are so used to seeing TV/movies that our brain perceives those effects as realism enhancement.

 

[doncale]

(ok this could almost be done thisgen, at least on highend PC cards)


(but not this, this would need nextgen consoles)

 

[SolidSnakex]

ARe there any videos of that in-game Silent Hill 3 goodness in motion?

http://www.konamityo.com/sh3/gallery/SH3.mpg

 

[Grubdog]

So long as the game is fun (i.e all of the time wasn't spent making it look good and you end up with beautiful crap), I tend to be a happy camper. To be honest I don't want games to look more and more like reality - I live in the real world, give me something I haven't seen yet.

I agree.

I want to see more than just "better" graphics. I can't really describe what i'm hoping for, because I don't know, I just hope that there is more to next gen than just "better graphics", because really, i'm passed that stage, I don't really care how many polygons a character has or any of that crap, as long as the game is playable and there is nothing restricting it. Games at the moment have already evolved to the point that they're pleasing to the eyes.

 

[BeOnEdge]

Not really - what your eyes focus on looks clear, the rest is blurry, it's just that the way our eyes work, the blurry stuff stays in the corners of our vision.
Anyway people constantly talk about "photo "-realism - and every camera has depth of field, which is why games simulate it. Moreover because cinema direction usually exagerates things like that for dramatic effect - and most of us are so used to seeing TV/movies that our brain perceives those effects as realism enhancement.

in games the blurry stuff is always in front of you!!!! cameras have depth of field. eyes dont work like cameras. when i'm driving, stuff down the street isnt blurry. it blurs as i pass it.

 

[={<SMOKE>}=]

i think lighting is going to be big next gen. i expect all games to have lighting at least on par with splinter cell. self-shadowing can have a huge impact on how "real" a game looks. espn 2k5 looks incredible on the xbox and it's due to:
a) the ultra high res uniform textures
b) the way the character models are lit

to be honest, as the gen is winding down, i think we've seen some incredible things--especially on the xbox. they've pulled stuff off that i didn't think i was going to be seeing this gen.

however, i think maybe some of you guys hopes are a little too high. i think next gen's improvement are going to be more subtle; better lighting, higher res textures, and higher poly counts, but not cg-quality stuff. no toy story for you!

maybe i'm wrong here though... does everyone fully expect every next gen title to look as good or better than doom 3 or the unreal 3 demos? or at least be of that caliber?

 

[u_neek]

I don't really care about Pikmin but if Pikmin 3 looks like that Rebirth demo we saw some time ago...... hot damn!!

 

[u_neek]

maybe i'm wrong here though... does everyone fully expect every next gen title to look as good or better than doom 3 or the unreal 3 demos? or at least be of that caliber?

No, let's be realistic - most low-budget games still doesn't look much better than the big titles from last gen..

 

[seismologist]

probably not possible

however...

probably possible

That's definitely possible. I get graphics like that right now in Doom 3.

 

[Fafalada]

cameras have depth of field. eyes dont work like cameras.

They are both lenses - and DOF is a result of how a lens works.
Any person that has to wear glasses for sight-distance correction, has seen it in practice.

when i'm driving, stuff down the street isnt blurry. it blurs as i pass it.

DOF during driving doesn't really make sense I agree - that's a case for bad design. Was there any game EXCEPT Wreckless that did that though?
I'm much more used to see it done in cutscenes to capture a more cinematic feel, much like in real cinema.

maybe i'm wrong here though... does everyone fully expect every next gen title to look as good or better than doom 3 or the unreal 3 demos? or at least be of that caliber?

After (finally) spending some time with Doom3, I would hope the nexgen titles will look a lot better then that. Particularly the lowpoly aspects are rather jarring.
Saying "every" title is being silly though - even next gen you'll still have a fair share of 2d titles and stuff that simply doesn't have any use for fancy graphics.

 

[cybamerc]

={<SMOKE>}=:

> maybe i'm wrong here though... does everyone fully expect every next gen title to look
> as good or better than doom 3 or the unreal 3 demos? or at least be of that caliber?

Of course not. You'll always have games that don't even come close to pushing the hardware. When using a game like Doom 3 as a benchmark you really need to distinguish between the technical aspects and the artistic aspects. I expect the vast majority of next-gen games to have a renderer that beats Doom 3 on features while also pushing more polygons (not dissimilar to UE3). But that's not the same as saying that the games will look as good. Everything comes down to how that technology is put to use. That said I think you'll see many games that look significantly better than Doom 3.

 

[={<SMOKE>}=]

another issue, to me, is aliasing. do you guys think that next gen will completely get rid of aliasing? how "jaggie-free" can we expect next gen graphics to be? if aliasing is non-existant, i think it will go a long way towards making next-gen games look all the more impressive.

 

[Solid]

Something like this... it's Oli's pic just so you know.

 

[={<SMOKE>}=]

^^
that's what the gcn build should of looked like. unified lighting system my ass...

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I know the quality and detail of visuals will be greatly improved, but I'm still waiting for fully comprehensive physics in all games. Animation would greatly benefit from more generous use of more realistic physics. That's pretty much it on the visual end.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

I want the same sh!t I've wanted every new gen...

Non-compromised frame rates
High res textures
Rendering Options
Large set of post rendering effects
And lighting. Lots and lots of lighting...

Havok is more than adequate as far as physics go.

 

[Mr_Furious]

Pushing more polys or rendering higher res textures will be a given next gen. What I hope to see mostly though is the advancement in lighting and it's effects on the environment and it's varying surfaces/materials. Lighting is still very expensive to calculate but hopefully, it'll be greatly improved upon when next gen rolls around.

 

[gofreak]

Havok is great given the capabilities of current systems, but there is a LONG way to go in physics simulation in realtime. Havok will step up and do the best that can be done with next-gen systems, I'm sure, but in its current iteration, it probably wouldn't be as good as it could be. There'll need to be a Havok 3.0, in other words, and even that won't be the absolute last word, by any means.

Think about things like deformation, destruction of objects etc.

 

[Hari]

The one thing I would love to see next gen…

- All games to support 720p, 1080i and 1080p over HDMI. (Output selectable in options menu.)

 

[MightyHedgehog]

The one thing I would love to see next gen…

- All games to support 720p, 1080i and 1080p over HDMI. (Output selectable in options menu.)

For next-gen, that's probably a given...well, I don't think we'll see full support for 1080p, but certainly 480p, 720p, and 1080i.

 

[madara]

I want incredible stylish graphical improvements. Enough with reality crap. If I want see that I go outside :0