Support NeoGAF

[jcorb]

I’m not gonna sit here and pretend that I’ve never been interested in great graphics. But I really feel like we sort of hit a ceiling *last* generation. The Hitman reboot trilogy are about the best I honestly care for any game to look. A memorable art style will always win out in my books, but even among more “realistic” styles, I actually don’t know modern games have evolved *that* far beyond the Xbox Ninja Gaiden. The cel-shaded Prince of Persia game is probably the best-looking game ever made, as character models go.

Obviously the PS5 Pro has got people speculating how much more powerful it is, and certainly their presentation made them look incredibly foolish. But moreover, I question why people even *want* realistic games?

I mean, every other medium is trying to make itself more fantastic, yet for some reason video games are always pursuing “better graphics”… to what end? Most modern releases already bleed together visually, and I find the more “realistic” a game looks, the more mundane it feels.

I catch myself wondering, what would devs back in the 80’s and 90’s have done with all this hardware power? Because I can’t possibly imagine it being “use decades’ worth of tech advancement to make the most realistic canvas pockets on your operator’s vest you’ve ever seen”.

Just seems like we’ve really lost the forest for the trees.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

It is indeed getting much smaller. And part of the problem is that the cross-gen stuff just won't really go away. And in fact, with Switch 2, will probably make it worse since I suspect most third party devs will now make that their lowest baseline (it should be less powerful than the Xbox Series S, I imagine).

So you don't have anyone really pushing exclusively high end graphics, so the differences between games becomes less apparent and distinct.

It's just the way things are. That doesn't mean we aren't getting awesome looking games though, it's just that I think it's going to become more rare to have those games that really push next-gen like we've had in the past. Games will become scalable, and it will be up to the devs to determine how much focus they put on the higher end spectrum of the platforms they support.

Some will definitely push it more than others (like CDPR seems to always love supporting high end bells and whistles).

I'm not even disappointed though, the PS5 Pro will do what I want it to do --- give me higher fidelity with the higher frames so I don't need to put up with blurrier 60 fps modes. For some, that isn't going to be a big enough deal to justify. But for me, it's worth it as my primary system for the next 4 years or longer.

 

[Optimus Lime]

Dedicating modern graphics processing to paint by numbers movie games, as in Ubisoft or Sony's horrible recent years, is definitely like putting lipstick on a pig - a very expensive pig, which you have to pay more money in order for it to have all four legs.

My hope is that eventually, incredible graphics are applied to a game that isn't a big sack of monkey spunk. In the meantime, I will run everything on my PC, and feel incredibly smug while doing so.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Indeed

Game development costs and time have skyrocketed and graphical fidelity is a leading cause.

Once we get consoles that can run Matrix Awakens at 2160p/60 the vast majority of gamers will be happy.

 

[NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt]

I’m not gonna sit here and pretend that I’ve never been interested in great graphics. But I really feel like we sort of hit a ceiling *last* generation. The Hitman reboot trilogy are about the best I honestly care for any game to look. A memorable art style will always win out in my books, but even among more “realistic” styles, I actually don’t know modern games have evolved *that* far beyond the Xbox Ninja Gaiden. The cel-shaded Prince of Persia game is probably the best-looking game ever made, as character models go.

Obviously the PS5 Pro has got people speculating how much more powerful it is, and certainly their presentation made them look incredibly foolish. But moreover, I question why people even *want* realistic games?

I mean, every other medium is trying to make itself more fantastic, yet for some reason video games are always pursuing “better graphics”… to what end? Most modern releases already bleed together visually, and I find the more “realistic” a game looks, the more mundane it feels.

I catch myself wondering, what would devs back in the 80’s and 90’s have done with all this hardware power? Because I can’t possibly imagine it being “use decades’ worth of tech advancement to make the most realistic canvas pockets on your operator’s vest you’ve ever seen”.

Just seems like we’ve really lost the forest for the trees.

For me Law of Dimishing Returns is a thing

When it comes to PC gaming, I still play 1080p 60FPS. I have played a couple of games on 4k before and hardly noticed any difference

With Switch 2 I'm fine with it being better than a PS4 when it comes to graphics. Hell I play a ton on my Steamdeck OLED and the screen on it isn't even full 1080p. Still looks great

For me graphic jumps don't impress me like it used to. The last time I was impressed was when I played PS4 for the first time and the first game I got for it is Tomb Raider Definitive Edition. Which I still go back sometimes to play and I'm still impressed by the graphics

That's my two cents

 

[RetroGamingUK]

For me graphic jumps don't impress me like it used to. The last time I was impressed was when I played PS4 for the first time and the first game I got for it is Tomb Raider Definitive Edition. Which I still go back sometimes to play and I'm still impressed by the graphics

I remember going from PS1/Saturn to PS2/Dreamcast and being repeatedly mind blown by new games. Sonic Adventure, Soul Calibur, Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, all just breathtaking.

I don’t get that now, but the only reason for that is because a lot of PS4 games still look amazing. The SSD is my favourite PS5 feature.

 

[GigaBowser]

Nintendo was rigggggght in 2017 my friends portbles are the future

 

[The Cockatrice]

Im replaying the Uncharted series and it still looks fantastic, so much that I really dont care that it lacks super detailed shadows no one really notices when playing that tank performance. Also its crazy how much standard reflections got worse with time only to push forward raytraced reflections. With each year I am more and more replaying and sticking with old games rather than new shit.

 

[captainnapalm]

You notice it when you go back and play older games. In my head, the first Plague Tale and the first God of War games were graphical powerhouses, but if you compare them to their sequels they both actually look very dated already. When I first played GoW Ragnarok, I thought there wasn't much of a leap from the first game. Then I installed the first game and realised there was a very big leap.

 

[Cakeboxer]

Hitman really looks stunning. I would be happy if every game looks like that and runs in native 4k60fps, but people will go for 8k60fps, then 8k120fps and so on. This never ends.

 

[Hyet]

While I agree completely with OP, we still have to understand that graphics are still one on the bigger selling points and one of the easier ways of mitigation risk as far as execs are concerned. It works for them: you spend more time and money on it, it looks better and the products prospects increase. Feels manageable from their PoV

I wonder if projects like Dave the Diver changed this somewhat. We'll see in a couple years I guess.

 

[Crayon]

Last gen the quality pbr was a great jump that made things look new. This gen was supposed to be Ray tracing, but it's not yet having that pbr did right from the start.

Without anything new jumping out in the graphics, a PS5 feels like a straight hardware upgrade that just does all the same stuff but faster.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Hitman really looks stunning. I would be happy if every game looks like that and runs in native 4k60fps, but people will go for 8k60fps, then 8k120fps and so on. This never ends.

Again, diminishing returns.

Most people in the world just don’t have room for an 8K TV and never will.

Every time you double frame rate you lose the perceivable difference, most people can’t tell the difference between 60fps and 120fps

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Last gen the quality pbr was a great jump that made things look new. This gen was supposed to be Ray tracing, but it's not yet having that pbr did right from the start.

Without anything new jumping out in the graphics, a PS5 feels like a straight hardware upgrade that just does all the same stuff but faster.

I wonder when we’ll see the “last” generation?

By that I mean the one that finally breaks the upgrade cycle of every 6-7 years?

If PS6 comes out in 2028 and people don’t care about graphics beyond that, could PS6 still be the main home console in the 2040s?

 

[Crayon]

I wonder when we’ll see the “last” generation?

By that I mean the one that finally breaks the upgrade cycle of every 6-7 years?

If PS6 comes out in 2028 and people don’t care about graphics beyond that, could PS6 still be the main home console in the 2040s?

Something big can still happen in graphics if there's a real new technology. This time though... there really wasn't anything. Raytracing was the buzzword but it's impact has been minimal. 4 years in and you still need a good card for the few games that raytracing really make a difference in. In consoles, it was a non starter.

So this gen just didn't have any wowing tech. That's the first time ever lol. But it's the only time so far. Diminishing returns is real but hopefully we get to see a few more breakthroughs in the future.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Something big can still happen in graphics if there's a real new technology.

But will the mass market care?

How many will pay £600 for a new box because they didn’t think Alan Wake 2 looked good enough?

 

[Crayon]

But will the mass market care?

If it really looks different,then yeah. I think...

 

[Melfice7]

i blame the standardization of engines like unreal, the diminishing of developers skills (the good ones didnt stop being good, maybe theres just too many worse ones now) and lack of willingness of publishers to take risks (based on tech)

 

[Radical_3d]

I knew that the moment I saw the Uncharted 4 teaser ten years ago. But my take on this is:

 

[tusharngf]

if i am spending $1500 bucks on my RIG i want to play the best. I don't care about diminishing returns or high budget cost games that's not my problem. I want everything to be on par when i am paying 70 bucks. This is coming from me who plays Castlevania games every year.

 

[Astray]

We say this a lot, but the biggest game of the year (Black Myth: Wu-Kong) built its pre-release hype on graphical fidelity.

Meanwhile Sony tried to promote the PS5 Pro on better 60fps support and the internet sneered.

Developers go for graphics because graphics sell games still. Gamers continue to self-delude as per usual.

 

[Felessan]

I’m not gonna sit here and pretend that I’ve never been interested in great graphics. But I really feel like we sort of hit a ceiling *last* generation. The Hitman reboot trilogy are about the best I honestly care for any game to look. A memorable art style will always win out in my books, but even among more “realistic” styles, I actually don’t know modern games have evolved *that* far beyond the Xbox Ninja Gaiden. The cel-shaded Prince of Persia game is probably the best-looking game ever made, as character models go.

You can stop wherever you want personally
But some people will still look forward for better picture. Art can smooth something, but art+graphics are just better than just art - Elden Ring looks cute but still it obviously aged engine and UE5 demo just miles away in IQ.
We are still far away from the point when graphics upgrade will become unnoticable - photo textures, micro-geometry, heavy RT etc are still make significant and easily noticable graphics upgrade
And where is a demand - there is a supply

 

[RetroGamingUK]

You can stop wherever you want personally
But some people will still look forward for better picture. Art can smooth something, but art+graphics are just better than just art - Elden Ring looks cute but still it obviously aged engine and UE5 demo just miles away in IQ.
We are still far away from the point when graphics upgrade will become unnoticable - photo textures, micro-geometry, heavy RT etc are still make significant and easily noticable graphics upgrade
And where is a demand - there is a supply

I’d love this, but games already take too long to make, where do we draw the line?

 

[Kumomeme]

well from another perspective, this is the period where devs can give more focused on improving IQ and other in game gameplay aspect with A.I support.

 

[N1tr0sOx1d3]

well from another perspective, this is the period where devs can give more focused on improving IQ and other in game gameplay aspect with A.I support.

Not kidding here. Let’s go back to developing proper physics too and destruction.

 

[SweetTooth]

Dedicating modern graphics processing to paint by numbers movie games, as in Ubisoft or Sony's horrible recent years, is definitely like putting lipstick on a pig - a very expensive pig, which you have to pay more money in order for it to have all four legs.

My hope is that eventually, incredible graphics are applied to a game that isn't a big sack of monkey spunk. In the meantime, I will run everything on my PC, and feel incredibly smug while doing so.

WTH are you on about? Movie games?

 

[Physiognomonics]

I remember going from PS1/Saturn to PS2/Dreamcast and being repeatedly mind blown by new games. Sonic Adventure, Soul Calibur, Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, all just breathtaking.

I don’t get that now, but the only reason for that is because a lot of PS4 games still look amazing. The SSD is my favourite PS5 feature.

That and all games at 60fps.

 

[atyourservice]

Human physiology is the entire reason the 'video' part of video games is more dominant in marketing. Our eyes are very specialized and sensitive. It is very easy to derive pleasure from that sense. Very easy to appeal to the imagination.

The 'games' part; the rules, mechanics, and systems that govern play, is still hard to abstract, and thus hard to sell (even though they're barely innovating on it anymore at the top level).

To anyone who is seriously still chasing graphics, an experiment:
Pull out your phone and open the camera. Point out your window and look at the screen. What you see is the endpoint of the graphics arms race. Now imagine playing a game with those graphics in VR.

Would that really be a much better experience? It would be different, for sure, but If the gameplay is the same, what is the point?

I don't know what I'm talking about, I am very tired. I just don't believe anything will change. Games are made for the lowest common denominator. And the lowest common denominator is 'oh that looks really good, so realistic'.

 

[Robb]

It is naturally getting smaller but looking back at the scope and visuals of the UE5 Matrix demo I don’t think big jumps are not possible anymore.

The bigger “problem” to me is cross-gen stuff (games still being tied to hardware from 2013), adaption to low end hardware (Series S, Switch, Switch 2), and ‘Pro’ consoles (somewhat mitigating the feeling of an actual major jump in hardware).

 

[NovaSe7en]

for some reason video games are always pursuing “better graphics”… to what end?

If we assume there's continuous improvement, even to the smallest degree, we're probably headed toward simulated universes.

Edit: I would think AI would need to assist in generating this though. As we try and add more and more detail to games (GTA6, Cyberpunk 2), the size of the development team balloons into something... unmanageable.

 

[tronied]

For me the most important thing to a game is gameplay, but if graphics are there too then all the better. A recent example which delivered on this is Warhammer 40K: Space Marine 2. There are those games though where it seems like they've ploughed all their time into graphics and the gameplay suffered... *cough* hellblade 2... *cough*. Don't get me wrong, if that game appealed to you then great, however you can't sell a game on graphics alone and expect it to be a success. Even Crysis which was the graphics benchmark back in the day delivered on the gameplay.

I would rather have a lesser looking game with fun gameplay than an amazing looking game with barely any. I do love see developers pushing the boundaries (Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 most recently) and would love to be able to play them. However, looking at my aging PC I just can't justify spending £2-3k+ on a new PC. I guess this is where I'm happy with Geforce NOW to showcase the graphics of those games (when available) and use my console and PC for everything else.

 

[Optimus Lime]

WTH are you on about? Movie games?

That's right. Sony makes boring, bland cutscenes interspersed with PRESS BUTTON TO WIN gameplay. You don't agree? Let me introduce you to my friend Morgan:

 

[ShadowNate]

I don't really care for the push to increase realism any more. Too many plants, tall grass, reflections and shadows and floating particles moving around can be distracting or even disorienting and annoying during an action segment or when you need to find your way to a point.

I don't need to look at a 4k texture on a rock or a cliff (and I hate how this was actually a thing to deduct review points abused by "game journalists").

Anyway, historically I've had more fun with games that attempt something new or fun with gameplay and graphics or both (like Obra Dinn, Into the Breach, Hollow Knight, Journey), and those are usually different than the ones that superfocus on better graphics.

I will likely at least give a try to the popular titles as well, but it's usually a routine of: play for a couple of hours, go "wow look at that" a few times before uninstalling and never touching again.

 

[Preseznik]

Good, now we can push for the infinitely more important aspect of visuals - performance.
The road to 1000hz is a long one.

 

[PeteBull]

I think ps5pr0, which will launch in november only, gonna be first console with over 50% of games running in 1080p60 at the least, till we got console that does it with all their games in native or close to native 4k60 we are very far from actual photorealistic graphics and dimnishing returns even tho they always were there, arent that big yet.

 

[FunkMiller]

The salivating greed exhibited by all hardware producers and publishers means that innovation has been utterly stifled this generation.

 

[Big Baller]

Astrobot just raised the bar.

 

[Felessan]

I’d love this, but games already take too long to make, where do we draw the line?

"We" will not draw a line. As "we" are just a bunch of persons with personal opinions irrelevant to the global state of the market and its diversity (in a good way). Every one of "we" has different preferencies and goals. so there are no common "we" to answer question.
While it's commercially reasonable - graphics will be pushed forward. And if it's not - graphics-focused products will consitenty fail, budgets will be pulled out and graphics-focused will stagnate (until its became cheaper to achive graphics progress).
Now games just moved in "spearheaded" motion - a very-very few games takes 5-6-7 year to make, costs hundred millions and aim for the best graphics. On the wings yearly or biennial realease and less ambitios projects. Further on the wings is AA, then A-B, then ambitious indies. And in the tail 100,000 1$ indies PC gamers so proud of.
Unlike people whinning on the forum opinion - its rather normal market structure as it aim to fullfull everyone preferencies. Some just can't agree that they are not at the most spearhead target.

 

[justiceiro]

There is one place where graphics jumps are still visible and it's called VR.

 

[foamdino]

The biggest issue at the moment is the fact that we're in the migration stage from baked lighting to real-time lighting

This means that artists have to d the manual busy work *and* the devs have to create two different paths in the code to support old & ray-traced new.

Once the hw is powerful enough, then the dev workflows will simplify again and a big chunk of busy work will disappear.

We got very very good at mimicking lighting through a variety of tricks and we're always knew that real-time RT would be great - I remember presentations at uni in 1997 about rt with simple flat-shaded rooms and it was mind-blowing that it could run at all.

So yeah, there are diminishing returns for sure, yeah we're in a crappy gen with respect to wanting to use new tech while being held back by *not quite powerful enough hw* and also needing to support an overly long cross-gen period.

At the end of the day the best looking games almost always boil down to a combination of correct use of technology married to excellent art direction and hitting the sweet spot of reigning in scope to achieve the most ambitious goals the devs can get away with in the render budget they have available. Getting all these to align is an art-form in itself (production).

 

[RoboFu]

Gamers just see the fact that while graphics get better they are clearly not the same leaps and bounds every new gen as they were.

In tech front the amount of transistors that have to be added and made to work together doesn't just double each time but increases by an almost unimaginable amount.

Also the level of inefficient code also increases not only because of the high level of hardware interaction but also because of the crazy amount of transistors that it's impossible for even the compiler to be as efficient as it once was.

So not only is their great diminishing returns with what's on screen but also in how it gets on screen.

 

[RPSleon]

I’m not gonna sit here and pretend that I’ve never been interested in great graphics. But I really feel like we sort of hit a ceiling *last* generation. The Hitman reboot trilogy are about the best I honestly care for any game to look. A memorable art style will always win out in my books, but even among more “realistic” styles, I actually don’t know modern games have evolved *that* far beyond the Xbox Ninja Gaiden. The cel-shaded Prince of Persia game is probably the best-looking game ever made, as character models go.

Obviously the PS5 Pro has got people speculating how much more powerful it is, and certainly their presentation made them look incredibly foolish. But moreover, I question why people even *want* realistic games?

I mean, every other medium is trying to make itself more fantastic, yet for some reason video games are always pursuing “better graphics”… to what end? Most modern releases already bleed together visually, and I find the more “realistic” a game looks, the more mundane it feels.

I catch myself wondering, what would devs back in the 80’s and 90’s have done with all this hardware power? Because I can’t possibly imagine it being “use decades’ worth of tech advancement to make the most realistic canvas pockets on your operator’s vest you’ve ever seen”.

Just seems like we’ve really lost the forest for the trees.

Lighting in games this generation has been a significant improvement, and one ive greatly appreciated.

We are finally past the point of almost every game having aliasing issues.

We have some way to go with shadow implementation, hair and particles.

Ray tracing is obvously the next step in graphics, especially reflections, and we dont yet have the power in current consoles to fully implement that.

I think we have further to go in terms of big obvious things.

As for small details, such as cloth detail, like stitching and physics, object polygon count, face wrinkles, general world detail, i think there isnt really much point in pushing that stuff anymore. Its kinda 'there' now.

 

[Felessan]

As for small details, such as cloth detail, like stitching and physics, object polygon count, face wrinkles, general world detail, i think there isnt really much point in pushing that stuff anymore. Its kinda 'there' now.

When you can render them in proper 4K (HD wrinkles in 4K looks meh)
Problem that other stuff degrade natural performance so much that these little things start matters again

PS. Polycount far far from satisfactory. UE5 demo and Demon Souls remake are good targets for poly count quality. Not jus average next gen game where there are still "cubic design" in its core

 

[nemiroff]

No. And the notion that visual fidelity is only improving "realistic graphics" is bullshit. With a larger toolbox, stylized art will have an equally enhanced potential.

Funnily enough, this discussion has been going on for ~two decades. Just think about that.

 

[Fahdis]

Focus on Physics, interesting narratives, hire better writers, better animations and enemy AI instead.

 

[nkarafo]

Now it's only about performance.

 

[chokotoureiki]

Thankfully I don't have this Debbie Downer attitude of seeking the negative in everything. I for one think the last few generations have been fantastic, the latest one being Wukong which completely blew me away graphics wise. I'm probably one of the few here who doesn't need to witness a FF7 classic - FF7 Remake jump every single time to be happy.

 

[Ivan]

I remember going from PS1/Saturn to PS2/Dreamcast and being repeatedly mind blown by new games. Sonic Adventure, Soul Calibur, Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, all just breathtaking.

I don’t get that now, but the only reason for that is because a lot of PS4 games still look amazing. The SSD is my favourite PS5 feature.

That picture is misleading. That's only the number of polygons, only one aspect of game "graphics". There's A LOT more.

 

[Sanepar]

I’m not gonna sit here and pretend that I’ve never been interested in great graphics. But I really feel like we sort of hit a ceiling *last* generation. The Hitman reboot trilogy are about the best I honestly care for any game to look. A memorable art style will always win out in my books, but even among more “realistic” styles, I actually don’t know modern games have evolved *that* far beyond the Xbox Ninja Gaiden. The cel-shaded Prince of Persia game is probably the best-looking game ever made, as character models go.

Obviously the PS5 Pro has got people speculating how much more powerful it is, and certainly their presentation made them look incredibly foolish. But moreover, I question why people even *want* realistic games?

I mean, every other medium is trying to make itself more fantastic, yet for some reason video games are always pursuing “better graphics”… to what end? Most modern releases already bleed together visually, and I find the more “realistic” a game looks, the more mundane it feels.

I catch myself wondering, what would devs back in the 80’s and 90’s have done with all this hardware power? Because I can’t possibly imagine it being “use decades’ worth of tech advancement to make the most realistic canvas pockets on your operator’s vest you’ve ever seen”.

Just seems like we’ve really lost the forest for the trees.

Tbh if we get the best graphics games we are fine where we are. We should focus to evolve AI and animations.

 

[MikeM]

Anything in history is like that. The early stages are massive leaps. Then smaller refinements that cumulate over time.

We are at the refinement stage. Better lighting in RT is the next refinement as is upscaling technology. I firmly believe that 4k will be the resolution sticking point going forward.