-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
We have obviously long since passed the point of diminishing returns in the arms race for “better graphics”
- Thread starter jcorb
- Start date
Wildebeest
Member
Half-Life 2 was maybe the last time I felt that a lot advanced in a single game in terms of getting better. Maybe some felt the same way for Alyx, but that experience is just way more niche, especially in a time when gaming on tiny phone screens is considered where all the money is in gaming. Mostly I feel that new expensive effects just look weird or are not worth the performance hit. Ray tracing has obviously been the dream since at least the 90s, but real time ray tracing has a long way to go before it feels like a bet that is paying off and the idea that it is currently saving the future of gaming just laughable.
chokotoureiki
Member
I'm actually quite content with that, seeing small refinements with each gen. As long as companies keep making games with fresh engaging stories coupled with solid gameplay, I'm good. It doesn't take a whole lot to keep me happy as a gamer.
Wildebeest
Member
Small refinements are not what you are getting, though. You are getting revolutionary tech that is changing the fundamentals of graphics engines, making it so that you can't easily downgrade a game to run it on older hardware, and it barely runs on the most high-end hardware. It is just the end results that feel like a very small refinement or minor upgrade.
BbMajor7th
Member
Graphics rarely push the industry forward. The most influential games of the past two decades have been graphically unambitious: Dark Souls, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Skyrim, Stardew Valley, Breath of the Wild, Minecraft, PUBG, Fortnite, Among Us. Despite this, they've all introduced mechanics, modes and models that have seen widespread adoption and iteration by other developers. Meanwhile, graphical powerhouses like The Last of Us Part II, Cyberpunk 2077, Horizon Forbidden West and Red Dead Redemption 2 (despite being insanely successful) rarely inspire other developers to create similar products.
The overwhelming focus on graphics by major studios is one of the reasons we've seen creative stagnation within AAA development - games with vast scope and insane visuals that are nothing but a grab bag of the same mechanics and tropes we've already played to death. Despite the runaway success of IPs like Minecraft and Breath of the Wild, major publishers still funnel most of their resources into building ever prettier renditions of already stale templates, rather than pursuing design innovation.
The overwhelming focus on graphics by major studios is one of the reasons we've seen creative stagnation within AAA development - games with vast scope and insane visuals that are nothing but a grab bag of the same mechanics and tropes we've already played to death. Despite the runaway success of IPs like Minecraft and Breath of the Wild, major publishers still funnel most of their resources into building ever prettier renditions of already stale templates, rather than pursuing design innovation.
Last edited:
Danny22
Neo Member
I firmly believe AI upscaling is the counter to 'law of diminishing returns' that have largely stopped graphics from improving majorly in the past decade. Consoles are only starting out on it with the PS5 Pro.
Not to derail the topic (as this is related), but there is a certain 'technological accleration' that I have been following most of my life, it basically refers to the point where AI, once it's more efficient than humans, starts to improve upon itself which leads to further improved AI which leads to more improvement leading to a rapid technological acceleration that's not possible to slowdown. It's referred to as the 'singularity' and the process should be starting out in a decade or so. IF it were to happen, that is the way we will finally have AI upscaling to the point where photorealistic graphics can finally be achieved.
Nvidia CEO had this to say about upcoming DLSS 'in the future, we'll even generate textures and objects, and the objects can be of lower quality and we can (upscale to) make them look better.' There really isn't a limit to AI upscaling if this all works out.
Not to derail the topic (as this is related), but there is a certain 'technological accleration' that I have been following most of my life, it basically refers to the point where AI, once it's more efficient than humans, starts to improve upon itself which leads to further improved AI which leads to more improvement leading to a rapid technological acceleration that's not possible to slowdown. It's referred to as the 'singularity' and the process should be starting out in a decade or so. IF it were to happen, that is the way we will finally have AI upscaling to the point where photorealistic graphics can finally be achieved.
Nvidia CEO had this to say about upcoming DLSS 'in the future, we'll even generate textures and objects, and the objects can be of lower quality and we can (upscale to) make them look better.' There really isn't a limit to AI upscaling if this all works out.
King Dazzar
Member
Some have been saying this for nearly two decades and the days of Crysis. Yet, they still keep improving. We've got way further to go yet. And even if we didn't move forward, consoles will always have something further to add/catch up on.
Schmendrick
Member
Sounds like you are mixing up graphical quality and art.
On the graphical quality side there is still a lot of headroom as we`ve just recently seen with Wukong f.e., and that game was nearly 100% static and didn`t offer much complexity.
Last edited:
Astray
Member
Good point.
I am certain that the death of Moore's Law is a real cause behind the supposedly diminishing returns. Lesser improvements gen-on-gen for both consumer and pro-grade electronics have led to this.
chokotoureiki
Member
RDR2 and Last of Us 2 have won several awards, with the latter being in the Guiness Book with over 300, more than any game in history.
T4keD0wN
Member
I want every game to have pathtracing, other than that we are at the point of good enough and i see no reason to care for any graphical improvements with the exception of draw distance which is severely lacking in most games even on maximum settings, devs could start focusing on this like eliminating clipping rather than slightly prettier meshes and terrible post processing effects that downgrade the image quality to oblivion, but that doesnt sell, majority of consumers of traditional games base their purchases purely on how well the screenshots or trailers on its storepage look so this focus on graphics will never end.
Last edited:
alucard0712_rus
Banned
Same here!
I was always fan of graphics because I saw everything since ZX spectrum and every generation I felt very interested where all of this goes. But after I played Cyberpunk with path-tracing everything suddenly changed. "Realistic" graphics is stupidest shit ever in gaming - you will spend dozens of resources, time and money for then to graphics became boring again. And even after that it will not be "perfect" - there will be always something on the horizon that distincts virtual from real - like every object in real life is different (every grain of sand, every tree and leaves, e.t.c). In other words you spend everything on a useless thing from games perspective (realistic graphics).
And there something else - realistic graphics doing almost nothing with your imagination but imagination is a first target for artist to connect with.
Then all this diminishing returns and all.
Glad Nintendo was right about all of this a long ago and now it shows.
I was always fan of graphics because I saw everything since ZX spectrum and every generation I felt very interested where all of this goes. But after I played Cyberpunk with path-tracing everything suddenly changed. "Realistic" graphics is stupidest shit ever in gaming - you will spend dozens of resources, time and money for then to graphics became boring again. And even after that it will not be "perfect" - there will be always something on the horizon that distincts virtual from real - like every object in real life is different (every grain of sand, every tree and leaves, e.t.c). In other words you spend everything on a useless thing from games perspective (realistic graphics).
And there something else - realistic graphics doing almost nothing with your imagination but imagination is a first target for artist to connect with.
Then all this diminishing returns and all.
Glad Nintendo was right about all of this a long ago and now it shows.
BbMajor7th
Member
And despite that, they've had so little impact on the direction of the industry - more than anything, they represent a high point of polish for what's already gone before. Rather than advancing things, they act as a full stop against which other games are unflatteringly judged.
xanaum
Member
I think we’re still far from reaching the peak of realistic games. We’re worlds away from 2010 CGI. We’ve made big strides with lighting, but when it comes to resolution and physics, we’re still in the Bronze Age.
And this search isn’t random. There’s research behind delivering what people want because they ask for it, and sometimes the success of something sends the message.
A great example is Harry Potter. There were tons of simple, cartoony games, but then a realistic, AAA title came out and broke all franchise sales records. The world was craving something like that.
In short, people love games with immersive environments and convincing characters, like watching a movie with beautiful cinematography. There’s huge demand for it, and someone’s got to buy and sell those $1000 GPUs for a reason.
And this search isn’t random. There’s research behind delivering what people want because they ask for it, and sometimes the success of something sends the message.
A great example is Harry Potter. There were tons of simple, cartoony games, but then a realistic, AAA title came out and broke all franchise sales records. The world was craving something like that.
In short, people love games with immersive environments and convincing characters, like watching a movie with beautiful cinematography. There’s huge demand for it, and someone’s got to buy and sell those $1000 GPUs for a reason.
64bitmodels
Reverse groomer.
then dont spend 1500 bucks on a rig. ur just putting yourself at the mercy of the publishers & developers to justify your financial mistakes
Last edited:
64bitmodels
Reverse groomer.
No it's been going on for like 4 years.
People didn't care so much about graphics until it started impacting the dev times of games.
dragonyeuw
Member
I like shiny realistic graphics as much as the next person, but I've always played games to be transported to whimsical worlds that you won't see IRL and I feel like thar artstyle holds up much better. It's why you could take something like Windwaker from 2003, slap HD on it and it looked like a brand new release. Add some more QOL to it and you could probably say the same in 2024.
Saturn Dragon
Member
We're far from it.
The very last 1% of improvement is what's gonna make the difference.
The very last 1% of improvement is what's gonna make the difference.
rm082e
Member
100% this. I got the itch out of nowhere to play TLOUP1 again last night. Started playing and this ancient game on PS5 still looks just fine to me. Meanwhile, I think about getting back to FF16 with the choppy frame rate and I just sort of recoil at the thought.
finalflame
Banned
Nah. It's going to be the combination of VR / display tech, 3D graphics, and neural interfaces that will allow us to finally attain true "presence" in virtual experiences, i.e. indistinguishable from reality. What a naive point of view.
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.
There's still a massive amount of improvement that can be made in terms of visuals. That image doesn't account for things like lighting, animation and physics. The real problem is that we are still tethered to last gen and the switch and companies would rather use those machines as the baseline so they can drop ports on there rather than go all in on 'next gen' machines... hence we pretty much have ps4 graphics with better frame-rates and load time. PS5 is essentially a PS4 Pro+
Last edited:
ResurrectedContrarian
Suffers with mild autism
yeah, I have to say that nothing in the world of "make the normal tv game image sharper and sharper with even better textures" over the past decade in gaming has given me the slightest feeling of awe, just an "okay it's crisper... anyway" reaction. But walking through Alyx was mindblowing.
I kind of agree that the 2D space of graphics is saturated to the point where it's a waste of time (for nearly all genres) to spend in that direction anymore. Arkham Knight for instance still looks perfect to me; I mean that I quite literally would take that game's engine and graphics for a new Batman game immediately, and would rather they spend more on level design, polish, etc than even spending a single penny more than that on the graphics.
Kataploom
Gold Member
I'm actually ok with that, I want game devs to finally master and standardize current tech which hasn't been the case due to performance, and I want them to finally focus on performance until we have more powerful devices. Once we get sub-pixel geometry and RT at proper 60 with decent IQ it will just be up to creativity at that point.
Last edited:
Go_Ly_Dow
Member
Totally happy with a cross-gen future where gameplay and quality of content is the greater emphasis over the endless pursuit of AAAA visuals.
Cross-gen will also ensure all groups are happy. Those who aren't fussed and are fine with the current standard of visuals can stick to PS5 without breaking the bank for a new console. Those who want all the best features can buy the Pro or a PS6.
Cross-gen will also ensure all groups are happy. Those who aren't fussed and are fine with the current standard of visuals can stick to PS5 without breaking the bank for a new console. Those who want all the best features can buy the Pro or a PS6.
Madserb2023
Member
Nintendo has the right idea. They stay a generation behind. Seems to work and their games sell millions. If Metroid Prime 4 looked twice as good, would it sell twice as much? Nope, probably sell the number of units except it would cost more to make.
nemiroff
Gold Member
Listen, I've been a part of graphics discussions since back in the Usenet days. I'm well versed in what's been going on. To claim this is a four years old thing is preposterous.
Last edited:
Ebrietas
Member
If only most publishers understood this. We're now past the point where hardware is holding back developer's vision.
I'd also argue that the types of games you listed that don't push bleeding edge graphics...still look really freaking good for the most part. Nobody who is of sound mind looks at Fortnite, BotW, Mario Kart, or Elden Ring and says "wow this looks complete shit!".
Games of Today
Member
I'm the person that wants games to have more realistic graphics. But I want said games to primarily feel authentic and as long as that is baseline, apply better graphics on top of that.
Games like Killzone 2, Uncharted, Battlefield 3, Medal of Honor: 2010, Titanfall 1, CoD: 4, World at War, Infinite Warfare, Assassins Creed: 3, Unity and Origins are some examples that are so authentic that it feels like I'm in the realistic reality of that world. They know what they are, they know what they set out to achieve and they take themselves seriously. This is the zone that you want a game to lie in.
HogIsland
Member
yawn at conventional+cope take.
Advancements in graphics force developers to take all kinds of new things into account. The amount of first-person and camera animation in AAA games now is night and day different from earlier generations. Compare the gameplay feel of Splinter Cell 1 with Last of Us Pt 2. The fluidity of movement, the impact of getting shot, the dynamism of hand to hand combat are all inseparable from The Graphics. It would be jarring to have modern gameplay advancements with 2002 presentation.
Advancements in graphics force developers to take all kinds of new things into account. The amount of first-person and camera animation in AAA games now is night and day different from earlier generations. Compare the gameplay feel of Splinter Cell 1 with Last of Us Pt 2. The fluidity of movement, the impact of getting shot, the dynamism of hand to hand combat are all inseparable from The Graphics. It would be jarring to have modern gameplay advancements with 2002 presentation.
64bitmodels
Reverse groomer.
i mean the current state of the discussion where people are claiming that these types of visuals are unsustainable. not the "these graphics cant possibly get better bs"
nemiroff
Gold Member
Discussions about "diminishing returns" have persisted for quite some time, and it's likely that those who once strongly opposed "the race" may now feel stupid (hence why I posted the image above).
Regardless, graphics fidelity is not an issue. Investing in something better than the competitor has been a part of every industry on this planet for ages. Developers have nosedived forever, the race is not a new thing. Only the investment size in certain segments has changed. But remember, today we have a thriving gaming industry, larger and more diverse than ever before. Steam alone releases ~12,000 games per year, including a vast sea of indie devs and minimalistic graphics. So, from a user's perspective, I don't many issues to be concerned about here.
Last edited:
GoldenEye98
posts news as their odd job
I'm not even sure 1-to-1 photorealism is what you want in games. Maybe sports/racing sims but most games are not realistic, particularly the movement. And the more photorealistic a game gets the more that fast artificial movement of a character is going to stick out like a sore thumb.
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
Yes, diminishing returns is already here and it's not alone. We are also fast approaching the end of Moore's law.
The gaming industry is soon gonna be in a hell of a lot of trouble. If we don't find another way to do things quickly we're fucking screwed..
The gaming industry is soon gonna be in a hell of a lot of trouble. If we don't find another way to do things quickly we're fucking screwed..
RCX
Member
After ray tracing became more of a mainstream thing I realized I never once found myself looking at cube maps or baked lighting and thinking it was bad and needed an urgent upgrade.
Most of these improvements are window dressing that does nothing to fundamentally improve the game.
Graphics got prettier but IMO mechanics and gameplay have stagnated.
Most of these improvements are window dressing that does nothing to fundamentally improve the game.
Graphics got prettier but IMO mechanics and gameplay have stagnated.
RetroGamingUK
Member
Listen, I've been a part of graphics discussions since back in the Usenet days. I'm well versed in what's been going on. To claim this is a four years old thing is preposterous.
That looked awful at the time though, especially when you consider you could walk into an arcade and see this…
Last edited:
Astral Dog
Member
Yes and No, it took alot longer for me to be impressed over a 'next' gen /current gen game, but it happened
for example, DOOM the Dark Ages shows a fully realized medieval world ,along with new gameplay possibilities, showing higher detail and ambition, its not something that could have been made for Xbox ONE and i love the result
Its about talented developers using the hardware available, to expand gameplay as well as visual art ,there will always be that game that shows why this machine works better than the last, i also can't wait to see what Nintendo can cook on the next Switch
for example, DOOM the Dark Ages shows a fully realized medieval world ,along with new gameplay possibilities, showing higher detail and ambition, its not something that could have been made for Xbox ONE and i love the result
Its about talented developers using the hardware available, to expand gameplay as well as visual art ,there will always be that game that shows why this machine works better than the last, i also can't wait to see what Nintendo can cook on the next Switch
semiconscious
Member
the video game industry very deliberately fabricated this forest. the more their 'enhanced' sales pitch hits home, the more demand for new tech toys they create, the more new 'product' they can sell. it's a lot easier, & requires a lot less imagination, than figuring out how to make loads of great games. a helluva lot easier...
WhamBamThankYouMaam
Member
Now I want less popin, higher framerate, and then we are good.
ItJustWorks
Member
Okay, some of you guys really lose your ambitions and imagination over time, or just assume that what currently is...is all that can be done.
Until we see titles looking, and having physics like this in real time:
Hell, there are tech demos 5 years ago in physics that still aren't being done today:
9 years ago, PhysX Demo, we now see WuKong utilize it, but literally barely anyone else.
The problem is, gamers would rather have 4k 60 games than 1080p 30/45/60 with that tech involved. So it SEEMS like we're stagnate because alot of the console only gamer market don't really realize how taxing 4k/60 really is. You're going to continue to get games that look like "last gen" if you want to run them at that framerate and resolution. Especially if you're favoring ray tracing over everything else.
I also feel like we're getting scammed a bit too, there's a reason why they are doing less and less tech demos. Because as long as they can make a last gen looking FROM game seem like it's hard to run with bad optimization and ray tracing, then you'll think you need a 4 series card or a ps5 pro to run those graphics. And calming your knowledge and ambitious vision of what those cards/consoles can REALLY do.
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think a 1080p 30 fps game that is pushing all of what we see combined above, will "wow" you more than a game doing none of that at 4k 60fps. But hey...wtf do I know. Seems like Gamers think the way things are going is the way to go. And the 15 yr Olds that were not alive when crysis came out; and are inevitably in charge of the hobby will never know any better.
Until we see titles looking, and having physics like this in real time:
Hell, there are tech demos 5 years ago in physics that still aren't being done today:
9 years ago, PhysX Demo, we now see WuKong utilize it, but literally barely anyone else.
The problem is, gamers would rather have 4k 60 games than 1080p 30/45/60 with that tech involved. So it SEEMS like we're stagnate because alot of the console only gamer market don't really realize how taxing 4k/60 really is. You're going to continue to get games that look like "last gen" if you want to run them at that framerate and resolution. Especially if you're favoring ray tracing over everything else.
I also feel like we're getting scammed a bit too, there's a reason why they are doing less and less tech demos. Because as long as they can make a last gen looking FROM game seem like it's hard to run with bad optimization and ray tracing, then you'll think you need a 4 series card or a ps5 pro to run those graphics. And calming your knowledge and ambitious vision of what those cards/consoles can REALLY do.
Maybe I'm crazy, but I think a 1080p 30 fps game that is pushing all of what we see combined above, will "wow" you more than a game doing none of that at 4k 60fps. But hey...wtf do I know. Seems like Gamers think the way things are going is the way to go. And the 15 yr Olds that were not alive when crysis came out; and are inevitably in charge of the hobby will never know any better.
Last edited:
digoutyoursoul
Member
Feels like more of an excuse to not put the extra effort in to me
By the time next generation comes around, tell the media and the likes of Keighley not bother with anymore engine showcases with improved visuals to market new consoles , waste of time
By the time next generation comes around, tell the media and the likes of Keighley not bother with anymore engine showcases with improved visuals to market new consoles , waste of time
Last edited:
U n i o n 0015
Member
Completely agree with OP.
Watching the State of Play and seeing the HZD Remastered trailer, I thought I could barely tell the difference from the PC release I played last year.
Watching the State of Play and seeing the HZD Remastered trailer, I thought I could barely tell the difference from the PC release I played last year.
MarkMe2525
Gold Member
I'll say it for the 28th time, if you want to be in the thick of innovation and substantial generational leaps, get into VR. IMO, that's where all the exciting advancements are happening. Standalone specifically.
Last edited:
Felessan
Member
You are mixing stuff here
Big games rarely innovate, because innovation is a risky business - for one to succeed tens will fail, and big games with their 100+mil budgets simply can't afford it
It's completely natural that small games innovate and then proven mechanic absorbed by bigger games. Their loss in failure are much smaller. Bigger games by default playing it safe as they should be, they represent the current liking of majority and tailored as such