Lunasole wrote:
Cannot agree with it. There was some line crossed few years ago, after which graphic quality remains almost at same level.
The reason is simple - for now there are no technical limits to product true realistic graphic [in almost every scene]. The one limit is cost of making lot of HQ resources and models. The price is too high for big games (and takes too much time) so by fact we have the same level of graphic even in all those new games, no any leap was taken. Just compare those new graphics with Crysis (even 1st), you will not see a big difference.
But why they keep raising tech. requirements... well, my GPU is still cool enough to play most games [excluding some with ultra-bad code] at high, but CPU not so cool and seems soon I will need to overclock it from 3.7 to 4.5 or 4.8 GHZ
I can't quite agree with you either. I do see what you're saying that a lot of games look similar in quality yet the tech requirements keep getting higher. There's a reason for that though.
For example Final Fantasy XV is using nurb based hair with geometry and tessellation shaders to form the strands (I believe it's based off the nivida hair demo). Which creates very realistic hair strands.
In the demo the main female character Agni had 6 million polygons in her hair alone. There was 50 active shaders and 8192x8192 resolution textures on it as well.
Now the in game character's hair have the polygon count quite a bit lower to support a wider variety of systems, but the 30,000 polygons in their hair is still a crazy amount compared to past games. And this is just a characters hair.
In the past, games faked a lot of graphic effects by finding shortcuts, but to the standard player the effects looked very real. We're now getting into more accurate depictions of graphics, but the problem is to most people the graphics look about the same as the old ones.
That's the problem gaming companies are dealing with now. They add more realistic accurate graphics, but the majority won't notice or care about them.
Which is why we are starting to see alternatives (aka virtual reality). Companies fear becoming obsolete so they're hoping VR will be the next big thing to keep the money flowing. If it's not then they'll scramble and try to find something else.
the.weavster wrote:
Why would you sit on an ass to watch sports?
...
Perhaps if you sat on a sofa you'd enjoy it more
Watching sports, while eating potato chips, on the couch was too easy for him. So he upped the challenge.
