>video games will never reach this level of detail in your

Good, let's focus on gameplay then.

Good, let's focus on putting my dick in your ass then.

>>381152272
dis nigga 'ere?
he understands what the deal is

>>381152191
this is why console optimisation is fucking cancer.
how long will master race have to put up with console plebs?

>>381152785
good shit. i love that ive wasted 5 years of my life reading this exact same post 10 million times

>>381152353
>>381152496
hurf durf feggtz git off mai vidyer

>>381152191
>MUH GRAFIX
Please fuck off. I don't want developers spending millions of dollars on a character model.

File: Glasses_800_edit.png (3MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1536px

Ray tracing WHEN

>>381152191
_ ____ __ ____ ____ _______

>>381153192
not for many years and by then there will be something better

>>381153550
>look mom, I know how to use spoiler
fuck off asshole

File: 1495340598182 (1).jpg (220KB, 1280x675px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1280x675px

As a mainly PC gamer, I don't think graphics really need to improve past what we already have for games.

>>381152191

Detail is doable. Animation and AI are the real issues.

File: 1495280522539.jpg (17KB, 275x253px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 275x253px

>>381153856
>Getting this triggered over nothing

No, you do not 'fit in' yet.

>games will never look like cgi produced over thousands of hours in a supercomputer render farm
Fucking console peasants, it's their fault real time rendering doesn't look like prerendered animation

File: shedances.gif (143KB, 350x450px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 350x450px

Scenes like this aren't happening in real time. They're prerendered, and even then takes so goddamn long to render out as a flat video that there are companies that own warehouses full of computers whose sole purpose is to all divide the task of rendering a single shot up among themselves so it only takes several days to get a few seconds of footage that may or may not be used.

Also, if anything graphics could afford to take a few steps back. Stylized graphics are often better than photo-realism for most games.

File: jumping-jacks.gif (14KB, 570x548px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 570x548px

>>381152191
>it should be possible in Telltale games
>Telltale games looks worst of all

literally next gen

maybe the gen after that, at most.

File: C3yEIdbUoAAkJRn.jpg (76KB, 1200x578px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1200x578px

what I wanna know is what happened to unlimited detail?

File: file.png (251KB, 620x314px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 620x314px

>>381152191
>Movies will never reach this level of detail in your lifetime

>>381154375

1) Go upstairs and grab a knife, lad.

Reply to this post once you get back for the next step.

>>381154876
Good point. Last time I checked they were doing medical imaging with their tech.
I probably didn't matter anymore because fake mapping techniques in games are good enough.

>>381152191

We probably will by next generation or within 10 years.. Are you terminally ill or 76?

Would you let yourself be turned into a small furry animal person of Rocket's size if it meant he'd date you?

>>381152191
>why are things that have to be rendered in realtime on $400 or $800 machines so far behind things that are rendered way in advance on farms of $2000+ equipment
yeah I wonder

>>381154661
But mostly because they render in 8k with 50+ passes and image quality cranked up to the max.
Fur and Animation will be visually on par within the next 10-15 years.

>>381154919
>needs to go upstairs to grab a knife
>literally lives in his parents basement

>>381154876
can't be animated. zero potential for video games.

I heard they changed their target market more towards architectural photogrammetry

>>381152191
really graphics are held back because the hardware needs to be affordable.
the top of the line shit right now could do so much more if they utilized it but it would just cost too much money for the average consumer.

>>381155437
>doesn't have a 2 floor house
poor Tbh

>>381155574
Kitchen is typically on the first floor. unless you mean hunting/combat type knives.

>>381154124
This, graphics are already making game development time take years and years longer, getting that level of detail is going to be time consuming and expensive, its just not worth it.

File: IMG_1386.jpg (1MB, 3277x1942px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3277x1942px

Movies cheat and spend 3 days in a render farm of 200 supercomputers to produce a single frame, video games like Paragon have ACTUAL graphics rendered in real-time on a mid-range home computer.

I want VR that lowers your spatial perception to 2D so I can VR-fuck cute 2D cat boys.

>>381152191
Do you somehow not understand how rendering works?

>>381156221
You could just play without a headset then.

>>381152191
It takes months to render a 2 hour film across server farms located in 3 different states. An enthusiast machine would take probably a full year to render the original toy story.

Yeah lets expect a dual sli machine to render it in real time. The movie industry is doing something wrong to need that much time and processing power

>>381152272
>>381152550

>Years and years on /v/ and around gaming forums
>"Gameplay first"
>"We prefer gameplay first"
>"Graphics? Ptf!"
>Overwhelming response is graphics and story are always a second fiddle to good gameplay
>Game comes out with shit graphics
>"What the fuck is this?"
>"Oh my fucking god!"
>">55 million dollars"
>Game gets released
> "This story is ass and the game looks like ass 0/10"
>"Fucking cartoon graphics."
>">Crysis was released 18 years ago"
>"This game has soured the entire series for me. Look at this bullshot."

Are we just operating on some ascended level of irony?

File: 1476473220146.jpg (274KB, 968x1300px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 968x1300px

>>381152191
Serious question, why wouldn't it?
I'm guessing we'll reach it in the next 10 years.

>>381155467
It still probably took on the order of seconds to render OP's single frame. It's not even possible if you take "affordable" out of the equation.

>>381156337
>An enthusiast machine would take probably a full year to render the original toy story.
Nah, they already replayed the original Toy Story in realtime at Sigraph a couple of years ago. Mind you, the old original version. It was re-released with better lighting and animation years after its theatrical release.

>>381156364
>/v/ is one person

>>381156562
/v/ is one hivemind, yes.

And I think a majority of those people who go "gameplay > everything else" are a buncha lying fucks.

>>381156080
MOBA shit takes nothing to render due to not having to have draw distance

>>381152191
They're in the same level, retard. It's called pre rendered cutscenes, which is basically what your movies are.

>>381156562
It's two people. You and me.

File: 1497405060824.jpg (6KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 184x184px

>>381156562
Honestly it pretty much is. The autism levels are the only real variance.

>>381156469
>why wouldn't it?

Why should it? Hollywood special effects blockbusters are fucking trash that tries to appeal to as many people as possible to make up for the inconceivable amount of money spent.

File: 1494074684403.png (600KB, 750x578px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 750x578px

>>381152191
Why you make the same thread every week with that goddam raccoon ?

File: 1445393939472.jpg (47KB, 680x583px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 680x583px

>>381152496

File: 1495257288415.gif (4MB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 600x600px

>video games will never be able to pull off this type of realistic animation and facial expressions

>>381156364
Roaches are a loud minority

File: 1497304659258.png (889KB, 663x868px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 663x868px

>>381157073
Because the objective is to have a non-vidya thread because in most cases they're better than:

1. trying to seriously discuss Bioware games
2. trying to discuss new releases without the /v/core crowd
3.trying to discuss a game with a female character that's hot without waifufags shitting everything up.
4.trying to not get in an argument because /v/ is a shithole.
5. trying to discuss an old game without shitposters.
6. trying to discuss a game with a black character in it.

video games with this level of detail would probably be shit in every other aspect rn

>>381156364
gameplay > everything else

BUT

there is no excuse for releasing games with shit graphics in 2017

Honestly I would watch 10 movies with Rocket and Drax in them. Fuck the rest of the Guardians.
Also Nova when?

>>381152889
I wish we could leave

File: mmmgmgmg.jpg (16KB, 274x406px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 274x406px

>>381154876
>artificial atoms

>>381155183
I'D DO ANYTHING

>>381153192
Never. Raytracing everything in a scene is a waste of performance that will never be justified, even centuries from now when we might have the processing power to do it in real-time. We're getting close to ray-tracing using thousands of backwards hacks and their performance benefits will remain more important than the last tiny reflection on some glass bottle in your peripheral vision.

What we will see are more and more partial tracing techniques for things like reflections. We will get the notable benefits of ray-tracing without the performance hogging aspects. Reflections in games as early as Killzone Shadowfall used tracing methods. Unreal Engine uses tracing for reflections even better now. The age of proper reflections is less than a decade away imo.

>>381153192
Raytracing is only good if you want to render glass. Most of what people really want is called radiosity, which is quite a lot harder.

>>381157012
We aren't talking about Hollywood special effects, just graphics in general.
There's no reason why video game consoles wouldn't be able reach today's movie's visuals someday.

File: ss_13c48fa8e3808bc55369920aac8d9e628f3ad328.600x338.jpg (56KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x337px

>>381157504
Alright, let me add some bloom and depth of field into my 2d pixel or minecraft clone.
There you have 2017 graphics

File: 16710191803037479405.jpg (86KB, 1024x724px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1024x724px

>you'll never fuck rocket raccoon's raccoon boipussy
;_;
>>381155183
yes, he don't even have to date me
i wish i was a qt yordle boi

>>381156469
The actual problem is that real-time graphics are fast because they're explicitly designed to have very few data dependencies. This also means you can only render triangles (no smooth/implicit surfaces), and you can only have very limited lighting/shading interaction between triangles. Because of this, most real-time rendering techniques are pretty simple hacks, like plastering hair onto a plane using alpha maps, and multipass "image space" shading techniques. This also means the problem isn't about flops per se, but about a whole universe of modeling techniques, so I'm sorry to say that movies and video games will not be converging anytime soon.

>diminishing returns
>people seem to think having 6 billion polygons means one character
no, 6 billion polgyons means a fucking army on the screen at once

>>381158149
shiiiieeeet, a winner here. this game had enough gameplay to reach the second most sold videogame of all time.

>>381157976
Do you think you just magically make graphics look better and better? No, someone needs to make them. The people that make Hollywood movies look so good are incredibly large special effects teams that costs filmmakers MILLIONS for 90-minutes. Look at Blizzard's incredible CGI expansion trailers, those take over a year to produce and boatloads of money for a 5-minute cutscene.

We have the technology to run graphically impressive games today, but who is going to make them? Do you understand how much it would cost?

File: 1497220241248.gif (1021KB, 421x389px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 421x389px

>>381158389
Oh look, the league faggot is also a furry
I am shocked

>>381158993
>there are only 1 league faggot on /v/

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (87KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1280x720px

Did anyone play the newest Telltale episode?

>tfw everyone Rocket loves ends up dying

>>381158650
The problem with an army on screen really isn't the graphics (any more), it's the AI taking up too much memory and processing time. That's why those big "brawler" type games from Asia always feature braindead enemies where teams of enemies will play the exact same animations in sync and move the same way. IO (Hitman) have some clever ways of simulating crowds, Ubisoft has tech like that for AC and I'm sure Rockstar has to be advanced in that area as well. That's what's doable right now and it's FAR from "army" level.

>>381156792
Maybe you're only focusing on the people who are expressing negativity at any given time, so even if they are two different groups they appear to be the same due to anonymity

>>381155987
>that level of detail is going to be time consuming and expensive
Thank you copyright and shit.
No sharing quality assets/resources between different games, it's baaad.
Give me my exclusive right and money how dare you take the same picture of a brick wall REEEE

>>381152191
You act as if the computer that rendered that did it in real time. It probably took a solid 10 minutes for that frame alone.

>>381156792
>>381156364
>I'm too retarded to understand nuance and the fact that a certain level of graphics is required for certain games to work properly and actually will feed into gameplay.

not that "gameplay" or "atmosphere" sells games persay. It's actually a lot more disturbing what sells games.

File: e4de29dbdc4d3c3868e97448d993bc83.jpg (140KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1920x1080px

>>381152191
Someone hasn't played Paragon.

>>381159132
shits fine if the smoke and mirrors is okay. just split up groups into the military. squads, platoons, whatever. as long as your world and map isnt completely dead flat it wont be that obvious

Is Rocket Raccoon a power bottom?

>>381157828

>even centuries from now when we might have the processing power to do it in real-time.

Holy shit people, don't ever be this fucking retarded.

>>381152191
who cares about improved graphics dude resolution is where it's at 4K GAMING WOWWOOWOWOW 4k DOOOODDDDOO WOWOWOWOWOAOHAHAHH

File: microexpressions-disgust.jpg (28KB, 524x336px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 524x336px

>>381159608

File: 1497381484115.jpg (14KB, 239x209px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 239x209px

>>381159075
No there are thousands and they are all as gay as the other

>>381157338
You're OP? You seriously think it won't happen in our lifetime?

Look back 10 years. Look back 20. Look at CGI in film at that time. It's always been ahead of the curve. I think you're being a bit young to think it's impossible within our lifetimes.

Because it takes a long time to render something like that. Games need to do it quickly in real-time.

>>381159608
????????

>>381159654
You're taking Moore's Law for granted, I guess. We're going to hit real limits on computing speed. Not bandwidth, bandwidth will just keep increasing. But speed is already stagnating with no sign of recovery.

Inb4 quantum meme computing will save the day. You don't know that.

>>381159736
That doesn't answer my question.
Is he?

>>381159920
hes asexual, didnt you even watch the film? its literally cannon, ya sick degenerate furry

>>381159920
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L66IxBpiM0

>>381152191
because consoles hold back the potential of games

File: 008.jpg (91KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1366x768px

>>381160503
>Wearing a fursuit at a non-furry event

>>381159215
Fuck off commie

>>381160289

That's literally never stated in the film

File: e0iI5gK.jpg (19KB, 504x415px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 504x415px

>>381160674
>being cringy at a cringe event

>>381161001
if you werent so busy masturbating loudly in a public theater you might of noticed

>>381160289
>not wanting to break asexuals into sex loving sluts

>>381155445
>can't be animated.
I thought this meme died a month after /v/ kept trying to shit on the poor guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZqPMg-Y7gE

It's infuriating just how much /v/ shat on these guys at the time.

>>381152191
a movie im guessing? pre-rendering a shot takes way less power than a game where you look around and explore because the scene only contains what is needed in the shot. on top of that, even if artists made a game with that graphical prowess using 6 1080tis, there would be practically zero people able to play the game with their hardware

Because video games have to render shit in real time. Rendering one frame of that raccoon thing probably took a whole day to make in a render farm.

>>381162168
*one scene
you get my point

>>381152191
Computers take THOUSANDS of hours to generate a SINGLE frame like that one, you realize that videogames will never have that level of detail EVER?

>>381152272
except you won't. you retarded gamers buy every new franchise installment that has less base content than the previous one at $60+ a pop without even flinching. You let EA shit a laughably gimped remake of Star Wars Battlefront down your throats, a game that didn't have half the shit that the FIRST battlefront, had and then asked for more.

>inb4 HURRR DAT WASNT ME

doesn't matter, retard.

>>381162384
The same used to be true for toy story 1. That was only 20 years ago. We have games now that have far greater detail than that.

>>381162384
Computers take thousands of hours to render frames like that one with that method. You can get reasonably close with other methods though, and within a decade we will get there.

File: raz.jpg (22KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x400px

>>381152272
>>381152550
>Be artist.
>Go to school for art and design.
>Develop my skill to the point that I get really good.
>Graphic tools are amazing, give me tons of freedom, and I can make anything I want.
>Get hired on to work with a AAA studio.
>On a team with similar skilled artists.
>Work together to make the best looking shit we possibly can.
>Highly detailed renders, impeccable designs, masterful cinematography.
>Some anon on /v/ expects me to be working on game design for some reason.

I want to ____ that racoon

>>381162487
I hate nu-battlefront so much

>>381152191
>>video games will never reach this level of detail in your lifetime

Maybe if you moved on from nintendo consoles and onto ps4/xbone/pc, you'd see we already went past that level of detail.

File: 1493513333222.jpg (45KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 736x552px

>>381152191
>videogames will never have the level of detail of super powerfull million dollar computers from companies that have trillions in the bank which productions take a whole 24 hours to render just a single frame of the movie in which multiple thousands of people kept working to get a level of detail that still fails to look realistic, and only if ever arrives to the uncanney valley level, many times ended up looking like some PS2 rejected game
hmmm...

>>381163669
You're talking art style, the fag you're replying is talking gameplay, OP is talking about detail in the 3D models.
Stop whining and do your job, faggot.

>>381157308
That looks fucking horrible. People actually like this capeshit in space?

>>381165609

>a 2 second gif of rocket winking looks horrible