The quality of artists isn't going to magically go up around the board overnight, if ever. The quality of tools might.
Better hardware is really needed - not strictly for how games look, but also for what you can do with them. Memory is a BIG restriction right now, and console GPUs (7th generation) are now seven generations behind.
Development costs are going up, but I'm expecting the games themselves to change somewhat more than their content.
It's completely assinine at this point for a new console. What will make better looking games at this point are BETTER ARTISTS.
Until we can have realtime cloth/hair simulation, and uncompressed animations/textures, it's REALLY not worth going forward with a newer console.
We don't need 2x more powerful. We need exponentially 10x more powerful than a PS3 for it to be somewhat worth it.
Development costs will likely skyrocket from $25-50million to over $100million.
I'm really not seeing where the benefits are coming from.
I agree with this somewhat, but why do you say its not worth it? More power would mean bigger levels, better quality audio/more audio, higher res textures, more geo, ect.
Working on Forza 4, we had to be extremely picky about geo/texture memory in order to hit 60fps. If we would have had 2-3x more CPU/GPU/Ram, we could have made even more detailed environments alot more easily. Of course it's very good practice to optimize as much as possible, but when you already have that and have to cut content, it sucks.
How big of an update was going from VHS to DVD? You still saw the movie, right? Or going from DVD to Blu-Ray? It's the same movie, sometimes literally the same movie as it had both a DVD and Blu-Ray release, but the benefits to Blu-Ray are obvious.
Honestly, if we got a console where every game was in full 1080p and had full scene anti-aliasing, in my opinion at least, that's worth switching to the next generation of consoles. But of course, that console could do a lot more too, with higher rez textures, higher rez skeletal meshes, etc etc
Also, when they say that the next generation will hit in 2012, I took it to mean that devkits will hit in 2012 so that development can start on those games, not that the console will go on sale to the general public in 2012. When those games are done, then they'll release it, which will be in at least a couple of years afterwards. So it still makes sense.
Just think that if the games didn't change, and we had about 6Gb of memory to read from, you'll almost never see a loading screen again (except for when you first start playing the game each session).
I think you missed the fact that sony and ms with their new consoles managed to shift large portions of the pc gaming public towards consoles, they managed to bring over developers to their consoles and have them develop games that just hadn't happened on consoles before that.
I think it's enough to just look at call of duty or something more niche but yet super popular like elderscrolls to realize what kind of thing that has been achieved with the more "hardcore" console market.
Sony and microsoft will be releasing new vastly more powerful consoles, heck, sony already has with the vita, which is silly powerful.
I never said AAA is going away. Top blockbuster games make tons of money, that business will continue. It's the bottom 70% of the retail market that is disappearing. We saw lots of studio closings this generation that showed that.
However, a healthy market for blockbuster AAA is not a big enough reason for MS and Sony to release "vastly more powerful consoles." That's ignoring the rest of the picture. They will release new, more powerful consoles, but the generational leap will not be what you are used to. Taking a loss on high end hardware doesn't make much sense anymore.
The business model of stupidly powerful consoles with stupidly high price tags is primed to be disrupted by a digital open market.
Just think that if the games didn't change, and we had about 6Gb of memory to read from, you'll almost never see a loading screen again (except for when you first start playing the game each session).
That in itself sounds awesome to me
More RAM does not = faster loading times. Your hard drive does that.
The biggest problem with going onto the new generation compared to the last one is there is honestly no HUGE visual difference between what we have this generation and next. Going from PS2 you gained pixle shaders and had the ability have things like specular/normal maps. It DRAMATICALLY changed the way games looked.
What do you gain from the coming generation? Visually not a ton. Sure things look better but the difference between PS2 to PS3 will not be had going from PS3 to PS4. The big selling point of the PS4 generation will be tessellation. And honestly I dont see most consumers noticing a big enough difference to say hey yes I will buy another 400+ dollar console. It just dosnt add enough. Or at least thats how I see it.
I agree somewhat, but add simulated hair and cloth to that. And much prettier lighting.
But yeah. New consoles are FAR aways yet. Not even next E3.
Personally I could give a rat's ass bout "gameplay"... And I will definitley have to puke if I hear "another"
gameplay before graphics post on a graphics oriented forum.
As if all this technology is not going to evolve into somthing other than just the current
button mashing masturbation that some think is all so sacred. I'd say the best game
experience I have had in this current gen was Bioshock. And that immersion had nothing to do
with it's lackluster FPS "gameplay" which was far from tuned. But instead came from a
level of acting and storytelling that immersed the user in a dystopic environment achieved
with a terrifying environment art, mature narrative and a beautiflul score/dripping wet sound design soundscape.
Now I would be fine if Bioshock Infinite did absolutely nothing to improve "gameplay" if only the
distractingly bad graphic elements were addressed instead:
( unreal 2.5 horrid compression of textures, sub-par immature character sculpting ). And I am willing to
bet that game will affect me more than all the other banal, boingy boingy, Brain reward center,
mario jack-off, button junk food gameplay gems combined.
In the future where a digital interactive immersive art has finally evolved games will simply be it's pornography.
I would consider such game play before art sentiment "suspect" normally...
( that on an artist-centric forum as much would be a cover for talent insecurities ) but a lot of really
talented folk here seem perfectly fine with "putting down" graphics and do not find associating visuals as
the tacky enemy of good gameplay insulting in any way. Bad gameplay is the enemy of good gameplay.Nothing else.
You could claim that the expense of graphics steals from investment in good gameplay.
Which I suppose is true. So what does visuals cost? Is there a multi-billion dollar visual machine that
spits out expensive graphics indies do not hace access to?
The only thing they do not have access to are the army of the best talent and
the paying masses that appreciate the sweat and talent of the work you got paid for.
And instead of calling bullshit on that envious sentiment for what it really is: Petty jealousy against
what they cannot afford ( A large team of talented creative minds working hard on a craft they mastered ).
Many artists have instead adopted the same atitude to their own craft. I can imagine a musician calling any
other "signed" musician a "sellout" because they have to much respect for their craft...
But I wouldn't want music composers to start rallying for less orchestrated music scores in games in
favor of midi instead. To each his own. The promise of visual magic and all that is possible is dead in you?
If you are an artist then grow a pair and be an artist. The very thought of what I might be able to do with
shadows and light in a future without the current console economic ball and chain is liberating in itself.
A beautiful hypereal future better than realism does not suffer from anything uncanny:
I am not sure how a new generation of consoles will introduce any concerns that would make visuals
more expensive. ( executing new technologies may require more programming development )
but an army of artists that have an interest in and a savvy for next gen 2.0 is just that....
the size does not have to grow if you already have a team that was hired for and proven they can handle "new".
It's now all gravy ( or should be ). the pain of transistioning happened already.
You as a specialist have already been hired.
( when the industry concentrated on elevated graphics in the first place ).
The argument in the article that MS and Sony do not want to trail Wii U does seem like a very
good economic point. In which case future forward thinking hardware concerns and past experience makes me
think that I might actually want to wait out the current technology chips ( Kepler ) and instead hope that
some level of Maxwell/Ivy Bridge-E will be enough to develop comfortably with.
The 6800 gtx was the nvidia chip during xbox 360 production, however my 7800 gtx was far from
adequate compared to the tuned performance the xenon/xenos allows.
( I imagine an nvidia equivalent to be the gtx 8800 or 8800 ultra. )
In general I find when running games in 3d or with multi-monitor resolutions...
Without good SLI scaling, overclocking with modded bios to over volt and watercooled for the heat that
creates, there are many games that bring my hardware to it's knees.
Craving an openworld where I could camp for days instead of seconds I imagine that hardware is far far far away.
Actually, if a new console isn't released till 2013 that will give the right amount of hardware distance to future
proof yer imagination. ( using the past experience from the last release again) If xbox 720 is more powerful than
the NV chip in production at the time ( which would be Maxwell in 2013 ) It would then have to be MORE THAN:
" 8 times better than Tesla, 7.5 times better than Fermi and at 2.5 times faster then Kepler"
that 1 year would
make a huge difference to the gamescape of the next 10 years. Hopefully filled with very little compromise.
Either way...
it would sure be nice if they included mouse and keyboards with a new xbox so there is no need for XIM . But that argument is a page longer.
Personally I could give a rat's ass bout "gameplay"... And I will definitley have to puke if I hear "another"
gameplay before graphics post on a graphics oriented forum.
1rst POST! :poly121:
Uh really? Do you not think... playing games is what got us into games development in the first place?
Why would you think that? I think heavier shaders and postprocessing will be the "selling point" nothing people can point out specifically, but I think our rendering quality will increase ALOT, we dont really need that much more polys, its the shader, lighting and postprocessing etc that is lagging behind. Playing through uncharted I barely noticed any polies, so you guys are a good example of that Looking at epics samaritan demo, if you would pull that down to 10% of the polycount you probably wouldnt notice it THAT much, and specially not during gameplay. Hopefully alot of that stuff will be under the hood aswell, so the production time dont increase AGAIN.
And NO way the new consoles arrives in 2012.
I went with tessellation because I think it would be the most visually striking change for your average consumer. Things like postprocessing/better shaders would go more un-noticed by your average wallmart shopper. I could be wrong here.
And tessellation doesn't add enough striking visual difference to really warrant a new console.
As for lighting, I honestly think its just because most studios dont have professional lighting artists hired to focus just on lighting. Really there are some games out there or small parts of games with great lighting, but most, most suck because of just bad lighting artists. And thats because you have your modeler doing the lighting instead of a real professional lighting artist.
Im not saying modelers are bad lighting artists, nor am I saying that they shouldn't light things because hey I love doing lighting. But there absolutely is a huge difference between someone who went to school/self taught themselves how to model and someone who went to school to become a lighting artist.
Having someone who's sole job is to focus on lighting will always net you better results as they are constantly working with the tools, they are learning tips and techniques to push it further and instead of worry about poly budgets, gameplay, frame rate. They are only focused on the lighting/color/mood/shader interaction.
If you want better lighting, hire real lighting artists, great tech can make anything look good, but having a great artist behind that tech can make things look amazing.
Uh really? Do you not think... playing games is what got us into games development in the first place?
For me it was the Nvidia demo-ing of the final fantasy movie in "real time".
And I saw the promise of a future art whose immersion level might some day rival cinema and thus become the predominant art form. ( a promise I feel is still constrained by the compromises imposed by current console economic concerns )
Games are just the only game in town. Happily I have had a console since the magnavox Odyssey. So yeah I like squeezing one off just as much as the next guy.
But still look forward to the revolution.
And sadly I haven't found the game that has hit me as hard as the best film experiences.
Personally I could give a rat's ass bout "gameplay"... And I will definitley have to puke if I hear "another"
gameplay before graphics post on a graphics oriented forum.
That just sounds like a pretty egocentric point of view to me. It's not about us artists, it's about the game. People play them because they're fun, not because they have great graphics. They could go and watch a movie instead if they want outstanding visuals.
As for lighting; Better hardware = More lights = easier to achieve better lighting. Think of large levels which currently only supports a limited amount of lights until it f-s up. More lights would benefit in those cases.
I read somewhere that the ps4 and 720 or loop or whatever will be out in 2014. I highly doubt they will release the consoles before any games are finished, they've only now just sent out devkits to a few companies. 2014 still sounds a bit too early though.
Edit: @Dr jekyll: That wasn't an attack against you as a person, it was your comment that I criticised.
That just sounds like a pretty egocentric point of view to me. It's not about us artists, it's about the game. People play them because they're fun, not because they have great graphics. They could go and watch a movie instead if they want outstanding visuals.
As for lighting; Better hardware = More lights = easier to achieve better lighting. Think of large levels which currently only supports a limited amount of lights until it f-s up. More lights would benefit in those cases.
I read somewhere that the ps4 and 720 or loop or whatever will be out in 2014. I highly doubt they will release the consoles before any games are finished, they've only now just sent out devkits to a few companies. 2014 still sounds a bit too early though.
As much as I am ridiculed for being an Artist ( in my lifetime ) I think most artists rarely make "ego_centric" rants... My ego is about as withered, beaten and pathetic as they come.
I think an important factor which is completely ignored with graphics is its affects on gameplay.
Every one of these fantastic looking games out on the market today on the consoles have earned its looks from using a ton of tricks, and having a very focused scene of gameplay, and faking everything that is outside of it. And there's a ton of budget put down into developing systems that can do these things, or stream content, and there's a ton of artists that have to spend time on doing things that really doesn't add to the art at all, like optimizations, planning to make something cost less than it does, building lod steps, remaking stuff since they already baked something.
It's not just about the art, it's what kind of worlds we can create that are actually real and going on, without having to rely on faking everything that is outside of the players near view, it's about having the same kind of fidelity but being able to do these elderscrolls type of games where you can just build the world and not have to worry about how to solve the backdrop.
There's a ton of money going in to trying to fake things to seem like things they are not, while we could in fact with the current pc hardware levels having reached exponentially higher levels than the consoles do some really real experiences without having to cut down on the fantastic level of technical achievements we have managed to reach, and the artwork we could do with those tools.
~ By asking this question You clearly don't understand how videogames are developed or funded.
This is actually very true, the only games I have worked on was funded by an eccentric rich hippie with an inheritance that I burned through never to see the light of day.
So please.
More RAM does not = faster loading times. Your hard drive does that.
When the player begins the game, load content for that section of the game into memory. As the player progresses, stream it from the disk into memory. Higher bandwidth and more memory means you can put more in memory, and faster - given a current optical disk based game tends to be under 6.5Gb (albeit compressed) to fit on a DVD, given 6Gb of memory and reasonable bandwidth, sitting pretty with current-gen content could cut out the need to load between levels.
The situation eld describes above with Mass Effect streaming content while you wait in an elevator is a classic example of not having enough memory to contain the content, so it has to play switcheroo while the game is still running. This is still in the PC version, but if you have a reasonable spec machine, it's all handled well before whatever quip the characters come out with.
There are games that already do this on the 360s limited spec.
I think an important factor which is completely ignored with graphics is its affects on gameplay.
Every one of these fantastic looking games out on the market today on the consoles have earned its looks from using a ton of tricks, and having a very focused scene of gameplay, and faking everything that is outside of it. And there's a ton of budget put down into developing systems that can do these things, or stream content, and there's a ton of artists that have to spend time on doing things that really doesn't add to the art at all, like optimizations, planning to make something cost less than it does, building lod steps, remaking stuff since they already baked something.
It's not just about the art, it's what kind of worlds we can create that are actually real and going on, without having to rely on faking everything that is outside of the players near view, it's about having the same kind of fidelity but being able to do these elderscrolls type of games where you can just build the world and not have to worry about how to solve the backdrop.
Thats a really good point!
Reminds me of Tim Sweeny evangalizing as much... ( Not only the art pipeline but all the trickery he hacks together when in the future raw processing power would/should alleviate )
Thats a really good point!
Reminds me of Tim Sweeny evangalizing as much... ( Not only the art pipeline but all the trickery he hacks together when in the future raw processing power would/should alleviate )
Exactly, I wouldn't in any way deny the sheer awesomeness in people pulling tricks to make games look good, I've been through all that hard work myself, and I've seen fantastic artists together with programmers pull some true magic.
But we are essentially spending a ton of money on making sure we can actually make these good looking scenes work, and so that we can squeeze that last bit of prop in, and then cutting levels apart, zoning them and having to make sure we don't go above the already silly low memory levels we have in the consoles.
You can easily build a computer and put in 32 times the standard memory of a console in it without it having to cost much extra.
The situation eld describes above with Mass Effect streaming content while you wait in an elevator is a classic example of not having enough memory to contain the content, so it has to play switcheroo while the game is still running. This is still in the PC version, but if you have a reasonable spec machine, it's all handled well before whatever quip the characters come out with.
There are games that already do this on the 360s limited spec.
Exactly, or games will rely on streaming, which isn't the easiest feature to implement or something you can just carelessly use as you wish.
Not to mention huge sandbox games (once again using elderscrolls as an example) where they would have to pull climbing and floating from the series since big cities would have to be zoned off due to performance, which is an example of graphics and hardware directly affecting gameplay.
yeah replacing smoke and mirror hacks with actual simulation would work...BUT then someone will come and do 1000 more things at the same time using smoke and mirrors (further down the consoles cycle)...
as a lighting guy here I am looking forward to good GI solutions that dont require a load of smoke and mirrors (even if the tools are good)
has anyone noticed that games of a leading edge level of detail are getting more and more linear. a new generation would hopefully alleiviate some of this allowing for easier development openworld games or just slightly less corridorified games
So how much to you think the budgets will have to balloon to accommodate the newer consoles? There's always a lot of talk about production budgets getting larger (which is true) but I'm wondering if it will be as extreme with this next generation.
I mean (on the art side)...we're already sculpting high res assets, retopologizing, baking maps, designing, concepting, ect. This general workflow will carry over to the next generation of development right? The workflow made a dramatic change from developing for the last generation to accommodate the new technology available. I can't see the workflow changing so dramatically for this next gen. So whats causing the dramatic increases in budget?
I understand there's going to be that increased time/money because of the higher expectation of the visual fidelity. More time spent working with lighting and shaders but as far as asset generation goes I don't see any huge difference that will double the dev cost like some have been saying.
Oh, and for what its worth I don't see the next consoles coming until 2013 at the earliest. I'm really curious to see what the specs are going to be though.
has anyone noticed that games of a leading edge level of detail are getting more and more linear. a new generation would hopefully alleiviate some of this allowing for easier development openworld games or just slightly less corridorified games
Very true, but that has little to do with the graphics, linearity has more to due with easing up on the complexity that the player has to put up with, for good and for bad.
Very true, but that has little to do with the graphics, linearity has more to due with easing up on the complexity that the player has to put up with, for good and for bad.
Also the fact that making something linear vs. something like GTA or Skyrim takes a shit ton of more dev time + testers + bug fixing.
I don't think the Wii U will put any pressure on Sony or Microsoft, they are really only competing against each other. I feel that Sony or Microsoft will have to announce or suggest SOMETHING before the Wii U releases though. I really wish there was more PC games that but consoles to shame though, just something that says "current gen consoles could never do that."
@eld- "Very true, but that has little to do with the graphics,"
IT does if your trying to maintain the bleeding edge of graphic fidelity increasing the linearity increases the amount of memory available by up to or over 3x... a linear corridor you only need to load (this is with streaming) infront and bwehind, if you grid ify this its the detail your on the detail infront and behind... with an openworld it needs to load the detail to each side (generally 3x though at distances it becomes circular so some savings are made)
this contributes to memory foot print and disc reads and CPU overhead as there are more potential things (characters props AI etc) to contend with due to non-linearity
@eld- "Very true, but that has little to do with the graphics,"
IT does if your trying to maintain the bleeding edge of graphic fidelity increasing the linearity increases the amount of memory available by up to or over 3x... a linear corridor you only need to load (this is with streaming) infront and bwehind, if you grid ify this its the detail your on the detail infront and behind... with an openworld it needs to load the detail to each side (generally 3x though at distances it becomes circular so some savings are made)
this contributes to memory foot print and disc reads and CPU overhead as there are more potential things (characters props AI etc) to contend with due to non-linearity
Oh yeah, I got that, I thought we were talking linear level design versus non-linear in a shooter for example.
In this months Game Developers Magazine the editorial was kind of interesting. The editor got a lot of backlash from an interview he had done with ID before Rage was released in which the developers were critisized because of the level of linear hand holding. The impression I got from the reaction of the developers was that they were shocked that anyone would have a problem being "led" around the wasteland and the author could only suppose that they developed in a vacuum or that no one wanted to call "ID" out on a gameplay issue.
I personally believe having a linear story line is perfectly fine, as long as the story is strong and the whole game is based around that aspect. Some games are better suited for a linear movie like approach, others need to be completely open. But there's are more game dev issues, besides for the streaming issues from a tech stand point.
You're in the right place so :poly142: BTW there's tons of work in non-game related CG, so its not the only game in town by a long shot!
There is another artistic forum whose members are primarily interested in creating "real time rendered immersive environments" and the end result of that experience is not a game? I don't think interactivity on the GPU has evolved past games yet. But "when" it does it will be born here. As far as real time talent is concerned the best polygonal minds are here. ( thus the only game in town ). Before 2001 I was in broadcasting working hard for a Pixar direction. After the final fantasy movie on the first nvidia card ( 1rst or second? ) The writing on the wall said real time rendered immersive digital experience. And the discovery of it's language will be born out of the video game.
You can see the promise as small baby steps in every great game that is released.
After the final fantasy movie on the first nvidia card ( 1rst or second? )
What? Are you talking about rendered in real-time? You said something about the FF movie being rendered in real-time previously. The first Nvidia card could not do that, hell, the card in my system now could not do that, and it's a 3GB Nvidia.
What? Are you talking about rendered in real-time? You said something about the FF movie being rendered in real-time previously. The first Nvidia card could not do that, hell, the card in my system now could not do that, and it's a 3GB Nvidia.
has anyone noticed that games of a leading edge level of detail are getting more and more linear
I'm not sure actually. I mean rockstar have been blasting out their usual sandboxy type games, as has bethesda, and the Assassin's Creed games have stayed open. Yeah there are linear games about but there's still been a good portion that aren't. Saboteur, Just Cause 2, Bulletstorm?
Yeah that wasn't their first card, or even second. Not by a long shot.
Sorry I am not sure what I am doing wrong in my statements? I apologize.
But as far as I know we have the same internet with the same historical facts.
In 2001 when that demo was released It was demo-ed on the 2nd generation gpu chips released that year. With such revolutionary pixel shader work I can't see how they didn't have to do at least some of that work on the first generation of cards, but as far as I know there were no Quadro's that could have handled the pixel shader technology.
So...
It was not by a longshot at all. But WAS actually on that 2nd generation???????? http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_20010618_6259.html
Yes... this is true. It has been a dream of mine for more than 10 years to see that new art form evolve into the predominant art form taking cinemas place. And watch the birth of the language born to do that work and hopefully contribute what I could.
"NVIDIAs GPU enables over 100,000 speed-up over software renderers running on a farm of the fastest supercomputers."
However I do not see how this amazing feat ( for it's time ) does anything but cement how inspiring it must have been: that technology had the promise to provide an immersive experience in real time " interactivity with cinematic levels of immersion".
I wish that quote was actually 100% true.. but that bit was a bit of marketing.
I THINK ( for my dream to have been crushed ) you thought that quote meant that the demo represents nothing more than a hardware render rather than a software render.
NO.
Realtime render as in rendered in real time. They are boasting that they did as much in "real time".
To be fair... A lot of artists at the time touted the render as "good" as the film. ( which of course was false )
But the level of qualty was enough to really inspire one to switch professions and search for that digital grail.
The real-time demonstration was made possible by NVIDIAs nfiniteFX shading technology, including vertex and pixel shaders, to overcome the technical challenges presented in creating realistic skin, hair, clothing and other organic attributes.
This interactive demonstration of Final Fantasy is a major achievement for the 3D industry. The realism and subtleties of the images demonstrate the power of the programmable GPU that NVIDIA pioneered, stated Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO at NVIDIA. Weve taken a giant step in visual computing. The work done by Square and NVIDIA is a glimpse at the future of video games and "other"interactivestory telling experiences.
If it makes you happy and you really have a need for my dreams to be crushed... Then you will be happy to know that I was hired by Bay Raitt to work on Lord of the Rings for his team on the Gollum facial "hero" animations But never got the HUNDREDS ( a shitload not a hundred. drama queen :poly117: ) of e-mails he sent me because my family,sick and tired of me spending all my time chasing my artistic dreams of working in the "industry" Started in with the ole classic: their way( flipping burgers in the familys ghetto business ) or the highway ultimatums.
Homeless, it wasn't till 6 months until I got settled and stable enough to buy my own computer... I chose My way. The future where I do not compromise on my dreams and work part time and live with people who are supportive and believe in the same or at least believe in me! ( I didn't have to be homeless but I had spent 10 long hard years trying to learn and be proficient in CG ) and around the same time I was getting alot of attention for my work and the tools I was building.
After Some good Art reviews of my paintings and some Magazine interviews ( voted one of the top developers for Maya which was a pretty big deal back then considering no one knew what they were doing at the time. ) So back when edge loop and Edge flow modeling was 12 guys and Bay Raitt in a small corner of the internet ( Mirai Forums )... I invested in Mirai ( Bay being an application designer at nichimen was hiring Licensed Mirai edge loop disciples left and right... Guys like Ken Brilliant got their e-mails ) I got mine when it was to late. 10 years is long time to be ridiculed while you are working towards yer dreams. To have that kind of legitimacy "stolen" from you while you were freezing in the woods was a bit more than I could bear.
I was in Texas at the time I found out ( actually got the e-mails ) living on a friends couch. Had a nervous breakdown and reverted back to being homeless ( I lived like an animal for 2 years in austin in the field that use to be across from the expose strip joint )
If I posted my face I am sure a lot of Austin members here would recognize me right away. ( one of those tweaking south congress pimps walking back n forth waiting for the girls to "finish up" at the st elmo Hotel )
I blew out my veins pretty early and till I die will suffer circulation and complications from cellulitis and 15 seizures. I hit Rock bottom about six years later and tried to kill my self ( I stole a needle from the arm of a friend who nodded out with that full bloody syringe freshly registered. She was infected with full blown AIDS and Hepatitis C. ) And I injected that into my own veins.
I can however say that although my dreams being crushed was pretty severe. It was/is the only thing keeping me alive. My dreams saved my life. I use to sit at the bus stop everyday with Dietel and Dietels C++ and try to use a pen and paper and pretend that was a computer screen. And I would assume/pretend that I was getting errors and would check for hours trying to find logic errors and mistypes in code I had no way of building! :poly136:.
Your dreams can be a guardian angel.. they won't let up and are always whispering in your ear. Mine kept reminding me how good I felt when I was being creative. And how much fellow creative types that I looked up to: Bryan Ewert, Bay Raitt, and Steven Stahlberg had supported me and shown much admiration appreciation for my contributions. And the overwhelming poularity of my contributions
( at the time my tools were second only to Dirk Bialluch.. not something I think I deserved today.. but at the time it was all pretty new ) Instead of being positive and believing in my dreams I rated successs only by financial gain instead of how much I had contributed and how much the changes in other peoples lives because of those contributions were appreciated. In which case I was very succesful already. more successful than I could have ever hoped. Even if I didn't get those e-mails... Heck! I got All those fucking e-mails. ( Instead of being crushed those e-mails should have been affirming ) I suppose many here know the same feeling. Like You are hanging on a ledge with your dreams in one hand and white knuckled hanging-on agony in the other hand... for foreverrrrrrr...
And yes through alot of sick days in jail and cold wet nights shivering in the rain at night in a bus stop desperately trying to keep my copy of Mirai and Dietel And Dietel C++ from getting ruined. I had the sweet inspiration of the promise that this demo I saw of the Final Fantasy movie. And that inspration was that we would indeed witness a new pre-dominant art form whose immersion level hoisted up by one's OWN interactive meandering, would usher in creative joy new and unique to our times. And perhaps? I could be allowed to contribute dutifully as well.?
2013 for the next console on Hardware about 8 times more powerful than current fermi technology?
I think that extra year will make a big difference. I have been dreaming this long perhaps the extra year assures less compromising finally and more evolving.
Sorry if I came off offensive earliar.. I am just kinda passionate about the interactive medium. I find it offensive when visual mediums are regarded as an antithesis to quality and I find it disrespectful to disregard the graphic medium's importance. And I find it preferable to defend and concentrate on one's chosen craft as a privilige and upholding, contributing and defending it's progress as a burden and responsibility.
( Sometimes I wonder if a generation of impressive self-teach might be missing that mantle by not attending an Artistic University "BFA/MFA" ) I am hoping the introduction removes any doubt that I might just be pulling a rant out of my ass for no reason. And that the future of consoles as fulfillment of a dream is actually really serious important and perhaps might be very exciting in the next couple of years!
Doh! I am sorry.. I dodged a viral bullet! I do not have AIDS. I am not even HIV positive. The only traces I have of Hepatitis C are the Anti-Bodies present in my system when it successfully saved my life. My doctors knowing 100% of my story ( idiot shot himdelf with aids ) did as thorough of a search as possible ( Johns Hopkins positive! )
Sorry, for being a douche and making it sound like I was dying.
To those saying costs will sky-rocket, are you sure about that?
I'm pretty sure that Environment artists would like to have a word on that about the shader area alone on why extra beef is always better, not to mention if the pipeline doesn't synch up, you can add a little extra bevel/chamfer here and there instead of spending the next whole day manually optimizing the model because the console of choice couldn't render another tree in the distance or you can't split your UV's to Normal ratio.
Plus, it's pretty heinous on the amount of extra fore-planning on the optimization area alone is need to run stuff. I mean seriously, just read up on Deus-Ex. The reason bosses are located in small rooms and you fight against one boss with environmental assets which are both simple and reused to the n-th degree is so that they could save on overhead. Same DMC3, the only reason you where limited to two weapons was due to lack of RAM on the PS2.
Yes, costs will increase in the next generation pipeline, that is because like any new initiative, you need a overhaul and change of things, but in the long run, I do believe they will be cheaper because less tricks will need to be used the art side alone, not to mention audio area of things too.
Who knows, maybe I'm talking out of my ass, but if studios want to publish games on a yearly basis, they better step up the next gen hardware, because unless you plan on recycling assets to the n-th degree in your games under 6 month cycles for the art, and 6 for the programming cleanup, then having mushy hardware isn't going to help.
Realism doesn't come for free, artists will need to create the visual aspects of it. More realistic = more work that needs to be done to achieve that level of realism. More work = more $/time to complete it (or more crunch ).
Maybe we'll be able to get away with less smoke and mirrors and all the associated headaches and extra work needed to implement them, but we'll also have to produce work that requires a lot more time to author.
Sure I'd rather spend more time producing art and less time working around technical issues (that's one of the things that attracts me to the tech art field), but I doubt all that extra horsepower will be given over to artists so our work will be easier. Companies will still want to push the limits because they can and want to compete with each other, so things will likely still need crazy technical tricks to be optimized for whatever the new hardware limits will be.
EDIT:
I guess the real question is: Will the outsourcing studios be ready for the challenge? I hear Kwramm's company is ready to rock n' roll.
Realism doesn't come for free, artists will need to create the visual aspects of it. More realistic = more work that needs to be done to achieve that level of realism. More work = more $/time to complete it (or more crunch ).
Maybe we'll be able to get away with less smoke and mirrors and all the associated headaches and extra work needed to implement them, but we'll also have to produce work that requires a lot more time to author.
Sure I'd rather spend more time producing art and less time working around technical issues (that's one of the things that attracts me to the tech art field), but I doubt all that extra horsepower will be given over to artists so our work will be easier. Companies will still want to push the limits because they can and want to compete with each other, so things will likely still need crazy technical tricks to be optimized for whatever the new hardware limits will be.
EDIT:
I guess the real question is: Will the outsourcing studios be ready for the challenge? I hear Kwramm's company is ready to rock n' roll.
You mentioned a good point. Games will become more realistic and/or complex for sure. Which in turn will require more time/money/skilled people. However, having more power could help alleviate time spent messing with tech issues or extreme memory constraints, and let artists get stuff done faster/easier.
I think a big part though of whats to come is a need for better tools. Right now packages like 3DS Max still are lacking in performance and tools for certain tasks, and make doing environment work and whatnot a pain. Max 2012 is much better at handling many objects in the viewport, but things like the lack of good internal scene management tools and placement tools aren't quite good enough.
I think not only consoles will move forward, but tools will need to move forward in speed/reliability as well, in order to get work done faster/easier.
To those saying costs will sky-rocket, are you sure about that?
Every generation the price to develop games have doubled or tripled. I read that Lair's budget was about $20 million while God of War III's budget was around $40 million - that's in one generation.
Every generation the price to develop games have doubled or tripled. I read that Lair's budget was about $20 million while God of War III's budget was around $40 million - that's in one generation.
And they're both on the same platform, it says more about the scope of the project rather than the cost of developing a game, if you would've said god of war 2 to god of war 3 I would've agreed though, since pipelines change, assets has to be made in entirely different ways.
But in the case of making assets for consoles we often find ourselves scaling down textures and cutting corners so that it'll fit the hardware, we're already doing all these crazy things that cost tons of money ever since games went from small-sized to big-sized cinematic projects.
We have projects like the witcher 2 or the total war series which has been developed for platforms and specs much higher than the consoles, they show that it isn't too far off from current console budgets, and they even target the less feasible pc platform.
I don't see any kind of reason for the doom and gloom, we'll have big budget games, and we'll have even more room for small budget games and indie games on the new platforms, as digital distribution will become bigger and better, and I would even believe that indie-developers could make use of more hardware in creative ways.
While PCs are more powerful than consoles it's also a smaller market. Consoles are where you make the most money so a multiplatform game will have it's PC port restricted by console limitations while on the other hand nobody wants to invest console sized budgets on a PC only game. Even John Carmack agrees - Consoles are the leading platform despite PC's being 10x more powerful
Even if the next gen consoles came out with all off the shelf PC parts we would see a huge leap.
Exactly, just the specs of a modern computer is insane if you compare it the consoles, but imagine a game specifically built for a very specific set of carefully put together hardware, magic could be made there.
Replies
Better hardware is really needed - not strictly for how games look, but also for what you can do with them. Memory is a BIG restriction right now, and console GPUs (7th generation) are now seven generations behind.
Development costs are going up, but I'm expecting the games themselves to change somewhat more than their content.
I agree with this somewhat, but why do you say its not worth it? More power would mean bigger levels, better quality audio/more audio, higher res textures, more geo, ect.
Working on Forza 4, we had to be extremely picky about geo/texture memory in order to hit 60fps. If we would have had 2-3x more CPU/GPU/Ram, we could have made even more detailed environments alot more easily. Of course it's very good practice to optimize as much as possible, but when you already have that and have to cut content, it sucks.
Honestly, if we got a console where every game was in full 1080p and had full scene anti-aliasing, in my opinion at least, that's worth switching to the next generation of consoles. But of course, that console could do a lot more too, with higher rez textures, higher rez skeletal meshes, etc etc
Also, when they say that the next generation will hit in 2012, I took it to mean that devkits will hit in 2012 so that development can start on those games, not that the console will go on sale to the general public in 2012. When those games are done, then they'll release it, which will be in at least a couple of years afterwards. So it still makes sense.
That in itself sounds awesome to me
I never said AAA is going away. Top blockbuster games make tons of money, that business will continue. It's the bottom 70% of the retail market that is disappearing. We saw lots of studio closings this generation that showed that.
However, a healthy market for blockbuster AAA is not a big enough reason for MS and Sony to release "vastly more powerful consoles." That's ignoring the rest of the picture. They will release new, more powerful consoles, but the generational leap will not be what you are used to. Taking a loss on high end hardware doesn't make much sense anymore.
The business model of stupidly powerful consoles with stupidly high price tags is primed to be disrupted by a digital open market.
More RAM does not = faster loading times. Your hard drive does that.
I agree somewhat, but add simulated hair and cloth to that. And much prettier lighting.
But yeah. New consoles are FAR aways yet. Not even next E3.
gameplay before graphics post on a graphics oriented forum.
As if all this technology is not going to evolve into somthing other than just the current
button mashing masturbation that some think is all so sacred. I'd say the best game
experience I have had in this current gen was Bioshock. And that immersion had nothing to do
with it's lackluster FPS "gameplay" which was far from tuned. But instead came from a
level of acting and storytelling that immersed the user in a dystopic environment achieved
with a terrifying environment art, mature narrative and a beautiflul score/dripping wet sound design soundscape.
Now I would be fine if Bioshock Infinite did absolutely nothing to improve "gameplay" if only the
distractingly bad graphic elements were addressed instead:
( unreal 2.5 horrid compression of textures, sub-par immature character sculpting ). And I am willing to
bet that game will affect me more than all the other banal, boingy boingy, Brain reward center,
mario jack-off, button junk food gameplay gems combined.
In the future where a digital interactive immersive art has finally evolved games will
simply be it's pornography.
I would consider such game play before art sentiment "suspect" normally...
( that on an artist-centric forum as much would be a cover for talent insecurities ) but a lot of really
talented folk here seem perfectly fine with "putting down" graphics and do not find associating visuals as
the tacky enemy of good gameplay insulting in any way.
Bad gameplay is the enemy of good gameplay. Nothing else.
You could claim that the expense of graphics steals from investment in good gameplay.
Which I suppose is true. So what does visuals cost? Is there a multi-billion dollar visual machine that
spits out expensive graphics indies do not hace access to?
The only thing they do not have access to are the army of the best talent and
the paying masses that appreciate the sweat and talent of the work you got paid for.
And instead of calling bullshit on that envious sentiment for what it really is: Petty jealousy against
what they cannot afford ( A large team of talented creative minds working hard on a craft they mastered ).
Many artists have instead adopted the same atitude to their own craft. I can imagine a musician calling any
other "signed" musician a "sellout" because they have to much respect for their craft...
But I wouldn't want music composers to start rallying for less orchestrated music scores in games in
favor of midi instead. To each his own. The promise of visual magic and all that is possible is dead in you?
If you are an artist then grow a pair and be an artist. The very thought of what I might be able to do with
shadows and light in a future without the current console economic ball and chain is liberating in itself.
A beautiful hypereal future better than realism does not suffer from anything uncanny:
more expensive. ( executing new technologies may require more programming development )
but an army of artists that have an interest in and a savvy for next gen 2.0 is just that....
the size does not have to grow if you already have a team that was hired for and proven they can handle "new".
It's now all gravy ( or should be ). the pain of transistioning happened already.
You as a specialist have already been hired.
( when the industry concentrated on elevated graphics in the first place ).
The argument in the article that MS and Sony do not want to trail Wii U does seem like a very
good economic point. In which case future forward thinking hardware concerns and past experience makes me
think that I might actually want to wait out the current technology chips ( Kepler ) and instead hope that
some level of Maxwell/Ivy Bridge-E will be enough to develop comfortably with.
The 6800 gtx was the nvidia chip during xbox 360 production, however my 7800 gtx was far from
adequate compared to the tuned performance the xenon/xenos allows.
( I imagine an nvidia equivalent to be the gtx 8800 or 8800 ultra. )
Considering the Samaritin demo was on a gtx 580 tri sli machine to run smoothly. I am hoping the numbers touted by
nvidia on x79 scaling are true:
SLI is so very sexy when the drivers are tweaked correctly.
http://www.geforce.com/News/articles/x79-sli-motherboards-launch
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2011/11/nvidia-4-way-x79/
In general I find when running games in 3d or with multi-monitor resolutions...
Without good SLI scaling, overclocking with modded bios to over volt and watercooled for the heat that
creates, there are many games that bring my hardware to it's knees.
Craving an openworld where I could camp for days instead of seconds I imagine that hardware is far far far away.
Actually, if a new console isn't released till 2013 that will give the right amount of hardware distance to future
proof yer imagination. ( using the past experience from the last release again) If xbox 720 is more powerful than
the NV chip in production at the time ( which would be Maxwell in 2013 ) It would then have to be MORE THAN: that 1 year would
make a huge difference to the gamescape of the next 10 years. Hopefully filled with very little compromise.
Either way...
it would sure be nice if they included mouse and keyboards with a new xbox so there is no need for XIM . But that argument is a page longer.
1rst POST! :poly121:
Uh really? Do you not think... playing games is what got us into games development in the first place?
I went with tessellation because I think it would be the most visually striking change for your average consumer. Things like postprocessing/better shaders would go more un-noticed by your average wallmart shopper. I could be wrong here.
And tessellation doesn't add enough striking visual difference to really warrant a new console.
As for lighting, I honestly think its just because most studios dont have professional lighting artists hired to focus just on lighting. Really there are some games out there or small parts of games with great lighting, but most, most suck because of just bad lighting artists. And thats because you have your modeler doing the lighting instead of a real professional lighting artist.
Im not saying modelers are bad lighting artists, nor am I saying that they shouldn't light things because hey I love doing lighting. But there absolutely is a huge difference between someone who went to school/self taught themselves how to model and someone who went to school to become a lighting artist.
Having someone who's sole job is to focus on lighting will always net you better results as they are constantly working with the tools, they are learning tips and techniques to push it further and instead of worry about poly budgets, gameplay, frame rate. They are only focused on the lighting/color/mood/shader interaction.
If you want better lighting, hire real lighting artists, great tech can make anything look good, but having a great artist behind that tech can make things look amazing.
A fuckton of studios Shut the Fuck down due to changeover costs and general development prices.
For me it was the Nvidia demo-ing of the final fantasy movie in "real time".
And I saw the promise of a future art whose immersion level might some day rival cinema and thus become the predominant art form. ( a promise I feel is still constrained by the compromises imposed by current console economic concerns )
Games are just the only game in town. Happily I have had a console since the magnavox Odyssey. So yeah I like squeezing one off just as much as the next guy.
But still look forward to the revolution.
And sadly I haven't found the game that has hit me as hard as the best film experiences.
That just sounds like a pretty egocentric point of view to me. It's not about us artists, it's about the game. People play them because they're fun, not because they have great graphics. They could go and watch a movie instead if they want outstanding visuals.
As for lighting; Better hardware = More lights = easier to achieve better lighting. Think of large levels which currently only supports a limited amount of lights until it f-s up. More lights would benefit in those cases.
I read somewhere that the ps4 and 720 or loop or whatever will be out in 2014. I highly doubt they will release the consoles before any games are finished, they've only now just sent out devkits to a few companies. 2014 still sounds a bit too early though.
Edit: @Dr jekyll: That wasn't an attack against you as a person, it was your comment that I criticised.
As much as I am ridiculed for being an Artist ( in my lifetime ) I think most artists rarely make "ego_centric" rants... My ego is about as withered, beaten and pathetic as they come.
I'd say it is a rather art-centric comment.
guilty.
What would have to change ( regarding graphics )
That this iteration would cause to cost extra?
Would your team not be up to it?
~ By asking this question You clearly don't understand how videogames are developed or funded.
Every one of these fantastic looking games out on the market today on the consoles have earned its looks from using a ton of tricks, and having a very focused scene of gameplay, and faking everything that is outside of it. And there's a ton of budget put down into developing systems that can do these things, or stream content, and there's a ton of artists that have to spend time on doing things that really doesn't add to the art at all, like optimizations, planning to make something cost less than it does, building lod steps, remaking stuff since they already baked something.
It's not just about the art, it's what kind of worlds we can create that are actually real and going on, without having to rely on faking everything that is outside of the players near view, it's about having the same kind of fidelity but being able to do these elderscrolls type of games where you can just build the world and not have to worry about how to solve the backdrop.
There's a ton of money going in to trying to fake things to seem like things they are not, while we could in fact with the current pc hardware levels having reached exponentially higher levels than the consoles do some really real experiences without having to cut down on the fantastic level of technical achievements we have managed to reach, and the artwork we could do with those tools.
Maybe one day we don't have to do this:
So please.
When the player begins the game, load content for that section of the game into memory. As the player progresses, stream it from the disk into memory. Higher bandwidth and more memory means you can put more in memory, and faster - given a current optical disk based game tends to be under 6.5Gb (albeit compressed) to fit on a DVD, given 6Gb of memory and reasonable bandwidth, sitting pretty with current-gen content could cut out the need to load between levels.
The situation eld describes above with Mass Effect streaming content while you wait in an elevator is a classic example of not having enough memory to contain the content, so it has to play switcheroo while the game is still running. This is still in the PC version, but if you have a reasonable spec machine, it's all handled well before whatever quip the characters come out with.
There are games that already do this on the 360s limited spec.
Thats a really good point!
Reminds me of Tim Sweeny evangalizing as much... ( Not only the art pipeline but all the trickery he hacks together when in the future raw processing power would/should alleviate )
Exactly, I wouldn't in any way deny the sheer awesomeness in people pulling tricks to make games look good, I've been through all that hard work myself, and I've seen fantastic artists together with programmers pull some true magic.
But we are essentially spending a ton of money on making sure we can actually make these good looking scenes work, and so that we can squeeze that last bit of prop in, and then cutting levels apart, zoning them and having to make sure we don't go above the already silly low memory levels we have in the consoles.
You can easily build a computer and put in 32 times the standard memory of a console in it without it having to cost much extra.
Exactly, or games will rely on streaming, which isn't the easiest feature to implement or something you can just carelessly use as you wish.
Not to mention huge sandbox games (once again using elderscrolls as an example) where they would have to pull climbing and floating from the series since big cities would have to be zoned off due to performance, which is an example of graphics and hardware directly affecting gameplay.
Hopefully with less proprietary technology, I wonder how much the IBM Xenon processor added to costs compared to using an existing Intel processor.
as a lighting guy here I am looking forward to good GI solutions that dont require a load of smoke and mirrors (even if the tools are good)
has anyone noticed that games of a leading edge level of detail are getting more and more linear. a new generation would hopefully alleiviate some of this allowing for easier development openworld games or just slightly less corridorified games
I mean (on the art side)...we're already sculpting high res assets, retopologizing, baking maps, designing, concepting, ect. This general workflow will carry over to the next generation of development right? The workflow made a dramatic change from developing for the last generation to accommodate the new technology available. I can't see the workflow changing so dramatically for this next gen. So whats causing the dramatic increases in budget?
I understand there's going to be that increased time/money because of the higher expectation of the visual fidelity. More time spent working with lighting and shaders but as far as asset generation goes I don't see any huge difference that will double the dev cost like some have been saying.
Oh, and for what its worth I don't see the next consoles coming until 2013 at the earliest. I'm really curious to see what the specs are going to be though.
Very true, but that has little to do with the graphics, linearity has more to due with easing up on the complexity that the player has to put up with, for good and for bad.
Also the fact that making something linear vs. something like GTA or Skyrim takes a shit ton of more dev time + testers + bug fixing.
In the case of sandbox games, absolutely.
I was thinking more old school first person shooters where level design sometimes had a bit more freedom and non-linearity.
IT does if your trying to maintain the bleeding edge of graphic fidelity increasing the linearity increases the amount of memory available by up to or over 3x... a linear corridor you only need to load (this is with streaming) infront and bwehind, if you grid ify this its the detail your on the detail infront and behind... with an openworld it needs to load the detail to each side (generally 3x though at distances it becomes circular so some savings are made)
this contributes to memory foot print and disc reads and CPU overhead as there are more potential things (characters props AI etc) to contend with due to non-linearity
Oh yeah, I got that, I thought we were talking linear level design versus non-linear in a shooter for example.
My carpal tunnel Consolitis circa 1978:
Click click click click Click click
http://videogamessystem.blogspot.com/2011/04/magnavox-odyssey-2-game-system.html
I remember the joy stick as being quite responsive however.
You're in the right place so :poly142: BTW there's tons of work in non-game related CG, so its not the only game in town by a long shot!
There is another artistic forum whose members are primarily interested in creating "real time rendered immersive environments" and the end result of that experience is not a game? I don't think interactivity on the GPU has evolved past games yet. But "when" it does it will be born here. As far as real time talent is concerned the best polygonal minds are here. ( thus the only game in town ). Before 2001 I was in broadcasting working hard for a Pixar direction. After the final fantasy movie on the first nvidia card ( 1rst or second? ) The writing on the wall said real time rendered immersive digital experience. And the discovery of it's language will be born out of the video game.
You can see the promise as small baby steps in every great game that is released.
What? Are you talking about rendered in real-time? You said something about the FF movie being rendered in real-time previously. The first Nvidia card could not do that, hell, the card in my system now could not do that, and it's a 3GB Nvidia.
I'm pretty sure you are smoking crack right now.
EDIT: Found it;
You are definitely on crack.
I have my keychains that say otherwise :poly124: ( 2 years sober and proud of it )
Yeah that wasn't their first card, or even second. Not by a long shot.
"NVIDIA’s GPU enables over 100,000 speed-up over software renderers running on a farm of the fastest supercomputers."
I'm not sure actually. I mean rockstar have been blasting out their usual sandboxy type games, as has bethesda, and the Assassin's Creed games have stayed open. Yeah there are linear games about but there's still been a good portion that aren't. Saboteur, Just Cause 2, Bulletstorm?
Sorry I am not sure what I am doing wrong in my statements? I apologize.
But as far as I know we have the same internet with the same historical facts.
In 2001 when that demo was released It was demo-ed on the 2nd generation gpu chips released that year. With such revolutionary pixel shader work I can't see how they didn't have to do at least some of that work on the first generation of cards, but as far as I know there were no Quadro's that could have handled the pixel shader technology.
So...
It was not by a longshot at all. But WAS actually on that 2nd generation????????
http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_20010618_6259.html
Yes... this is true. It has been a dream of mine for more than 10 years to see that new art form evolve into the predominant art form taking cinemas place. And watch the birth of the language born to do that work and hopefully contribute what I could.
However I do not see how this amazing feat ( for it's time ) does anything but cement how inspiring it must have been: that technology had the promise to provide an immersive experience in real time " interactivity with cinematic levels of immersion".
I wish that quote was actually 100% true.. but that bit was a bit of marketing.
I THINK ( for my dream to have been crushed ) you thought that quote meant that the demo represents nothing more than a hardware render rather than a software render.
NO.
Realtime render as in rendered in real time. They are boasting that they did as much in "real time".
To be fair... A lot of artists at the time touted the render as "good" as the film. ( which of course was false )
But the level of qualty was enough to really inspire one to switch professions and search for that digital grail.
If it makes you happy and you really have a need for my dreams to be crushed...
Then you will be happy to know that I was hired by Bay Raitt to work on Lord of the Rings for his team on the Gollum facial "hero" animations But never got the HUNDREDS ( a shitload not a hundred. drama queen :poly117: ) of e-mails he sent me because my family, sick and tired of me spending all my time chasing my artistic dreams of working in the "industry" Started in with the ole classic: their way( flipping burgers in the familys ghetto business ) or the highway ultimatums.
Homeless, it wasn't till 6 months until I got settled and stable enough to buy my own computer... I chose My way. The future where I do not compromise on my dreams and work part time and live with people who are supportive and believe in the same or at least believe in me! ( I didn't have to be homeless but I had spent 10 long hard years trying to learn and be proficient in CG ) and around the same time I was getting alot of attention for my work and the tools I was building.
After Some good Art reviews of my paintings and some Magazine interviews ( voted one of the top developers for Maya which was a pretty big deal back then considering no one knew what they were doing at the time. ) So back when edge loop and Edge flow modeling was 12 guys and Bay Raitt in a small corner of the internet ( Mirai Forums )... I invested in Mirai ( Bay being an application designer at nichimen was hiring Licensed Mirai edge loop disciples left and right... Guys like Ken Brilliant got their e-mails ) I got mine when it was to late. 10 years is long time to be ridiculed while you are working towards yer dreams. To have that kind of legitimacy "stolen" from you while you were freezing in the woods was a bit more than I could bear.
I was in Texas at the time I found out ( actually got the e-mails ) living on a friends couch. Had a nervous breakdown and reverted back to being homeless ( I lived like an animal for 2 years in austin in the field that use to be across from the expose strip joint )
If I posted my face I am sure a lot of Austin members here would recognize me right away. ( one of those tweaking south congress pimps walking back n forth waiting for the girls to "finish up" at the st elmo Hotel )
I blew out my veins pretty early and till I die will suffer circulation and complications from cellulitis and 15 seizures. I hit Rock bottom about six years later and tried to kill my self ( I stole a needle from the arm of a friend who nodded out with that full bloody syringe freshly registered. She was infected with full blown AIDS and Hepatitis C. ) And I injected that into my own veins.
I can however say that although my dreams being crushed was pretty severe. It was/is the only thing keeping me alive. My dreams saved my life. I use to sit at the bus stop everyday with Dietel and Dietels C++ and try to use a pen and paper and pretend that was a computer screen. And I would assume/pretend that I was getting errors and would check for hours trying to find logic errors and mistypes in code I had no way of building! :poly136:.
Your dreams can be a guardian angel.. they won't let up and are always whispering in your ear. Mine kept reminding me how good I felt when I was being creative. And how much fellow creative types that I looked up to: Bryan Ewert, Bay Raitt, and Steven Stahlberg had supported me and shown much admiration appreciation for my contributions. And the overwhelming poularity of my contributions
( at the time my tools were second only to Dirk Bialluch.. not something I think I deserved today.. but at the time it was all pretty new ) Instead of being positive and believing in my dreams I rated successs only by financial gain instead of how much I had contributed and how much the changes in other peoples lives because of those contributions were appreciated. In which case I was very succesful already. more successful than I could have ever hoped. Even if I didn't get those e-mails... Heck! I got All those fucking e-mails. ( Instead of being crushed those e-mails should have been affirming ) I suppose many here know the same feeling. Like You are hanging on a ledge with your dreams in one hand and white knuckled hanging-on agony in the other hand... for foreverrrrrrr...
And yes through alot of sick days in jail and cold wet nights shivering in the rain at night in a bus stop desperately trying to keep my copy of Mirai and Dietel And Dietel C++ from getting ruined. I had the sweet inspiration of the promise that this demo I saw of the Final Fantasy movie. And that inspration was that we would indeed witness a new pre-dominant art form whose immersion level hoisted up by one's OWN interactive meandering, would usher in creative joy new and unique to our times. And perhaps? I could be allowed to contribute dutifully as well.?
2013 for the next console on Hardware about 8 times more powerful than current fermi technology?
I think that extra year will make a big difference. I have been dreaming this long perhaps the extra year assures less compromising finally and more evolving.
Sorry if I came off offensive earliar.. I am just kinda passionate about the interactive medium. I find it offensive when visual mediums are regarded as an antithesis to quality and I find it disrespectful to disregard the graphic medium's importance. And I find it preferable to defend and concentrate on one's chosen craft as a privilige and upholding, contributing and defending it's progress as a burden and responsibility.
( Sometimes I wonder if a generation of impressive self-teach might be missing that mantle by not attending an Artistic University "BFA/MFA" ) I am hoping the introduction removes any doubt that I might just be pulling a rant out of my ass for no reason. And that the future of consoles as fulfillment of a dream is actually really serious important and perhaps might be very exciting in the next couple of years!
Doh! I am sorry.. I dodged a viral bullet! I do not have AIDS. I am not even HIV positive. The only traces I have of Hepatitis C are the Anti-Bodies present in my system when it successfully saved my life. My doctors knowing 100% of my story ( idiot shot himdelf with aids ) did as thorough of a search as possible ( Johns Hopkins positive! )
Sorry, for being a douche and making it sound like I was dying.
I'm pretty sure that Environment artists would like to have a word on that about the shader area alone on why extra beef is always better, not to mention if the pipeline doesn't synch up, you can add a little extra bevel/chamfer here and there instead of spending the next whole day manually optimizing the model because the console of choice couldn't render another tree in the distance or you can't split your UV's to Normal ratio.
Plus, it's pretty heinous on the amount of extra fore-planning on the optimization area alone is need to run stuff. I mean seriously, just read up on Deus-Ex. The reason bosses are located in small rooms and you fight against one boss with environmental assets which are both simple and reused to the n-th degree is so that they could save on overhead. Same DMC3, the only reason you where limited to two weapons was due to lack of RAM on the PS2.
Yes, costs will increase in the next generation pipeline, that is because like any new initiative, you need a overhaul and change of things, but in the long run, I do believe they will be cheaper because less tricks will need to be used the art side alone, not to mention audio area of things too.
Who knows, maybe I'm talking out of my ass, but if studios want to publish games on a yearly basis, they better step up the next gen hardware, because unless you plan on recycling assets to the n-th degree in your games under 6 month cycles for the art, and 6 for the programming cleanup, then having mushy hardware isn't going to help.
Maybe we'll be able to get away with less smoke and mirrors and all the associated headaches and extra work needed to implement them, but we'll also have to produce work that requires a lot more time to author.
Sure I'd rather spend more time producing art and less time working around technical issues (that's one of the things that attracts me to the tech art field), but I doubt all that extra horsepower will be given over to artists so our work will be easier. Companies will still want to push the limits because they can and want to compete with each other, so things will likely still need crazy technical tricks to be optimized for whatever the new hardware limits will be.
EDIT:
I guess the real question is: Will the outsourcing studios be ready for the challenge? I hear Kwramm's company is ready to rock n' roll.
You mentioned a good point. Games will become more realistic and/or complex for sure. Which in turn will require more time/money/skilled people. However, having more power could help alleviate time spent messing with tech issues or extreme memory constraints, and let artists get stuff done faster/easier.
I think a big part though of whats to come is a need for better tools. Right now packages like 3DS Max still are lacking in performance and tools for certain tasks, and make doing environment work and whatnot a pain. Max 2012 is much better at handling many objects in the viewport, but things like the lack of good internal scene management tools and placement tools aren't quite good enough.
I think not only consoles will move forward, but tools will need to move forward in speed/reliability as well, in order to get work done faster/easier.
Every generation the price to develop games have doubled or tripled. I read that Lair's budget was about $20 million while God of War III's budget was around $40 million - that's in one generation.
And they're both on the same platform, it says more about the scope of the project rather than the cost of developing a game, if you would've said god of war 2 to god of war 3 I would've agreed though, since pipelines change, assets has to be made in entirely different ways.
But in the case of making assets for consoles we often find ourselves scaling down textures and cutting corners so that it'll fit the hardware, we're already doing all these crazy things that cost tons of money ever since games went from small-sized to big-sized cinematic projects.
We have projects like the witcher 2 or the total war series which has been developed for platforms and specs much higher than the consoles, they show that it isn't too far off from current console budgets, and they even target the less feasible pc platform.
I don't see any kind of reason for the doom and gloom, we'll have big budget games, and we'll have even more room for small budget games and indie games on the new platforms, as digital distribution will become bigger and better, and I would even believe that indie-developers could make use of more hardware in creative ways.
Even if the next gen consoles came out with all off the shelf PC parts we would see a huge leap.