Crytek are finding it "increasingly difficult to wow people" with graphics
74 replies, posted
[QUOTE=CQRPSE;46175398]i dont think that makes them a bad developer or anything tho. clearly theyve had a change in focus. i dont think a developer should be faulted for working with video games when their focus is clearly on pushign real time rendering as far ahead as they can. afterall, video games are great for real time demostrations. maybe im just crazy tho.[/QUOTE]
they've always been pushing graphics but now the actual quality of the gameplay is declining. gonna go back to crysis which absolutely pushed p. much every gaming pc at the time to the limit (and still looks better than most games out nowadays almost 7 years later), but was still a really fun shooter with lots of replay value.
[editline]7th October 2014[/editline]
now we're at ryse which yea looks good but the gameplay is basically "swing sowrd, block, swing sord, block, qte to kill" rinse and repeat
[QUOTE=Talvy;46172863]The day has come: graphics are now full.[/QUOTE]
[t]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7azZu-dKdk0REiSlW4sIzEtn4hzuicW8_kl2wngUHx14CONcVVg[/t]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46173930]It's pretty sad that Half Life 2 still has some of the best AI I've encountered in a single player FPS. They actually move around and flank and shit. Meanwhile AI in Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty might as well be pop-up targets.[/QUOTE]
This is not true. Half Life 2 has very basic AI that a ton of games have done better that aren't the multiplayer-centric FPSs you mentioned. Games like FEAR, Rage, the Halo series, almost any stealth game, all have AI that blows Half Life out of the water.
And need we be reminded of this gem?
[video=youtube;e0WqAmuSXEQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0WqAmuSXEQ[/video]
[QUOTE=Yogkog;46175996]This is not true. Half Life 2 has very basic AI that a ton of games have done better that aren't the multiplayer-centric FPSs you mentioned. Games like FEAR, Rage, the Halo series, almost any stealth game, all have AI that blows Half Life out of the water.
[/QUOTE]
I'd list FEAR and Halo (up to 4 ofc) as games having decent AI as well. Note that I specifically was comparing it to newer big budget games.
[QUOTE=Yogkog;46175996]And need we be reminded of this gem?[/QUOTE]
You can make videos about behavioral quirks for any game.
Well duh. All they do is limit themselves to gray and brown.
[QUOTE=Yogkog;46175996]This is not true. Half Life 2 has very basic AI that a ton of games have done better that aren't the multiplayer-centric FPSs you mentioned. Games like FEAR, Rage, the Halo series, almost any stealth game, all have AI that blows Half Life out of the water.
And need we be reminded of this gem?
[video=youtube;e0WqAmuSXEQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0WqAmuSXEQ[/video][/QUOTE]
The AI only seems basic because the enemies don't have enough time to even get the opportunity to live usually against the player in a normal playthrough. They'll try to flank, take cover, flush you out with grenades, and, if the AI isn't feeling cheap and know where you are at all times, they can even lose track of you should they search for where you were last and not find you. Half-Life 1 was also filled with lots of neat little AI aspects that most players will never notice, because it's a mostly straightforward shooter and played as such.
F.E.A.R. still blows it out of the water but Half-Life 1 and 2 aren't pathetic by any means. And even in F.E.A.R., the AI is terrible at fighting other AI or more than one player, just like with Half-Life.
Okami HD is still the most beautiful thing to have ever graced my television, and it's just a port of a game that came out 8 years ago.
[QUOTE=Yogkog;46175996]This is not true. Half Life 2 has very basic AI that a ton of games have done better that aren't the multiplayer-centric FPSs you mentioned. Games like FEAR, Rage, the Halo series, almost any stealth game, all have AI that blows Half Life out of the water.
And need we be reminded of this gem?
[video=youtube;e0WqAmuSXEQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0WqAmuSXEQ[/video][/QUOTE]
That's a kind of unfair comparison. Turret AI is always fairly simplistic, and the method used for line-of-sight could totally have been better, but that is hardly representative of the actual combat AI, the second the player gets close enough the real AI kicks in and actually hits them.
The Half Life series doesn't have the best AI known to mankind, but it sure as hell helped progress FPS AI to what we see in games like FEAR.
Id pick a game with a solid art direction over "photo realism" graphics any idea ( TF2, Dishonored, Mirrors Edge ) etc, At least to me they are WAY more pleasent to watch and really fill more the world with color instead of MUH REALISTIC BROWN!
[QUOTE=Chryseus;46173433]Fuck graphics we need better physics.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Impact1986;46173458]But don't forget the gameplay. Gameplay is so important to games, you can't spell gameplay without game.[/QUOTE]
KSP gameplay is built on top of having a realistic physics simulation, and I'm sure fully destructible shooter will bring new tactics
If only current physics engines aren't shit, it doesn't lag when it simulates a lot of physics stuff...
This is not shit: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jGZv1YYe2c[/url]
It may look slow, it only runs at 30 FPS, but it simulates 110k boxes, which is huge
Now, why this instead of PhysX? Because I don't think Nvidia exclusive game isn't good
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;46172854]That's because graphics aren't everything
If you make a game about flying pogo sticks, but have the graphics hyper-realistics, it will still be about flying pogo sticks and it will suck[/QUOTE]
um that actually sounds awesome though
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46173930]It's pretty sad that Half Life 2 still has some of the best AI I've encountered in a single player FPS. They actually move around and flank and shit. Meanwhile AI in Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty might as well be pop-up targets.[/QUOTE]
Don't forget F.E.A.R's AI, I always underestimate them in the campaign.
They actually should avoid trying to get ahead of themselves in graphics. Intense graphics tend to limit what games can actually be capable of. It's way harder to pull of some game feature and make it work in with all the fancy graphics features that you end up requiring to make it look believable in your fancy graphics. You see this a lot in games today compared to older ones. Battlefield 4 is a great example of "Wow we made amazing graphics!.. but they're actually so good we can't really pull off making a game with them" although there are many other reasons they botched that up.
No shit, when we've got games like GTAV that both look good and play well, I couldn't care less about your tech demo.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.