when will games look AND play like the CGI videos or have more of a photorealistic look to them...."like the CGI intro to GRAW2"

1. what does it take to get it done?
2. is it larger disc space?
3.will we see it in this GENERATION??




:confused:

I wonder why people who don't like the PlayStation 3 spend so much time posting here.

I wonder why people who don't like the PlayStation 3 spend so much time posting here.

so YOU dont know..thanks anyway..

No problem. What negative things did you want to say about the PS3?

No problem. What negative things did you want to say about the PS3?


here again:



when will games look AND play like the CGI videos or have more of a photorealistic look to them...."like the CGI intro to GRAW2"

1. what does it take to get it done?
2. is it larger disc space?
3.will we see it in this GENERATION??

I wonder why people who don't like the PlayStation 3 spend so much time posting here.

The OP asked a technical question and you guys are attacking him? :confused: :confused: :confused:

The OP asked a technical question and you guys are attacking him? :confused: :confused: :confused:


its coool i kill the ps3 at times/all the time...but now im asking a serious question, will the PC be the one to take it to the next level?

The OP asked a technical question and you guys are attacking him? :confused: :confused: :confused:
No, the original poster asked a question that has no answer. CGI videos can always look better than gameplay because they have all of the benefits of the game engine plus they can be rendered in non-real time. And they can have art directors tweak the settings and behaviours of the "actors" for more dramatic effect.

No, the original poster asked a question that has no answer. CGI videos can always look better than gameplay because they have all of the benefits of the game engine plus they can be rendered in non-real time. And they can have art directors tweak the settings and behaviours of the "actors".


whats the key elements to make it happen in your opinion

Nothing could ever make it possible. That's why this is such a classic post from epicbloodline. I especially like how HE mentions "larger" disk space (really big bytes! LOL). It was a great segue for someone to rant about blu-ray. It only took one post in the Xbox forum for it to happen.

whats the key elements to make it happen in your opinion
Better yet, since you post so much nasty stuff in the PS3 forum, please contribute something and tell us what YOU think.

Not this generation, and probably not the next either. Disk space shouldn't be an issue if blu-ray is used. It is all about the processor speeds, gpu speeds and the way physics are implemented. Just remember, when animated movies are being made, computers are running day and night just to render minutes of animation. We will get there, but I would guess ten years minimum.

Nothing could ever make it possible. That's why this is such a classic post from epicbloodline. I especially like how HE mentions "larger" disk space (really big bytes! LOL). It was a great segue for someone to rant about blu-ray. It only took one post in the Xbox forum for it to happen.


Better yet, since you post so much nasty stuff in the PS3 forum, please contribute something and tell us what YOU think.

Never say something is impossible. Everything is possible, its just a matter of time (and sometimes unbelievable luck ;) ).

Not this generation, and probably not the next either. Disk space shouldn't be an issue if blu-ray is used. It is all about the processor speeds, gpu speeds and the way physics are implemented. Just remember, when animated movies are being made, computers are running day and night just to render minutes of animation. We will get there, but I would guess ten years minimum.

sounds good thanks......

guess we're light years away from progressivly thinking software too :mad:

edit: and while im on the subject of software.... does software have to catch up to hardware or does hardware have to catch up to software

Nothing could ever make it possible. That's why this is such a classic post from epicbloodline. I especially like how HE mentions "larger" disk space (really big bytes! LOL). It was a great segue for someone to rant about blu-ray. It only took one post in the Xbox forum for it to happen.


Better yet, since you post so much nasty stuff in the PS3 forum, please contribute something and tell us what YOU think.

Never say never. Its stupid to think something can't be done. Plenty of CGI in the past are now being rendered in real time. The classic Pixar Animation intro originally took weeks to render, can now be done in real time. You're simply being short sighted if you think real time rendering will never look as good as what we see today in cgi.

sounds good thanks......

guess we're light years away from progressivly thinking software too :mad:

edit: and while im on the subject of software.... does software have to catch up to hardware or does hardware have to catch up to software


I'd say hardware catch up to software. On the pc side at least, it seems the devs are making the games as good as possible, and leaving it up to the users to have the hardware requirements.

If you look at oblivion, if you crank the settings up, that game pwns all but the best computers. Future games will be the same way. One (unreleased) game I can think of is crysis.


nice to see you're leaving the whole 360 vs ps3 thing out of this thread...

Never say never. Its stupid to think something can't be done. Plenty of CGI in the past are now being rendered in real time. The classic Pixar Animation intro originally took weeks to render, can now be done in real time. You're simply being short sighted if you think real time rendering will never look as good as what we see today in cgi.

Exactly. Just remember that cgi film do use the same type 3d characters and textures. Its all just a matter of the hardware being able to do it in real-time.

While in the future I fully expect today's current CGI to be done in real time. There will be better, faster CGI at that point in the future.

Simply put. real time rendering will never look as good as the CGI.

Nothing could ever make it possible.

I can see why you're a Sony customer. Low expectations for improvement.

Happy now?

Never say never. Its stupid to think something can't be done. Plenty of CGI in the past are now being rendered in real time. The classic Pixar Animation intro originally took weeks to render, can now be done in real time. You're simply being short sighted if you think real time rendering will never look as good as what we see today in cgi.
No, you simply need to understand that in the future CGI will be that much better also.

I can see why you're a Sony customer. Low expectations for improvement.

Happy now?
"Simply put. real time rendering will never look as good as the CGI."

or from before:
"CGI videos can always look better than gameplay because they have all of the benefits of the game engine plus they can be rendered in non-real time. And they can have art directors tweak the settings and behaviours of the "actors" for more dramatic effect."

No, you simply need to understand that in the future CGI will be that much better also.

He was asking about current cgi not future cgi.

Was he? Where did he ask that? If you need help finding this, he posted the question twice and once was even enlarged.

"like the CGI intro to GRAW2"

Was he? Where did he ask that? If you need help finding this, he posted the question twice and once was even enlarged.


i just wanna know..when can i use those CGI graw2 charcters in the game for both single player and online???

I can see why you're a Sony customer. Low expectations for improvement.

Happy now?


Nice to see you're posting the same type of crap in both of his threads in the 360 section and this one. AT least you're consistent.

I can see why you're a Sony customer. Low expectations for improvement.

Happy now?

I dont see how posts such as these are tolerated.

"like the CGI intro to GRAW2"
Not out on the PS3 so not current.

At least epicbloodline has gotten what he wanted though. More trash.

I'd say hardware catch up to software. On the pc side at least, it seems the devs are making the games as good as possible, and leaving it up to the users to have the hardware requirements.

If you look at oblivion, if you crank the settings up, that game pwns all but the best computers. Future games will be the same way. One (unreleased) game I can think of is crysis.


nice to see you're leaving the whole 360 vs ps3 thing out of this thread...

My theory is that software is always catching up to hardware, mind you not the kind of hardware we (most of us anyway) have but the top end developer stuff, how else can they tell how good their product is if it can't be fully used by their own hardware. Plus when hardware makes a generation leap it is usually on the order of a couple magnitudes, software makes more of an evolution as it grows and expands to utilize new aspects of the hardware. For me my hardware is never going to touch the top end of software capabilities but thats because it costs too much to participate in that arms race.

when will games look AND play like the CGI videos or have more of a photorealistic look to them...."like the CGI intro to GRAW2"Have no idea what the GRAW2 intro looks like but that depends a lot on what you consider photorealistic to be. If you mean it in the literal sense, being indistinguishable from real life, than that depends on resolution (480p, 720p, 1080p) and frame rate (24p, 30p, 60p). Than posters can give you a completely random guess as to when it might be ;). I think the safe guess would not be anytime soon.


1. what does it take to get it done?More than what we can currently do in real time with current GPUs.


2. is it larger disc space?That sort of depends on which discs you are comparing, but honestly disc space has more to do with the size of an entire game than with rendering a single scene.


3.will we see it in this GENERATION??No, at least not in terms of true photorealism.

Nice to see you're posting the same type of crap in both of his threads in the 360 section and this one. AT least you're consistent.


im glad you/sony thinks its crap.. its just a question! you donk like-you dont reply.. "GO Fold or something"

Not really an answer to your question, just my opinion based on a limited experience.

The hardware available now has the processing power to display the kind of polygons and texture required for realistic humans, but to get the final realistic look also requires complex lighting/shadow/shader calculations too. On top of this you would want to see complex realistic motion and AI, and not only 1 but multiple characters interacting with the surrounding scene.

Also, the more realistic the character, the more accurate the motion has to be, ever tried to animate human movement? Because we see people everyday, the slightest anomaly in the photorealistic human and you will spot it instantly. If the character has a slight cartoon, cg feel you are more likely to ignore these anomalies.

For instance, a single frame render in Toy Story took anything from 2 to 13 hours to render, and was estimated at 300mb in size, try running that at 30 frames per second (fps).


Here is some additional info on the making of Toy Story to help explain my thinking.


DISNEY'S "TOY STORY" USES MORE THAN 100 SUN WORKSTATIONS TO RENDER IMAGES FOR FIRST ALL-COMPUTER-BASED MOVIE
Pixar Animation and Sun Microsystems Create Powerful Rendering Engine for Disney Movie


MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.- November 30, 1995 - The making of "Toy Story," the stunning new movie from Walt Disney Pictures that is the world's first full-length completely computer-generated animated film, involved the use of more than 100 high-powered computers from Sun Microsystems -- which together comprised one of the most powerful graphics rendering engines ever created. Pixar Animation Studios, of Point Richmond, Calif., the pioneering digital animation studio that produced "Toy Story" for Disney, selected the Sun systems for their affordability and expandability, as well as for their high quality graphics rendering abilities.

For the movie, Pixar created a networked bank or "cluster" of 117 Sun™ SPARCstation™ 20 workstations -- each containing at least two microprocessors, and running on Sun's Solaris™ operating environment --to handle the critical task of "rendering" each of the 114,000 frames in the 77-minute movie. Rendering is the time-and computationally-intensive process in which the correct lighting, textures and shading are applied to 3-D computer models to produce sharp, colorful images with photorealistic detail. To render the startlingly lifelike images in "Toy Story," Pixar used its own Academy Award-winning RenderMan® software running on its cluster of networked Sun systems, which was dubbed the "RenderFarm."

The use of multiprocessor, high-speed networked Sun technology answered one of Pixar's key requirements for "Toy Story": an unprecedented amount of sheer computing power. While more films are using digital effects, from "Jurassic Park" to "Forrest Gump," "Toy Story" is the first entirely computer-based animated film, which required a tremendous amount of rendering performance. Until now, the cost of rendering technology to produce a full-length film has been prohibitive, but Sun's cost-effective, scalable multiprocessor technology promises to revamp the industry by providing these capabilities in a high-speed networked environment using standard systems.

"The production of `Toy Story' shows that Sun systems can offer the film industry an astonishing level of computing performance at much lower cost than ever before," said Anil Gadre, vice president of marketing at Sun Microsystems Computer Company. "Pixar's use of Sun marks a real change in the way computer animation will be done in the future. Now it will be more affordable for moviemakers to put their vision -- whether or not it exists in reality -- onto the screen."

"Toy Story," which opened nationwide November 22, tells the story of a pair of toys, a cowboy doll named Woody (Tom Hanks supplies the voice) and a space ranger named Buzz Lightyear (voice by Tim Allen). When they get lost, the two must put aside their rivalry and join forces to make it back home.


Pixar's RenderFarm
Sun worked closely with a team from Pixar to create its RenderFarm, which serves as Pixar's central resource of computer processing power. The RenderFarm uses a network computing architecture in which a powerful SPARCserver™ 1000 acting as a "texture server" supplies the necessary data to the many rendering client workstations needed to complete the rendering process. The RenderFarm was assembled by Sun and Pixar engineers in less than a month and drew upon Sun's own experience in setting up "farms" of many systems linked together. Some facts about Pixar's RenderFarm and the computing aspects of "Toy Story":


The RenderFarm is one of the most powerful rendering engines ever assembled, comprising 87 dual-processor and 30 four-processor SPARCstation 20s and an 8-processor SPARCserver 1000. The RenderFarm has the aggregate performance of 16 billion instructions per second -- its total of 300 processors represents the equivalent of approximately 300 Cray 1 supercomputers.

Each system is the size of a pizza box, and all 117 systems work in a footprint measuring just 19 inches deep by 14 feet long by 8 feet high.

Sun is the price/performance leader, in Pixar's own rankings. The SPARCstation 20 HS14MP earned a rating of $80 per Rendermark (a Pixar measurement for rendering performance), while the comparable SGI Indigo Extreme came in at approximately $150 per Rendermark.

Using one single-processor computer to render "Toy Story" would have taken 43 years of nonstop performance.

Each of the movie's more than 1,500 shots and 114,000 frames were rendered on the RenderFarm, a task that took 800,000 computer hours to produce the final cut. Each frame used up 300 megabytes of data -- the capacity of a good-sized PC hard disk -- and required from 2 to 13 hours for final processing.

In addition to the high-resolution final rendering, the RenderFarm was also used to generate the test images animators needed to plan and evaluate lighting, texture mapping and animation. Since fast response is key in doing tests, RenderMan could produce test frames in as little as a few seconds.

Scalability is built-in: the RenderFarm can be upgraded (with more processors and disk storage) to a nearly four-fold performance level, without requiring any additional space. The RenderFarm also integrates seamlessly with Pixar's existing computer network containing different types of machines.
Pixar's future plans include developing a parallelized version of RenderMan to further exploit Sun's SPARC/Solaris multiprocessing and multithreaded architecture. This new software, Parallel RenderMan, will allow multiple processors to work on a single image. Pixar is also using Sun multiprocessing workstations to render images for an upcoming "Toy Story" CD-ROM game.


Article link

http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/1995-11/sunflash.951130.3411.xml

Why ask a technical question, when most likely you wont understand the answer in the first place? When, its just matter of time. The games have came long ways since PS2/Xbox.

It will take a while, but the gaming community is currently in progress to switch to multi threading.

Now, think about it - there are great tools that have refined many processes and combined some technologies into one. It should be a great 5-8 year cycle. We are barley scratching the surface of what these two consoles are capable off.

Gabe Newell said Naughty Dog was ahead of any developer when it comes to multi-threading, and I believe him. Just look at the old trailer and the latest information about Uncharted's technology. :)

Gabe Newell said Naughty Dog was ahead of any developer when it comes to multi-threading, and I believe him. Just look at the old trailer and the latest information about Uncharted's technology. :)


Exactly. I think that people are gonna be mighty impressed at the technical achievements of PS3 exclusives over the next year...and really impressed ove the next 5 years.

Any game for multiple platforms will NOT be optimzed to utilize Blu ray or the cell. So any multiple platformer will be held back by the limitations of the other consoles.

Games like Uncharted will definately wow people, especially considering that the improvements devs make it utilising the cell and blu ray will continue for some time because it is such a radically new tech for home consoles. I can't even imagine the games for the PS3 6 year from now!

im glad you/sony thinks its crap.. its just a question! you donk like-you dont reply.. "GO Fold or something"

Nice logic, too bad you can't use it yourself. I think you've caused enough trouble for today.

when will games look AND play like the CGI videos or have more of a photorealistic look to them...."like the CGI intro to GRAW2"

1. what does it take to get it done?
2. is it larger disc space?
3.will we see it in this GENERATION??




:confused:

get a PC, they are way ahead of the Curve.

you bet when the day comes... they will have what you seek first.

don't listen to these FanClowns.

that's right.

Dun dunt dunele na dunta dunta.

I dont see how posts such as these are tolerated.

Because you know I'm just having fun. :D

It's funny, as a 360 owner (who always had PS consoles in the past) I'm pretty fair. Plus, my comments stem from years of dealing with Sony in a B2B space, not just as a game buyer. You may have a different perspective in that case, although I can see why it may be seen as PS3 bashing. Really, it's just the ability to see through Sony PR fumbling.

Nice to see you're posting the same type of crap in both of his threads in the 360 section and this one. AT least you're consistent.

If he's going to double post and get away with it, may as well be consistent.

when will games look AND play like the CGI videos or have more of a photorealistic look to them...."like the CGI intro to GRAW2"

1. what does it take to get it done?
2. is it larger disc space?
3.will we see it in this GENERATION??

I think animation is more impressive than graphics this generation. Take the GRAW commercial for example. If we had that kind of animation during gameplay, I would **** my pants. It would be so real.

whats the chance of KILLZONE meeting what we seen back in 2005..is it possible..or not yet..those videos look really good if it was actual gameplay!

Not really an answer to your question, just my opinion based on a limited experience.

The hardware available now has the processing power to display the kind of polygons and texture required for realistic humans, but to get the final realistic look also requires complex lighting/shadow/shader calculations too. On top of this you would want to see complex realistic motion and AI, and not only 1 but multiple characters interacting with the surrounding scene.

Also, the more realistic the character, the more accurate the motion has to be, ever tried to animate human movement? Because we see people everyday, the slightest anomaly in the photorealistic human and you will spot it instantly. If the character has a slight cartoon, cg feel you are more likely to ignore these anomalies.

For instance, a single frame render in Toy Story took anything from 2 to 13 hours to render, and was estimated at 300mb in size, try running that at 30 frames per second (fps).


Here is some additional info on the making of Toy Story to help explain my thinking.


DISNEY'S "TOY STORY" USES MORE THAN 100 SUN WORKSTATIONS TO RENDER IMAGES FOR FIRST ALL-COMPUTER-BASED MOVIE
Pixar Animation and Sun Microsystems Create Powerful Rendering Engine for Disney Movie


MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.- November 30, 1995 - The making of "Toy Story," the stunning new movie from Walt Disney Pictures that is the world's first full-length completely computer-generated animated film, involved the use of more than 100 high-powered computers from Sun Microsystems -- which together comprised one of the most powerful graphics rendering engines ever created. Pixar Animation Studios, of Point Richmond, Calif., the pioneering digital animation studio that produced "Toy Story" for Disney, selected the Sun systems for their affordability and expandability, as well as for their high quality graphics rendering abilities.

For the movie, Pixar created a networked bank or "cluster" of 117 Sun™ SPARCstation™ 20 workstations -- each containing at least two microprocessors, and running on Sun's Solaris™ operating environment --to handle the critical task of "rendering" each of the 114,000 frames in the 77-minute movie. Rendering is the time-and computationally-intensive process in which the correct lighting, textures and shading are applied to 3-D computer models to produce sharp, colorful images with photorealistic detail. To render the startlingly lifelike images in "Toy Story," Pixar used its own Academy Award-winning RenderMan® software running on its cluster of networked Sun systems, which was dubbed the "RenderFarm."

The use of multiprocessor, high-speed networked Sun technology answered one of Pixar's key requirements for "Toy Story": an unprecedented amount of sheer computing power. While more films are using digital effects, from "Jurassic Park" to "Forrest Gump," "Toy Story" is the first entirely computer-based animated film, which required a tremendous amount of rendering performance. Until now, the cost of rendering technology to produce a full-length film has been prohibitive, but Sun's cost-effective, scalable multiprocessor technology promises to revamp the industry by providing these capabilities in a high-speed networked environment using standard systems.

"The production of `Toy Story' shows that Sun systems can offer the film industry an astonishing level of computing performance at much lower cost than ever before," said Anil Gadre, vice president of marketing at Sun Microsystems Computer Company. "Pixar's use of Sun marks a real change in the way computer animation will be done in the future. Now it will be more affordable for moviemakers to put their vision -- whether or not it exists in reality -- onto the screen."

"Toy Story," which opened nationwide November 22, tells the story of a pair of toys, a cowboy doll named Woody (Tom Hanks supplies the voice) and a space ranger named Buzz Lightyear (voice by Tim Allen). When they get lost, the two must put aside their rivalry and join forces to make it back home.


Pixar's RenderFarm
Sun worked closely with a team from Pixar to create its RenderFarm, which serves as Pixar's central resource of computer processing power. The RenderFarm uses a network computing architecture in which a powerful SPARCserver™ 1000 acting as a "texture server" supplies the necessary data to the many rendering client workstations needed to complete the rendering process. The RenderFarm was assembled by Sun and Pixar engineers in less than a month and drew upon Sun's own experience in setting up "farms" of many systems linked together. Some facts about Pixar's RenderFarm and the computing aspects of "Toy Story":


The RenderFarm is one of the most powerful rendering engines ever assembled, comprising 87 dual-processor and 30 four-processor SPARCstation 20s and an 8-processor SPARCserver 1000. The RenderFarm has the aggregate performance of 16 billion instructions per second -- its total of 300 processors represents the equivalent of approximately 300 Cray 1 supercomputers.

Each system is the size of a pizza box, and all 117 systems work in a footprint measuring just 19 inches deep by 14 feet long by 8 feet high.

Sun is the price/performance leader, in Pixar's own rankings. The SPARCstation 20 HS14MP earned a rating of $80 per Rendermark (a Pixar measurement for rendering performance), while the comparable SGI Indigo Extreme came in at approximately $150 per Rendermark.

Using one single-processor computer to render "Toy Story" would have taken 43 years of nonstop performance.

Each of the movie's more than 1,500 shots and 114,000 frames were rendered on the RenderFarm, a task that took 800,000 computer hours to produce the final cut. Each frame used up 300 megabytes of data -- the capacity of a good-sized PC hard disk -- and required from 2 to 13 hours for final processing.

In addition to the high-resolution final rendering, the RenderFarm was also used to generate the test images animators needed to plan and evaluate lighting, texture mapping and animation. Since fast response is key in doing tests, RenderMan could produce test frames in as little as a few seconds.

Scalability is built-in: the RenderFarm can be upgraded (with more processors and disk storage) to a nearly four-fold performance level, without requiring any additional space. The RenderFarm also integrates seamlessly with Pixar's existing computer network containing different types of machines.
Pixar's future plans include developing a parallelized version of RenderMan to further exploit Sun's SPARC/Solaris multiprocessing and multithreaded architecture. This new software, Parallel RenderMan, will allow multiple processors to work on a single image. Pixar is also using Sun multiprocessing workstations to render images for an upcoming "Toy Story" CD-ROM game.


Article link

http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/1995-11/sunflash.951130.3411.xml


how much of the CELL will be used for this?

whats the chance of KILLZONE meeting what we seen back in 2005..is it possible..or not yet..those videos look really good if it was actual gameplay!

In between levels/intro cut scenes is what those will most likely be. GoW made an interesting graphical statement when the cut scenes looked as good or worse than actual gameplay. Let's see that bar raised. It's good for the entire industry.

No chance in hell the animation will look like the KZ footage from E3. There's always a chance that graphics may come close, but who knows.

No chance in hell the animation will look like the KZ footage from E3. There's always a chance that graphics may come close, but who knows.
DAMN

I dont think we'll ever see photorealism in video games. As far as what I've seen in animation, with cars and happy feet being the last two animated filmes I've seen, we're not even close. I cant imagine ever seeing something animated or "rendered" that tricked me into thinking it was real.

As unbelievable as scenes from "Heavy Rain" and a few other perspective video games are...they are no where close to watching a movie.

I dont think we'll ever see photorealism in video games. As far as what I've seen in animation, with cars and happy feet being the last two animated filmes I've seen, we're not even close. I cant imagine ever seeing something animated or "rendered" that tricked me into thinking it was real.

As unbelievable as scenes from "Heavy Rain" and a few other perspective video games are...they are no where close to watching a movie.Keep in mind though that Cars and Happy Feet weren't trying to be photorealistic. In fact I don't know if there's ever been any animated film that's tried to look 100% real. Even films like Final Fantasy: Spirits Within have some amount of stylization to them.

I think the people at Pixar are talented enough to pull it off if they wanted. No question the technology to render it is there. It's just a question of being able to animate it well enough.

The motorstorm intro fooled me the first time I saw it... Then the rendering hitched a little and I went..." Wait a minute... thats not a video..."

I think the non-moving environments can be rendered totally photorealistic. Its when natural like motion is required that all goes to crap. Some of the motion cap technology (like in Heavenly Sword) looks like that can be "worked around" by just capturing natural motion and reproducing it... but from-scratch natural movement just isnt there yet, on any system.

I think the fact that even ones that are supposed to look like the real thing have some stylization to them says they cannot pull it off.

Im trying to think of the most realistic animated media I've ever seen but nothing jumps to mind as being ultra realistic. Advent children is probably the best I've ever seen.

The motorstorm intro fooled me the first time I saw it... Then the rendering hitched a little and I went..." Wait a minute... thats not a video..."
Yeah, one of my non-console owning friends was amazed by the intro for Motorstorm. He thought it was actual recorded footage, until my other friend told him otherwise.

Keep in mind though that Cars and Happy Feet weren't trying to be photorealistic. In fact I don't know if there's ever been any animated film that's tried to look 100% real. Even films like Final Fantasy: Spirits Within have some amount of stylization to them.

I think the people at Pixar are talented enough to pull it off if they wanted. No question the technology to render it is there. It's just a question of being able to animate it well enough.

IM STARTING TO BELIEVE THAT VIDEO GAME DEVELOPERS ARENT THAT TALENTED AS OF YET!!


and that being said: its better to assume that physics will over shadow graphics!! I'LL take that..i rather have better gameplay than a old Ho' with a new dress..

RIP EAsports... :mad:

Here's some great images just for fun. To me these would qualify as photorealistic. Of course animating them realistically would be infinitely more difficult.



http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e359/oddbodyAS2/Venture/pr3.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e359/oddbodyAS2/Venture/pr1.jpg

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e359/oddbodyAS2/Venture/pr2.jpg


Taken from the CGSociety gallery (http://forums.cgsociety.org/forumdisplay.php?f=121)

and the CELL is waiting to be unleashed..because the CELL can make all things possible!!!


right?!?! :confused:

and the CELL is waiting to be unleashed..because the CELL can make all things possible!!!


right?!?! :confused:
Please quit trolling. This is getting out of hand. I can't believe that Kyser won't ban you permanently from the PS3 forum.

and the CELL is waiting to be unleashed..because the CELL can make all things possible!!!


right?!?! :confused:

and I was hoping you wanted to bring intelligent discussion to this forum. Gee, you disappoint... :rolleyes:

Please quit trolling. This is getting out of hand. I can't believe that Kyser won't ban you permanently from the PS3 forum.


..its all over the internet..i didnt make it up!
edit:
what i shouldve said was..that the CELL..is not being used to its full capability as of NoW, so once the CELL is unlocked, we will begin to see some CGI type stuff......right!

I've been trying to avoid posting in this thread, as I don't want to give epicbloodline any attention at all, but I suggest someone just report him already. He wants to be a clown, he should go to gamefaqs. I'd expect this behavior there.

I feel bad for the people who responded to this thread seriously trying to contribute something, because he's taking you all for a ride.

I reported him before I posted. We'll see...

PS- I think we need a Playstation user to moderate this forum. I don't think Kyser is in the PS forum enough to stop this crap.

I've been trying to avoid posting in this thread, as I don't want to give epicbloodline any attention at all, but I suggest someone just report him already. He wants to be a clown, he should go to gamefaqs. I'd expect this behavior there.

I feel bad for the people who responded to this thread seriously trying to contribute something, because he's taking you all for a ride.


dude whatever..

i asked a serious question...and did not roast your beloved PS3 at all, im tring to get some facts right...like' not to get excited for anything over the top for a very long time..my son popped in graw2 then he got up and walked into his room..the intro came on and i watched it saying to myself..WOW IT'LL BE COOL IF INGAME REALLY LOOKED LIKE THAT NOW WHILE WE PLAYED..then it dawned on me..


""""start a thread about it""""

epicbloodline, I'm going to be nice here. Don't post in the Playstation forum anymore, if you do, you will be suspended for at least a month. Maybe more.

Post in any of the other gaming forums and bash the PS3... same deal.

Everyone is getting sick of your trolling and you've been suspended for doing this in the past.

Consider this your last chance.

Kyser