Pictures of your games...

[LadyCrimson]

Our house, in the funky, non-scale, & very limited Sims2 style ... I'll never understand why they designed this house w/the bathrooms in the middle; imo that sucks. <_<

[Bokishi]

Her face looks realistic. Its about time technology starts to look real.

I think I can see pores in her nose! :D

The teeth/smile still looks a bit unnatural...maybe because they're too perfectly straight/aligned or something. the lips themselves look great...just the teeth when she smiles.

 

But yeah, I agree...best digitized human face I've seen, probably. I'd like to see the hands upclose/in motion. They always seem to be one of the hardest things to do - or at least an area where they cut the most corners in favor of other areas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hands:

 

[Pidesco]

You mean ass. :D

[astr0creep]

I remember in the 90s there were these games made with real people in them, filmed against a blue screen.

 

Why are people trying to simulate this?

 

I mean, the girl's face is obviously scanned from a real person's face.

 

I have a rock on my desk and I'm making a fake rock so that I can throw it.

Why?

[Diamond]

I have a rock on my desk and I'm making a fake rock so that I can throw it.

Why? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Simple. Because if you throw a real rock today, you may accidentally become liable for physical damages to someone/someone's property.

 

Not exactly a direct analogy with digital people, but you get the idea.

 

 

 

BTW, creating skin texture involves more than just scanning (now only if I remembered where did I have this link...).

[astr0creep]

BTW, creating skin texture involves more than just scanning

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly. So why not just go back to real people? Wouldn't that be more cost effective?

 

Also, name me 1... ok 2 games that allow the player to come close nough to a character's face that one can see the frakin pores.

 

Edited December 18, 2006 by astr0creep

[Diamond]

Exactly. So why not just go back to real people? Wouldn't that be more cost effective?

1. Significant issue: You can't make 3D games with shots of real people.
    
   
2. Less significant issue: It can be hard to find the people you need (say, 4-handed, 5-eyed monster).
    
   
3. Common sense: 3D graphics is being developed and invested in, so someone with a bit more business knowledge than us obviously thinks that it is cost-effective.
   

Also, name me 1... ok 2 games that allow the player to come close nough to a character's face that one can see the frakin pores.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can recall one, Half-Life 2. But I don't play too much modern games, so...

 

 

Regardless, I don't really see the point of going back to 2D video-based games with real people (if that's what you are implying), when you can do much more with 3D. I hated them back in the past, I still hate them now.

[astr0creep]

"Significant issue: You can't make 3D games with shots of real people."

 

 

 

Tell that to George Lucas!

[Diamond]

Tell that to George Lucas! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you are implying that you can have a 3D model in a 3D game without vertex or texture mapping data, based purely on 2D sequence of frames?

[astr0creep]

Tell that to George Lucas! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you are implying that you can have a 3D model in a 3D game without vertex or texture mapping data, based purely on 2D sequence of frames?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No.

 

I'm saying the level of realism shown in the pics above is useless in a game. Sure it's a demo for a card but I for one will not buy it because it can render this kind of graphic quality.

 

Skin pores and realistic hair/fur is useless in a game, unless part of the gameplay.

[Diamond]

No.

 

I'm saying the level of realism shown in the pics above is useless in a game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And that's why it should totally be replaced with real people? I'm lost.

 

Sure it's a demo for a card but I for one will not buy it because it can render this kind of graphic quality.

 

Skin pores and realistic hair/fur is useless in a game, unless part of the gameplay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, it is a demo, but it shows the potential and the features of hardware (and not only to retail customers). Hence it is not pointless. A few years ago a programmable pipeline was exotic.

 

 

 

Oh, and pores:

Edited December 18, 2006 by Diamond

[Wistrik]

Her face looks realistic. Its about time technology starts to look real.

I think I can see pores in her nose! :D

The teeth/smile still looks a bit unnatural...maybe because they're too perfectly straight/aligned or something. the lips themselves look great...just the teeth when she smiles.

 

But yeah, I agree...best digitized human face I've seen, probably. I'd like to see the hands upclose/in motion. They always seem to be one of the hardest things to do - or at least an area where they cut the most corners in favor of other areas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hands:

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The form is about right, but she might as well be wearing gloves because there are no fingerprints or typical lines in the palm and fingers. A different texture would fix that easily enough.

[astr0creep]

And that's why it should totally be replaced with real people? I'm lost.

 

The tech is trying to reproduce reality, to make 3D models looks so real that a player can barely see the difference between the real and the virtual.

 

I'm saying this level of... dedication is too much. For a movie or a tech demo, sure. For a game? No.

[Diamond]

I'm saying this level of... dedication is too much. For a movie or a tech demo, sure. For a game? No.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why? It makes perfect sense even for a tech demo, because, well, you've got show the best you can do with your hardware. Putting a photo in a video card promo material is, on the other hand, pointless.

[karka]

Kingdom Elemental:

 

I know it looks primitive.

[Deraldin]

And that's why it should totally be replaced with real people? I'm lost.

 

The tech is trying to reproduce reality, to make 3D models looks so real that a player can barely see the difference between the real and the virtual.

 

I'm saying this level of... dedication is too much. For a movie or a tech demo, sure. For a game? No.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You are obviously missing the point of graphics. Realistic graphics is so you can go "My game pwnz0rzs your game, because mine has better graphics! So nyah! "

 

Believe it or not, but graphics are a big selling point for a lot of games.

 

At least, that's what I've heard. I wouldn't know what with my ancient Radeon 9600 Pro.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Deraldin

[LadyCrimson]

Those hands have a nice shape to them, but they look like store mannequin hands in terms of detail.

 

And I do doubt that such clarity/realism will find it's way into the average game any time really soon. But it's nice to know what's possible.

[Mortis Nai]

Kingdom Elemental:

 

I know it looks primitive.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It looks "Classic" but is it fun?

 

If so I may have to get it, Ive been aching for a good action RPG.

[Dark_Raven]

Her face looks realistic. Its about time technology starts to look real.

I think I can see pores in her nose! :D

The teeth/smile still looks a bit unnatural...maybe because they're too perfectly straight/aligned or something. the lips themselves look great...just the teeth when she smiles.

 

But yeah, I agree...best digitized human face I've seen, probably. I'd like to see the hands upclose/in motion. They always seem to be one of the hardest things to do - or at least an area where they cut the most corners in favor of other areas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now that faces are becoming realistic and pretty, I wonder if they can mimic expressions accurately.

[alanschu]

I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces (nor pretty faces) to mimic expressions accurately.

[Pidesco]

And anyway facial expressions are very hard to do. That lady's smile for example, looks clearly artificial.

 

I still remember the whole movie theater laughing when the lead character in Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within pulled off a sad face.

[Dark_Raven]

I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces (nor pretty faces) to mimic expressions accurately.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Part of the game experience is realism, with me. If you are talking to a character, least they can do is look real and be able to do complex expressions.

[Bokishi]

[alanschu]

I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces (nor pretty faces) to mimic expressions accurately.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Part of the game experience is realism, with me. If you are talking to a character, least they can do is look real and be able to do complex expressions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I'm not sure why you'd need more realistic faces to mimic expressions accurately. For example, why could you not have accurate facial expressions in a game such as Half-Life 2, compared to the girl in this nVidia demo?

[Pidesco]

 

While the graphics are indeed sweet, the facial expressions are still lacking.