-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
why do people keep saying we haven't reached photorealism yet? am i out of the loop?
- Thread starter 64bitmodels
- Start date
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Graphics look incredible these days but we’re not at the level of photorealism.
tassletine
Member
1) Apart from the first blurry Callisto pic (which is probably that exact photo wrapped around a model) the examples you cite aren't photoreal.
2) No one will ever be happy with photoreal as it's not what games are about.
The closer we get, the longer it will take between iterations, and the less impressive it will be. Eventually you won't even be able to detect any advancement at all. You can only be wowed by something when it shows a significant departure from what you've seen before.
2) No one will ever be happy with photoreal as it's not what games are about.
The closer we get, the longer it will take between iterations, and the less impressive it will be. Eventually you won't even be able to detect any advancement at all. You can only be wowed by something when it shows a significant departure from what you've seen before.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
This looks good, no?
Good? Yes. Photorealistic? Nowhere close.
SLB1904
Banned
You give people top much credit
Roman Empire
Member
We are far from photorealism. People need to go outside more.
H . R . 2
Member
we will never achieve photorealism because people's perception of what is realistic is not universal, it's actually quite idiosyncratic
I remember watching the Division's reveal back in 2013 ...
this shot in particular
...and I was blown away. then it was the Order 1886 and now The Matrix Demo
I still subconsciously think they are all equally photorealistic to me despite the time gaps between them why? even for a graphics whore like me?
the mood, the setting, the presentation, gameplay that resembles my favourite movie, or my ideal vacation or weather ...
for me we are already there
but it can always be even nicer
I remember watching the Division's reveal back in 2013 ...
this shot in particular
...and I was blown away. then it was the Order 1886 and now The Matrix Demo
I still subconsciously think they are all equally photorealistic to me despite the time gaps between them why? even for a graphics whore like me?
the mood, the setting, the presentation, gameplay that resembles my favourite movie, or my ideal vacation or weather ...
for me we are already there
but it can always be even nicer
Last edited:
buenoblue
Member
Tech demos always look better than actual games cause they have no ai or gameplay systems to calculate.
I picked up watchdogs legion on ps5 the other day and on my decent HDR tv at some times of day the environment does look pretty photorealistic, but the characters still look super gamey. Especially the faces and hair.
Also movies and tv don't look like real life either. Everything is lit up with lights and filtered on tv and movies.
I picked up watchdogs legion on ps5 the other day and on my decent HDR tv at some times of day the environment does look pretty photorealistic, but the characters still look super gamey. Especially the faces and hair.
Also movies and tv don't look like real life either. Everything is lit up with lights and filtered on tv and movies.
Last edited:
Rendered Tangent
Banned
She was unusually odd looking for such a beautiful game with so many well realised character models.
Rendered Tangent
Banned
There is a difference between photo realistic (PR) characters models and PR textures in the actual game world.
Death Stranding game world looks incredible, with beautiful foliage, rocks, clothing, vehicles, buildings, water etc...
Then there's the character models of something like the new MW2, which are industry leading.
Something like The Last of Us Remake and the sequel have both incredible game world detail AND character models - which is why it's such a ridiculously good looking game.
Ditto RDR2.
Death Stranding game world looks incredible, with beautiful foliage, rocks, clothing, vehicles, buildings, water etc...
Then there's the character models of something like the new MW2, which are industry leading.
Something like The Last of Us Remake and the sequel have both incredible game world detail AND character models - which is why it's such a ridiculously good looking game.
Ditto RDR2.
Hugare
Member
Because soon, OP realized:
He made the thread with the premisse that "CG like" = photorealism. Which is ridiculous.
Hence the many posts of dicussion after that
Trilobit
Member
Because soon, OP realized:
He made the thread with the premisse that "CG like" = photorealism. Which is ridiculous.
Hence the many posts of dicussion after that
OP everytime when he sees someone responded to his thread:
There are actually instances in DS, where you can forget for a brief moment that it's not real-life footage.
I'm thinking some of the incredible scenery involving icelandic volcano rocks and some character moments, like Hardman, Cliff.
Never had any other game fool me like that.
Rendered Tangent
Banned
Definitely, it's verging on photo realism.
anthony2690
Banned
I love you 64Bit.
But non of the games you have posted look like photo realism at all.
That being said the Bruce Willis render and forest UE5 demo thing do, but these are not in any actual games.
I'm personally not after photo realism in my in games, as long as a game plays and looks good I'm more than happy, I quite like games to have a good art direction or unique style too, as it can really add to the game for me.
But non of the games you have posted look like photo realism at all.
That being said the Bruce Willis render and forest UE5 demo thing do, but these are not in any actual games.
I'm personally not after photo realism in my in games, as long as a game plays and looks good I'm more than happy, I quite like games to have a good art direction or unique style too, as it can really add to the game for me.
My wife just did, showed her the first person and she thought it was a real person. But she is a non-gamer, I wouldn't be tricked like she would.
PendekarRajawali
Member
Game character's facial expressions are still far from reality. They still look like robots.
lukilladog
Member
Aerofly still is the most photo realistic
⣐⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣅⡠⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⢹⣿⣇⡀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣤⣤⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀
⢸⣿⣿⣷⡀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣶
⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣀⣤⣾
⠀⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇
⠀⠀⠉⠙⠉⠉⠁⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠁⠀⠀
⣐⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣅⡠⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⢹⣿⣇⡀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣤⣤⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀
⢸⣿⣿⣷⡀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣶
⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣀⣤⣾
⠀⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇
⠀⠀⠉⠙⠉⠉⠁⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠁⠀⠀
Last edited:
ChiefDada
Gold Member
Nope. TLOU 2 checked that box in it's entirety. Their facial animation has only been matched/topped MAYBE by the Enemies demo.
dr_octagon
Banned
They need to perfect peanut butter on toast, this is the benchmark for visual fidelity.
Lethal01
Member
dr guildo
Member
Don’t agree, the lighting (photon) is very realistic.
Last edited:
nightmare-slain
Member
still a long way to go.
raytracing is a big step towards photo realism. i'm not saying cyberpunk is photo realistic but when you turn on psycho rtx and max everything else out you start to get a hint of it.
yesterday i was playing it and i was in an area with a lot of glass and water. that shit blew my mind.
flight simulator is probably the closest but that relies on actual photography and being far away from the textures. the lighting is phenomenal too. i have yet to try it with raytracing.
still many games rely on rasterisation but once we go fully raytracing games will be more realistic. that's not happening any time soon though.
look at Portal RTX. you need a 3080 to play at 1080p and go above 30fps or a 4080 to play at 1080p above 60fps. With DLSS you need a 3070 for 30fps or a 3070 for 60fps.
if you have a 4K display then good luck. a 4090 will get you 26fps. with DLSS only a 4090 can hit 60fps. for 30fps you need a 3090.
raytracing is a big step towards photo realism. i'm not saying cyberpunk is photo realistic but when you turn on psycho rtx and max everything else out you start to get a hint of it.
yesterday i was playing it and i was in an area with a lot of glass and water. that shit blew my mind.
flight simulator is probably the closest but that relies on actual photography and being far away from the textures. the lighting is phenomenal too. i have yet to try it with raytracing.
still many games rely on rasterisation but once we go fully raytracing games will be more realistic. that's not happening any time soon though.
look at Portal RTX. you need a 3080 to play at 1080p and go above 30fps or a 4080 to play at 1080p above 60fps. With DLSS you need a 3070 for 30fps or a 3070 for 60fps.
if you have a 4K display then good luck. a 4090 will get you 26fps. with DLSS only a 4090 can hit 60fps. for 30fps you need a 3090.
Rendered Tangent
Banned
It's going to be 5-7 years minimum before ray tracing is able to be fully enabled with high frame rates.
5090 or even 60 series is my bet, and definitely at least another console generation.
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
I disagree. If you showed me some of these shots without me knowing where they were from, I'd think they were real pictures
RoadHazard
Gold Member
It's not "photonrealism", it's "photorealism", meaning that it looks like a photograph. Of course the terms "photo" and "photon" are related (they both have to do with light), but you're stretching.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yes? Photorealism still doesn't mean just "realistic lighting". It means it looks like a real photo/video. The Matrix demo comes pretty close, especially in the non-playable parts, but the open world section is definitely not photorealistic.
dr guildo
Member
Where is your source ?
And for the last part, it always depends on your tv capabilities, and your settings. On my LG C9, even open world section is photorealistic depending of the Time of day, and the color filter of the game you applied.
Edit : I finally think you are right about your définition. I checked…
Last edited:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
photorealism
noun
pho·to·re·al·ism ˌfō-tō-ˈrē-ə-ˌli-zəm
variants or less commonly photo-realism
1
: the quality in art (such as animation or painting) of depicting or seeming to depict real people, objects, etc. with the exactness of a photograph
Definition of PHOTOREALISM
the quality in art (such as animation or painting) of depicting or seeming to depict real people, objects, etc. with the exactness of a photograph; a movement in painting characterized by photographic exactness of detail… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com
Johnny Concrete
Member
What are you smoking? Gimme some of that.
This looks better than the cgi dude from Rogue One. Also let’s compare 10 hour frame render times against 0.033 second frame render times…
dr guildo
Member
Yep I made my own research, you were totally right about that.
About Matrix demo, my shots are from the open world section and they are photorealistic for the most part. You can put them to the test by showing them to people who don’t play games, without telling a word about their source. Just check their reaction…
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
and then you move the camera, and this photorealism quickly turns into an early 2000s internet video with the amount of artifacts and blur lol.
so maybe some games can look photorealistic in carefully selected still shots, but not a single one comes even close to looking photorealistic during gameplay.
dr guildo
Member
I don’t see polys in this shot. Looks like a shot from a real sci-fi movie to me.
K2D
Banned
@op: Because there are usually caveats that say otherwise..?
..or because the closer you come the more you're fighting uncanny valley?
..or because people argue that it's not widely adopted, or feasible in real world applications for most people?
Imma go back and read what other have posted.
..or because the closer you come the more you're fighting uncanny valley?
..or because people argue that it's not widely adopted, or feasible in real world applications for most people?
Imma go back and read what other have posted.
Lethal01
Member
More realistic than many video games, but still video game lighting with tons of light leakage and other inaccuracies.
22:22:22
NO PAIN TRANCE CONTINUE
Photos are static. Perhaps we're very close. But I'm responding under the assumption that the term photorealism is used in a more general sense of shit's looking real ie lifelike. And yeah, when shit starts to move you have animation etc so maybe that answers your question?
Romulus
Member
I think some of it can be written off because graphics whores/hardcore gamers have a different lens when looking at images. Most normal people looking at pics aren't trying to discern gaming shots vs real world. So for us, the bar is even higher. That should be put into perspective.
But do I think we've reached photorealism? No, but under very specific circumstances, it can look close. I've seen nothing in motion that nails it. Asking my wife to look at some of the pics in this thread, she was fooled about 30% of the time, but those are stills and even bullshots. Also, keep in mind she was on the defense to really scan for inconsistencies.
Some of it is also fandom. I recall a Killzone 2 thread years ago where a guy was trying to convince people that it was photorealistic and that being a future war would actually look like that without a discernible difference. So yeah, not everyone is being honest either.
But do I think we've reached photorealism? No, but under very specific circumstances, it can look close. I've seen nothing in motion that nails it. Asking my wife to look at some of the pics in this thread, she was fooled about 30% of the time, but those are stills and even bullshots. Also, keep in mind she was on the defense to really scan for inconsistencies.
Some of it is also fandom. I recall a Killzone 2 thread years ago where a guy was trying to convince people that it was photorealistic and that being a future war would actually look like that without a discernible difference. So yeah, not everyone is being honest either.
Last edited:
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
This isn’t 2002 good graphics are happening, developers aren’t starting off in garages like the 80s.
Lumpyoatmeal
Member
That’s number 3.
And that’s number 4.
I deadass put 4 weirdos in one whole ass thread on ignore. Any others?
I’m a get back to eating my food, happy holidays everyone.