Why don't they make video games with more of a film look?

Theodebernacius

Theodebernacius

The look of video games is not very appealing to me. It lags far behind what has been achieved in feature films.

Years ago I used to play Half-Life. While I enjoyed it, I thought the graphics were pretty crude. Everything seemed to be made out of chunky dull geometric blocks. I haven't played for some time, but more often than not, when I watch a DVD, there's some ad for a video game. And the progress in graphical design doesn't look very spectacular.

Why is that? Why has the video game industry not adopted the CGI techniques developed for movies? Has the crude cartoonish look become the accepted standard? Is there no market for a more refined cinematic look?
 
Theodebernacius said:
The look of video games is not very appealing to me. It lags far behind what has been achieved in feature films.

Years ago I used to play Half-Life. While I enjoyed it, I thought the graphics were pretty crude. Everything seemed to be made out of chunky dull geometric blocks. I haven't played for some time, but more often than not, when I watch a DVD, there's some ad for a video game. And the progress in graphical design doesn't look very spectacular.

Why is that? Why has the video game industry not adopted the CGI techniques developed for movies? Has the crude cartoonish look become the accepted standard? Is there no market for a more refined cinematic look?
Click to expand...

Half Life came out a good 10 years ago, perhaps you should play a few more current games. One of the most cinematic games I've played recently is Final Fantasy XIII. L.A. Noir also looks very cinematic.

Video game technology and camera technology are very different. Games look how they look because no one wants 10 discs just to play one game, and I'm sure it's very expensive to do. It's very impractical. Games have come a long way though.
 
Yeah, anything by Square will push the current limits of tech. Part of the complexity of game engines is rendering all that in real time, as the gamer plays. You get a little more leeway in cutscenes (again, Square has used that to GREAT effect over the years. Didn't play FFXIII, but FFXII was brilliant).

I remember coming across a discussion about 3d retro once. Take old 2d sprite based games. They look dated, but you can certainly do modern things in that style (with better resolutions if you want), and it can be an appealing art style, not just a limitation of the era. But go back to early 3d polygons, and it's hard to find retro-appeal to it. It doesn't look like a style, but just a limitation. The conversation went on to to and develop a good balance between low-poly count models and a style that looked like a retro style (I don't recall anything really achieving it, but some interesting art).

Anyway, games (for some of us) are as about the gameplay as much as the graphics. I can see why someone just looking at games now would find, say, Atari games unappealing, but for those of us who started there, we found the things that were there to love, rather than what wasn't (if that makes any sense). Anyway, as Dession says, there are plenty of modern games that approach cinematic level of graphics (both console and computer).
 
To me, Avatar looks like one big video game...

Games consoles don't have the processing power to render the huge models that Hollywood uses in CGI. Even if they could, the fact that a video game requires real-time rendering is probably the biggest reason that video games need to use low-poly models as apposed to the highly detailed models that hollywood movies use.

There are other issues with creating a "film-look" in video games, like DOF for one. They can easily have a focused foreground and blur the background, we've seen it done, but in a game like "Gears of War" or "Call of Duty", you need everything on screen to be in focus, so you can choose what to look at, not be directed to look at something in particular.

It's all about gameplay, anyway, not what a game looks like. I'd much rather play the original "Resident Evil" than play the abomination that was "Resident Evil 5".
 
JoshL said:
Yeah, anything by Square will push the current limits of tech. Part of the complexity of game engines is rendering all that in real time, as the gamer plays. You get a little more leeway in cutscenes (again, Square has used that to GREAT effect over the years. Didn't play FFXIII, but FFXII was brilliant).
Click to expand...

Bingo!

P.S. FFXII turned off a lot of gamers, it's different than any of the other Final Fantasy games. But to me it wasn't a problem. And it's SOOOO freaking beautiful to watch on a PS3.
 
Well never fear great minds are working the problem right now.

Recently I listened to some Chief Technical Officer muckety muck from some super studio (cant say who or what cause its privileged) That described how they are begging for technology to catch up so that digital film, both CGI and live action, cant get into video games with high cinematic value. They expect to use the SAME assets for the games that come along.

Its my personal believe that this is part of the push into 3d live action films. Think how the 3d digital assets might be used to create 3d models of the same scene for a video game.. ...
 
wheatgrinder said:
Well never fear great minds are working the problem right now.

Recently I listened to some Chief Technical Officer muckety muck from some super studio (cant say who or what cause its privileged) That described how they are begging for technology to catch up so that digital film, both CGI and live action, cant get into video games with high cinematic value. They expect to use the SAME assets for the games that come along.

Its my personal believe that this is part of the push into 3d live action films. Think how the 3d digital assets might be used to create 3d models of the same scene for a video game.. ...
Click to expand...

I have no doubts about using the same models in films and video games, it's already been done in some instances. I think you're misinformed in believing that's part of the push toward live action 3d, though. If there's a CG model, it can already be converted and used for the game whether the film was 2d or 3d. As for live action 3d, all you get is essentially a depth map from the two slightly different angles, not an actual 3d model. It wouldn't be all that helpful to game artists.
 
SinEater,
use some of that wonderful
spongebob-imagination.jpg
imgination.. :)


I wasn't informed on this at all, I said its my belief, in other words I just made it up :)

Im bringing a lot of tangential ideas together to come up with that belief... particularly the idea of utilizing the live action assets in the 3d game space. (cgi is no brainier there) A simple depth map sure, but what if the film crew took the time to do a full "scan" of the live action set... with that you can then map the cinema quality footage onto the depth map and have... what?.. just riffing there, I never let what I "know", block me from imagining what could be...
 
wheatgrinder said:
SinEater,
use some of that wonderful
spongebob-imagination.jpg
imgination.. :)


I wasn't informed on this at all, I said its my belief, in other words I just made it up :)

Im bringing a lot of tangential ideas together to come up with that belief... particularly the idea of utilizing the live action assets in the 3d game space. (cgi is no brainier there) A simple depth map sure, but what if the film crew took the time to do a full "scan" of the live action set... with that you can then map the cinema quality footage onto the depth map and have... what?.. just riffing there, I never let what I "know", block me from imagining what could be...
Click to expand...

So let's say they "scanned" everything in Avatar. The problem still is rendering all of this in a real-time interactive environment. A game console or computer that could do this is out of an average consumer's reach. It would be so expensive. By the time we get to a place where this is affordable, film is going to look even THAT much better.
 
step OUT of CGI land. There's no "SET" to scan in avatar.. its all CGI (mostly) its the REAL world capture that Im talking about... .think MOCAP for reality. And in my initial post youll see that I was referring to a studio muckety muck lamenting that tech hasnt caught up with what they want.. so.. apply your own ideas to that interesting info and enjoy.. or ignore it completely..
 
As a related aside (and moving in the direction of better motion capture, etc from 3D tech), I've wondered why the FMV-heavy adventure game/"interactive movie" hasn't made a comeback. It was never done well before technology had marched on, and by the time they were hiring real actors and writers in games, no one wanted to play that sort of game anymore. But I loved games like the 7th Guest and Phantasmagoria, and tech is growing to the point where the game play and (albeit low-budget b-movie-esq) live action story sequences can be more integrated and seamless. Adventure games are making a bit of a comeback lately (with the resurrection of Sam & Max and Monkey Island, among others).

At the end of the day, it'd be a lot of work (filming all sorts of alternate scenes based on player choices, let alone making the gameplay engaging), and probably not worth what it would cost to make, but it's something I'd like to see reappear in gaming.
 
Although it's not live action, "Heavy Rain" is essentially an interactive movie and the graphics look really nice. "Metal Gear Solid 4" is also heavy on cut-scenes, literally two-thirds of the game are pre-rendered cut-scenes!
 
WOW! After seeing games like BATMAN ARKHAM ASYLUM and ASSASSIN's CREED, I guess it's just a difference of opinion, but I think video games get more and more cinematic with every generation. Those two titles were pretty much movie quality animation when viewed in HD at 1080.

More games hire Hollywood A-List talent for voice over work. Places like LUCASARTS are now sharing CGI assets with ILM who create them, and moved into the same complex at the Presidio too.

To me, the integration of video games and film have never been tighter.

like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_-ypR1yYa4

or even this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHZthskJ8Mk

Looked better than all 3 prequels, more cinematic and current.
 
Last edited:
Play Red Dead Redemption, Uncharted 2 and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood and tell me video games aren't cinematic enough....



Disclaimer: These are the only video games I've ever played, but they were good!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top