Crytek Says It's Getting Increasingly Difficult to Wow People With Graphics

[Buster's Uncle]

Crytek Says It's Getting Increasingly Difficult to Wow People With Graphics
GameSpot CBS
By Emanuel Maiberg  October 4, 2014 2:50 PM



VIDEO: Ryse: Son of Rome - PC vs. Xbox One Graphics Comparison [03:15]

Crysis and Ryse: Son of Rome developer Crytek is known for some of the best looking games in the industry, which it creates with its proprietary CryEngine. The first Far Cry and Crysis in particular were ahead of the technological curve when they came out. However, the developer says that it's not as easy to impress players with beautiful graphics as it used to be.

"As opposed to the times of the original Crysis, we as an industry have reached a quality level now where it is getting increasingly more difficult to really wow people," Crytek’s principal rendering engineer Nicolas Schulz told DSOGaming in an interview. "That said, there’s still enough areas to explore and we will definitely keep pushing the boundaries as much as possible."

Schulz also discussed the limitations of high-end PC graphics processing units (GPUs) and the current generation of consoles. On PC, he said, the current generation of high-end GPUs is still far from being able to reach 60 frames-per-second at 4K resolution, which is four times the amount of pixels that need to be shaded compared to 1080p.

"This is very quickly saturating the available bandwidth," Schulz said. "The consoles are clearly behind high-spec GPUs in terms of raw horsepower, however on the positive side, they share the same modern architecture which enables a wealth of interesting optimization techniques."

Ryse: Son of Rome comes out for PC on October 10. Crytek recently announced that it has stripped the Xbox One's microtransactions out of the PC version of the game. If you want to know if you can run Ryse: Son of Rome, check out the PC system requirements.

http://news.yahoo.com/crytek-says-getting-increasingly-difficult-185000419.html

[Green1]

More that there has been a shift in gaming. Folks nowadays want competent graphics that will work on budget machines at decent FPS. The days of spending 2k on a massive water cooled rig that is obsolete in 3-4 years are on the decline. Back then, cinema style gameplay was impressive, but an Xbox 360 or PS3 can do that without spending insane.

Plus, Crytek can be accused of making games that required absurd power that ran like crap on even some of the higher powered machines at the top settings. Maybe they should look at that.

[Flux]

I think the final advancement into complete graphical realism where you can't tell the difference between it and life will be the phasing out of textures entirely.
Until that can be achieved I think we've about hit the maximum we can do. I've been playing my Dreamcast mostly when it comes to games lately, so here are my examples:
Here we have a game released in 2001 for a 6th gen console. That's the console war lineup before the 360/wii/PS3.

As you can see, the grass is just a flat green texture. Compare it to a game released in 2010 on the Wii. There is still a texture visible under the blades of grass, but we're getting better.

And here was an "amazingly realistic" ocean from 2001. It still looks okay, but it's a flat texture.

Compare it to a more modern release:
So I think until hardware can handle TONS and TONS of loaded polygons, graphical development will be slow.
And now you know my preference in game genre. platformer

[Buster's Uncle]

Who let a platformer in here?

[Flux]

Who let a platformer in here?

me

[Flux]

Okay. Turns out i'm wrong, and Ray Tracing already looks like real life.
It just takes hours to render a frame on a computer.
Take a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_tracing_%28graphics%29#mediaviewer/File:Glasses_800_edit.png
Someone I know told me about this.