At first, this image may seem rather boring. Who's this woman and why is she on the front page of Joystiq? This image is rather uneventful until two facts are revealed: a) she's a CG creation and b) she's being rendered in real time with new AMD technology. AMD's new effort, "Cinema 2.0," promises to bring photorealistic graphics that blend the visual fidelity found only in the most recent of Hollywood movies to the interactive space. AMD is imagining a future where consumers won't just play movies, they'll play in them.
While practical applications of "Cinema 2.0" weren't showcased at AMD's recent event in New York, the company executives were keen on noting how the tech can be implemented. Movie producers will be able to manipulate digital actors that are more realistic than ever -- in a rendering environment that happens in real-time. Gamers will be able to find character models and environments that are truly lifelike.
The demonstration we saw in New York did prove that this technology is very real. A very human model, one that would put the efforts of Square Enix to shame, had all sorts of dynamic lighting applied to it. But how is it that AMD has managed to create such a realistic human character model, while Hollywood still struggles to create true human actors with a gigantic rendering pipeline?
Obviously, new hardware is part of the solution. More processing power has always meant more realistic visuals. However, there's another trick: a globe-shaped room that feature rapid high-definition photography from all angles. These cameras can capture surface detail to a level that surpasses human touch. These cameras operate so quickly that to the naked eye, they appear as solid lights, when in fact they are flashing on and off at fractions of a second. The information captured by these cameras can then be interpreted into 3D data. Here's the same woman we featured as these cameras capture her:
Once the digital actor is captured, directors (and game players) will be able to manipulate them how they see fit. Some truly science fiction applications were mentioned during the presentation, like the ability to recreate Star Trek's Holodeck. We're not holding our breath for that, but this stunning technology does appear to be a revolutionary leap forward in rendering technology.
While AMD will tout that this technology is available "now" for everyone, that is far from the realistic truth. As with all advancements in 3D technology, the availability of new graphics hardware doesn't necessarily mean they'll be utilized by developers. For example, how many games push PC graphics cards to the levels of Crysis ... other than another Crysis?
Developers from Splash Damage, Crytek, Rebellion, Remedy (yes, they're still making Alan Wake) and even Blizzard were highlighted in the presentation as partners of AMD. While it's clear that this impressive technology will be used, the real question is when will gamers see real playable products on store shelves? That may be years off ... and who knows if competitors will be able to produce equally impressive visuals on an even larger scale by then? Until then, enjoy the eye candy.
Reader Comments (76)
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 3:36AM MaulerX said
Does MGS4 use Real Time Cinemas of FMV?
Because if it uses FMV, then imagine how much less space it would use with this kind of great looking Real Time Cinemas.
Because if it uses FMV, then imagine how much less space it would use with this kind of great looking Real Time Cinemas.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 1:50AM (Unverified) said
"AMD is imagining a future where consumers won't just play movies, they'll play in them."
Meh. Those exist, they're called story-driven games, and I can't stand them. (Where's a picture of the Battletoads pissing Calvin-style on Solid Snake when you need one...?)
As for the tech, I *would* be impressed if it didn't require a system where the graphics card alone cost more than any of today's already overpriced consoles.
Meh. Those exist, they're called story-driven games, and I can't stand them. (Where's a picture of the Battletoads pissing Calvin-style on Solid Snake when you need one...?)
As for the tech, I *would* be impressed if it didn't require a system where the graphics card alone cost more than any of today's already overpriced consoles.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 2:51AM (Unverified) said
Ok, I'm impressed. I thought that was jsut a photo of a older girl. If they can really get that to move? Wow...just, Wow.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 2:52AM (Unverified) said
HOLY SHIT.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 3:03AM SoCoolCurt said
holy shiz-cakes batman! that is probably the best CG i've ever seen. i expect it will be some time before we see this in games but still, being a graphics whore and all, i just soiled myself thinking about the possibilities.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 4:02AM (Unverified) said
The day video gaming becomes "photo-realistic" is the day video gaming dies.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 10:57AM (Unverified) said
No. The day video gaming becomes "photo-realistic" is the day video gaming dies. How is it that the day video gaming becomes "photo realistic" is the day movies die?
Think next time before you post to someones comments. Or at least read what they say.
Reply
Think next time before you post to someones comments. Or at least read what they say.
Posted: Aug 13th 2008 12:21PM (Unverified) said
Thats so silly, why all retro/cartoon/casual gaming fans think good graphics equals bad gameplay or lack of innovation? Bad graphics equals good gameplay and innovation then?
The day we achieve photorrealism in games, we will have extremely realistic and impressive experiences in gaming. And the Jack Thompsons of the world will expontaneously combust. I cant wait! ( I do think movies would be in trouble, at least crappy movies)
It doesnt mean they would stop creating any other type of gaming, did they stop making cartoons when Movies were created? no actually there are more Cartoon studios now than Ever in history. So stop worrying. Traditional gaming will still have a place. (also is not like every studio is going to be crazy/rich enough to build one of these photo-games in a heart beat)
Reply
The day we achieve photorrealism in games, we will have extremely realistic and impressive experiences in gaming. And the Jack Thompsons of the world will expontaneously combust. I cant wait! ( I do think movies would be in trouble, at least crappy movies)
It doesnt mean they would stop creating any other type of gaming, did they stop making cartoons when Movies were created? no actually there are more Cartoon studios now than Ever in history. So stop worrying. Traditional gaming will still have a place. (also is not like every studio is going to be crazy/rich enough to build one of these photo-games in a heart beat)
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 3:49AM (Unverified) said
HOLY CRAP
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 5:02AM (Unverified) said
"Gamers will be able to find character models and environments that are truly lifelike."
Except for the AI, which in most games will still suck because all game development energy is going into shinier graphics.
Except for the AI, which in most games will still suck because all game development energy is going into shinier graphics.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 5:45AM (Unverified) said
The 8th generation... or 9th... maybe.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 6:13AM (Unverified) said
Okay the really realistic renders - pictures 1,2,4 are a scanned person, with motion capture gained from the same person and textures taken from scans of that person.
When looking at the original character, it doesn't look that great. They are still doing hair in that anime / advent children way, which looks great, but is quite stylised.
The scanned womans hair on the other hand is just a block with a high res texture, as you can see from picture 5.
Basically, the reason the woman doesn't look uncanny is because it a very high quality representation of a real person. When applying this to an original character, less so.
When looking at the original character, it doesn't look that great. They are still doing hair in that anime / advent children way, which looks great, but is quite stylised.
The scanned womans hair on the other hand is just a block with a high res texture, as you can see from picture 5.
Basically, the reason the woman doesn't look uncanny is because it a very high quality representation of a real person. When applying this to an original character, less so.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 8:20AM Obienator said
Those look great in stills, but once it moves and animates ( especially the face), is when things start to look odd.
Can't wait to see more tho!
Can't wait to see more tho!
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 9:28AM Spunky Monkey 190906 said
Suddenly Micheal Jackson is black again.
Elvis has been reborn :O
Dinosaurs exist!
Heavy Rain is already outdated, ouch :O
Elvis has been reborn :O
Dinosaurs exist!
Heavy Rain is already outdated, ouch :O
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 10:37AM (Unverified) said
The scary thing about all this advanced graphics technology is--how far will it go? Making games look photorealistic would be prohibitively expensive, and playing a photorealistic game (such as GTA) might have more psychological consequences than playing the current slightly exaggerated looking (Gears of War, GTA) games we play now. It's one thing to play something violent that is a an artistic take on reality, it's another thing to play a violent game that looks no different than real life.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 10:51AM (Unverified) said
The lady-in-chair model still does look a little pasty. But, they are getting there. They are pretty damn close though!
*The head one scares the hell out of me. IT LOOKS REAL! :0*
*The head one scares the hell out of me. IT LOOKS REAL! :0*
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 12:04PM ZeroCorpse said
Eh. Call me when they make a "Sexy Beach" game using this technology.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 8:45PM (Unverified) said
Eureka! This will reduce my shame of masturbating to polygons by almost 70%.
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 10:26PM MechMarine said
We went from Uncanny Valley, to Nondescript Alley.
Posted: Aug 13th 2008 6:06PM (Unverified) said
i found the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz7AukqqaDQ
Posted: Aug 12th 2008 11:38PM Lekko said
Cinema 2.0 isn't the name of software. It's the name of their new console...
Now that would be interesting to see.
Now that would be interesting to see.
Posted: Aug 13th 2008 11:45AM (Unverified) said
I'd hit it.
Posted: Aug 13th 2008 5:01PM (Unverified) said
I see dead people
Posted: Aug 14th 2008 7:05AM (Unverified) said
That's pretty and creepy.
Posted: Aug 16th 2008 11:34AM (Unverified) said
Holy shit.
Featured Stories
Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma
Posted on May 25th 2012 3:30PM







