| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (54)

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:05PM Ezio Auditore da Firenze said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's good.

I don't want photorealism in my video games. :)
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:15PM Verrier said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ezio Auditore da Firenze

Unless they're in Renaissance Italy, that is!

Stylized is great, unique art styles are always good.Prince of Persia's 2008 style, that looked almost like a moving watercolor painting, was one of the best art concepts I've seen.

That said, the characters in-game in Bioshock look kind of odd, like with a plastic sheen. Same thing with the characters they've shown so far in this one.

The floating city looks great though, much more original than the rehash that was Bioshock 2. But of course Levine and Irrational weren't involved with that cash-in, it wasn't their fault.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 7:55PM Chareth Cutestory said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ezio Auditore da Firenze

Even in Ezio's home town, the photorealism is best realized in inanimate objects.

Faces are still pretty butt in AC2.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:06PM Otimus said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Kevin levine's head isn't human-realistic. it looks like a pineapple!

What this has to do with anything is beyond me.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:07PM Wiizer said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report

As long as everyone in the game has wooden teeth...
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:08PM Ezio Auditore da Firenze said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Wiizer ...but, but.. the splinters.....
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:18PM daytripper said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Wiizer
Can we hock them for booze money?
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:10PM FernandoRocker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh, Joystiq... you and your funny pics!
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:15PM Pingles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with him. It's like Polar Express. Creeptastic!
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:20PM Hooch said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Pingles

Oh god, you just brought back suppressed memories...their eyes are so dead...
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:16PM Kid Icarus said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Two words:

Uncanny Valley
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:20PM Mach2 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Kid Icarus

One more word:
Zombies.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:41PM liquidsoap89 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mach2

And babies...


What?
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 8:00PM Eric the Amazing said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Kid Icarus

Tell it to me in Star Wars.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:18PM MatthewMk2 said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Why is it even called Bioshock?
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:20PM Hooch said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@MatthewMk2

Why are you even called Matthewmk2?
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:22PM Wiizer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@MatthewMk2

From the interview you couldn't be bothered to read on the front page:

"I think it's both because I think BioShock is a lot more than just Rapture. This is a game; it's a first-person shooter set in an amazing place with a story wrought with – from our perspective – ideas that are tied with history. And everything else really is up for grabs. But we felt that if we made this game and it wasn't a BioShock game, that would be a bit of a cheat. To say, "Oh, it's a totally new thing." But it is a new thing, but it's also a continuation of the things we've done before."
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:19PM jynxycat said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The real reason? Unreal Engine 3 isn't that hot :P
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:21PM FernandoRocker said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@jynxycat

Bioshock wasn't using Unreal Engine 3...
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:25PM Hooch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:30PM Faerie Tael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@FernandoRocker - Infinite uses UE3.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:34PM Faerie Tael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@FernandoRocker - I guess reading your comment from a different perspective, you could have also meant that, 'Bioshock didn't use UE3, yet it still had stylized visuals.' So, my apologies mate.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:40PM Hooch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@jynxycat

Sorry for being a cynical bastard then!
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:06PM WolfForager said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Faerie Tael

Though they were making they're own engine for it?
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:32PM Faerie Tael said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@WolfForager -

Joystiq: 'The first game was built on a heavily modified version of Unreal Engine 2.5. Is this fresh tech, from the ground up?'

Ken Levine: 'It's built on Unreal 3 this time ...'

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/12/video-interview-ken-levine-on-bioshock-infinite/
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:20PM PrimetimePragz said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
i don't understand downtalking the photorealism in games. I think its great. So are stylized games. It's apples and oranges. Uncharted 2 and Modern Warfare were the most photorealistic games i've playe and there is nothing "creepy" about them. i don't think they're "cop outs". anyways, this game looks interesting.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:34PM Petebot330 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@PrimetimePragz The problem is, they look great, until a cut scene. I LOVE the graphics in the Mass Effect games, but after every interaction with an NPC, they look to the side and then walk off in the exact same manner.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:42PM PrimetimePragz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Petebot330
Never played Mass effect (i know. i should) but i don't think your arguement is strong for uncharted. And i believe pushing photorealism in gaming is the frontier to making them on par or even surpassing movies as far a emersion. Obviuosly stylized games will always have a place but i still think kevine Levine is underrating photorealistic games.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:43PM greyseal said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@PrimetimePragz For what it's worth, I would call Uncharted 2 very stylized. The structure of things was "realistic" but the shading and facial expressions had a vivid and almost cartoony appearance. And I thought that stylization is what made the graphics so excellent.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:47PM liquidsoap89 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Petebot330

That's more to do with the animation though, not the graphics themselves. And on the subject of cutscenes, the cutscenes in Uncharted 2 were fantastic.

I'm all for photorealism. The uncanny valley isn't always reached when graphics go towards photorealism, it's reached when the animation also isn't photorealistic. Look at a character move in a game like Mass Effect, they just don't look natural. The weird movements (or lazy faces ie. POLAR EXPRESS) are usually what creep us out.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:49PM osirus824 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@greyseal

I completely agree with you. I think others' confusion about whether or not Uncharted is photorealistic proves Levine's point perfectly. Uncharted is most definitely a stylized game but, because it's stylized in ways that are perfectly suited for the game, it only draws players in and never distracts.

You could never achieve that in a game that strives for photorealism because photorealism is literally impossible. Attempting photorealism only ties the hands of the game's art designers and distracts the player.

Besides, reality is boring. That's why we play games.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:06PM Alex R said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@PrimetimePragz

I think Far Cry 2 was pretty good for the realism of the movement and interaction of characters.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:15PM PrimetimePragz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Alex R I played far cry 2 but sold it within a month so i don't remember. but i these games aren't so much stylized as much as they have to certain stlye in the sense that live action films have a stlye. obviously no is going to mistake movies like the indiana jones or district 9 or such with real life but they are photorealistic. i think it would be foolish to say games can't be photorealistic. We have to concept of what 30 years into the future holds. if things progress like they are now in 100 years games can be indistinguishable from reality. and uncanny valley will be a thing of the past
Reply

Posted: Aug 13th 2010 11:54AM Jayeffaar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Alex R

Yup... the problem with Far Cry 2 was the dialog pacing. Every voice actor read his lines like he was in a hurry to get out of the recording studio. The graphics were pretty stellar.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:42PM PrimetimePragz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Never played Mass effect (i know. i should) but i don't think your arguement is strong for uncharted. And i believe pushing photorealism in gaming is the frontier to making them on par or even surpassing movies as far a emersion. Obviuosly stylized games will always have a place but i still think kevine Levine is underrating photorealistic games.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:43PM PrimetimePragz said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@PrimetimePragz reply fail. downvoted myself.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:45PM greyseal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm actually glad to hear Levine say this. The problem with photorealism is it doesn't exist, and things wind up in Uncanny Valley. Once you let go of realism as a goal, things don't look funny any more.

That doesn't mean cartoony, mind you. I think games like God of War do a great job of showing visceral "realistic" graphics that are not striving for photorealism, and as a result don't trigger the feeling of weirdness we encounter when playing Mass Effect or watching Polar Express.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:46PM The Dark One said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd rather they go in an interesting direction than have yet another corridor shooter with strangely shiny foreheaded enemies. If they can get more mileage out of the hardware by not trying to be photorealistic, then I hope they succeed.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 5:51PM gevenstaines said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
movies are free now... huh.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:00PM liquidsoap89 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@gevenstaines

Yea I thought I read that Avatar cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make... I guess James Cameron was wrong...
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:29PM kojo87 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@liquidsoap89 take a movie like A Scanner Darkly. it would have been cheaper and easier not to do the cell shading animation and just shoot it like a normal movie. instead they spent more time effort and money to add graphical style. thats the point he is trying to make. he did not say movies are free.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:41PM liquidsoap89 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@kojo87

I'm just going off of the actual words he said. don't worry, I agree with you on a movie like that.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 7:17PM ThePenIsMightier said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@gevenstaines

You are completely missing the point.

Take your camera, shoot something real. BAM! It's right there, looking realistic, because it's real! No extra cost.

Now, build a model or CG model or matte painting or any kind of special effect-ooops, realism isn't included or free, it takes extra time/effort.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:23PM Drakkenfyre said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"A movie uses photorealism often because it's free"

That's one of the stupidest things ever said. It uses photorealism because, you know, most of them are real?

it's like saying pizzas use pizzaism often because it's often free.

I am not knocking the game's visual style, hell, I haven't even seen the screenshots yet, and I don't have any problem with non-photorealistic games, but that answer is just a cop-out.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:23PM mrmobius said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Nice to hear the maker of Gears of War saying this. I don't play games for photorealism, I play them for entertainment. I got as much entertainment out of unrealistic games like Super Mario Galaxy, Okami, Wind Waker and Burnout Paradise etc than out of games aiming for a more realistic feel and look. It is maybe also why I love Pixar movies so much. I go to see a Pixar movie not because I know it'll be realistic (graphics are amazing but Pixar wisely never aims for realism) but because it'll be entertaining.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 7:30PM TheDarkWayne said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mrmobius Ken Levine didn't make or have anything to do with Gears of War
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 7:31PM Crusty Magic said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@mrmobius I think you are thinking of Cliff Blezinski. Mr. Levine has no connection to GoW.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 7:33PM mrmobius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yea, I simply misread/ forgot what game the article was about. Bioshock I meant to say. My mistake. Point of my comment still stands.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 6:47PM NasalBaton said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That comment is bogus. Photorealism has a time and a place. Just because something looks real doesn't mean it can't be stylized either. Look at 300, underworld, or Scott Pilgram for example.Also, it makes sense for Pixar's stuff to looks cartoony because or the nature of their films. Photorealism only looks creepy when done poorly. It's a lot harder to achieve than a cartoony creaion like a pixar film or a game like borderlands, but it can look fine when done right.
Reply

Posted: Aug 12th 2010 8:09PM Chareth Cutestory said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@NasalBaton

"Photorealism only looks creepy when done poorly."

The point you appear to be missing is that doing photorealism well is insanely hard. That's why Uncharted 2 is pretty much the only example of "photorealism done well" that anyone has cited here and, even then, its definitely not photorealistic. Look at their eyes, for Christ's sake!
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW