We remember when video games were little more than pixelated characters bouncing about the screen. That was a simpler time: no one really talked about the power of a particular physics engine, or whether or not a game was ‘realistic’ enough, because it didn’t really occur to most of us to ask. It wasn’t something we considered a vital element of our gaming experience. Games were fun distractions, simple escapes from reality. They weren’t, in most cases, all that realistic, though some were quite complex and in-depth.
Tim Bender, Hooded Horse CEO, has brought to light the discussion of price. With AAA projects such as Star Wars: Outlaws stirring controversy with its peak $130 price tag, gamers have come to expect the worst from new releases. Manor Lords, on the other hand, looks like it’s going to be an entirely different story.
A Helldivers 2 players shares an amusing story to warn players not to do this if they want to keep their Samples
WWE 2K24 developer has turned heel banning arguably the most popular community creator to the dismay of fans.
I agree that developing hyper-realism is a waste of time and money. Especially so considering the tech is a LONG way from tricking the human eye. I am talking about digital human characters, not landscapes, objects, or animals.
Still images and movies are able to be convincing by virtue of having much more control over the perception of the viewer. But even movies are limited in what they could show before the audience knows its a digital character.
Basically its currently impossible to create a 100% digital human character that fool the audience the second it starts talking. Human instinct will always know when something is not quite right.
So, wasting resources on trying to be more convincing is not a great idea IMO. (for games) Better to have less "visually" human characters and more "behaviorally" convincing human characters.