Do you think video games will get any better?

Here's a list of what I mean.

1. Graphics.

2. Animations.

3. To the point where movie games are good.

And King Kong already did that.

Here's a list of what I mean.

1. Graphics.

2. Animations.

3. To the point where movie games are good.

And King Kong already did that.

Dizzyman572

I doubt things will ever be life-like, it would cost to much to make such a game, but graphically we've already advanced alot with better lighting/shadowing/textures/character models/environments, animations-wise we're already seeing the benefits of such techniques like animation-blending in Uncharted where you can be in complete control of the character but the character would still be able to react to things like shots from enemies, and whether during gameplay or in cutscenes, games are displaying more cinematic qualities. Games are already becoming too expensive to make, but developers will be able to do more with less as we go forward.

Yes. This generation is far from graphical perfection. There is much more to accomplish.

I wish devs would focus on gameplay over graphics.

Sure there's a lot to accomplish (like creating realism with out a brown tone on everything) but what's the big deal? Do we NEED games to take up terabytes on our computers just so we can zoom in on each thread in someguy's shirt?

Graphics look fine now, it's to the point where round objects look round. Hands are no longer squares or triangles. What more do we need?

Yeah it's great crysis looks so good, but it doesn't mean **** when the game its self isn't that good.

Lately it seems people are confusing graphics with gameplay. Crysis should only be topping the "best graphics" charts and not anything else, it's shallow. And jsut because it has an amazing physics engine doesn't change the fact that you're treading through the same crap level by level except now it's a spaceship not a jungle.

Back in the starting 3-d days graphics and animation were vital to games. Redfaction wouldn't have been redfaction if you couldn't blow tunnels into walls with a rocket launcher, something that couldn't be be put in a full game that fit on a disc for ps1 really.

Now that we can fit physics engines that can suppot whatever a game dev wants to create (ie portals...couldn't be done on the 64) and we have graphics that can show every detail needed...why continue to focus on it and make it the selling point of games?

I bought crysis because it looks amazing. I didn't have fun PLAYING it, I had fun playing with the physics engine to see all of the stuff it could support, I had fun looking at how nice the game looked level by level. However the actual gameplay was crap. Now that I've seen all that, I'm not going to buy another crytek game unless the GAMEPLAY is as good as the graphics. I wish I could have just bought the sandbox that came with the game for a reduced price. That's all I ended up needing after I realized the game was only rated high because reviewers were blown away by graphic quality.

Do I think games will improve in the specified areas? Hell yes! There is ALWAYS room for improvment, as technology continues to advance. Right now, Blue Ray is the latest chapter in that book. Devs can to whatever the **** they want on a BD.

^^WTF? Just because a game isn't ub3r RPG zores doesn't mean it is "shallow".! Crysis is ub3r 1337 pwn4g3!!!1111

Here's a list of what I mean.

1. Graphics.

2. Animations.

3. To the point where movie games are good.

And King Kong already did that.

Dizzyman572

1. Yes, they will always get better as long as technology gets better.

2. Same as #1.

3. Um, goldeneye anyone? The majority of movie games will always suck because they are usually rushed out to be released at the same time as the film.