i have the uncanny valley feeling when i look at ellen page in beyond but only the short hair variant of her (and i believe it's intentionally) so it is not really a problem and everything which will look better as beyond face models won't give me that uncanny valley feeling, i'm almost sure about that so i think we are already at graphics better as that.

but besides that, for many games simulating the real world would be wrong but i don't think someone making a pokemon game would ever try to make a world looking exactly like the real world but for other games like battlefield or gran turismo it would work good. but what the guy making the pokemone game would try is to let his fantasy world look as good as possible with new technology.

what i mean with beyond is:

horrible, can't look at it:

looks nice and i doubt something even better will give me a bad feeling:

I don't really want photo realistic graphics in most of the game genres I play.

To me, what is most important to improve are:

- the landscape draw distance (how far you see before graphics fade)

- the quality of the animations (how well they blend, how natural they look, etc...)

- how properly smooth the polygonal material looks (how round are the shapes that are supposed to be round and the likes)

- and of course, I want a frame rate that never drops (be it either 30 or 60, as long as it's locked!)

So graphics may or may not be photo realistic. In fact, I quite enjoy the art style/direction side of a production. So to me, photo realistic or not is a non issue, as long as the stuff I mentioned are properly handled.

That being said, game like racing sim (Forza, GT5) really benefit from a photo realistic approach. And I wouldn't want these games any other way. In fact, they're really not quite there yet (they need to do a lot of extra work on the stuff that aren't the cars).

lol no Uncharted looks nothing like this haha  Even the character models are nothing realistic.  They are all filled with colors.  Sure it has a real aspect to it but it is because of the unique color pallet and style that uncharted stands out.  That and it looks crystal clear. with a good polish to it.  

Looking at the picture above that looks more like "Watch Dogs' from ubisoft

I would argue that Gears of War was trying to look more realistic than Uncharted, and that pic of Drake is art, not an in-game shot. In fact, boh of those pics are. Uncharted isn't a very good example anyway, because its characters have never repulsed anyone. It's very stylized.

Very few games fall into that category, VERY few, but the ones that did, for the most part, were highly successful (Heavy Rain, Mass Effect as examples). Besides, it can't be "the wrong path" until it proves a detriment.

Compound to that the repulsive nature of overly charicaturised videogame characters, the "necessary" association to the nitty-gritty, and you have a recipe for an uncanny valley.

However, a movie like Brave tells another story. There is some incredible photorealism there, and good caricatures, but it's done right.

So, I think it's a tricky concept, but photorealism done right works (e.g. no uncanny valley), it just all depends on how interesting your characters are. Some things can fool the human eye, as long as they're done right. Animation and drawing have captured the imaginations of humans for ages, and lately with the advancements of Pixar and company this has not changed despite the leaps in photorealism. Yet, we continue to be drawn in. That's because it's well done.

soulless-serious-nitty-gritty =/= photoreal.

then you're gonna love this ;)

how many people who have actually played uncharted or gears do you see complaining about this issue?

...you're the first person i've seen