While I'm not completely sold on what this guys says, from a strictly visual perspective, i believe games may end up looking almost as good as Avatar to an untrained eye. You have to remember that Avatar was rendered for IMAX theaters and in 3d. This means that the resolution was at the least 2x 720p, and had to be rendered twice from two slightly different perspectives because the movie was being filmed by two cameras at a time.There are also many other effects that made Avatar such a hassle to render but most people wouldn't even notice the difference if it wasn't included. For example, I honestly cannot see the difference between Crysis 2 on high and ultra settings without an actual side by side screen comparison. The funny thing about it though is that the performance difference is huge. On high i get almost 50fps, but on ultra I get around 16fps. And trust me, I am a bit of a graphics whore and so when I say I barely see a difference, there really is barely a difference.
Putting these factors into consideration, I honestly believe that to the untrained eye the next generation of games may seemingly look as good as Avatar...well at least to some people. The next xbox does not need to equal the computing power of all those computers used to render Avatar to have games that look comparable. Developers are very good at using smoke and mirrors to make a games look better than they actually do.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
