kay hi folks,

i just watched some 'Documentary' about FFVII on Youtube lol (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e56uYE121lw)

And i wondered.. will modern CGI like in FFXIII be possible to use as normal real time graphics? So, that you are actually playing a game that looks as amazing in general like FFXIII in those special scenes?

and ... where's the difference in CGI and normal .. 3D modelling?

thanks  in advance ^^

Quality.

lol if THAT was his intend.. xD

@topic: well okay makes sense, but 'could', in  case the hardware would be strong enough - 'could' Games look like FFXIII's CGI Sequences? or is it really the same method already only that dev's are limited to time and hardware? :o

sounds pretty promising, i thought the upcoming gen would be like .. dunno.. Xbox540, or PS3,5 to keep costs low.  but if there will be enough power in the hardware  to let games look like todays CGI-Quality titles, i would be heavilly impressed.. that may be a much harder impact than PS2->PS3 was to me .. :o

now i am excited. ^^

i thought the CGI thing is called "Heavy Rain"?

OT: i have no doubt that one day game graphics will be as good as those CGi scenes, i just don't want to know what they will charge for such a game.

AAA Game = FIVEHUNDREDNINETYNINE DOLLARZ
Standard AAA Game = 70 Bucks

x)

nah seriously, when i think about it, i could imagine that there will be heavy qualitydifferences in the future. . . like today's Nippon Ichi games compared to .. dunno.. Uncharted? ^^ one with the standardpricetag of 60-70 bucks, and the Uberquality One for 100 bucks.

0o

It really depends on the game and what else it's doing.  Games can't really do something like Shrek or some other high quality CGI movie real time but even the PS3 or 360 can do really amazing stuff if it isn't doing much else.

All things like rendering objects, AI, physics, texture sizes, streaming, how many characters on screen, etc all affect the quality.  You can't have high quality everything so you skimp on one thing to make something else that much better.

from my perspective i would put that since PSX there is some kind of rule of tumb... the CGI in the game of that generation is usually the standard in the next one... or some times even better... the top quality exclusive ps2 games had graphics better than most cgi from psx (i exclude ffix that still beautifull and i don't think were really surpressed in ps2 lifetime ingame graphics)... ps3 games have cgi ps2 graphic quality, so i expect ps4 to have the same leap.

The main issue is that to make the graphics for the game as good as current CGI the number of artists and designers you'd need to employ would be so large that the game would never make a profit. Many non-Halo, non-CoD HD games are on the edge of this right now.

Hardware is fast enough now or will be fast enough within a few years to do it (look at current high-end PC graphics cards). But you won't see it in the vast majority of actual games because of the development cost.

Shrek has far fewer art assets because of its length and views them from far fewer angles than a game does.

If you look back at the CGI graphics from the PS1, today's graphics are now crushing most of what was done back then.

It's only a matter of time before today's CGI is matched by in-game graphics.