thank you, i really do appreciate that. its hard to bring up something i want to talk about without my history getting in the way of the real point im trying to discuss.

http://n4g.com/news/1750121/uncharted-4-videos-show-awesome-foliage-and-water-puddles-technology-and-more

But the foliage and water of Uncharted 4 aren't THAT impressive compared to the gameworks/PhysX demos:

View on YouTube

View on YouTube

You know how it is on the internet. Sometimes people mean the exact opposite of what you think they do!

But this only further proves the point, technologies in games is a valid and worthwhile talking point, not a "problem with the games indystry".

Graphically they are indeed nowhere near as impressive as the above to videos, no, but the grass and puddles in uncharted are done entirely with shaders, the nvidia technology demos are done running physics simulation on cuda, a resource heavy and costly process (and why games don't use this sort of tech yet), it's one thing to have a small patch of just grass in a demo, or water splashing around a small rectangular box with a single object in, but use it in a game and as well as the rest of the geometry it has that world geometry to interact with too.

Well, Rubber, here's the problem, most of these conversations don't just start out of thin air. Most are a result of developers actually trying to instill a realistic physics/fluids engine into their games. As such, we marvel at them when they nail it, and criticize it when it's nothing special.

Additionally, as time passes and technology evolves, people expect improvements, an evolution, if you will of the realism/design in games. Not all games, hell, not even most games, but the ones that attempt to hit the bleeding edge of tech? Absolutely.

And the best thing about the gaming industry? If you don't like it, don't buy it, don't rent it, don't borrow it, and most importantly, don't play it.

@Mornelithe

Graphics too good? no buy from me! said no one ever :P
How is haveing a good looking game suddenly become a bad thing? Is it because nintendo comes out and says realistic graphics suck and means all games end up looking the same?

Graphics for as long as I can remember, have been something that made people marvel at games, when ever games came out that looked better.

I can just barely remember gameing when it was 2D (like duke nukem), and I can tell you when I first say what a 3DFX card could do to a game, running in 3D.... man I was left with my jaw on the floor.

Graphics do matter.

If talking about graphics and how technology has allowed for better water effects is "The problem with the gaming industry today", I'd say the gaming industry is in damn fine shape.

those pics look worse than they actually do in-game from what i seen atleast

I think you should probably re-read what I wrote.  Nowhere did I say Graphics don't matter. /facepalm

Maybe you mistook my closing comment that way, but, let me clarify.  It means, if you have a problem with realistic graphics, or discussions of graphics, tough shit.  Don't buy it.

The issue here Rubber is that, once again, you insist on seeing the world from no view point but your own. I'm someone that enjoys discussing game tech, but in a shocking twist, i also enjoy talking about game mechanics, music, stories, and art.

My interest in one does not negate my interest in everything else. You're free to put no value in something as a point of discussion, but claiming that other's interest in it is somehow a "serious problem with video games today" is silly. It's not like tech discussions are anything new either. The internet just makes it considerably easier for people with shared interests to be able to discuss said interests.