#1 Posted by 1oneWON (87 posts) -

I've become increasingly convinced this generation that the number of pixels a game can push is of little importance to the visual appeal of a game. This really dawned on me while playing the Too Human demo, when I realized that beyond its bland character models, what irked me more than anything else was the stiffness in the main character as I ran his little ass around the screen. There was little bend to his legs, very little weight to his movements, and all I could think about the entire time was how different this character was to the characters I've gotten used to this generation: Niko, Altair, etc - and how for me the biggest thing was just how fluid and "real" their movements felt.

The evolution of animation and physics, I think, is the biggest technological leap that has been made in this generation. I would imagine that I'm not alone in this belief that it's no longer about the pixels, but how those pixels move. Maybe I'm late to the party with this epiphany, but it's something I just realized is one of the most important aspects of gaming in this generation. It's even a reason I was kind of "eh" toward Mass Effect at first. You just moved very...."videogamey."

Anyone feel the same way?

#2 Posted by Callik (138 posts) -

Stuff like Euphoria is definitely the way forward now that graphics are peaking for current systems; as much as realism can be achieved with photo realistic visuals it ultimately is let down by very unrealistic movements and actions. Rag dolls look very out of date and are very immersion killing.

#3 Posted by banksrob (1126 posts) -

its all about interaction with the environment, Alone int he dark for fire, Battlefield bad company for destruction est est

#4 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

Animations and lighting are two of the biggies, but that's just at first glance, there are a lot of other important things that make games good. 

#5 Posted by 1oneWON (87 posts) -

Well I'm obviously overlooking art style, which is perhaps even more important. I'm sure many will agree that games like Shadow of the Colossus (in its time), Okami, Loco Roco, Flower, etc are better looking games than the photo realistic stuff people get all hot and bothered about.

There are of course the games that pull off both visuals and art style, like BioShock, and boy is that still a joy to play.

#6 Posted by Colonel_Cool (808 posts) -

Animation could use some improvement in today's games (GTA4 looks great), but I still think graphics could improve in the normal visual areas too. I often look at Crysis and can see room for improvement.

#7 Edited by 1oneWON (87 posts) -
Colonel_Cool said:
"Animation could use some improvement in today's games (GTA4 looks great), but I still think graphics could improve in the normal visual areas too. I often look at Crysis and can see room for improvement.
"
There's certainly room for improvement, of course. I know people tend to think we've hit a wall but people say that every generation and then a new generation comes along and blows us away. But I think we've hit a point with a lot of games where so much emphasis is put on pure, raw visuals that the opening cinematic blows us away and then it's time to move the analog stick and it feels like we're playing Crash Bandicoot 1.
#8 Posted by Seroth (709 posts) -

I've always been an animation whore. I thought the greatest thing about Assassin's Creed was the way Altair moved.