The end of games....

[Sprafa]

I've been thinking and well...there'll be a time, maybe even soon in the future, that everything that'll count will be originality. And after a few time, won't we.***n out of ideas? I mean, sure, that'll take a while, but after some time everything will just look and feel the same...

Eventually we'll reach a peak of technological advance. Allow me to explain -

1st - Graphical Engine it appears as if the graphical engines are the top ranking element on the game technology. Therefore, we can say that the 1st thing to reach the peak will be graphics - photorealism

2nd - Physics engine - we already have some great physics today. Soon enough we'll have the peak, which will be something like that rumor about HL2 talked about, the Grand Unified Physics Theory in a game.

3rd - Extension of Terrain - after the peak of physics and graphics, developers will just make bigger and bigger maps until they have an entire Universe (as the computer processing power will never stop rising...).

4th - Real Life Destrucion - Eventually, probably even with the maps size evolution, models & terrains will reach a "near" real life destruction engine.

5th - Artificial Intelligence - if we ever make an artificial intelligence comparable to ours, we can progressively take it to games (probably starting with important NPCs and then integrating them to all of the human NPCs...).

6th - 3d - So far games are 3d generated but only 2d projectable. There are already some games that support a "simulated" 3d, but soon enough we'll probably have total 3d interaction.

Maybe enhanced Reality is applied, but I'm not sure. It take the fun off the game to feel the pain of the caracther.... :dozey:

So, maybe in...20 to 100 years we have photorealism, near life physics, destructable terrains and models and maybe a map of the size of Earth. When that happens, most surely games will start to rely more on originality than anything else, because the technological base will be quite near completion.


A few 20 years from that point, we might see a point where games get cheap to make at home and you can't notice the difference, because, once again, the technological base has stagnated. Therefore, we might see a point, a few years after the popularization of house-made games that really, the stories wil all give us some deja vu...

What do you think ? Will human imagination eventually die off, or will it feed the games industry until the end of times?

 

[joule]

There will be a point in the far future where graphics will reach its most realistic state.

But that doesn't mean that games will die off.

When the sound, graphics, level design, A.I., and physics get to there highest degree, people will still be playing games. It's all about the immersiveness of the game, because you are basically playing in another reality-perhaps real virtuality. Kinda like The Matrix. You jack in and live in near perfect rendition of the real world-and you can program anything you want into The Matrix. And another thing that will strive the games industry, and people in it, to play games is the replay value. I mean just because you have reached your highest standard for graphics, sound, etc., doesn't mean you can't keep playing that specific area over and over again.

Games will be played for centuries to come. Except the games will make you feel like you are actually in the game, rather than playing them.
We are still in the very early stages of gaming.

And if people eventually run out of new ideas for games, they will look to the past and "remake" old stories, ideas, etc.

 

[Direwolf]

Ahahahaha....thats like saying film or music will die because they can't move beyond their mediums. Hasn't happened yet.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Yeah, music has lasted a couple thousand years, and film has been going strong for more than a century.

Games as we know them are only about 40 years old.

 

[Gunner]

Ahahahaha....thats like saying film or music will die because they can't move beyond their mediums. Hasn't happened yet.

Exactly, but Sprafa does have a point about originality but that hasn't stopped game developers from making world war 2 games or first-person shooters for that matter. The basic idea is to take something and improve upon it.

 

[Dedalus]

Ahahahaha....thats like saying film or music will die because they can't move beyond their mediums. Hasn't happened yet.

in some people's eyes it has. both mediums you mentioned are seriously stagnated.

just because photo realistic graphics are achievable, doesn't mean every developer has to use them. gaming is varied enough to allow people to experiment with the medium, so i don't think we'll find games dying off like you say. but i do expect them to stagnate like (mainstream)films and music have.

there will always be a place for indie developers though.

 

[KagePrototype]

1st - Graphical Engine it appears as if the graphical engines are the top ranking element on the game technology. Therefore, we can say that the 1st thing to reach the peak will be graphics - photorealism

/me points at Tetris and Wind Waker

A good designer knows that graphics do not have to be photorealistic to be good. If we reach photorealism, then we move onto another art direction.

2nd - Physics engine - we already have some great physics today. Soon enough we'll have the peak, which will be something like that rumor about HL2 talked about, the Grand Unified Physics Theory in a game.

Games don't need realistic physics engines to be fun. Designers wil just look for the next best thing. How about realistic biological development? Good enough for you?

3rd - Extension of Terrain - after the peak of physics and graphics, developers will just make bigger and bigger maps until they have an entire Universe (as the computer processing power will never stop rising...).

I doub they'd have the entire universe...but regardless, video games need limits. Having a map the size of the galaxy might not be needed. Remember, video games are supposed to be fun, not mirror reality.

4th - Real Life Destrucion - Eventually, probably even with the maps size evolution, models & terrains will reach a "near" real life destruction engine.

Again, games don't need deformable terrain to be fun. Designers will think of something else (for example, once again, realistic biological development. How about having things grow instead of destroyed?)

5th - Artificial Intelligence - if we ever make an artificial intelligence comparable to ours, we can progressively take it to games (probably starting with important NPCs and then integrating them to all of the human NPCs...).

Again, games need limits. having a true AI stuck in a video game is too much of a chaotic factor.

6th - 3d - So far games are 3d generated but only 2d projectable. There are already some games that support a "simulated" 3d, but soon enough we'll probably have total 3d interaction.

That would be cool. Perhaps after that we could have direct stimulation of the senses. But by this time, we might not even need video games anymore, and have found something else to pass our time with. you have to remember that video games, however prevailant and ingrained into society they are today, might very well be forgotten about within the next century or so, because something else cuaght our attention.

Or we could all be dead, which is probably more likely.

 

[Brian Damage]

<<

>>

oo

Life is a game...

 

[joule]

<<

>>

oo

Life is a game...

Then where is the reset button?

 

[Sprafa]

/me points at Tetris and Wind Waker

A good designer knows that graphics do not have to be photorealistic to be good. If we reach photorealism, then we move onto another art direction.



Games don't need realistic physics engines to be fun. Designers wil just look for the next best thing. How about realistic biological development? Good enough for you?



I doub they'd have the entire universe...but regardless, video games need limits. Having a map the size of the galaxy might not be needed. Remember, video games are supposed to be fun, not mirror reality.



Again, games don't need deformable terrain to be fun. Designers will think of something else (for example, once again, realistic biological development. How about having things grow instead of destroyed?)



Again, games need limits. having a true AI stuck in a video game is too much of a chaotic factor.



That would be cool. Perhaps after that we could have direct stimulation of the senses. But by this time, we might not even need video games anymore, and have found something else to pass our time with. you have to remember that video games, however prevailant and ingrained into society they are today, might very well be forgotten about within the next century or so, because something else cuaght our attention.

Or we could all be dead, which is probably more likely.

you certainly didn't got the point. You mentioned a lot of reasons for why the "game doesn't needs that to be fun". Well, sure, but when they're available, and you don't use them, you know what that means? that you're going to make something different to stand out. originality. which is exactly my point.


New graphical tecnhiques in the likes of cel shading will probably randomly appear, and that surely will keep the industry alive for a while.


you can simulate basic biological evolution in a pentium 600mhz...it's quite easy, game makers just never used it.

 

[thefiznut]

Wow, kage you made some excellent points and ideas. Having things grow instead of being destroyed? Awesome!

 

[Neutrino]

What do you think ? Will human imagination eventually die off, or will it feed the games industry until the end of times?

Well, considering that people are still writing original books after a few thousand years I'd say you don't have a lot to worry about.

 

[Sprafa]

Well, considering that people are still writing original books after a few thousand years I'd say you don't have a lot to worry about.

only novels can be compared with games, books can be merely informative or declarative, etc.

 

[EVIL]

As long as man walks the earth and we still have that little powerfull thing that seperates us from teh noobs called imagination then we wont run out of idea's

 

[Brian Damage]

Then where is the reset button?

Ah, reincarnation...

 

[Foxtrot]

The peak of video games will be somthing like the matrix.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

Surely once we reach a point where we can recreated the universe...it won't matter so much what game developers do, because...the universe is...well...the universe.

Take for instance online RPG's, they basically run themselves, even now in their primitive state. Ok, so occasionally the developers add something new but eventually as Foxtrot says, we will reach something like the matrix at which point as I said it won't matter so much what game developers do.

Anyway, humans don't live forever, and although every generation thinks its being original, very few actually are and most of us are repeating what our parents did, and what their parents did and so on.

 

[Adidajs]

people have repeatedly claimed that nothing new can be discovered/invented, but it's happened time and time again. I doubt the game genre is going to die out anytime soon.

 

[Direwolf]

This doesn't even bear thinking about. Gaming is for all purposes still in it infancy as a medium.

 

[csmighty1]

I'm sure people said the same thing about movies...

 

[KidRock]

my 2 cents...


For us to actually have to "jack in" and have something like the matrix where you can really belive your in another place is still i would say 90 years away.

 

[Dalamari]

More than 90, we know SO little about the brain that even trying something like that you would need to be 100% sure it would not kill the person.