TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 87 of 87

Thread: Youtube Gaming Channels

  1. #76
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    This does kinda remind me of this idea I had as a teenager (yep, that's my excuse): games that would use hypnosis to make players do the hard work of improving the graphics past a certain point. Obviously the game would have to present an approximation of what the game's supposed to look like, but the hypnotic suggestion would be to add all the bells and whistles that a player might expect, with the result that you could reach higher framerates.

    In this case, it's sort of as if the computer was hypnotised into making the graphics more photorealistic.

  2. #77
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Looking at that, I immediately started thinking about the writing on the wall for game design. It means for some environment, you don't have to perfectly texture it. What you do is just label a brush or an asset as an object type, pavement or building or tree or whatever, and then you pick the aesthetic you want that's already had a deep neural net run up on it (or they make it easy to collect 1000s of images to learn a net the aesthetic you want), and then the net takes care of just filling in the textures for you. And then at most an artist might have to go in and touch up a few brushes or assets.

    I mean at that point, it's not only the texturing, but you can have deep nets dynamically coming up with the geometry, the landscape and architecture (and while we're at it models of anything you could imagine) according to whatever style of place it's learned up on. And while people could make their own aesthetics, I think at a certain point modders will have made their own aesthetic sets such that there will be hundreds or thousands of free ones to choose from.

    I don't want to say that kind of development wouldn't also have some costs involved. It'll be like pro-tools for music making, i.e., a glut of crap coming out of people mixing music from their bedrooms, where the slapped together crap aesthetic isn't only tolerated but actually becomes the standard. (I'm sure I don't need to go off on the whole boomer diatribe against modern pop music because you're all well acquainted with the idea.) Anyway, I see that as an inevitable part of democratizing the tools to create in any art form. But the point is, while you get a glut and championing of crap, you also get some real jewels coming out too, and because I know how to scrounge around for the jewels in the muck, I think overall it's worth it.

    I'm talking about games again. I think there are a lot of good ideas out there that never find an outlet just because the barrier to entry for game-making is particularly high. So this kind of neural net led generation I think can take care of the artistic parts so devs can focus on the gameplay and story, etc.

    I guess we'll see one way or another soon enough.

  3. #78
    Level 10,000 achieved
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Finland
    Quoting on page 4 so everyone sees what we're talking about:

    Quote Originally Posted by henke View Post
    Not so much a channel as a single video, but check out this project that enhances photorealism using neural networks. :O It changes the mood of the scene quite a lot but apparently that's because the image data the AI is trained on is from cloudy Germany and not sunny California. For more accurate results I guess they'd need to feed it images from California, with different weather conditions as well. But anyway, this is the future of photorealism in games, ain't it?



    More about it here: https://intel-isl.github.io/PhotorealismEnhancement/
    Yeah, dema, I was thinking the same thing RE: the default geometry not needing to be terribly complex. Hell, just think about remasters of old games using this technique. Photorealistic Deus Ex or Thief? Of course these things can only interpret a frame at a time so things like character-animations won't be improved (I'm guessing). It'd still be the same slightly-wonky animations but photorealistic textures and lighting.

  4. #79
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    Looking at that, I immediately started thinking about the writing on the wall for game design. It means for some environment, you don't have to perfectly texture it. What you do is just label a brush or an asset as an object type, pavement or building or tree or whatever, and then you pick the aesthetic you want that's already had a deep neural net run up on it (or they make it easy to collect 1000s of images to learn a net the aesthetic you want), and then the net takes care of just filling in the textures for you. And then at most an artist might have to go in and touch up a few brushes or assets.
    Sounds like a proto-holodeck. And it makes sense that game devs would eventually go in this direction because who wants to hire hundreds of artists to draw every pebble on the ground?

  5. #80
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    Location: Switzerland
    I'd imagine that the results are better if the original material has reached a certain quality level. Low-poly would probably result in monstrosities that are somewhere between the uncanny valley and Thumper-style nightmares. Which would be interesting, granted, but I'm not sure I'd want to play an entire Thief remaster that is more unsetlling than the latest Kitty Horrorshow short. At the very least it'd push entirely different buttons than the original Thief dud.

  6. #81
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2002
    Location: Maupertuis
    It's nice to finally see an advance in graphics technology that doesn't require expanded development teams to implement.

  7. #82
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Regarding issues like the uncanny valley and "every frame" ... There's lots of flexibility once you have this kind of tech. E.g., reanimating something every frame doesn't have to be the only option. You could just cook up a whole new game engine, so it's actually recreating things like animation cycles and blocky models whole cloth with the classic game as an input, so your blocky weird animated guy is just fully replaced with a realistic looking guy knowing to follow the pathing but the animation is interpolated into a realistic-looking walk, etc.

    Also, while photorealism is one option, you could also have other kinds of "realisms", like fantasy or scifi aesthetics, or animation styles, or you could even force certain retro styles. I think some stylized artistic styles could mitigate the uncanny valley issue. I also think in 10 years photorealism may really mean photorealism beyond the ability of the eye to see the difference (maybe).

    Quote Originally Posted by Aja View Post
    who wants to hire hundreds of artists to draw every pebble on the ground?
    Not me!

  8. #83
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2002
    Location: Maupertuis
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    who wants to hire hundreds of artists to draw every pebble on the ground?

    Not me!
    The answer, of course, is Naughty Dog:


  9. #84
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2002
    Location: Maupertuis
    I want to remind everyone that Dunkey's E3 recaps are the best of the best, nearly on the same level as SMB2.

  10. #85
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Well if it's nearly as good as Super Mario Bros. 2, we must be in for a real treat!


  11. #86
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    Incidentally, Dunkey’s recap of SMB2 is also very good.

  12. #87
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2002
    Location: Maupertuis

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •