The bad thing about Games

Renegatus · Post by **Renegatus** » February 27th, 2005, 13:31

Nature is beautiful. Lie on the grass and look at each blade. You can think how each was composed and the think how each will be composted. Rummage through the grass and you're bound to find some little creature. Put it in your palm, marvel at it and then do something you're able to - kill it! Sit up now. Just look around you. You can see bushes, trees, flowers, all sorts of things. Can you see the way they're formed? It's beautiful, the way each has designed and evolved itself to be perfectly suited to survive in it's surroundings. Now stand up. Walk somewhere, preferably somewhere like a wood or a large field. Just marvel again at the wonder. Find a lake. Look, it's beautiful. The sky is so wonderfully blue, everywhere is lit by the great sun that radiates your skin. Breathe in deep. The air is so good. Now collapse. Close yours eyes.

Reopen your eyes. See the sea carress the beach. The sky is again powder-blue, the sea a living mirror and emerging from it isle after isle. The grass is so full of vitality and the trees so wonderfully random. The sun beats down again and you can feel it. The sea laps at your feet and the sand is so gorgeous. Birds emerge from the forests, fish swim in the clear waters. Rocks look awesome - truly putting you in awe - they've been here for millions of years and you, amongst other beings, have touched them and felt the rough beauty.

What's the difference between those two descriptions? They're in different locations, yes, but really, what is the difference? The first is the real world. It's simply amazing. The second is a game. It's also amazing. But what's the point? Today, the real world is like that description, but no matter how lovely and awe-inspiring it looks, I know there's a place even more captivating. This place is Far Cry and beautiful it is. I want to progress in the game, I really do, but I don't want to leave the Edens of the first levels. So to satisfy my need I play in the Sandbox. I create world after world of lush green and deep blue. Gorgeous environments that anyone would pay thousands to visit.

The bad thing about games is when the imitate life. They grab life, squeeze out the best bits and wrap it all up again. Place it in a box, give it to you in return on some paper money and leave you, hopeless. I'd love to go outside, but in here, the view is better.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » February 27th, 2005, 13:44

so.
fucking.
true.

farcry is a beautiful game, i spent a long time just exploring levels.

Stoat · Post by **Stoat** » February 27th, 2005, 13:47

You are an Edge columnist, and I claim my five pounds.

Renegatus · Post by **Renegatus** » February 27th, 2005, 14:17

Stoat wrote:You are an Edge columnist, and I claim my five pounds.

Oh, if only. I am an Edge Fanatic. I thought of that little piece today because it's truly what I feel. I did steal the little description about Far Cry but only because it's a perfect representation. I have written a letter in Edge though! I want to be Steven Poole crossed with Red Eye so much! Far Cry: Instincts is the picture for March on my Edge calendar and I can't wait. I love Edge, I have the bag from my subscription as my school bag.

viper_2090 · Post by **viper_2090** » February 27th, 2005, 17:04

I totally agree with you! They just look to good these days, it's not good for us!

Post by **deject** » February 27th, 2005, 20:57

Am I the only one who still thinks that today's (and even the nex gen) games aren't close yet?

I don't think we are close enough yet.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » February 27th, 2005, 21:01

i dunno, there a bits of some games which are beautiful, no doubt about it.

(some moments in farcry and hl2 certainly)

*BUT* we're not really all that close, we won't be able to match the thrill or feeling of looking down from the peak of a mountain, or even just looking up at the sky, for some considerable time.

Sol · Post by **Sol** » February 27th, 2005, 21:04

i agree a lot of farcry and hl2 is very beautiful

Jinxx · Post by **Jinxx** » February 27th, 2005, 23:19

Soloman wrote:i agree a lot of farcry and hl2 is very beautiful

Half Life 2 is beautiful because it isn't... That game confuses me so much

Post by **ProfHawking** » February 28th, 2005, 0:46

u guys seen this preview screenshot of half-life 3 ???
http://img24.exs.cx/img24/2053/HalfLife3.jpg

viper_2090 · Post by **viper_2090** » February 28th, 2005, 0:52

ProfHawking wrote:u guys seen this preview screenshot of half-life 3 ???

pfft!

Post by **deject** » February 28th, 2005, 1:20

haha!

Sol · Post by **Sol** » February 28th, 2005, 7:53

yeah i saw that i while ago, on few other gaming forums and it was dabated (on mass) quite hotly. No one quite knows weather its real or not.
if it is i need a new pc

Jinxx · Post by **Jinxx** » February 28th, 2005, 9:25

Soloman wrote:No one quite knows weather its real or not.

Hmm... Valve obviously have good camera shake and low level ccd noise renderers in their new engine.

Stoat · Post by **Stoat** » February 28th, 2005, 9:46

ProfHawking wrote:u guys seen this preview screenshot of half-life 3 ???

Ahaha! That's brilliance.

Renegatus · Post by **Renegatus** » February 28th, 2005, 10:17

God, I've seen that photo so much!

Post by **ProfHawking** » February 28th, 2005, 17:05

its funny as hell but it isnt real for sure!

i wonder what hl3 will look like! i'm already drooling at the thought

JamieChalm · Post by **JamieChalm** » February 28th, 2005, 18:15

Something in the first description said something to me. Just imagine when in games, each blade of grass acts independently of each blade, and when each leaf on the tree will sway gently on its own, and perhaps fall off independently. Imagine when rain makes puddles. IMAGINE!!!!!!!!

Man, i'm glad i'm young.

Post by **Joose** » February 28th, 2005, 18:59

JamieChalm wrote:Something in the first description said something to me. Just imagine when in games, each blade of grass acts independently of each blade, and when each leaf on the tree will sway gently on its own, and perhaps fall off independently. Imagine when rain makes puddles. IMAGINE!!!!!!!!

Man, i'm glad i'm young.

mmmm....I dunno.
That will be nice, but spangly graphics dont really do it for me.

Taking HL2 as an example; when i first got into the game, In the section where your running away from the combine, i noticed the door with the mottled glass. I spent quite a while moving from side to side slightly, looking at the refraction and going "ooh".

I then played the rest of the game, never really noticing the fact that glass refracts light again.

My point is this: Imagine a game where every blade of grass was individually modeled and reacted independently from each other blade of grass to things such as wind, feet, shotgun rounds etc. After the initial looking at it and going "woo", would it actually improve the game any? Over a game thats just made passable looking grass that, without close inspection, looks pretty realistic, I dont think the more realistic option is that much better. How many times in a game do you pay any attention to the grass, anyway?

Dont get me wrong, im not one of these wierdos who think everything should be reduced to the graphical level of a spectrum. I just think that good graphics does not always equal good game.

As a final example, take WoW compared to EQ2. EQ2 is undoubtably more realistic, with its bump mapping and its shiney shiney. WoW looks kinda wierd and cartooney, with some really rather simple textures and models. But WoW looks, in my opinion, better.

Anyway, food is calling me...

/scarpers
/consumes

JamieChalm · Post by **JamieChalm** » February 28th, 2005, 19:07

I see your point, but i'm a sucker for good graphics. I went and got EQ2, now that, I regret.

/Runs
/Trades in EQ2
/Spends many minutes comparing WoW and SW: Galaxies
/Runs home
/http://www.5punk.co.uk

I can't decide between WoW and SW: Galaxies.

/Makes new thread

The bad thing about Games

The bad thing about Games

mm

heh