4 ms·

> Guess the requirements in computer graphics are more inclined towards making something that looks right instead of getting the physics right. The first rule

> Guess the requirements in computer graphics are more inclined towards making something that looks right instead of getting the physics right. The first rule of real-time computer graphics has essentially always been "Cheat as much as you can get away with (and usually, even if you can't)." Also, it doesn't even have to look right, it just has to look cool! =)

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
Why not cheat? I'm not looking for realism in games, I'm looking for escapism and to have fun.
- digging 3y ago
  I don't think this is a great argument because everybody is looking for some level of realism in games, but you may want less than many others. Without any, you'd have no intuitive behaviors and the controls would make no sense. I'm not saying this just to be pedantic - my point is that some people do want some games to have very high levels of realism.
  - someletters 3y ago
    Some of the best games I've played in my life were the text based and pixel art games in MS DOS. Your imagination then had to render or enhance the visuals, and it was pretty cool to come up with the pictures in your head.
    - mewpmewp2 3y ago
      I mean yes, but, ultimately we want to be able to simulate ourselves to the truest to be able to understand our origins, which are likely simulated as well, right.
    - digging 3y ago
      I realize the thread started about graphics, but I didn't only mean realistic graphics when I referred to realism, because the comment I was replying to just said "realism in games". I do expect there's some degree of realism in your favorite text-based or pixel-art games as well. As you say, it's clear that a game doesn't need photorealistic graphics to be good, because most games do not.
- Sharlin 3y ago
  I didn't mean to imply that cheating is bad. Indeed it's mandatory if you want a remotely real-time performance.
- solardev 3y ago
  It's kinda cool when it feels real enough to be used a gameplay mechanism, such as diverting rivers and building hydroelectric dams in the beaver engineering simulator Timberborn: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/deep-dive-timberborn-s-water-mechanics https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/deep-dive-timberborn-s-...
- kevincox 3y ago
  The reason not to cheat is that visual artifacts and bugs can snap you out of immersion. Think of realizing that you don't appear in a mirror or that throwing a torch into a dark corner doesn't light it up. Even without "bugs" people tend to find more beautiful and accurate things more immersive. So if you want escapism, graphics that match the physics that you are used to day-to-day can help you forget that you are in a simulation. The reason to cheat is that we currently don't have the hardware or software techniques to physically simulate a virtual world in real-time.
corysama 3y ago
> Also, it doesn't even have to look right, it just has to look cool! =) The refrain is: Plausible. Not realistic. Doesn't have to be correct. Just needs to lead the audience to accept it. Yeah. And, cheat as much as you can. And, then just a little more ;)
Philpax 3y ago
“Everything is smoke and mirrors in computer graphics - especially the smoke and mirrors!”
- doctorhandshake 3y ago
  This was the big realization for me when I got into graphics - everything on the screen is a lie, and the gestalt is an even bigger lie. It feels similar to how I would imagine it feels to be a well-informed illusionist - the fun isn’t spoiled for me when seeing how the sausage is made - I just appreciate it on more levels.
  - chaboud 3y ago
    At some point every render-engine builder goes through the exercise of imagining purely physically-modeled photonic simulation. How soon one gives up on this computationally intractable task with limited marginal return on investment is a signifier of wisdom/exhaustion. And, yes, I've gone way too far down this road in the past.
    - solardev 3y ago
      Not being a graphics person, is this what hardware ray tracing is, or is that something different?
      - ReactiveJelly 3y ago
        Even the ray tracing / path tracing is half-fake these days cause it's faster to upscale and interpolate frames with neural nets. But yeah in theory you can simulate light realistically
        dexwiz 3y ago
        It’s still a model at the end of the day. Material properties like roughness are approximated with numerical values instead of being physical features. Also light is REALLY complicated when you get close to a surface. A light simulation that properly handles refraction, diffraction, elastic and inelastic scattering, and anisotropic material properties would be very difficult to build and run. It’s much easier to use material values found from experimental results.
arendtio 3y ago
This reminds me of how the Quake-3-based game Tremulous has just two functions to simulate physics: https://github.com/darklegion/tremulous/blob/master/src/game/g_physics.c https://github.com/darklegion/tremulous/blob/master/src/game...

FirmwareBurner 3y ago

Why not cheat? I'm not looking for realism in games, I'm looking for escapism and to have fun.

digging 3y ago
I don't think this is a great argument because everybody is looking for some level of realism in games, but you may want less than many others. Without any, you'd have no intuitive behaviors and the controls would make no sense. I'm not saying this just to be pedantic - my point is that some people do want some games to have very high levels of realism.
- someletters 3y ago
  Some of the best games I've played in my life were the text based and pixel art games in MS DOS. Your imagination then had to render or enhance the visuals, and it was pretty cool to come up with the pictures in your head.
  - mewpmewp2 3y ago
    I mean yes, but, ultimately we want to be able to simulate ourselves to the truest to be able to understand our origins, which are likely simulated as well, right.
  - digging 3y ago
    I realize the thread started about graphics, but I didn't only mean realistic graphics when I referred to realism, because the comment I was replying to just said "realism in games". I do expect there's some degree of realism in your favorite text-based or pixel-art games as well. As you say, it's clear that a game doesn't need photorealistic graphics to be good, because most games do not.
Sharlin 3y ago
I didn't mean to imply that cheating is bad. Indeed it's mandatory if you want a remotely real-time performance.
solardev 3y ago
It's kinda cool when it feels real enough to be used a gameplay mechanism, such as diverting rivers and building hydroelectric dams in the beaver engineering simulator Timberborn: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/deep-dive-timberborn-s-water-mechanics https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/deep-dive-timberborn-s-...
kevincox 3y ago
The reason not to cheat is that visual artifacts and bugs can snap you out of immersion. Think of realizing that you don't appear in a mirror or that throwing a torch into a dark corner doesn't light it up. Even without "bugs" people tend to find more beautiful and accurate things more immersive. So if you want escapism, graphics that match the physics that you are used to day-to-day can help you forget that you are in a simulation. The reason to cheat is that we currently don't have the hardware or software techniques to physically simulate a virtual world in real-time.

corysama 3y ago

> Also, it doesn't even have to look right, it just has to look cool! =) The refrain is: Plausible. Not realistic. Doesn't have to be correct. Just needs to lead the audience to accept it. Yeah. And, cheat as much as you can. And, then just a little more ;)

Philpax 3y ago

“Everything is smoke and mirrors in computer graphics - especially the smoke and mirrors!”

doctorhandshake 3y ago
This was the big realization for me when I got into graphics - everything on the screen is a lie, and the gestalt is an even bigger lie. It feels similar to how I would imagine it feels to be a well-informed illusionist - the fun isn’t spoiled for me when seeing how the sausage is made - I just appreciate it on more levels.
- chaboud 3y ago
  At some point every render-engine builder goes through the exercise of imagining purely physically-modeled photonic simulation. How soon one gives up on this computationally intractable task with limited marginal return on investment is a signifier of wisdom/exhaustion. And, yes, I've gone way too far down this road in the past.
  - solardev 3y ago
    Not being a graphics person, is this what hardware ray tracing is, or is that something different?
    - ReactiveJelly 3y ago
      Even the ray tracing / path tracing is half-fake these days cause it's faster to upscale and interpolate frames with neural nets. But yeah in theory you can simulate light realistically
      - dexwiz 3y ago
        It’s still a model at the end of the day. Material properties like roughness are approximated with numerical values instead of being physical features. Also light is REALLY complicated when you get close to a surface. A light simulation that properly handles refraction, diffraction, elastic and inelastic scattering, and anisotropic material properties would be very difficult to build and run. It’s much easier to use material values found from experimental results.

arendtio 3y ago

This reminds me of how the Quake-3-based game Tremulous has just two functions to simulate physics: https://github.com/darklegion/tremulous/blob/master/src/game/g_physics.c https://github.com/darklegion/tremulous/blob/master/src/game...