Games that look like CGI

Status
Not open for further replies.
My benchmark for "Games that look like CGI" in curent gaming market is anything that comes close to replicating this

Game does not need to have this level of asset/effect quality and density, but it needs to be spotless with its presentation with no obvious signs of rendering shortcuts [aliasing, low poly world/charachters, poor lightning, poor materials, jerky animations...].

So far, only Order 1886 and DriveClub [during car movement] qualify.

By your criteria Ryse should be on the list, as well as UC4, Quantum Break and fable legends.
 
Last edited:
@Shifty Geezer I think your (relative wide) application of the term CGI is mostly fine. If you could find a 2D "movie" which has animated closed splines which are automatically flood-filled with patterns, then that's CGI. An image painted with Photoshop though is clearly not CGI, the computer doesn't generate something which is not in the input set. An image which is segmented into planes and parallaxed is borderline CGI, technically I'm fine to call it CGI, although I would try to find another term which is more satisfactory to describe such a technology. An anime for which 3D models have been rendered and which then are rotoscoped, I would not accept to call that CGI, because there is no generation of content happening, all content has been hand-drawn.
 
Seems a pointless discussion to me. On the one hand all games are CGI by definition, save perhaps a few fmv driven ones. On the other hand videogames are realtime, and if you want to compare them against offline rendered material, you'll only be able to compare them to offline renders from many years ago. So I don't really see the point ...
 
...you'll only be able to compare them to offline renders from many years ago.
That's not true. Depending on art-style and scene, games can get to a point where they look like they could be the result of offline renders now. Of course, the very best CGI from movies or high-end cutscenes like Laa-Yosh's cinematics will eclipse what games can produce, but budget CGI and some specialist CGI is being matched. Like I say, the original opening video looks like a budget European computer animation to me. If you were to create the same animation with the same budget, offline rendering couldn't achieve a great deal more. The overall look would be identical. You could solve some artefacts with offline rendering, and perhaps up the poly budget, but things like the animation are more limited by budget than realtime capabilities. The same game could have way better animation if produced by a big developer.

CGI doesn't mean the best Hollywood has to offer in terms of photorealism. I'd say DriveClub is putting out videos that look every bit like a GT cinematic from last gen. From 45 seconds to 1 minute, for example:
If that very same 15 second section appeared on GT6 just over a year ago, we'd have said, "No way GT6 looks like that! That's CGI."
 
That's rendered offline then, at least. Perhaps we should introduce the term OCGI as opposed to RCGI?
 
By your criteria Ryse should be on the list, as well as UC4, Quantum Break and fable legends.

No, because they somehow give me the wibe of being "just videogames" with better assets. U4 E3 teaser looked unreal, but PSX gameplay looked like a [great] videogame. On the other hand, RAD managed to deliver [and surpass] the visuals that were showcased at E3 2013, and maintain that level of presentation excellence even in gameplay.
 
Continuation of a closed discussion.
I'm continuing here because somebody got mad enough to close the last thread and also because the discussion morphed into something more appropriate for this thread:

Just to make my self and others clear. What was counter claimed against your arguments was that the impressive look of the game is not thanks to "blurry, dirty, desaturated" visuals but mostly to other elements that make the visuals. Shifty Geezer's reply demonstrated those other elements that make graphics look "CGI'ish". The other point made was that the post processing effects fit this particular game's art style.
1) I never said the game looks good solely because of the filters.
2) Shifty stated plainly that those filters are required to produce the level of realism desired for this game. That sounds to me like they're important.

That was a reply to your "close to B&W" claim. I posted various images to point you the variety of colors depending on the setting which show clearly that the game is far from being close to "B&W". You ignored that point.
I didn't ignore it. I addressed it.

As for the second shot, I wanted to post the original but when I accidentally chose the wrong image I didnt notice because the difference isnt that big to begin with. Both of these images look mediocre with or without the post processing effects. Which again shows that your effort to make a point failed.
Quite the opposite since you're stating outright that without the noise and the exaggerated blur filters the game looks mediocre. Your words, not mine.

Yes. And the point I made was that the final isnt more impressive (or more realistic if you like) than the old because of it. It was just a change of style.
With which I didn't disagree.

Residing to trolling does not help the discussion
What's the point of the video then? It certainly shows pollution but since we're talking about color a B&W video is useless.

Yes.

CGI'ish. Shifty Geezer explained that himself in his own reply which you havent proberly responded to
I asked for yours. I'll ask again: specifically, what makes this game look CGI'ish?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not what you've been saying. Your opening question, the topic of the thread, is whether The Order's post effects make all games look better or not - you did not ask if The Order's post effects were important for The Order itself. You also included a completely ridiculous example of the post processing look, and even subsequent attempts to represent Ryse in 'The Order' style have involved over-the-top blur, which is the behaviour of one wanting to mock The Order's style rather than ask a sincere question about the impact of its post-effects on the final aesthetic.
Your accusations of malice are completely unwarranted. I simply asked what other people think about the use of these filters and I even took into account their feedback to produce better comparisons. I even managed to produce a clean image from The Order to compare with unaltered direct feed shots.

Yes, the conversation evolved. Isn't that what usually happens in the lifespan of a forum thread?

How on earth do you come to that interpretation when my post, with images, says precisely how post effects aren't necessary?! The only requirements I made were for DOF and moblur. Your 'cheap tricks' aren't necessary at all, if you are excluding motion blur and DOF from that selection of effects.

You stated that in Order to achieve a photorealistic style you need to apply those effects. However, if you're going for non-photorealistic style those effects aren't needed. Hence my point about Driveclub.

Maybe by posting examples of what you mean by photorealistic filmic CGI you could better clarify your argument.

From my thread, board members feel games that look like CGI are (in order of appearance in that thread):
Silence: The Whispered World 2
The Tomorrow Children
The Order: 1886
Ryse, Son of Rome
Far Cry 4
Infamous
Alien Isolation
Crysis 3
DriveClub
Marvel Lego on PS4

...and others if you want to look them up. May have missed some.
If you want a discussion on what makes a game look CGI-like, I suggest not starting with an outlandish posit and some ridiculous reference material, but an open question asking people who think a game looks like CGI, what it is about that game. Cheap post effects clearly isn't the answer because they don't feature heavily in that list of titles people think look like CGI...
Look at my statement: "...games most widely considered to look CGI'ish...". Your thread is hardly a good enough sample to show consensus even more so considering it only lists recent games.
 
Forum for dummies, rule 634: never, ever continue a discussion from a locked thread, and if you do, never actually write 'I'll continue here cause my other thread got closed'.

:runaway:
 
Why such relentlessness?

You're even risking the ban hammer over this. Why?
 
Look, if you want to discuss, discuss, if not, don't. Seems dumb to me to ban discussions that don't involve insults or personal information.
 
He's just spat his dummy over the fact that people are finding it to be a very good looking game. All this started because someone dared to mention his beloved crysis in the same sentence as the Order. You can't argue with a fanatic, to them the world is always wrong if it doesn't agree with their ideology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top