Next-gen graphical pet peeves

Bohdy

Regular
Right now my top one is flickery shadows. A lot of really nice looking games coming out seem to suffer from this, like Mass Effect and Heavenly Sword. Probably an unavoidable side-effect of some popular fast shadow technique these days, but they are still distracting. Can HS guys elaborate?

After that it would probably have to go to bloom abuse, but that is an old sad tune which everyone has already heard.

What are the next-gen graphical fads have annoyed you guys of late?
 
For me it's crappy animation and floaty physics.

I DEFINITELY Second that!!

Although i'd also like to add my distaste for sloppy particles..

I recently watched the trailer of Frontlines: Fuel of War & it perfectly encapsulates exactly how even an Unreal Engine 3.0 title can look like cold sh*t when you have choppy, rigid animations, hyper-surreal physics and lazy, shitty particles..
 
Mountains and Rocks. Can we please get mountains, and rocks that don't look like giant styrofoam blocks with dogshit smeared all over em??

I mean up close, not from far away btw...
 
There's a few small things I've seen in a few games:

Lighting where edges glow that aren't supposed to (Gears of War is a serious offender of this and most easily seen). I've seen it in other games too, but everyone has played GeoW, so it's an easy example.

Blur effects that don't seem to take effect behind alpha textures and some other things (leaving the area behind clear texture or near the texture clean from blur, but other areas are blurry in the same scene) -- this happens in almost every game with motion blur to some extent. I noticed it in Motorstorm (only in certain situations -- in crash mode sometimes around the body of the vehicle), Dead Rising (any dof/blur around a characters hair, for example) and a few others.

Those are probably my pet peaves at the moment -- anything that causes a nasty side effect that takes away focus of the intended effect is always a bit jarring. Usually it's no big deal though.
 
Yeah the lighting inside of mouth syndrome is annoying, I agree.

Now I know what I liked about Tekken on the PSP (and probably also on the PS2/3) - there's a scene where this big guy who's King's enemy celebrates his victory and you see him from below, and you can see his teeth. They look really good and the rest of the mouth has a good color. It looks so much better than most I've seen so far, which is probably precisely because it manages to avoid 'lighting-inside-of-mouth'
 
Right now my top one is flickery shadows. A lot of really nice looking games coming out seem to suffer from this, like Mass Effect and Heavenly Sword. Probably an unavoidable side-effect of some popular fast shadow technique these days, but they are still distracting. Can HS guys elaborate?
We don't use any fancy shadow projection scheme in HS, though we split the camera space in 3 areas along the view vector, with each shadow map assigned to each area. this help keeping shadow maps 'ugliness' constant and more or less independent from the angle between light vector and eye vector (while all those schemes that improves shadow resolutions fails when the angle between the eye vector and light vector is close to pi )
In my opinion the only ROBUST way to address this problem is to split the screen in many areas and to have a (even very small) shadow map 'covering' each area (but this technique can have huge costs..)
Also shadow maps filtering could help improve the situations: variance shadow maps are nice..and I'm sure more advanced techniques which rely on the same basic idea/principle will appear in the future.
 
I guess that would be boring level design but that isnt really next-gen only. Bloom and HDR are probably on #1 then I think. I hate it when everything starts glowing and you suddenly cant see anything anymore because apperantly you are watching into the sun. Also not being able to see enemies because they blend into to enviroment to much pisses me off.
 
In addition to the above...

  • I really don't like it when faces don't synch up properly with speech during in-engine cut-scenes. I think the cinematic directors should push for more articulation points there especially with next-gen looking characters.
  • clipping -> smoke, characters, everything really
  • flat lighting
  • lights that don't affect their surroundings
  • letting the player get close to an object with a low-res texture. If you know it looks bad/blurry, try to make it so it isn't obvious please.
 
* Billboards for grass and bushes
* Straight-edge z-clipping of smoke and fire particles

(Pretty much anything that sticks out like a 2D sore-thumb in a supposedly 3D world)
 
For me it's crappy animation and floaty physics.
I'm lost as to when and how physics became a "graphical" pet peeve, but FWIW, most of the "floatiness" is attributable to the relative slowness of the average person's thumb (and/or some overestimation thereof). All in all, a lot of your problems with the latter can be covered up by more work on the former.

While people do a lot of things with physics that are theoretically more fun, I do find that less effort is made to make otherwise imponderable physics more believable. For instance, PoP wall runs had a little more believability to them because of all the transitional animations and the quick steps with short strides as well as the fact that the rest of his body made subtle movements as if he's trying to maintain balance and so on. However, since there's a lack of immediacy and continuity of speed to this, a lot of other games with wall-run features just have a character suddenly running sideways as if gravity works in all directions.

Lighting where edges glow that aren't supposed to (Gears of War is a serious offender of this and most easily seen). I've seen it in other games too, but everyone has played GeoW, so it's an easy example.
Yes, well, it's like any new toy. One moment, it looks like a major step forward in graphical quality, so then everybody starts doing it because they'd look like they'd been left behind if they didn't... and then it gets overused enough that everybody thinks it's a joke. How soon we forget the inciting forces that made everything in a game shiny-shine-shine! With rim lighting, it was no different -- back with X-box games, it seemed to make everybody's jaws drop, and now it's overbright and oversharp and overused, and boom -- it's the bane of gamers. I often wonder how far we really were as an industry from having Quantum Hitler ride a T-Rex.

Bloom and HDR are probably on #1 then I think.
Bloom and HDR? I may be mistaken here, but don't a lot of people think those two are the same thing? Complaining about bloom is one thing. It's the Lens Flare of the 21st century... But what is it with people and the term "HDR"? And it's not just the public... at my last job (no, not the creature job), even the so-called art director would make comments about other games such as "eww... look at all that HDR they're putting all over it." What the hell do people think HDR is?
 
Shadow Aliasing. As great as a game like Mass Effect is, the "shadow crawl" across the faces is horribly annoying. MotorStorm is another where the shadows is just horrible.

Lack of Self Shadows. Self Shadows give a lot of depth to characters and look fabulous. Comparing a game like VT3 to Madden, and the self shadows just pop out in VT3. I love them and cringe when I don't see them. Don't ask me to choose between no self shadows and self shadows with aliasing... grrr!

Dynamic Shadows. See a trend? Having dynamic objects both cast and receive shadows to/from other dynamic objects isn't too much to ask... is it?

Bloom. Some bloom is good, but the constant glow some games have on every lit edge is very, very annoying. I love HDR effects but bloom is one that must be handled with care.

Flat Textured Grass, Sprite bushes. Games that feature a lot of grass really need to put some effort into it. Trackmania and BF:V had decent grass a while ago and a number of launch titles also had solid grass (like Kameo). Even if you cannot go all out on 3D grass, some sprite grass is better than horribly flat... textures. But for bushes... no. You better make those 3D. If I see another bush that looks the same from every angle and has no lighting or shadowing... grrr! MotorStorm, looking at you!

Non-interactive Worlds. Boom! That was a huge bomb! Oh, and the half decayed brick wall... isn't scratch. Yawn. If I hit something in the world, I want to see some input. Part of immersion is showing the gamer they DO make an impact in the world.

Animation. Great visuals with poor animation make average, at best, graphics. Graphics is equal parts visuals and animation, and without the later the title suffers. I am tired of LOOOONG unbreakable animations, especially ones that where you run into an object (wall, another player, NPC, etc) and it just continues as if they are not there. Classic examples abound in Madden. Jump into a tackle animation... and you do a super jump suspended in the same spot in the air. Too Human also has some of those looong unbreakable animations where you do a special move and some enemy may be walking into you (moon walk of course because you cannot be moved!) but you keep going as if no one is touching you.

Texture Flicker and Pop-in. Nothing worse than seeing a texture flicker (texture/black/white/repeat) because it is on a seam or somesuch. Likewise pop-in. You have 512MB of memory so use it wisely. Yes, DOF can help but it is still noticable.

Last Gen Particle Effects. When your smoke or fire looks like a pixelated and static mess then you need to redo it. Lost Planet really showed us what we should expect from game particles, RFoM has some great snow effects and Kameo a lot of nice particles all over the place. They go a long way to give the world life. Lifeless last gen particles make a title looked dated. No real grey area here.

Body / Facial Animation. HL2 was 2004. We are now in 2007. When only a handful of games can claim parity that is not a good sign. Valve really nailed the "life" expressed in the characters not only through excellent facial animation (and acting) and lip sync, but also body gestures. Few things bore me more than really, really bad character animation.

Unbreakable Lights. If I can shoot them I want them to go out. Totally destroys immersion for me--and getting to break them is waaay up on the cool factor. This alone could add a TON of replay to games, especially MP. Take any FPS... you wander into a room and are being chased... hide in a corner, shoot out the lights. When the enemy comes through the lit door (and the HDR iris effect hits him) you have him nailed! Or better yet, he turns on his flash light. Bang!

Dishonorable mentions: Repetitive Textures, Edge Aliasing, Texture Aliasing, Low Poly, although I can excuse some of these depending on the circumstance.
 
models showing their polygonal joints and textures still aren't that great compared to PC...

animations that are stiff.
 
Speed Tree, I just don't think the trees look good, proper artists can do much better.

Perspective shadows (PSM, LPSM.. and the kind) used for everything when not needed to.
There are games where shadowmap is way too small to be used in any proper way for character selfshadowing and then those games choose to zoom in characters faces and we see huge blobs of shadow jiggle around.

Bloom and motion blur implemented as a checkbox feature and HDR implemented as a method to get easier bloom and some dynamic tonemapping.
HDR should not be last feature implemented in a game, atleast not after graphics have been mostly finalized.
In oblivion the candles are quite horid looking as the flame isn't bright enough to cause blooming, but when we go close enough and see the wax it is way brighter and actual bloom kicks in..

Shader aliasing and undersampling when intended material needs clearly more to look good.
Like specular and reflective components of water.

Plastic like feel in some objects and the fact that mipmaps go from bumpy to flat without affecting the actual light equation.
I would love to see shiny surface with lots of directional small bumps go dull and have some anisotropic properties when I walk away from it, not the 'what a nice plastic wall we have', feel.
Currently we lose all light detail smaller than pixel.
 
Shadow Aliasing. As great as a game like Mass Effect is, the "shadow crawl" across the faces is horribly annoying. MotorStorm is another where the shadows is just horrible.

Lack of Self Shadows. Self Shadows give a lot of depth to characters and look fabulous. Comparing a game like VT3 to Madden, and the self shadows just pop out in VT3. I love them and cringe when I don't see them. Don't ask me to choose between no self shadows and self shadows with aliasing... grrr!

Dynamic Shadows. See a trend? Having dynamic objects both cast and receive shadows to/from other dynamic objects isn't too much to ask... is it?
Yes, it most certainly is (when all is put together). Quite frankly, while I do believe that a relatively "generic" shadowing algorithm has a slight possibility of being developed within the next 15 or 16 years, I don't think there will be anything "generic" that is practical for use on this round of consoles. VSMs are a step in the right direction, as are LogSMs, and a few other techniques, but none of them solve everything, and even combining techniques leads to more fragility and failure cases that are probably more catastrophic than the techniques would be separately. There is also no *good* solution for point lights -- shadow volumes, cubemaps, dual paraboloids, silhouette extraction all have failings that make them worthless in the end.

Admittedly, though, I'm a pessimist of such a degree that people could pass on tall tales of me for generations to come, so if I'm wrong, all the better.

Speed Tree, I just don't think the trees look good, proper artists can do much better.
And with simpler geometry. I've seen good environment artists do some pretty impressive vegetation with under 1000 tris. I think the really attractive part of SpeedTree is just the fact that you only need to store creation rules, and you can get some acceptable results without a few man-minutes. But in general, I wouldn't consider it that often anyway unless forestry was a common setting throughout your game (i.e. it's too expensive if you're not going to make use of it heavily).
 
Iat my last job (no, not the creature job), even the so-called art director would make comments about other games such as "eww... look at all that HDR they're putting all over it." What the hell do people think HDR is?
This is called "I'm an art director but I'm not still ready to do this job, just wait a couple of years..." :)
 
While everything has been said, ill state the ones that i hate the most:

- Clipping (meshes,textures)
- Poor texture filtering
- Overused bloom/dof or other un-necessary blurring fx's (Lair comes easily to my mind thanks to this screenshot)
- Lack of dynamic shadow/lighting (only applies on supposedly "next-gen" games)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right now my top one is flickery shadows. A lot of really nice looking games coming out seem to suffer from this, like Mass Effect and Heavenly Sword. Probably an unavoidable side-effect of some popular fast shadow technique these days, but they are still distracting. Can HS guys elaborate?

This is a tough problem, I'd say the toughest problem in real-time rendering and there's no robust solution. I absolutely hate flickery shadows too.
But any clever filtering that you can invent has to fight against the given limited resolution that you can use with today's hardware. It will only partially hide flickering and jaggies, it will never add resolution.

Given that, in a next-gen game I want to see every object in the scene casting non flickering dynamic soft shadows on any other object in the scene. Generating shadows is the biggest source of headaches for me.

And for the love of anything that is just and holy, cut down on that bloom.

Fran in Rome
 
Back
Top