You are on page 1of 1

I have bad feeling about future of realtime 3d graphics and of course about my j ob.

Many gamers dreaming about era of raytrace rendering with global illuminatio n for photorealistic rendering, but even with current scanline render pipeline p hotoreal graphics is possible. If almost nobody do it, then why it will be in fu ture? Budget of high quality games don't allow to spend time for tweaking lights , materials and create textures like 3d modellers do for software renderers, so there are no many chances to see revolution in 3d graphics with powerful hardwar e, complexity is always bad. Probably solution to such problem could be developm ent of few huge game engines with low price for using them in all games, as prog ramming own engine for small studios will be impossible and monsters like EA Gam es are not doing really good games even if they can pay to 500+ developers per p roject. From hardware side, performance is far not enough to run at playable fps all required effects with raytracing, limitation of memory amount is not a prob lem now, but performance of memory is bottleneck for such computations and memor y bandwidth grow up veeery slow, similar to CPU frequency. Only radical hardware changes could help, but videocards are distinguished enough from other PC compo nents, NVidia and ATI can do almost any experiments, but they can't. Why? Becaus e these ideas may be unknown at this moment yet; they may be under patent and si mply dead; vendors are fine with current hardware because of money, it's a busin ess and they must earn as much money as possible, not to develop fastest videoca rds in the world. From developers side, amount of gamers will not change much, s o profit can't increase, but game budget for high quality graphics is growing in times, plus concurency on the market increasing each day. New effects and featu res in most cases require more time and knowledge of 2d and 3d artists. Piracy p roblem on PC and too slow PS3 and XBox360 (as temporary solution against piracy) for newest and future games are adding headache and suspending progress too. Fr om time to time i get asked by users, why not develop and learn dx11? But gamers don't know that it gives a lot of new potential features, which require special content, nothing will change from just porting game from dx9 to dx10/11, so why to bother even learning dx11 graphic api if it features can be done for AAA pro jects only? Better performance of dx11 also required for very specific projects. As rendering techology dx11 will live fine, but industry can't use the true pow er of it. So what to expect? x10 times bigger price of games and only 10 games p er year from EA, Ubisoft, Square Enix with nice quality? Of course not, it's aga inst business. Instead, we will have all the same crappy graphics as it's now fr om studios who can develop games faster - quantity, not the quality. I see how i gnorant developers even to suggestions about graphic side of games, they just ca n't, but thinking about themselves as about gods. Best games are those, which gi ves you fun by playing them, all the same games are useless and only attract new children, who grow enough to start playing games first time in life, they care about release date of the game and don't know that all these was before. You may say that future with indie games (those with non standart gameplay) or reincarn ation of 20-25 years old games, but it's not graphics. Probably remakes of succe ssful games of latest 15 years have a chance to live and not cost as much as dev elopment of completely new 3d games with quality above average. May be progress will turn to virtual reality, don't know... With such thoughts i'm trying to loo k in to own future and don't see it in gamedev. Probably better to try on my own to develop something unique in 3d graphics and games. From: