/vr/ - Retro Games

You think whatever game out these days is the peak of realism until you start seeing VR games projecting zombies shambling through your own house and stimulating pain in your nerve endings when they bite your character.

>>10224768
I think the most realistic game I've seen so far is Cyberpunk but I remember thinking the graphics in Fallout 4 were amazing lol.

But those games actually look realistic, a lot of retro games didn't but were lauded as being Peak Realism

>>10224764
It's incredibly realistic when it runs at 256×224 resolution on shitty CRT television at night. Your mind filled in the blanks.

>>10224779
Nobody knew how much technology was going to evolve back then. Every year was a massive leap, and RE1 was still only 1996.

>>10224768
>projecting zombies shambling through
i thought you gonna say through walls and floors and other solid objects and then twitch and spaz. very realistic

Yes.

>>10224779
>I think

>>10224764
early 3d graphics always felt "real" because it represented an actual physical space you could move around in. the fidelity didn't matter. it worked because it contrasted with 2d games, which all just seemed like flat cartoons.

playing super mario 64 in 1996 felt like opening up a portal into narnia. you had to be there.

>>10224779
>But those games actually look realistic
And you're gonna think they look like shit in 20 years

>>10224794
>The game would not work, however, if the graphics weren't as perfect as they are
been deboonked by previous generation already that graphics mean shit in horror

>>10224816
Realistically where can we go from here beyond having your conciousness beamed into Silent Hill or something

>>10224794

>>10224764
I thought it was good, so did my friends. I don't recall anyone around me thinking it was the best thing ever, but things were improving and advancements impressed us. If you weren't part of that, your loss.

>>10224841
Nigga do you really think games are realistic right now? They still look like shit compared to reality. The level of detail in vidya worlds is extremely low in general. We don't even have good games with proper fluid physics yet

>>10224849
Shipwreckers mediocre eurojank though

>>10224764
Compared to early 3d games for PC or consoles, these games looked far more detailed. 3D games were starting to become viable as a mainstream choice.
It's not as if we couldn't see the blocks, but it was impressive for the time. I remember fearing at that time that if graphics were to become too realistic, they would bore me. And well, I personally don't care about most AAAs precisely because of that, although I fortunately have a decent amount of alternatives.

>>10224764
I rememer how it all happened. When Resident Evil came out, people were shocked. They were looking at their TVs and saying, "holy shit is this real?". One kid brought the game to an elderly home, and the boomers literally shat their pants when they saw it.
After a public hysteria, the congress called Shinji Mikami to testify if the scenes were real or not. He explained they weren't, but people didn't believe him. He tried to explain how the 3D graphics worked, but one true American patriot stood up and said, "woah woah woah buddy, enough with your technical babble, now tell it again so that an average guy like ME could understand". The court clapped to this hero. So after some hesitation, Mikami said that basically there were small goblins inside Playstation that quickly rotated the "polygons" inside. He was left off the hook because no one knew what "polygons" were.
Almost 30 years later, we still don't know how they did it, so probably Resident Evil was real all along.

>>10224884
Kek, saved

>>10224764
>the height of realism at the time
nah

>>10224932
>requires literally four times the RAM the PS1 has

>>10224945
Nevermind him. It's some autistic PCfag who likes to pretend his dadsims were popular.

another
>what was thing like
retarded faggot zoomer thread. fuck off and kys. the rule change was a mistake

>>10224860
Even fundamental things like character faces are still fucked up quite often. Only super high budget games are able to escape the uncanny valley when it comes to realism.

>>10224794
>set-top gaming
Never heard that term before, huh.

>>10224945
>>10224953
>everyone just coping really hard
This is you pair.
When it comes to heights, enjoy strolling up Mt. Fuji and pretend Everest doesn't exist.

>>10224860
>We don't even have good games with proper fluid physics yet
And you never will because it's too computationally intensive and a waste of processor time when other aspects of the game world are far more important. The only game where you will ever see proper fluid dynamics is in a "game" meant to simulate fluid dynamics and do nothing else.

That's a really retarded zoomer thought. Yeah they're "coping" while they're enjoying a 3rd person game.

>>10224961
literally soulless looking

>>10224884
wtf is this real

>>10225003
>you never will because it's too computationally intensive and a waste of processor time when other aspects of the game world are far more important
People could have said the same exact thing 30 years ago about physics for objects such as barrels, boxes, bodies, etc, yet they're in almost every game today and cost almost nothing to process with modern hardware

>>10224764
I think the first time I thought "wow, this looks so real...!" was probably when I played Half-Life 2's... demo. On the original Xbox. I was a kid, also playing on an (even at the time) old CRT so that probably changed my perception of it at the time

>>10225069
Yeah but we're approaching the reasonable peak of computing power. There's a reason a 4090 is like 100 times bigger and hotter than a top GPU in 1999.

>>10225204
>we're approaching the reasonable peak of computing power
Absolutely not. GPUs run hot because manufacturers are being lazy because people will still pay for them, not because we've "reached the peak and nothing else can be done".
Pentium 4 CPUs released in 2000 are infamous for running extremely hot yet we still have much more powerful CPUs today. The Xbox 360 ran so hot it would kill itself (RROD) but we still have more powerful hardware today

>>10225204
Realism is more than graphics alone, people are still laughing at dumb AI behavior in modern games (even when not bugged). Or npcs repeating the same dialog over and over.
Graphics may not see anymore massive leaps, but other systems will. And a game 20yrs from now will feel a lot different from todays as a result.

>>10224764
1. You didn't post what the game looked like. You post what it looks like blown up in resolution and removed from CRT effects.

2. Realism is a scale. So if you lived in the 1970s whats realistic for you is different than the 1990s

>>10224764
Sounds like you're coping because you didn't get to experience it

>>10225213
>Absolutely not.
home consumer-wise, yeah, we are. Unless you think people are going to start building server rack sized gaming rigs.

>>10225273
Have you not read the rest of my post?

>>10225312
Yeah, you listed a couple examples of outlier hardware with massive noted flaws. What point did you think you were making?

>>10225315
>t-they're just outliers
You're wrong, cope

>>10224764
>didn't get to live through the golden age of videogames
>will be bitter about it until the day he dies

>>10225325
I'm not the one that needs to cope. I've fully accepted the limits of our current technology.

>>10225329
If you genuinely believe that computers won't be more powerful than they are right now in 20 years you are absolutely delusional

>>10225337
>If you genuinely believe that computers won't be more powerful than they are right now in 20 years
Except I haven't claimed that. Learn to read, little American.

>>10224953
As opposed to his kiddy-corner games?

>>10224764
Why do you zoomers troll so damn hard? You guys don't even try either it just comes across as irritating.

I actually was about to hit post and say more answering your shit thread but I decided that would be an injustice to this board. This kind of crap needs to start getting removed from /vr/. This is /v/ level shit that has no need being here.

>>10224790
what is that gif from? thats not re1 is it?

>>10225502
obviously it's resident evil 1, fucking zoomers

>>10225528
i looked it up. its from vagrant story. thanks for nothing

i just really like the animation in it

>>10224764
I don’t think anyone thought it was "realistic" at the time. Resident Evil did however show off how games could be cinematic feeling on the new disc-based consoles.

>>10224764

It should be illegal for stinky zoomers to play old games.

>>10224764
They were referring to the pre-rendered backgrounds, not the character model polygons, you braindead zoomer.

It was realistic back then but not so much now that I'm seeing a real-life zombie making a thread about it.

>>10224764
I WAS 5 IT WAS REAL TO ME

>>10224764
DID YOU KNOW THAT THEY USED A PHOTOGRAPH OF A REAL CORPSE TO CREATE THE ZOMBIE THAT TURNS AROUND!?

>>10226028
I
gotta say I
did not KNO that

>>10226030
It's true. I was the corpse they used.

Opinions like this are why I generally hate zoomers playing retro games, or trying to understand retro technology and entertainment in general. Those who are mature enough to try to imagine a different time are fine, but those types are so few and far between.

>>10226247
I think it's genuinely difficult bordering on impossible for people who didn't live through that era to grasp just how fast technology was moving. I don't mean that as a slight either. It was a very crazy and exciting time that I don't think we'll see repeated anytime soon.

>>10226265
Yeah it's kind of weird growing up during that time period and realizing it was basically an anomaly. Games were constantly visually evolving at such a rapid rate that I kind of just took for granted that it would keep happening forever.

>>10225326
>live through the golden age of videogames

You fired up my nostalgia. Such a magical period of time to be a gamer, and we didn't even know it at the time, that was just "the way things were". Entirely new genres being born left and right, new systems with wacky hardware dropping, clearly visible and impressive graphical improvements for every year that went by.

>>10224768
I don't think modern games look realistic at all. they all have that ugly 8th gen desaturated cartoony uncanny valley GTA V-ish look to them...idk it's hard to explain.

>>10224779
Ok Cyberpunk I can understand, even though everything looks like plastic, but honestly a Bethesda game?? Their engine has always been dogshit and years behind the competition.

I remember growing up the big graphical leaps forward being Daytona, Gran Turismo, Tekken 3, Soul Calibur, Far Cry, Half-Life 2 and finally Crysis. Nothing really impressed after that point.

>>10226289
I remember hearing something like "That new computer will be obsolete by the time you leave the store!" all the time. Exaggerated, but there was a little bit of truth in it too.

>>10224764

We had different standards for 'realism' in games back in 1996.

>>10225326
golden age for 3D was late 6th-early 7th gen after the clunkyness and roughness of 3D was gone and before COD FPS slop took over, so around 2004-2007

>>10226330
I'm a PC-guy, I'll never understand this "gen"-terminology

>>10226337
yeah it's gay zoomer shit I just use it because it's easier to understand. the golden age for me was 1991-2007, so in gens that would be 4th gen-early 7th gen

>>10226289
And it was all hope-inspiring improvements, not like today's "you will own nothing and it can be taken away at any time, and your future entertainment will be machine generated slop compiled by algorithm"

>>10226351
that's how tech "evolves,' all the "good" tech from the old days is what led to the shit we have now. smartphones, tablets, and all that shit was inevitable. if Apple didn't do it someone else would've. tech was being made more accessible and more dumbed down since the start, it was inevitable we would reach were we are right now.

>>10226362
>tech was being made more accessible and more dumbed down since the start
This. I wouldn't be surprised if half of this board wouldn't be able to use a PC from the early 80s

>>10224961
Those badly modeled or uglier than the actor faces are just trolling, there's no way they can't get them right when we had this in 2003 with lip synch mouth movements and all.

>>10226524
Granted, Max hardly has more expressions in the game than concern and anger besides the default face, but those other pictures where a fair comparison because they also had the blank/default stare.

>>10224764
There was no 'cope', consumers in 1996 weren't thinking "oh man I bet a generation 20 years from now are gonna think I'm a loser for this one".

>>10224764
I don't remember realism being part of the hype for Resident Evil when it was released. Sure, it was 'more' realistic than most games at the time, but that's not the same as your exaggerated suggestion that it was seen as the "height of realism". So no, people did not truly believe that.

>>10225012
People in real life are literally soulless looking, because souls don't exist.