Key Takeaways
- Photorealism in video games is mundane.
- True artistic direction in graphics allows for more visually appealing and timeless games compared to photorealism.
- Most game genres don’t necessarily benefit from raw photorealism, as art direction is key to create visually engaging experiences.
There’s a certain subset of gamers who seem to think that the pinnacle of video game visuals will be achieved on the day that video game graphics can’t be separated from real life, but like any media, realism isn’t necessarily the point of video games. Even when the technology for photorealistic graphics is perfected, that doesn’t mean the art of video games will peak.
What Does Photorealism Even Mean?
In the most literal sense, photorealism simply means “realistic lighting“. When you use a camera to capture a photo or video, there are real photons entering the lens and forming the image on film or the camera sensor. The same way that your eyes work to form an image on your retina. Thus, when your brain sees a photograph, you perceive it as an image of a real object. The light, shadows, and textures all look and behave as your brain expects them to in real life.
Simulating how light works in rendered computer graphics is fundamental to making your brain think it’s looking at something real rather than generated by a computer. Even though you might not consciously know why something looks off, your brain is trained on your life experience and billions of years of evolution to know what real light looks like.
Game developers have created endless “tricks” to get video games to look more realistic, since actually simulating how real light works (e.g. ray-tracing) was too computationally expensive to do in real time. Now, modern GPUs are capable, at least at the high-end, of rendering graphics that are completely ray-traced in real time at playable frame rates. This has pushed games closer to complete photorealism than ever before. Combined with advancements in 3D materials and simulations of water, fur, and other complex systems, it seems that photorealism in games isn’t that far off.
Photorealism Is Mundane
The thing is, by its very nature, true photorealism is mundane. If you want to see photorealism, look out the window. Even when we watch videos of real places, that imagery has been processed to change and enhance the color and lighting. Rarely do media creators aim to put on-screen what the eye sees. Just compare behind-the-scenes footage of a film like The Matrix to the final product, and you’ll see all the magic of cinema stripped away.
These media are “photorealistic” in the sense that they (by and large) show us a scene lit with real lighting, but not only is the lighting carefully staged, the post-processing is artistic, not realistic.
This is even more critical for video games, where the character is in control of the camera. That’s why every direction you look in a game like Horizon Forbidden West is like a painting. Just have a look through any of the mods for Cyberpunk 2077 which make the game more photorealistic. Yes, it’s technically impressive to look at, but it makes the game less visually attractive, not more.
The Pinnacle of Graphics Is Artistic Freedom
There’s a common refrain in the video game world that games with good “artistic direction” age far better than games that attempt a more realistic look. One reason this happens is that the best realistic graphics of the day quickly look ridiculous as technology advances, but of course, when we achieve true photorealism that will be moot because the improvements on that front will cease. In fact, there are already people who feel that the jump from, for example, the PS4 to PS5 isn’t particularly large. Now, it is a massive jump, but perceptually, most people feel the overall frames generated by both systems are pretty similar. Not like the jump from the PlayStation to the PlayStation 2!
For me, the point of advancing graphics technology isn’t to achieve photorealism. It’s to allow artists to put on the screen whatever it is they imagine in their mind’s eye. If that vision includes photorealism, then so be it. If, on the other hand, it’s something like Ratchet & Clank where ray-tracing effects were used to polish the game’s nearly flawless CG movie aesthetic, that’s just as legitimate.
Despite it’s technical limitations, Nintendo regularly releases games on the Nintendo Switch, that are far more visually appealing than boring realistic-looking games on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X. Likewise, I’d much rather watch the original animated Lion King than the photorealistic CG remake, which loses exactly 100% of the artistic appeal of the original and all the flavor in the storytelling. Sadly, people throw money at these photorealistic snorefests whether in games or movies, but the most interesting works don’t care much for the mundane.
Few Games Should Chase Photorealism
I’d argue that for most game types, and most visual directions, photorealism probably isn’t the way to go. Some games, such as Unrecord or Gran Turismo are prime examples of photorealism implemented where it should be.
Likewise, realistic military shooters, and simulators of various stripes all benefit from photorealism. Most games don’t fall into these categories, however, and though they can certainly benefit from advanced graphics technology, raw photorealism can never replace art direction.
