article on faking humans

[kisrael]

from my blog at http://kisrael.com:

The Uncanny Valley is a scientific study on how people react to robots...the main take away seems to be that there's a certain stage of "cyber-realism", right before resemblance to "real human" is complete, that people react very negatively to. I think this has some implications for modern videogames, modern games with realistic characters might be starting to approach that valley. Maybe that's why some game makers are going the other direction, most notably Miyamoto's change of style for the new "Zelda" game.

 

It's just a thought...but I have noticed myself getting kind of irritated with the characters in some of the "more realistic" games, in a way I don't with Nintendo's "kiddy" look.

 

And then of course, given the recent Sniper wave in Maryland, I'm filling not entirely comfortable with the rewarded-head-shot, fairly realistic animations of Timesplitters 2....gawd, maybe I am getting old.

[Mikau]

i think that stuff in games shouldnt look 100% real. if it is too real, it seems like you are watching a movie rather than playing a game (final fantasy comes to mind here )

[kisrael]

I've yet to see anything 100% real, including the Final Fantasy movie...

[eric_ruck]

Heh, I really liked the Final Fantasy movie though...anyway...

 

Reminds me of something tangentially related. I remember working out with a friend, practicing punches on a heavy bag. Used a floor standing bag with my friend behind it, holding it so it wouldn't slide. I had to make him step to one side, since I couldn't stand punching the bag with his head hovering over it...too much like punching him.

 

Video games may face that issue. OK, I've been playing Hitman 2, but it's not really realistic. When Hitmat 27 crosses Saving Private Ryan, I think that's when I hang up the modern systems for good and limit myself to just Breakout and Tempest.

 

Eric

[kisrael]

Oh, I liked the Final Fantasy movie as well, even if I rolled my eyes at some of the "Gaia is really blue goop" or whatever the hell it was near the end.

 

But over the years, FPSs are going to come closer and closer to training simulations. I mean, the US Army already has its own. Yeah, we already have violent movies, but these video games are going to be different; movie quality, but it's *you* deciding to pull the trigger. I don't think there should be any legislation or anything, but it does give one pause.

 

Hell, what if AI gets good enough that at some point there's a reason to feel bad about pulling the plug? Think of the game "Sea Man" or whatever the heck it was, but with really sophisticated AI...

 

Just some thoughts.

[Nukey Shay]

Games that require hard choices have been around for some time...the first one that I can remember is Ultima V.

 

"The name is Sea...Man." -Sea Man

[kisrael]

You mean at the begining, where it asks you moral questions with no clear single right answer to determine your character's attributes?

 

If that's what it is, I dunno, this is a different kettle of fish...I'm more thinking of realistic games (and in general, few FPS games make 'live and let live' a viable option) and/or "real" artificial intelligence.

[Nukey Shay]

No, during the game...like the character who will give up a bit of crucial info only if you turn some other NPC over to the government, or the kids in that dungeon room who attack you after you rescue them.

[AtariDude]

Realism is good is a waste of time. The more realistic a game gets, the more often the less fun it is. People play games sometimes to escape from reality and do things that they could never do in the real world. They should spend more time making games fun and less time on making them look realistic.

[Raijin Z]

R4's opening cinema is still the greatest piece of near-real 3D animation I've ever seen.

[kisrael]

What's R4 again?

[Pie]

Realism is good is a waste of time. The more realistic a game gets, the more often the less fun it is. People play games sometimes to escape from reality and do things that they could never do in the real world. They should spend more time making games fun and less time on making them look realistic.

 

That’s not necessarily the case…there are plenty of games that work well because of their realism. How about Operation Flashpoint or any simulation games? There are games that are unrealistic in their setting, but benefit from realism in the game itself.

 

There are plenty of games where the realism helps to immerse you in the game and if it wasn't there it wouldn't be so successful. Dues ex or half life for example - not very realistic in themselves, but realistic enough for things to seem logical.

[kisrael]

Oh, I missed responding to this.

 

Yeah, pure realism is not neccesarily a worthy goal... I mean who wants to play "traffic jam 2004: bumper 2 bumper". (On the other hand, stuff like the Sims and Animcal Crossing proves that "mundane" things can be engrossing when done right.)

 

But "hyper-realism"--where the central premise is "fantastic" (you have super powers, you're a heavily armed space marine, etc etc) but the details are about as true as you'd expect, can be fun. They let someone try out a different life for a bit, and it feels "real", as opposed to just being abstract-ish or iconic, like classic games.

 

And of course, sometimes too much reality isn't a good thing. I think most people prefer the WWII style dogfights of Star Wars to the "realistic physics" of, say, Babylon 5. In some ways, Star Wars is more real, because we can more closely identify with fighter craft banking and roaring than we can with how a fighter would really act in a vacuum. (Real life starship combat would almost certainly be far far far too fast for human pilots to deal with anyway...)