This absolutely blew my mind. Check out this video.
In case the clues didnt give it away, what you just saw was not an interview with a real person. "Emily" is a tech demo, a computer generated character created by the company Image Metrics. If you study the video with a fine tooth comb, you can notice a few imperfections. But I'll be honest - had this video been aired on the nightly news I would have never given her humanity a second thought. Wow.
Though the awesome factor of this video is in and of itself worthy of a post, the plot thickens a little bit when you find out that Image Metrics specializes in video game and film CG. Care to up the anti a bit more? They have worked in conjunction with Rockstar to recreate human animations for several of the Grand Theft Auto games.
I tend to be a pretty staunch defender of video game violence. I do it not because I harbor within me some sort of demented desire to hurt people, but precisely because I don't. And when you read that parents are now more terrifed of video games than of porn or alcohol, it tends to drive you batty. "The devil you don't" I suppose.
But despite my support and enjoyment of video game violence, and the amazing technological achievement that "Emily' represents - putting the two together (the next logical step) gives me pause.
Image Metrics works on GTA games. Image Metrics created Emily. What if Emily was in the next GTA game? Could I pull the virtual trigger on a character as "realistic" as her? Media violence in any form is ok in my book because its not real. Emily, as it turns out, is still not real, no matter how real she appears. But then again, how real did you think she was when you started watching the video?
Obviously there are multiple obstacles to realism that makes games games as far as your mind is concerned. For example the need to insert a disk, or the need for a screen to project them on, or the need for external devices to manipulate them with. Subtle details that continually remind you that you are playing a game, no matter how immersive it might be. And for the moment, those clues continue to separate the virtual from the real - even if game characters looked and responded like Emily.
But inevitably, technology will do as technology does and find ways to overcome all obstacles in its path.
What the eyes see the mind believes. If Emily is a part of the future of gaming, GTA 7 or 8 might be something worth actually worrying about - even for a virtual war criminal like me.
Could you carjack Emily?
In case the clues didnt give it away, what you just saw was not an interview with a real person. "Emily" is a tech demo, a computer generated character created by the company Image Metrics. If you study the video with a fine tooth comb, you can notice a few imperfections. But I'll be honest - had this video been aired on the nightly news I would have never given her humanity a second thought. Wow.
Though the awesome factor of this video is in and of itself worthy of a post, the plot thickens a little bit when you find out that Image Metrics specializes in video game and film CG. Care to up the anti a bit more? They have worked in conjunction with Rockstar to recreate human animations for several of the Grand Theft Auto games.
I tend to be a pretty staunch defender of video game violence. I do it not because I harbor within me some sort of demented desire to hurt people, but precisely because I don't. And when you read that parents are now more terrifed of video games than of porn or alcohol, it tends to drive you batty. "The devil you don't" I suppose.
But despite my support and enjoyment of video game violence, and the amazing technological achievement that "Emily' represents - putting the two together (the next logical step) gives me pause.
Image Metrics works on GTA games. Image Metrics created Emily. What if Emily was in the next GTA game? Could I pull the virtual trigger on a character as "realistic" as her? Media violence in any form is ok in my book because its not real. Emily, as it turns out, is still not real, no matter how real she appears. But then again, how real did you think she was when you started watching the video?
Obviously there are multiple obstacles to realism that makes games games as far as your mind is concerned. For example the need to insert a disk, or the need for a screen to project them on, or the need for external devices to manipulate them with. Subtle details that continually remind you that you are playing a game, no matter how immersive it might be. And for the moment, those clues continue to separate the virtual from the real - even if game characters looked and responded like Emily.
But inevitably, technology will do as technology does and find ways to overcome all obstacles in its path.
What the eyes see the mind believes. If Emily is a part of the future of gaming, GTA 7 or 8 might be something worth actually worrying about - even for a virtual war criminal like me.
Could you carjack Emily?
Leave a comment