Quote

Loads of computer graphics equals a terrible video in my book.

I worked for seven years doing computer graphics to pay my way through graduate school - I have no romance with computer work. There's no amount of phony graphics and things making sound effects on the screen that can change that.

Once we can do Pixar-quality graphics rendered in real time with interactivity, I could see games costing $200 million to make, and all of a sudden you have to sell a lot of games just to break even, so I'm a little worried someone's going to do that.

With our next generation hardware, polygon rendering will probably be an area we'll get more heavily into.

The minimum we should hope for with any display technology is that it should do no harm.

There are already a lot of devices in our lives that have rich text or the ability to handle graphics. Our devices are designed to be understood in less than a quarter of a second.

PC gaming has always been strong, and I see it surviving for quite a few more years. It will be around for at least as long as people use PCs.

In computer animation, every detail has to be thought out, designed, modeled, shaded, placed and lit. The more you add, the more computer memory you need.

I always get sick of these conversations where people are so obsessed with pixels, with high definition, and even with technology in general. I find it just dull and heartless. And so I wanted to use only the worst machines.

The days when you needed amazing Silicon Graphics machines to run animation software are gone now.