With the work being conducted to increase the capability of graphics rendering while reducing power consumption, heat production and overall size VR, AR, and MR applications will probably be very hard to tell the difference between what is real and virtual.
Most action scenes mix in real life footage, which excludes them from the "100% CG" criteria. Can you think of any that don't? (And ideally a segment that goes on for longer than 30 seconds.)
But, those are all examples of why photorealistic CG is fiction. We've never achieved it in video.
I'd like to dig further into what you mean by photorealistic CG being fiction? There are still tricky areas that are actively being researched, but I've seen plenty of CG assets that are photorealistic.
What do you think is technically missing from CG video, that makes it lack realism?
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=author:sillysaurus3%20%22real%...
To answer your question precisely: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15294721
I'd love to debate this with you, but few people seem interested.
Here's the criteria for "CG video": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15698859
If you approach the subject with an open mind, you'll find that we really haven't achieved those goals. But the most I've managed to wring from people is a grudging admission that even though we haven't done it yet, we could do it if we tried. I disagree.