EPTThey can't create art that hasn't been drawn, and the bottleneck to better graphics in games is the art budget not the hardware or engine.
The future of graphics in games - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Soleron
United Kingdom1324 Posts
They can't create art that hasn't been drawn, and the bottleneck to better graphics in games is the art budget not the hardware or engine. | ||
|
Cyba
Romania221 Posts
1. There's nothing that new about using atoms, the only reason they weren't always used is because of computation limitations 2. As we get better graphical boards poligons can get smaller and smaller. How small do you think a poligon will get? That's right the minimum size will be similar to those atoms, but besides bringing the same quality it will bring more speed because you don't need distinct atoms to describe some things, a poligon aproximation will do without ever beeing spotted by a human eye. Seems to me like there's little new and even less that's impressive in that vid. | ||
|
eohs
United States677 Posts
| ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
On August 03 2011 00:48 Cyba wrote: It's a bit of bogus imo here's why. 1. There's nothing that new about using atoms, the only reason they weren't always used is because of computation limitations 2. As we get better graphical boards poligons can get smaller and smaller. How small do you think a poligon will get? ye but as I understood the video they have found a way to dramatically decrease the computational work needed to render PER atom, so that you can have more complex objects. I don't know how they do it, but it sounds interesting and I would like to know more =) On August 03 2011 00:47 Soleron wrote: It's an investment scam as they've been around for over a year with nothing but this video to show. They can't create art that hasn't been drawn, and the bottleneck to better graphics in games is the art budget not the hardware or engine. The bottleneck is definitively the hardware and the computational methods! I dont know if this is a scam or not though | ||
|
KarlMax
France10 Posts
Waiting for a next update | ||
|
_fool
Netherlands685 Posts
Looks like they're doing just that. | ||
|
Southlight
United States11768 Posts
On August 03 2011 01:13 _fool wrote: There's a famous saying in software: "Don't make the demo look done". Looks like they're doing just that. Nah, they mentioned how they didn't have proper lighting at that stage, etc. It's an update presentation about how far they've come since their original video a year ago. Reasonable IMO. | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On August 02 2011 01:02 Morfildur wrote: Can't listen to the video atm since i'm at work, but it reminds me of the old Voxel Technology (Old meaning: DOS Games used it) => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voxel . The first game that used it iirc was "Comanche" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comanche_series) Voxel technology has started to be used in modern game engines as well. Even commercial ones. C4 engine is well known for having the first Voxel terrain editor in a commercial engine (I believe it even beat CryEngine2 in the timelnie). It also has an upgrade coming soon that will allow Voxel blob particles (similar to the Portal 2 "Gel" particles - which may be Voxels too I'm not sure). The lead developer of the engine releaesd a video of it recently - - Those are all Voxels with full lighting and great performance. Back on topic, it's all marketing at this point. It's too early to be anything but skeptical until the SDK is actually public. | ||
|
xHassassin
United States270 Posts
I'm not sure if this has been posted yet. I'm pretty sure their first video addressed that the technology they were using wasn't new, but they were able to develop some sort of search algorithm so that all the individual atoms didn't have to be rendered at the same time which would make performance increase a whole lot. | ||
|
RA
Latvia791 Posts
| ||
|
Temporarykid
Canada362 Posts
| ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On August 03 2011 02:06 xHassassin wrote: http://notch.tumblr.com/ I'm not sure if this has been posted yet. I'm pretty sure their first video addressed that the technology they were using wasn't new, but they were able to develop some sort of search algorithm so that all the individual atoms didn't have to be rendered at the same time which would make performance increase a whole lot. LOL Notch just raised in sympathy. He is exactly right. | ||
|
epikAnglory
United States1120 Posts
| ||
|
Maand
326 Posts
To put it bluntly, because each atom takes memory, if there are vast numbers of them. Well you know. Edit: Read the first paragraph in Notch's blog about the thing. | ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
There is no way to objectively judge graphics quality I always loved the quake artstyle, where you can have a few plattforms floating in space and that's the whole level. All gameplay, no bullshit. All those "pretty" graphics are creating visual clutter and are getting in the way of actual gameplay. | ||
|
BadgerBadger8264
Netherlands409 Posts
I do not understand graphics that much, so can anyone enlighten me on why this is so hard to load with modern/even next generation CPUs? It looks like almost the exact same graphics as CryEngine 2 on max, maybe a BIT better? He explained it in the video; it runs slower because it's made with particles instead of polygons; a polygon is basically an "area" between a certain amount of corners (think triangle/square), which draw very fast, whereas having very, very tiny atoms everywhere works really, really slow because you have to substitute a single polygon with a lot of atoms (think 10000+) to draw the polygon. On the plus side, it looks a lot nicer and allows artists for FAR greater detail (think real life level of detail), but it works way, way slower. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam Voxels are old news. There's pros and cons of using it. The video speaks of some pros and ignore the cons. Because they want to create hype to get funding. | ||
|
Destro
Netherlands1206 Posts
On August 02 2011 18:04 Xapti wrote: Until they solve those problems, it seems to me that this technology would be most useful for artists using 3D programs. If a modeling program could be used to use this technology natively or pseudo-natively, it would save so much on processing power in workstation graphics, since most of what they deal with is static modeling. This use would still require getting a hold of modifying these voxel models in their voxel form as opposed to just a polygon converter though. we already have render proxies, dont worry, 3d artists arent under stress for finding ways of high polycounts  | ||
|
| ||
| ||
