EPTThe future of graphics in games - Page 17
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
XiGua
Sweden3085 Posts
| ||
|
Perscienter
957 Posts
| ||
|
DetriusXii
Canada156 Posts
| ||
|
Southlight
United States11768 Posts
On August 13 2011 03:06 Perscienter wrote: This engine can apparently scale very well. In the video many objects are the same. That's probably the reason, why it runs well. I guess it will just introduce scaling and scanning of objects, while remaining taxing to the hdd and ram. If you further think about, it is not unrealistic to be able to run such graphics on a high-end pc in two to three years. Yeah, static objects at the moment are easy, presumably lighting effects and such aren't that far off, the main issue is the calculation of animation, esp with for instance lighting effects. Currently a rough example of how the system works is that if you have a 1024x768 res screen it calculates 786432 pixels' worth of "data" through the objects on the screen. For relatively static stuff this is straightforward, as you only have to look at the object map and calculate what those pixels have to be. But then when you start adding effects, you have to calculate the motion of those objects/motion of those effects and factor that into the 786432 pixels' worth of data. That's a lot of realtime calculation that's needed, and given that games tend to be like 30+ fps that's REALLY a lot. This is why people atm are skeptical about it being able to run on current hardware (CPU/RAM/etc. not GPU), and why the engine needed to show efficient calculation to prove skeptics wrong. Unfortunately as the demo stayed on only static objects there was no indication about the higher level real-time calculation load, and so techie concerns regarding the industrial viability (ie. whether current hardware can actually pull it off) remains. For people who cried scam, though, the video (if you can understand the technical concept) makes enough sense that you accept the theory as viable and turn toward the logistics. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
| ||
|
Latham
9593 Posts
| ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
| ||
|
rezzan
Sweden329 Posts
On August 02 2011 00:54 WniO wrote: the problem with this is they cant render it in real time, or animate for that matter. yes they can? O_o | ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
you obviously haven't done any voxel animation if you think you can do realtime animations in a world like that at ANY playable framerate. i've seen single character models barely break 40fps being animated. | ||
|
rezzan
Sweden329 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:46 Urnhardt wrote: was excited when i heard about this last year,.. except sorry to burst your bubble guys but http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam yeah lets all trust a guy that made a game with gfx from 1993 which involves 8-bit gfx at a best. ofc he want it to be a scam,with that awesome gfx notch wont stand a chance with his minecraft. | ||
|
Misanthrophic13
Bahrain22 Posts
This thread reminds me of this charlatan. Marko Fraudin. | ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:48 rezzan wrote: yeah lets all trust a guy that made a game with gfx from 1993 which involves 8-bit gfx at a best. ofc he want it to be a scam,with that awesome gfx notch wont stand a chance with his minecraft. please do some research before you make a larger fool of yourself. thanks | ||
|
rezzan
Sweden329 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:48 Urnhardt wrote: you obviously haven't done any voxel animation if you think you can do realtime animations in a world like that at ANY playable framerate. i've seen single character models barely break 40fps being animated. well do some research? also do remember this is in the FUTURE. meaning all will be differ from today. they show the game played in realtime with over 50 fps in a video. | ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:49 rezzan wrote: well do some research? also do remember this is in the FUTURE. meaning all will be differ from today. they show the game played in realtime with over 50 fps in a video. do some research? i've worked with 11 people that work with voxel animation and a lot more, what have you done? read this thread? i went to expression arts school for 5 1/2 years man.. pretty damn sure about what i'm talking about | ||
|
rezzan
Sweden329 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:50 Urnhardt wrote: do some research? i've worked with 11 people that work with voxel animation and a lot more, what have you done? read this thread? well arent you awesome? also one of the videos in notchs's blog is just the same old polygon gfx we got today, with a little mod, anyone can do that today, except maybe valve, they are stuck with VE bollocks | ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:52 rezzan wrote: well arent you awesome? also one of the videos in notchs's blog is just the same old polygon gfx we got today, with a little mod, anyone can do that today, except maybe valve, they are stuck with VE bollocks its fairly simple to understand. to run a world like they show in that video, with 100% pure atoms or voxel makeup, there is no computer in the world that can stream data that fast, especially when any AI or animation is involved. | ||
|
Hunterai
Thailand842 Posts
| ||
|
rezzan
Sweden329 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:54 Urnhardt wrote: its fairly simple to understand. to run a world like they show in that video, with 100% pure atoms or voxel makeup, there is no computer in the world that can stream data that fast, especially when any AI or animation is involved. you say this is your "area of expertise" yet it seems like you talk out of the blue with whatever make sense in your head. 20-50 videos on the internet proves it. also im gonna say it once again. any mod,engine or whatever wont launch this year.. next year..or the year after that. by the time these engines comes to power we'll have sucha good computers that this mod will be silly. also in a video and review i saw they clearly said engines as such doesnt require much GPU or CPU power as of now. a gaming laptop could play it out with 50 Fps in realtime. now this arent going anywhere, i've said what i wanted,im done. do some research before you open your mouth son,. | ||
|
Urnhardt
United States110 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:59 rezzan wrote: you say this is your "area of expertise" yet it seems like you talk out of the blue with whatever make sense in your head. 20-50 videos on the internet proves it. also im gonna say it once again. any mod,engine or whatever wont launch this year.. next year..or the year after that. by the time these engines comes to power we'll have sucha good computers that this mod will be silly. also in a video and review i saw they clearly said engines as such doesnt require much GPU or CPU power as of now. a gaming laptop could play it out with 50 Fps in realtime. now this arent going anywhere, i've said what i wanted,im done. do some research before you open your mouth son,. wtf are you even talking about? far from my area of expertise, but looks like charlie brown wrote your post dude. womp womp womp. ya maybe in 5-10 years this could be feasible, depending on how hard drive and memory speeds increase. but for the near future, impossible. guaranteed edit: i also find it hiliarous that your first reply to me was something about "believing some programmer making graphics from 1993" or some shit, yet you're battling back saying you've watched 50 youtube videos on it. you're basically criticizing yourself since you've done your "research" and this is completely viable, show me a retail game that runs using ANY of the mentioned engines in that post. please. i'll wait. | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On August 13 2011 05:48 rezzan wrote: yeah lets all trust a guy that made a game with gfx from 1993 which involves 8-bit gfx at a best. ofc he want it to be a scam,with that awesome gfx notch wont stand a chance with his minecraft. he MADE A GAME WITH ANIMATION. that means he probably knows more about animation in games than 99.99% of the world. | ||
| ||
