-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Little Australian games company invents technology 100,000 times better
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
Always-honest
Banned
when? and please, no more jaggies.
AshMcCool said:
witch means my camera isn't even 100,000 X better than the cameras Kurosawa used in his professionally filmed movies yet some small clip I recorded not really knowing what the hell I'm doing still look as good as what him & a big team of pros was able to do,
I mean kids make levels in Little Big Planet 1,2 that look better than PS2 games are you telling me that the tools in Little Big Planet is 100,000 X better than PS2 Dev Kits?
(not @ you)
Cow Mengde said:
I know all about not having artists available. I'm a programmer, but at my last consulting gig I wound up using Blender and the source from Elephant's Dream and Sintel to generate footage at high enough of a resolution for my software to be useful. Turned out to be a great solution for a variety of reasons.
Since they say they have mesh conversion tools now, they should look at Elephant's Dream, Big Buck Bunny, and Sintel, all three are open source movies with very generous licenses. Since they're not meant to be rendered at anywhere near realtime, they went nuts with the polygon count. If they can import the grass and fur meshes from BBB and animate them, then they'll have a tech demo! Maybe even just run the movie in realtime... obviously the lighting will be wrong, but it'd be a good start.
And they've got a scanner to scan real-life objects now. Surely they can find more than a few rocks, even in Australia?
In short, their demo looks terrible in exactly the ways naysayers expect, constantly repeating the fact that they aren't artists isn't going to help when they announced in the same video that they've come up with the tools to solve the lack of artists problem.
And yes, the lack of animation is a huge problem, it's nice that they say they've solved it, but they need to show it. Lack of shaders is a huge problem too.
Visualante
Member
Has John Carmack commented on this yet?
Visualante
Member
With what they have, it is very promising. You should see how early computer graphics progressed.jett said:
Always-honest
Banned
please pump an insane amount of money in this and hurry the fuck up.
Visualante
Member
It requires the whole industry to be on the same page, we're talking consortiums like Blu Ray, OpenGL. Not just "pump in the money"Always-honest said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPPLooLfEXE
BriareosGAF
Member
An old coworker of mine was a voxel Kool-Aid drinker. Although he at least had the guts to back it up by releasing a *GBA* game using the tech--one of the Mary Kate & Ashley games, no less.
True story.
True story.
this is a farce. all they're doing is cloud storing game assets and you're essentially supposed to stream these online, which is ridiculous.
bluray at this point is enough, storage isnt even the problem its having the hardware powerful enough to render these details.
good job on people seeing through it, LOL at people believing it.
bluray at this point is enough, storage isnt even the problem its having the hardware powerful enough to render these details.
good job on people seeing through it, LOL at people believing it.
Always-honest
Banned
Fine, do that then. and pump in insane amounts of money. Just to be sure.Visualante said:
from what i remember of this last time i saw it, the developer(s) seemed insane. like literally insane.
its just LOD scaling would be my guess, which is nothing new.
theres always some hype about a new engine that is going to change everything (that Republic: The Revolution game from 2003 also had an 'unlimited' detail engine that was going to revolutionise everything)
its just LOD scaling would be my guess, which is nothing new.
theres always some hype about a new engine that is going to change everything (that Republic: The Revolution game from 2003 also had an 'unlimited' detail engine that was going to revolutionise everything)
Asskicker064
Member
Neat, a rock!
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
Who the fuck is smart enough to do that, but dumb enough to upload a video that's only 480p (not that 720 or 1080 look great on youtube)... but still damn...
plagiarize
Banned
well, rendering like this will be very resolution dependant. might be the case that they aren't yet running at anything more than 480p, in which case uploading the video at 720p would look pretty bad for them. given that they're only at 20fps in this video, i'd be amazed if they're running in HD yet.Brettison said:
Pardon my complete ignorance in the matter but, as I have read about the issues with animating voxels, and assuming this guys are legit, could a game use a hybrid engine in which the more static elements in a game (i.e. ground, trees, cactuses) are made with this technology and characters are made with polygons?
NullPointer
Member
If I was them I'd get to work night and day scanning in real world items and forming a catalog of assets. Allow conversion of these unlimited-detail items back to polygons of various levels of detail, and then expose the operation as a service that studios could license for access to these assets.
Is anybody doing something like this? A shared real-world asset library? You'd think with the cost of producing this stuff you could make a killing.
Is anybody doing something like this? A shared real-world asset library? You'd think with the cost of producing this stuff you could make a killing.
I NEED SCISSORS
Banned
Smells like bullshit.
Tenkei said:
no it's not!
I said that if this tech was 100,000 better than what's already out today then the guy wouldn't have to point out that he is not good at art because if it was 100,000 better even his bad art would look as good as whats out today, & the other guy said that didn't make sense & brought up Kurosawa & said that by my logic anyone could be as good as him because cameras are better today, which isn't what I was saying but I showed that you don't have to be as good as him but because the tech is better it will look better even if you're not good at filming, & the fact that my camera isn't 100,000 X better than what Kurosawa used to film his movies only drive home the fact that if this tech was really 100,000 X better than what devs have now this guy's bad art would still look as good as what's out there now.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Ahh! I remember when they originally posted that video a year ago. Good to see some advancement. Will wait for it to be implemented in a game before I start judging it.
Not sure why they keep mentioning games - there's nothing in there that's relevant to games. Drawing tons of instanced objects is one thing; but others have already mentioned lighting and shaders. All of this looks static - what about dynamic objects, skinned objects? What about physics and AI? How are you gonna integrate all that with game logic and sound?
They should release a standalone demo for me to run so I can see for myself.
Anyway, if anyone wants to play a first person shooter game built with voxels:
http://voxelstein3d.sourceforge.net/
More of a demo than a full game, but it demosntrates animation, lighting, collision, physics and destructability. Hope you have a quad core.
Anyway, if anyone wants to play a first person shooter game built with voxels:
http://voxelstein3d.sourceforge.net/
More of a demo than a full game, but it demosntrates animation, lighting, collision, physics and destructability. Hope you have a quad core.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
the statement is kind of true. you need massive storage for the data, then you only show the "atoms" on screen that would be visible from a given perspective. but it seems that collision is a big problem.
I have much more faith in Atomontage Engine than this.
http://www.atomontage.com
http://www.atomontage.com/?id=gallery
http://www.youtube.com/user/AtomontageEngine#g/u
http://www.atomontage.com
http://www.atomontage.com/?id=gallery
http://www.youtube.com/user/AtomontageEngine#g/u
It's not about the tools you have, but what you create with them. It would be hard to argue that Earth Defence Force 2017 on 360 looks better than Metroid Prime on GC. If that doesn't make any sense to you, then I'm afraid that we will never be able to understand each other.onQ123 said:
Until they show some animation and better lighting implementation, i really can't see much use in this for gaming.
Right now polygons are very effective for realtime rendering, collision handling and animation, this tech seems to be only good for displaying detailed models so far.
I'd rather see some more developments in lighting tech, that would make a much bigger impact. And it seems realtime raytracing is only a few generations off.
I recently tried this renderer on my gtx580 and its mindblowing how fast it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqJyD7M_WQg
There's also a demo you can try, but you need to have a cuda enabled nvidia card.
And i really don't like their attitude
Right now polygons are very effective for realtime rendering, collision handling and animation, this tech seems to be only good for displaying detailed models so far.
I'd rather see some more developments in lighting tech, that would make a much bigger impact. And it seems realtime raytracing is only a few generations off.
I recently tried this renderer on my gtx580 and its mindblowing how fast it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqJyD7M_WQg
There's also a demo you can try, but you need to have a cuda enabled nvidia card.
onQ123 said:
So... you're saying that if I buy Wacom Intuos4 then suddenly I will be able to create a much better pictures than professional artists would do with a cheap tablet? Great.
The guy in the video compared objects like trees, rocks, grass, veins etc. that were created using this UD tech to those objects in current games (Crysis 2, Bulletstorm, Just Cause 2) and they do look much better.
User Name Here
Member
JWong said:
They're also using a polygon converter, so whatever is used with polygons can be used with this technology when it's done.
.nimrod said:
Imagine if they combined Ray Tracing for lighting, UD for models, and John Carmack's idea for textures with infinite resolution...