Apparently very soon we shall have rocks that look like rocks Seriously though, this may advance graphics and gameplay to a true open world environment where you really can do anything that you could do in real life. Once I own a deca-core 9Ghz cpu 25gb ram and an 8Ghz gpu that is. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gAbgBu8R4&feature=player_embedded"]Unlimited Detail Real-Time Rendering Technology Preview 2011 [HD]‏ - YouTube[/ame]
if this is true, i weep for game development times. also lol at the top comment ("minecraft looks better")
Indeed. It is a premise that i have dreamt about for years, the ability to do things in a game that i can do in real life, not just preset parts of the world that only do one thing. Whilst this video appears to be absolute bs, the goal is what i am more interested in. What do you guys reckon we are looking at time wise and spec wise before we can build environments from the "atom" up and then attribute them with real world physics? I do find it anoying that my RPG doesn't seem to be able to destroy flowers let alone buildings or just the ground in almost every game. Every true soldier knows that the quickest way to dig a fox hole is to use an rpg.
I wouldn't guarantee it'll happen, simply due to the time it'd take to build such an environment. That is unless they go down the minecraft route and algorithmically generate the landscape. As for being able to destroy flowers, buildings or the ground, try minecraft or terraria.
Minecraft is awesome in so many ways, not quite what i meant though. I don't know whether it is possible for standard model computers to advance enough to allow for what is proposed, without havng to dedicate a room to a bank of server type models and a massive electric bill, but perhaps quantum computing will be the solution.
They are snake oil salesmen, the technique that they are using is called voxels and it's cow poo. You cannot do what they are claiming you can with current technology, it's impossible, there simply isn't enough space on a pc to store the data and, even if you could, there is no way that you can calculate lighting for the scenes. They are showing faked up, off line renders and fractals (procedurally generated images that don't store data). They are also pompous asses.
I was a little dubious when i saw the video (due to power and spec requirements) but lolled quite a bit when i followed the link to youtube and read some of the comments and then did a bit of googling and was confused as to why they are claiming this is possible; i can't see the benefit other than to wind up a few people. So how long do you think before this level of gameplay environment is available?
This isn't about graphics. It's about technology. Graphics will get better because the technology got better. It's not so far fetched to believe that these guys came up with some kind of processing trick to make this feasible. I think their demo looks pretty good but I'd have to see it real time to believe it. I'd love to see the proof that this technology works. I'd love to watch them and catch their IPO. I can really see this going somewhere.
Kinect was demo'd walking around a virtual world and picking a fish out of a pond. I don't doubt they can do this but seen enough disappointments with new technology to not hold my breath it'll revolutionise gaming or even turn into anything decent. Also I'd end up wanting to nut the commentator if I worked with him day to day
Yeah he was immensely irritating. Re: the technology, I can't see why it isn't possible to perform small scale, however a sprawling landscape filled with ncps, trees, grass etc all built from the tiniest of building blocks, the 'atoms' he speaks of, will be an absolute impossibility with todays pcs and that's not incorporating physics in to the mix. Current specs for the latest games are amazingly high for what is essentially a low graphic game in comparison. Kind of like comparing processing power for frogger/toady on the speccy compared to crysis 2 on the pc.
I haven't even watched the video but the words "unlimited detail" is putting me right off. In my experience computer games (even high-end, top-spec ones) are ALWAYS a trade off. NOTHING is unlimited. There are always limits. Streaming time off disc, disc storage space, CPU time, loadable entities, alpha sorting, blah blah, etc etc. What you add in one area comes out of another. The real trick of making computer games is the smoke and mirrors that hides all of the optimisation you have to do just to make the damn thing run at a reasonable FPS while still looking spiffing. But hey...I might be wrong.
Hey whadayaknow? I was kinda right (not that I understand what the hell it's all about though). http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam
I personally think they might have actually done what they said they did. I hope they did, and if they did I want stock in their company. I'm skeptical about whether they can make this work and calculate movement and lighting and everything else, but I really hope they can.
