• Hello everybody! We have tons of new awards for the new year that can be requested through our Awards System thanks to Antifa Lockhart! Some are limited-time awards so go claim them before they are gone forever...

    CLICK HERE FOR AWARDS

What games can look like tomorrow?



REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS
Status
Not open for further replies.

Orion

Prepared To Die
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
20,385
Awards
10
Take note: that entire environment was stationary, any movements pre-programmed. That's going to become slow as hell as soon as you need something unscripted to happen. Atomic structures aren't useful for visuals, only for making super-realistic physics. Not to mention, having ultra-realistic graphics is virtually meaningless if you can't pair it with a decent visual style - something many high-visual-fidelity games are extremely lacking in.
As soon as you have to mix atomic physics/graphics with AI, scripts and actual movement, it's going to slow down really, really badly unless you have a high-end PC to run it.
 

lilVon

live, laugh, lobotomy
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
1,869
Awards
5
Location
Sweet Home Alabama
That video was such a tease. First of all what kind of kind of game engine can run all of this at a normal speed.

I find it hard to believe that what this video advertises is real. But, if it is, it is a massive leap in progress for the 3D art world. Too big actually. I don't think any real-life render or super-high-poly mesh would ever actually utilize more than 5% of this technology. The people who create these models are human, and it is just inhuman to come even close to the tri count of what they are advertising. But in some ways this could be real. I'm no one special, but I actually think that depending on their method, it might be simple to create "animations". Say you have a volume of "cloud stuff". Let's say it's a 1 mile by 1 mile block .Just like voxels which can be turned into "air", you could turn swaths of indexed particles on and off to give the appearance of motion. A moving ball then becomes a ball that "teleports" a number of units equal to its speed, in a direction appropriate to its current vector. But what do i know...


You gotta speak English son.




But just watching that video slowed my computer down. Running such software would prolly make my computer explode!


Edit: The random question asked my to Name one of Sora's two companions throughout his journey.



The 1st thing I typed was Rikku XD
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
7,143
Awards
4
Age
31
Take note: that entire environment was stationary, any movements pre-programmed. That's going to become slow as hell as soon as you need something unscripted to happen. Atomic structures aren't useful for visuals, only for making super-realistic physics. Not to mention, having ultra-realistic graphics is virtually meaningless if you can't pair it with a decent visual style - something many high-visual-fidelity games are extremely lacking in.
As soon as you have to mix atomic physics/graphics with AI, scripts and actual movement, it's going to slow down really, really badly unless you have a high-end PC to run it.

I was wondering about that too, I noticed nothing was actually moving there. When they mentioned the dirt I got to thinking, "How would characters moving on that work?"
 

metrifyx

New member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
527
Age
27
Not to mention, having ultra-realistic graphics is virtually meaningless if you can't pair it with a decent visual style - something many high-visual-fidelity games are extremely lacking in.

That's my concern with all of this. Sure, we have games that are getting better and better graphics-wise, but a lot of these same games aren't nearly as beautiful as games with poorer graphics and better visual style. For example, Okami.

And then there's this scanning technology. Ooh, we can make everything look exactly like they do in real life; ooh, we can make every experience in the game as realistic as possible. So what? If I want to experience real life, I'll do it myself, not through some screen. When are video games going to get so realistic that you can just go out and do whatever you're trying to accomplish in a game? Where do we draw the line? And most of all, where is the merit in scanning an entire world versus creating it and interpreting the world as we know it to be something far beyond what it really is? When I play a video game, I'm looking for that kind of depth. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I would much rather want interpretation and stylization than plain old, "let's make everything as it is in real life even though it'll never compare."

But I'm going off on a tangent, lmao.
 

Orion

Prepared To Die
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
20,385
Awards
10
Actually on the contrary its quite useful especially in the medical field
Except we already have microbiology and, you know, bodies to explore and experiment with. This sort of thing is redundant when it comes to medical applications or simulations.

Not to mention this system is only good for very pre-ordained mechanical systems. It doesn't take into account chemical interactions or the realistic integrity/elasticity of materials. It's effectively useless as a chemical or medical tool unless you go and program millions of possible interactions.
 

Wehrmacht

cameo lover
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
14,057
Awards
3
Location
brland
This is pretty fascinating, but the practical concerns involved make this a dubious investment.

The main concern for me is, obviously, what this will mean for the creativity of the industry. As things stand right now, game developers already are under extreme pressure to make something that will sell as much as possible, which often means stifling their creativity in hopes of making something with a wider appeal. That's why we're getting so many sequels and new IP's that are just variations of previously established formulas.
 

very differentiable
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,912
Awards
1
Location
an n-brane
With the slow realisation of the quantum computer, we will get towards that goal. Quantum computers allow for processing power to be an exponential multitude of what is possible now. However, the question is, will it make gaming more entertaining. I think that focus shouldn't be that much on gfx that much as that area is quite advanced, gameplay and storytelling should be looked at more.

I don't see how the physics emulation is a problem, games take place in the macroscopic world and, though sometimes somewhat complex, at least it is not as problematic to calculate the hell that quantum physics can be. In case of the latter, one would, indeed, require a supercomputer such used by research institutes.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
those were dirt specs the size of small rocks. but like they said, "we aren't game developers, we're just making the technology." just poking fun. :3

This would be interesting to see implemented in games.
 

Shinjuku

Entrapment
Joined
Apr 28, 2005
Messages
3,719
Age
34
Location
Georgia
This is something I'm not ready to see or I should say well I don't know how to put it, but it's just something I'd like to avoid in gaming.

I think there was similar discussion on PSU on this subject and then someone mentioned the Uncanny valley theory(I think that's what it's called) taking effect because of all the realism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top