Game Graphics 100,000x better?

Discussion in 'Indie Business' started by HarryBalls, Aug 3, 2011.

  1. HarryBalls

    HarryBalls New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Has anyone worked with this company's graphics technology at all?

    "Euclideon, an Australian company based in Brisbane has made the remarkable claim that they've developed a new graphics rendering technology for video games that is "100,000 times better" than existing systems. "

    http://www.ausgamers.com/news/read/3093969
     
  2. adesilva

    adesilva New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    1
    Notch (maker of minecraft) did a little article about them. He thinks they are snake oil salesmen. He had a big list of reasons why. Mainly that the way they do things has been around for awhile they are just acting like it is something new (to receive funding) and it works terribly with animations (partly why they only ever show landscapes). I am in the group of believe it once i see a big company use it successfully.
     
  3. richtaur

    Indie Author

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm probably in the minority here but I believe it's inevitable that 3d will move towards this type of technology eventually. It's like comparing vectors to rasters: they're infinitely more scalable and sometimes are just better for a given task. Once developers overcome the hurdles associated with this new tech, I think it'll be huge.
     
  4. meds

    meds New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2008
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    John Carmack is aiming for a hybrid polygon and voxel system to come up with a similar 'unlimited etail' system for the next-next engine (i.e. after Rage).
     
  5. Jack Norton

    Indie Author

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally I think 3d looks ugly no matter what, and won't ever replace a good 2d hand-drawn image. But obviously that's my personal tastes :D
     
  6. GaiaDreamCreation

    Indie Author

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    440
    Likes Received:
    26
    This looks very interesting and I hope it's real. It's just a video and it can be tricked easily to claim anything. They can show a pre-rendered scenery from a 3D movie and it will always look in real time in a video like this. They never explained the mechanism behind, so I'm not able to judge at this point. I'll keep an eye on this anyway.
     
  7. puggy

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most likely because current 3d realtime stuff isn't raytraced which means things don't look quite right. There was an expirement a few years ago that did raytracing on one of the quake games (not sure which one). The computer they used was insane spec wise but when the video was compared to the standard game the difference was massive. I beleive nvidia has done alot of work on making raytracing better on there graphic cards (optix api), not sure if any modern games use it.

    As for the original topic, the euclideon website seems to be down, so all i have to go on was that video with the wierd voice. Seems interesting if it works, the question is will it work for a game situation and what are the computer spec's needed for it.
     
  8. jcottier

    jcottier New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope, this has nothing to do with thecnology :)
    A beautifull hand drawn image will always look more interesting, more cute, more artistical than a pre-rendered image. In fact, it will even look nicer than a real photo...

    JC
     
  9. Digital Entanglement

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, full motion video is where it's at :p
     
  10. luggage

    Moderator Original Member Indie Author

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's clearly a load of crap rustled up to appeal to investors. And if you look closer, what's this? They've just secured nearly $2 million in funding...
     
  11. Bram

    Indie Author Greenlit

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am pretty sure the tech is for real.
    Apparently, it is 'sparse voxel octtrees'.
    http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2359842&cid=36957702

    Personally, I expect that the days of rasterizing triangles are coming to an end.
    Probably not because of this, but because we'll finally have the horsepower for real time ray tracing.

    The main reason is:
    The triangle count keeps going up every year, but pixel count of monitors stay pretty much the same.
    (roughly 10**6 pixels for the last 20 yrs)

    rasterizing is O(n) in nr of triangles, ray tracing is close to O(1) in nr of primitives.
    As a matter of fact: really large models, with 20M triangles or so, can be ray traced faster than they can be rasterized.
     
  12. terin

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    Words! Math! I marketing man confused! HIT YOU WITH ROCK.

    You guys suck. The importance of this video isn't the technology, its the sales pitch. PT Barnum would be proud. There's a lot to learn here :) Clearly the tech is silly at current levels, though something like that is possible when we'll look at a 100TB hard drive the same way we now look at a 512k stick of ram. I shall miss you polygons! You were the jagged edge of my childhood dreams.
     
  13. kraz007

    kraz007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, Notch said they are a cheat and Adam Martin seconded :)
     
  14. JeBuS

    JeBuS New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    This thing has been floating around for years now, and I've never seen anything come of it. I'd say, Snake Oil.
     
  15. desmasic

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    326
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haha, I love the responses to these videos. First the gamers and then the developers even.

    "LOOK OUT DER TRYING TO IMPROVE TEH TECH!!! HISSSS @#&$ BURN THE WITCHES.. HISSSSS"
     
  16. puggy

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, i've just thought of something. Has anyone ever tried using fractals in games to give textured surfaces the closer you get?

    I know pixar uses fractals in there movies to give extreme details, but using a limited version could give details just as good as this supposed technology while using a lot less resources.
     
  17. Olofson

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    270
    Likes Received:
    0
    Although processing power is increasing, constantly pushing the limits of what can be done in real time, fractals, Perlin noise and the like are still pretty heavy things, especially if you want reasonably good looking results. We're talking about orders of magnitude heavier than high quality texture filtering - and you'd still need all the usual shaders on top of it, to render the results nicely.

    Meanwhile, high end videocards already have way more than 1 GB VRAM, so doing this sort of stuff in real time is kind of hard to motivate, I think... You might do it "load time", to avoid filling DVDs or BluRay disks with basically Perlin noise. (That's what I'm doing in Kobo II at this point. Doing it all realtime would indeed enable "unlimited" map size, but the minimum system requirements would become insane for a game like this...)

    Years ago, various game engines started overlaying detail textures (usually monochrome) over the usual textures when up close. Usually not very impressive, but it made things look slightly less blurry without burning more texture memory than anyone had at the time.

    Maybe one could use simple Perlin noise and other algorithms to upgrade this trick to modern standards? Or just plain use pre-rendered detail textures when up close...? I'd certainly welcome that. Pretty much anything looks blurry up close in 2560x1600. :D
     
  18. Applewood

    Moderator Original Member Indie Author

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think the future is in polygons with procedural enhancement as olofson suggested. (Both on the texture and on the polygons)

    Point cloud rendering has some plusses, but it has a lot of minuses too. At the end of the day, to get your data made you start from polygons and add noise, bumps (into geom, not left as bumps) and etc., so it's procedural content whichever way you look at it. Only with polygons you have lots of other benefits also.

    This is the next "big thing" just like nurbs rendering was.
     
  19. ManuTOO

    Original Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    4
    Just a quick though : if I had created a technology which gives 100,000 better rendering, I'd have not created a landscape that has so much repetition & squareness that it feels like the map was taken from Zelda on NES ... except of course if this awesome technology had some very harsh drawback, like needing too much memory... ;)

    After a little research, it seems it depends of the conditions : quality achieved, screen resolution & structure layout, mainly; or of the use of specific hardware that are not for the mass market... Add a 0 (ie: 200 millions poly) if you want to be sure the ray-caster to win in all cases..!

    For interested people, here a little sample real-time ray-casting (down the page, with links to additional stuff with video):
    http://www.geforce.com/Hardware/GPUs/geforce-gtx-580/features
     
  20. Bad Sector

    Original Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,742
    Likes Received:
    5
    ...or an army of artists to make said landscape, which is hardly what some company looking for funding will have available and so the option of using a code generated one is a much more attractive alternative :p

    Well, i know that if i came up with some method to render huge scenes, i wouldn't go and paint all those scenes by hand but instead use some generator. I would try to mutate a bit the replications though :p
     

Share This Page

  • About Indie Gamer

    When the original Dexterity Forums closed in 2004, Indie Gamer was born and a diverse community has grown out of a passion for creating great games. Here you will find over 10 years of in-depth discussion on game design, the business of game development, and marketing/sales. Indie Gamer also provides a friendly place to meet up with other Developers, Artists, Composers and Writers.
  • Buy us a beer!

    Indie Gamer is delicately held together by a single poor bastard who thankfully gets help from various community volunteers. If you frequent this site or have found value in something you've learned here, help keep the site running by donating a few dollars (for beer of course)!

    Sure, I'll Buy You a Beer