An Australian company claims to have developed technology to make computer game graphics "100,000 times better" than current-gen systems. Euclideon says its "Unlimited Detail" engine offers infinite geometry "makes everything out of tiny little atoms instead of flat panels". 'Atoms', it would seem is Euclideon-speak for these …
Nicr to hear Lloyd Grossman is keeping busy!!
Darn, I actually thought of an idea similar to this about 5 - 6 years ago should have patented the broad concept as that seems acceptable now a days. I mentioned it to a colleague but could not fathom a way around the processing power needed.
I hope they get this working as it has the potential to be big. But they need more than a rendered video.
Patenting an idea that was in production 15 years earlier?
Yes, that does sound like how patents work actually - carry on.
What a sense of humour failure, unable to detect sarcasm I take it.
Sort of impressive ...
... but the large square steps everywhere are weird and probably very telling. They wouldn't have made it like that if they didn't have to. Is there some sort of tradeoff being done between large and small scale detail?
Is this the next Crysis gaming engine?
Cue the raft of patent trolls waiting in the wings.
and hoping that this takes off before their patent chest goes poof in a could of polygons (aka expired)
Like others have said, they're talking about Voxels. Not exactly new technology and people have been raving about how voxels are going to change everything for as long as I remember.
Still no word on how they're solving all the issues associated with voxels, high memory usage when doing lots of variation (because each voxels is stored as an individual entity, having lots of different ones on screen would take more memory than currently available) and critically no good way to do smooth animations with voxels like we currently do with polygons. Doing regular keyframe animation would take too much memory with voxels.
So yeah, tech demo good, usable today not.
I really don't care ...
Because the unrelenting focus on graphics has turned games into barely interactive movies - and anything that has kept a semblance of playability is usually either a badly botched clone, franchise game or a boring sequel of another equally boring game.
For bog's sakes, spend some money on proper gamedesign, innovation and playability.
If I want awesome graphics with superlative detail I'll go to a frakking cinema for the latest 3DCGI droolfest -- games I want to PLAY.
Voxels, or splatting?
I can't watch this with the sound on at work, but it sounded more like splatting than voxels to me - but I'll have to have another look when I'm home. I agree that until it's shown with animation, transparency, shadows and decent shaders it's a bit behind the times. Compared to a decent polygon-based system that uses proper LoD-based dynamic tesselation, it's less impressive than when compared against the engines they're using (common bit of marketing, never actually show your technology against the state of the art), but some software is quite behind the times from a rendering perspective anyway. Still, any attempt to explore rendering algorithms is a good thing. Especially if someone would like to fund the PhD on the subject that I've been wanting to do for the last decade...
It's not Voxels..
If skynet hasnt taken over by then
Man, the Playstation 6 is gonna be awesome!
Give us money!
Sounds like a typical investor promotion. They obviously need more money. Otherwise why show off an unfinished system?
sparse voxel octree
Carmack did it carmack did it
Took me ages to track down this article from 3 years ago, but the big man has been there done that and is still waiting on the hardware to catch up....
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Game Theory Dragon Age Inquisition: Our chief weapons are...
- 'How a censorious and moralistic blogger ruined my evening'
- Leaked screenshots show next Windows kernel to be a perfect 10
- Amazon warming up 'cheapo web video' cannon to SINK Netflix