while this is nice in theory... I don't really see how it can effectively be used... The amount of data for a single object is phenomenal and I doubt they included physical aspects to their atoms.... cause yeah this is all nice but can you bump into the atoms? can materials have their own weights? all these parameters are that much more data that will need to be stored and computed for each and every atom they have in their building blocks.

It goes from atom in
position 25;24;78 Color #323 to
position 25;24;78 Color #323 weight 32 viscosity 38 solidity 29 transparency 32 light refraction 45.......

Polygons create objects and you can set this per object
(yeah I'm talking off my butt, i don't know anything about programing :-p)

well my theory that these guys were Australian Uni students/professors/post grad or tech heads and they came up with this discovery and announced it last year, but then got there 2 million dollar government funding and has been quiet for the year while developing a toolset and have now announce an update to show that its still on and that they will have there toolset out soon.

Either that, or this is a government funding hoax.

If it isn't then this could be the future of computer graphics for gaming.

The main problem I have with this is that you can't conjure detail without the art design time. You might have a great rendering method but the real bottleneck to better graphics is not hardware but art budget.

I put up a post on this some time ago... Don't remember where though

Oh, and their website has remained completely unchanged for almost 2 year now.

It is not impossible that the rendering technique was sold to MS and that the nextbox will completely destroy the competition.

Soleron said: It has to be a scam for investment. It's been around for a while (year+) and they've produced nothing but a badly coded website and this video.

I emailed them almost 2 years ago looking for a long-term investment opportunity, but they had zero interest in my money. The reply was friendly, but to the point: They have all the investors they need.

So...MS(?)

Dr.Grass said: Soleron said: It has to be a scam for investment. It's been around for a while (year+) and they've produced nothing but a badly coded website and this video. I emailed them almost 2 years ago looking for a long-term investment opportunity, but they had zero interest in my money. The reply was friendly, but to the point: They have all the investors they need. So...MS(?)

C'mon!

This:" For all we know these renders might be coming out of 3D studio Max and taking 10 minutes to render per frame on a server cluster..."

Do you really think that any console in the next 10 years will be able to render this thing in real-time? I don't think so.

And i don't think any company has the copyright on voxel-based graphics or cloud-computing, so no, just no!

This should need a lot of RAM to work properly, even on the demo some objects are the sames to save memory, it is ok for close up but start to turn ugly when you look from more distance.

Also it reminds me of the 3D sprite that was inplemented in the first Geforce cards but was never used in games because they needed too much RAM.

I'm at work and couldn't hear.... but one thing for sure is it might be really nicely modeled but.... collor hue he used and the art direction is terrible.... it looks like my grandma's backyard 2 years after her death.....
the other thing is that world is completely static and square.... If I can have nicer tree and grass but in a cubic petrified world I'm not interest....
IMO the real need for improvement in visual now a days is not the environement design quality level.... this is already really good when devs take the time to do a good job..... the real need in improvement is physics and interaction..... I want wind that blows randomly in fields and trees, weather condition changing and affecting the environement I'm evolving in..... and most important TIME if I have rain I want rivers to rise over time I want villages to be permanently destroyed.... I want to see the bodies of my fallen ennemies decay when I pass by later in the game... I want my bullet holes to stay were they are.... my tire tracks to be permanent over a season of racing.... my bruises to show.... branches to break when I walk in the jungle and stay broken....
so yeah the tech look nice.... but honnestly I think they should stop trying to improve that too much cause other aspect of reallity are trailing far behind and if the trade off is to make a bigger gap into it.... NO THANKS..... because if I want a static petrified representation of reality I take a picture or buy a sculpture....

Necromunda said: Jdevil3 said: italo244 said: Newfags cant Triforce!   ▲ ▲ ▲   Did I make it? YOU FAIL.

 

   ▲
▲ ▲

The space when I hit enter was too big and couldn't make it, let's see if it works when I change the style from Paragraph to Preformated

mjk45 said: Jdevil3 said: Delete if old... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKUuUvDSXk4   You should edit the op to read Australian technology company , as he said they aren't a game company.

Actually, when I created this thread, I copy-pasted the exact title from the video on YouTube, but it seems they changed it to:

"Unlimited Detail Real-Time Rendering Technology Preview 2011"

I won't change the thread title so people know this is the same thread and don't think it's a new one, but I'll copy-paste this below the video so people know this.