Successor to Polygons?

[Fathom Zero]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010...ds/#more-26754

This made me lose my shit, honestly. And I get how it works, too.

If this does prove to be effective, it's gonna eliminate the need for the current types of graphics cards, which would piss off a lot of people, not the least of which are investors.

[Zomboid]

Sounds promising, and I hope it fucks over the graphic card companies.

[Zhukov]

Well. I'm dumb so I don't really get it from that video. You only need to render what is on the screen at any one time, rather than an entire world, is that it?

[Fathom Zero]

Da.

[kahljorn]

ALSO: GOOGLE.

[Kitsunexus]

It seems like what Ken Silverman's voxel editor does when you put it into dot mode and zoom all the way out. It looks more like that old DOS game Ecstatica, though.

BTW all the graphics gurus on that site are giving valid reasons why it's probably not going to replace polygons anytime soon.

edit: Bah, I watched the video, all they did was put a LOD system on a voxel engine. It looks like shit, maybe it would be good on DS or something but this isn't replacing polygons anytime soon. also, voxels don't move and they don't reflect (otherwise Shadow Warrior would have looked a LOT better) so I'm calling bullshit.

[Nick]

If they made the art look decent, maybe.

[Fathom Zero]

Originally Posted by Kitsunexus

It seems like what Ken Silverman's voxel editor does when you put it into dot mode and zoom all the way out. It looks more like that old DOS game Ecstatica, though.

BTW all the graphics gurus on that site are giving valid reasons why it's probably not going to replace polygons anytime soon.

edit: Bah, I watched the video, all they did was put a LOD system on a voxel engine. It looks like shit, maybe it would be good on DS or something but this isn't replacing polygons anytime soon. also, voxels don't move and they don't reflect (otherwise Shadow Warrior would have looked a LOT better) so I'm calling bullshit.

NAYSAYER.

And I wasn't aware that all tech demos looked fucking astounding.

And what you're saying is, they took an existing technology and made it better? FUCK THEM, INDEED>

[Dr. Boogie]

It looked to me like the demo was slowing down a little as the camera as moving through the city they made. In any case, I don't know enough about the stuff to really say either way, but until I see it on the market, it's just a cool idea.

[ChrisGlass]

Voxels really aren't the future. They're WAYY too processor heavy plus they fucking SUCK for animations. Polygon's strengths are in the fact it can bend as needed to reflect clothing, skin, water, waves, etc. You want to see what voxels are? Look up 3D Dot Game Heroes. A pretty cool game coming out soon, but think about it would handle animations on a large scale. It won't look natural.

This system is a bunch of single individual points. So it's fine for static geometry, but nothing else. (And anyways, polygon models are CONNECTED INDIVIDUAL POINTS)
It's the difference between Lego bricks for modeling versus K'Nex with meshes over the gaps for animating.

All the other ideas behind it are methods that 3D games already use, like culling off-screen/obscured objects and mipmapping. (Storing smaller versions of objects/textures to use when you don't need the detail)

The real future is just more shader code and terrain deformation.

[Supafly345]

It doesn't appear to be possible to animate it. But as far as new technology, polygons have already been on their way to being replaced by bezier curves in the near future anyway.

[Kitsunexus]

Originally Posted by ChrisGlass

,but think about it would handle animations on a large scale. It won't look natural..

Yeah, according to GameSetWatch you have to edit the walking graphics and other animations separately which makes me believe that instead of animating anything at all, it's swapping out voxel models for each frame of "animation". So it's kind of like a 3D sprite in a way, which I imagine looks really awkward (I haven't seen video, just pictures). I predict most people will be lazy when it comes to animation and just make characters that slide around without animating.

[ChrisGlass]

Originally Posted by Supafly345

It doesn't appear to be possible to animate it. But as far as new technology, polygons have already been on their way to being replaced by bezier curves in the near future anyway.

Curved lines will kick so much ass. If it can be done efficiently enough.

[Chojin]

man, those comments

haters gonna hate.

[Kitsunexus]

Originally Posted by Chojin

haters gonna hate.

And this game engine gonna stay deader than Corey Haim.

[Chojin]

i don't see why. polygon animation should be no different from animating this, since modern polys are animated with 'bones' which are tied to vertex groups. these dots would be the same exact thing as a vertex group, only there'd be a lot more of them.

even if the engine could only produce static environments, 90% of the crap you see in games is static and there's no reason a hybrid approach wouldn't work.

[Kitsunexus]

Originally Posted by Chojin

even if the engine could only produce static environments, 90% of the crap you see in games is static and there's no reason a hybrid approach wouldn't work.

Yeah, you could do polygons/voxels like that old game Outcast, but that kinda defeats UD's whole "polygons are dead" angle, no?

[Fathom Zero]

I don't think that there will never be a day where a processor can calculate these billions of points simultaneously and get smooth animation.

Tech's moving forward at an exponential rate, so I'll probably see it in my lifetime. AND IT WILL BE SWEET, DUDES.

[Zhukov]

I think eventually computers will just trick your brain into imagining that you are actually seeing whatever it wants you to see. So things will be as if you ARE ACTUALLY SEEING THEM IN REAL LIFE.

[Supafly345]

You are the one neo

[Kitsunexus]

I've never bought into the whole "Matrix brain-jack" theory of gaming's future. Sure it sounds cool, but there's many problems IMO.

Firstly, no one's game will be the same because everyone's mind is different. Like, if you were to see a red apple, and I were to walk into the scene and see the red apple, we could both agree that we are perceiving the sensation of seeing said red apple. However, your perception of red may be different than mine, and wouldn't that cause problems for the game?

What about a man who was born blind? How can he perceive anything in the game? How is someone from a remote country that is less educated in our culture to perceive a generic American city (if that was the setting)? Sure you could define everything (instead of just suggesting what to perceive), but sensation data for the mind would OBVIOUSLY be a lot larger than even point cloud data, and your brain wouldn't slow down like a digital computer, the rush of data would just simply overload your brain and kill you.

There's also topics like what if someone who was mentally impaired was to play the game, what if your body woke up somehow, simulation fatigue/post-traumatic stress syndrome, etc... but I think that if you thought a bit about it, you would agree that it's impossible and very dangerous.

[Nick]

Don't be a wuss, be a bro.


Brah.

[Chojin]

Originally Posted by Kitsunexus

I've never bought into the whole "Matrix brain-jack" theory of gaming's future. Sure it sounds cool, but there's many problems IMO.

Firstly, no one's game will be the same because everyone's mind is different. Like, if you were to see a red apple, and I were to walk into the scene and see the red apple, we could both agree that we are perceiving the sensation of seeing said red apple. However, your perception of red may be different than mine, and wouldn't that cause problems for the game?

What about a man who was born blind? How can he perceive anything in the game? How is someone from a remote country that is less educated in our culture to perceive a generic American city (if that was the setting)? Sure you could define everything (instead of just suggesting what to perceive), but sensation data for the mind would OBVIOUSLY be a lot larger than even point cloud data, and your brain wouldn't slow down like a digital computer, the rush of data would just simply overload your brain and kill you.

There's also topics like what if someone who was mentally impaired was to play the game, what if your body woke up somehow, simulation fatigue/post-traumatic stress syndrome, etc... but I think that if you thought a bit about it, you would agree that it's impossible and very dangerous.

um, if you give people the same inputs, they should respond to it the same way they already do.

it seems like you have a very specific (and flawed) perception of how such a thing could work, despite having no experience with any comparable technology, and are arguing against the mythical beast you've constructed in your head. this is also pretty much how you're responding to the OP, so no surprises there.

"However, your perception of red may be different than mine, and wouldn't that cause problems for the game?" - again, this seems to work in real life, idk how it'd throw off a game. Our "perception of red" holds true for the existing RGB system of displaying colors and I've yet to hear a complaint.

[Zhukov]

Also, I predict that such technology will only be available after the abolishment of all diseases and disabilities. Nobody will ever be born blind.

Not that it would matter. Don't know what an apple looks like because you are blind? Here, let me pump the image right into your brain. There we go.

[Tadao]

I can see how this would work in the future, but by the time the hardware catches up with that software, they might finder a better more fluid solution.