So it only renders as much points as your resolution? That's pretty awesome.
While it seems to work pretty well as far as rendering goes, I wonder how physics/collisions are calculated with this if it only loads the points that the player can currently see though.
Hopefully in 10 years we'll have non-euclideon island and a proper Lovecraft game.
Shit just got real.
[QUOTE=zerosix;31471100]they seem very unprofessional
the video quality is shit and is recorded at some kind of horid 4:3 res, and the unlimitedtechnology website looks like it was made by somebodies blind grandma in 1998[/QUOTE]
They're just a tiny australian tech company that happened to make something really really cool. They're not professionals, but you can tell they're very proud of what they've done!
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;31471108]Plus they're clearly begging for investors.[/QUOTE]
They don't really need them, they got Australia's largest ever commercialisation grant last year.
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;31471084]If only VALVe would adopt this.[/QUOTE]
The best thing about Valve is that their games are for everyone. By that, I mean basically any system can run it. I highly doubt this atom stuff is going to preserve that.
AMD and Nvidia will be really pissed.
[QUOTE=jakeabbott96;31471511]The best thing about Valve is that their games are for everyone. By that, I mean basically any system can run it. I highly doubt this atom stuff is going to preserve that.[/QUOTE]
This seems more optimized than a source game.
Something tells me that they aren't to worried about the advertising of their product. Because for game dev companies to pass up this kind of opportunity would be almost flat-out stupidity on their part.
What about physics? Or shaders? Or pathfinding? Or any sort of AI? Or decals? Or effects?
They've shown us a wonderful sightseeing engine. Congratulations. But it's no where near a game.
[QUOTE=jakeabbott96;31471511]The best thing about Valve is that their games are for everyone. By that, I mean basically any system can run it. I highly doubt this atom stuff is going to preserve that.[/QUOTE]
Well if what they are going by is true, that it looks better and it runs better, then wouldn't that still fall between where basically any system can run it?
What I think is going to happen, is that either AMD or Nvidia will buy this company, and make it that only their graphics cards are able to utilize the tech.
[QUOTE=jakeabbott96;31471511]The best thing about Valve is that their games are for everyone. By that, I mean basically any system can run it. I highly doubt this atom stuff is going to preserve that.[/QUOTE]
Did you even listen to what he said in the video?
20 fps in [B]software mode[/B].
[QUOTE=Hellborg 65;31471537]AMD and Nvidia will be really pissed.[/QUOTE]
They'll probably still be getting sales from game developers.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;31471575]What about physics? Or shaders? Or pathfinding? Or any sort of AI? Or decals? Or effects?
They've shown us a wonderful sightseeing engine. Congratulations. But it's no where near a game.[/QUOTE]
Since when did rendering have anything to do with pathfinding or AI?
[editline]1st August 2011[/editline]
damn automerge
Oh god. If things as small as dirt grains can be processed... [b]REALTIME SHRINKING TECHNOLOGY![/b]
[QUOTE=Hellborg 65;31471581]What I think is going to happen, is that either AMD or Nvidia will buy this company, and make it that only their graphics cards are able to utilize the tech.[/QUOTE]
The best thing would be if the company would just release this technology as opensource.
If it gets sold to either Nvidia or ATI, it'll be exclusive to a series of cards, thus making the use of this technology not so profitable due to the limited compatibility with hardware.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;31471575]What about physics? Or shaders? Or pathfinding? Or any sort of AI? Or decals? Or effects?
They've shown us a wonderful sightseeing engine. Congratulations. But it's no where near a game.[/QUOTE]
As stated before, they are NOT a GAME COMPANY. They are a technology company. They sell their technology to Game Devs and THEY make games out of it. The shaders and AI and effects and all that bullshit is up to the Game Devs.
[QUOTE=Unreliable;31471036]I'm pretty sure it's using a thing called sparse voxel octrees (?) The only problem is when you want to animate something. That's what the video doesn't tell you. I think I remember reading that it's some kind of raytracing. That's from raytracing. It looks pretty real.[/QUOTE] Likely. Probably what he's not telling you is you need a two pass render path, and while your static output is gonna look awesome, it's also non-dynamic and this doesn't cover animated models at all, which have to be dealt with using traditional meshes in a separate pass.
When I saw the video last year, I remember thinking that one of the challenges would be creating models using only 'atoms'. But the fact that they created a polygon converter is fantastic.
I'm so incredibly happy they're back.
Seriously, this is amazing.
Can't wait till they release their SDK.
I want a demo before I make any decisions.
atomontage.com They seem way further developed and have actually working crap so.
[QUOTE=Hellborg 65;31471537]AMD and Nvidia will be really pissed.[/QUOTE]
Not really, actually. The way modern graphics cards are designed, they can be used as powerful parallel processors for a variety of tasks. They haven't really explained how the technique works yet, but if it is indeed based on raytracing, it can easily be hardware accelerated with current generation graphics cards.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;31472104]atomontage.com They seem way further developed and have actually working crap so.[/QUOTE]
Isn't that Voxels?
I'll shit my pants if this actually works as he says
