Also, I'm pretty sure they don't store a point model without their own form of compression. I mean, companies don't even store raw IMAGE data, much less models.
EDIT: I'm also pretty sure their method doesn't involve making the entire object out of points, only the surface layer. Why would you fill a rock with millions of points that could be used elsewhere? I's also think only what you see is rendered, for instance, you look at the northern face of a mountain, only whats in your field of vision is rendered, the reverse side being only a collision object without any points mapped to it. <- Not saying that last sentence to sound smart, I just don't know how else to say it lol
I don't know about the next few years, Tech at it's current rate in terms of storage, i don't think we'll be able to have PB HDDs anytime soon. Even though it is the next step up, we're barely at 2-3TB drives, sure you could combine shit ton of them, but that isn't practical, at all. And that model they showed in the video is absolutely nothing compared to a full size game, i wouldn't imagine this working within the next 8-10 years.
Idk if it applies to this situation, but moores law.
it applies.
but honestly, notch just worried people might not accept the 1x1m blocks :3 _________________
I don't know about the next few years, Tech at it's current rate in terms of storage, i don't think we'll be able to have PB HDDs anytime soon. Even though it is the next step up, we're barely at 2-3TB drives, sure you could combine shit ton of them, but that isn't practical, at all. And that model they showed in the video is absolutely nothing compared to a full size game, i wouldn't imagine this working within the next 8-10 years.
Idk if it applies to this situation, but moores law.
it applies.
but honestly, notch just worried people might not accept the 1x1m blocks :3
I don't know why, minecraft has it's own thing going for it. I think if he switched to a more powerful engine and programming language, then really ramped up the shading quality and stuff like that, it would be really unique. Keeping the same textures and block style, but with next gen shading and particle effects, as well as reflections in steel tools, refracting light in diamond tools, it would look really cool.
Something kinda like this..hell, even with source engine, it would look good
I don't know about the next few years, Tech at it's current rate in terms of storage, i don't think we'll be able to have PB HDDs anytime soon. Even though it is the next step up, we're barely at 2-3TB drives, sure you could combine shit ton of them, but that isn't practical, at all. And that model they showed in the video is absolutely nothing compared to a full size game, i wouldn't imagine this working within the next 8-10 years.
Idk if it applies to this situation, but moores law.
it applies.
but honestly, notch just worried people might not accept the 1x1m blocks :3
Silicon (Transistors) on a chip doubles every two years. Its a historical saying be the cofounder of Intel, and said in regards to the development of CPUs. It does not apply directly, and I woul hesistate to take it out of context is such a way. I don't have hard figures, so maybe I'm wrong, but thats my two cents. _________________
This is the inception of deception, checking the depth of your perception.
Also, I'm pretty sure they don't store a point model without their own form of compression. I mean, companies don't even store raw IMAGE data, much less models.
EDIT: I'm also pretty sure their method doesn't involve making the entire object out of points, only the surface layer. Why would you fill a rock with millions of points that could be used elsewhere? I's also think only what you see is rendered, for instance, you look at the northern face of a mountain, only whats in your field of vision is rendered, the reverse side being only a collision object without any points mapped to it. <- Not saying that last sentence to sound smart, I just don't know how else to say it lol
Exactly what I was thinking, rendering only what you can see. They also probably don't render voxels that are behind other voxels.
Evil_Intentions wrote:
Strelok wrote:
That fag wrote:
ParanoidGypsy wrote:
I don't know about the next few years, Tech at it's current rate in terms of storage, i don't think we'll be able to have PB HDDs anytime soon. Even though it is the next step up, we're barely at 2-3TB drives, sure you could combine shit ton of them, but that isn't practical, at all. And that model they showed in the video is absolutely nothing compared to a full size game, i wouldn't imagine this working within the next 8-10 years.
Idk if it applies to this situation, but moores law.
it applies.
but honestly, notch just worried people might not accept the 1x1m blocks :3
I don't know why, minecraft has it's own thing going for it. I think if he switched to a more powerful engine and programming language, then really ramped up the shading quality and stuff like that, it would be really unique. Keeping the same textures and block style, but with next gen shading and particle effects, as well as reflections in steel tools, refracting light in diamond tools, it would look really cool.
Something kinda like this..hell, even with source engine, it would look good
what if it works just because 1 of their "atoms" is the only thing there, while in other games you have multiple different polygons. you need multiple polygons for multiple shapes, but they can use one "atom" and make anything , its basically like a pixel.
what if it works just because 1 of their "atoms" is the only thing there, while in other games you have multiple different polygons. you need multiple polygons for multiple shapes, but they can use one "atom" and make anything , its basically like a pixel.
Have you read the rants?
The argument is that many of these voxels would take up too much space.
I say, clever occlusion and rendering techniques may make it a possibility in the future.
what if it works just because 1 of their "atoms" is the only thing there, while in other games you have multiple different polygons. you need multiple polygons for multiple shapes, but they can use one "atom" and make anything , its basically like a pixel.
Have you read the rants?
The argument is that many of these voxels would take up too much space.
I say, clever occlusion and rendering techniques may make it a possibility in the future.
That a generic argument of if you do it right then its possible. Also what do you take to be rendering techniques? _________________
This is the inception of deception, checking the depth of your perception.
what if it works just because 1 of their "atoms" is the only thing there, while in other games you have multiple different polygons. you need multiple polygons for multiple shapes, but they can use one "atom" and make anything , its basically like a pixel.
Have you read the rants?
The argument is that many of these voxels would take up too much space.
I say, clever occlusion and rendering techniques may make it a possibility in the future.
That a generic argument of if you do it right then its possible. Also what do you take to be rendering techniques?
I was just bringing him up to speed with the thread and giving him the 2 main sides of the argument.
Rendering techniques maybe as "blurring" voxels together. Use less and cover the same area. Not sure how they'd do that, just a thought.
what if it works just because 1 of their "atoms" is the only thing there, while in other games you have multiple different polygons. you need multiple polygons for multiple shapes, but they can use one "atom" and make anything , its basically like a pixel.
Have you read the rants?
The argument is that many of these voxels would take up too much space.
I say, clever occlusion and rendering techniques may make it a possibility in the future.
it wouldnt take up any space, its just one thing on there over and over.
I forgot the name of the tech where you could have multiple models files using just one object file in memory. The only thing that was required for the multitude of the copies is just a simple position, rotation, scale, that kind of stuff.
But they're heavily using it. The rest is old existing stuff which they started using.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Reputation: 65
Reputation: 126
Reputation: 2
Reputation: 50
