Graphics = getting much better.

[Guest Mr. Nintendo]

Dead Rising and Halo 3 has so many enemies and effects going on at once because of graphics.

The reason why Dead Rising had so many enemies was because the Xbox 360's engine was very powerful and because other consoles like the Wii couldn't even handle over 800 zombies walking around trying to kill you. (Although Dead Rising was re-released on the Wii, the RE4 engine was bad and you could see just 50-100 zombies at once rather than 800.)

[Xortberg]

Bullcrap.

The "race for the best graphics EVER" thing is one of my least favorite things about gaming. Better graphics is good, but it shouldn't such a HUGE focus as it is IMO.

Art style is 100x more important to me than graphics quality. IMO a game like Dynamite Headdy looks MUCH better than, say, Crysis 2.

I've got mixed feelings about this, honestly. I'll be the first to say that the scariest games I've played in recent memory were a PS1 game and a Flash game in 8-bit graphics. PS1 game was Parasite Eve 2, and while it was only scary for one segment before turning into action, that short time running around an abandoned desert town with amazingly creepy atmosphere felt like an eternity. The other was Story of the Blanks, and while the discussion on whether or not it's a good pony game is neither here nor there, what it definitely was was a really creepy-ass game that didn't need fancy graphics to be so.

That said, graphics help muuuuch more than a lot of people give them credit for. Sabre's mention of Silent Hill holds a hell of a lot of water, as without good graphics the impact of the creepiness is very lessened. In addition, it's actually quite comparable to a well written story versus a badly written story.

If a story leaves out lots of details and doesn't describe anything very well, it's difficult to immerse yourself in it and even if, say, the dialogue is witty and good and the author's voice is clear and strong, the story just can't be very good. Well, no matter how good a game's art style may be, there's some things that just aren't as good without good graphics backing them. Horror games are one example, but far from the only one.

[Psygonis]

New possibilities always find their way to the public when it's promising!

In the meantime, you gotta make it look sexy to the companies...

[FoxMcCloud]

Something interesting that I read today by Notch.

http://notch.tumblr....7075/its-a-scam

[Psygonis]

That's good to know about the company that made that video, but as he said, it's just a matter of time before dedicated efficient algorithms are made so animating voxels is as easily as pixel-bades polygons.

[psy_commando]

If you look at their page : http://unlimiteddetailtechnology.com/description.html

He says that its mostly a "search" algorithm that seems to be based on visibility. And finally admits he isn't rendering all those millions of voxels at the same time.

Strangely their newer website redirect to their facebook now, from the comments there I think we ddos ed their website. lol

I like it that they mention this on their facebook :

Euclideon was the recipient of the largest commercialisation grant awarded by the Australian Federal Government in 2010

That's good to know about the company that made that video, but as he said, it's just a matter of time before dedicated efficient algorithms are made so animating voxels is as easily as pixel-bades polygons.

Voxels can't be animated in any other ways than by frames, just like pixels. The problem is the nature of the data, voxels hold only color, their position in their containing data structure defines their position in the 3D world, so if you want to move a voxels, in the process you have to move all surrounding voxels in the same row, column, and "height". Its the same problem as with pixels.

But with a polygon, you simply change the position contained in each of its vertices.

But the guy seem hesitant to use the term voxel, so maybe he use some kind of reference to render his voxels from, but then again, why not just render pixels directly... I think I'll try to send him a couple of questions on his e-mail...

[Psygonis]

Maybe the way to go would be to push the analogy with atoms further and implement a kind of proximity binding. You know, like molecular bounds. This way, moving a voxel would pull bound voxels with it, accordingly to their respective binding properties. That'd be a massive task for the CPU though... :/

[Sabre]

But the guy seem hesitant to use the term voxel, so maybe he use some kind of reference to render his voxels from, but then again, why not just render pixels directly...

If you watch the video with your properganda filter on, you see that most the video is basicly

"Polygons are crap and companies are bumb for chasing them." repeated over and over.

[sjrathbun812]

I find it so cool how people do this stuff. :)

[Sabre]

I find it so cool how people do this stuff.

Indeed. The sad part is when get 'in' with the programing crowd it's a world of extremes. Some absolute genius wizards, but 99% of the time it's just people winging it.

[Thu'um]

Indeed. The sad part is when get 'in' with the programing crowd it's a world of extremes. Some absolute genius wizards, but 99% of the time it's just people winging it.

i disagree, If i appyled i would not get choosen, and i am friends witha few mods. But Even if i did get the chance to become a mod, i'd reject the offer asap.

My thuoght is why another mod?

[Xortberg]

Wrong topic, bro :/

[Psygonis]

Lol Ajc, not even close enough!

Sabre> If it takes genius to develop techs, it takes also some just to make it work outside of test sandboxes. There are more "geniuses" that just make the latter than the former...