If this is real ( I think it is)
<3
| Data Realms Fan Forums http://45.55.195.193/ |
|
| Atom tech VS Polygons. http://45.55.195.193/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=24880 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | TorrentHKU [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 2:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Atom tech VS Polygons. |
Basically this company says they've created a technology that renders models via dots instead of polygons, and they've managed to NOT make it lag like a ♥♥♥♥. I personally think it's BS. Discuss. |
|
| Author: | unwoundpath [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 2:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
If this is real ( I think it is) <3
|
|
| Author: | CaveCricket48 [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 2:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
I'm calling BS. Also, I'm surprised modern games aren't using 3D vector graphics or something of the like. |
|
| Author: | TheLastBanana [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 2:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
CaveCricket48 wrote: Also, I'm surprised modern games aren't using 3D vector graphics or something of the like. That's essentially what polygons are, unless I'm misunderstanding you. |
|
| Author: | CaveCricket48 [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
I mean like, instead of having a large shape made of smaller polygons (a sphere is made of many 2D quadrilaterals), you have the entire object pretty much made of a handful of points and edges are simply values (the sphere might have a single point in the center and lines drawn around it using maths).  Zooming in on these 3D vectorized objects wouldn't show any 'polygons' since there are none. I'm pretty sure they use this graphical style in quite a few CAD programs, but I've yet to see it implemented in a video game. |
|
| Author: | TheLastBanana [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
That takes a lot of math to render, though. Essentially, vector graphics are polygons with anti-aliasing, aside from things like circles and such which are fairly easy to compute. If you wanted to do it in 3D, it would probably mean making pretty much everything out of primitives like cubes, spheres and cylinders. |
|
| Author: | Contrary [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
I think we should all go back to sprites. |
|
| Author: | Lizardheim [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
"polygon palm tree" "unlimited detail palm tree" Hahaha oh man what a load of bull♥♥♥♥. Of all games to compare their prerendered scene to they choose bulletstorm. Polygon rendering can be a lot prettier than that, especially with hardware powered tessellation. I mean, DX11 enabled crysis 2 with the hires texture pack, oh man that's pretty. |
|
| Author: | TorrentHKU [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
I'm pretty sure they dialed down Bulletstorm and Crysis's quality, too, to make them look shittier in comparison. Which is funny because at high quality they both look pretty damn good. |
|
| Author: | Lizardheim [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
Yeah plus crysis 2 without the DX11 addon and the hires textures look pretty bad, and bulletstorm looks bad in general. Hell, crysis 1 looks better than crysis 2 in places. But yeah, tesselation pretty much solves the issue of jagged models by taking information from the textures and applying it to the model in real time or some ♥♥♥♥ like that. |
|
| Author: | zalo [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
Pros: Gameplay dynamics. Being volumetric, you can do all sorts of fun things to them. Cons: Standards. A vertex shader on that stuff would make it run atrociously slow, and next to nothing can be adapted to handle voxels (Physics? Need a hybrid solution.). I want to see how the AtomMontage Engine turns out, but he seems to be updating in Data time. Also, CaveCricket: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-unifor ... l_B-spline It's Splines in 3D! |
|
| Author: | CaveCricket48 [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
zalo: That brought a smile to my face. Thank you. |
|
| Author: | 111herbert111 [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
I've seen this before, I don't remember why but for some reason it was supposed to be nearly impossible to use in a video game. |
|
| Author: | TorrentHKU [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
Because it'd be slow as hell. It's an interesting proof of concept to be sure, but there's a reason that polygons are still used today; they work. And if it ain't broke, don't fix it. |
|
| Author: | 111herbert111 [ Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Atom tech VS Polygons. |
TorrentHKU wrote: Because it'd be slow as hell. Yes, but, no, there was something else, I think it was how it animates or something, games would be basically sprite based, but in 3D. Or something... |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|