Unlimited Detail Technology

[AphexDreamer]

I thought this was very interesting. I did a search in the forums and nothing came up for it so I
m sharing it.

Using something called Point Cloud Data (which kicks are current method of making Video Games in the arse) they are able to have unlimited detail in games with no object pop up. Instead of using polygons it uses points giving rather overwhelming detail in objects. Well just watch the video and be amazed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-ATtrImCx4

Hope this follows through.

http://unlimiteddetailtechnology.com/description.html

Latest Update (2011)

Euclideon & Unlimited Detail - Bruce Dell Interview

Offical Website I take it http://www.euclideon.com

 

[DirectorC]

Holy crap that's amazing. Tessellation just got stabbed in its stupid face. So did all these big expensive GPUs?!

 

[AphexDreamer]

Holy crap that's amazing. Tessellation just got stabbed in its stupid face. So did all these big expensive GPUs?!

Exactly, I can't help but think its all for the Money. This man did it all through software, if thats what can be done through some Heavy Coding then wake up people.

 

[Nick89]

I like how it makes the scenes, like a search engine. That seems more efficient than the current system.

 

[pantherx12]

Seems like a logical and possible way of doing things actually.

Good luck to the guys behind it is all I say, it only benefits us as gamers : ]

I'm guessing when ATI or NV got the call from them they shat bricks about going out of business themselves.

Thinking short term rather then long term as usual, what is it with companies doing that D:

 

[kid41212003]

So, basicly, it only renders what you can actually see, and it's equal your screen resolution. Like a 2d game.

 

[DirectorC]

I'm guessing when ATI or NV got the call from them they shat bricks about going out of business themselves.

It probably helped spawn the current new technologies in place that can put the power of GPUs to use in executing regular code...

So, basicly, it only renders what you can actually see, and it's equal your screen resolution. Like a 2d game.

Uh both methods make a 3D model into a 2D image buddy.

 

[AphexDreamer]

There is a very good comparison Video on his web site up for download thats just amazing. I really want to use this. Its just DX11 for all.

 

[Phxprovost]

There are two possible outcomes to this tech
1. Its a scam and will be forgotten
2. Its real and the any one of the juggernauts in the industry buys it and buries it never to be heard of again

so dont get your hopes up

while OT: This looks amazing and has so much potential but i foresee problems. Mostly in the realm of directional natural lighting and physical interaction between objects. Honestly i think something like this has the most to gain in the medical field. Imagine a model of a human heart the becomes increasingly more complex the further a student zooms into it.

 

[pr0n Inspector]

Screenshots are tiny and of very low quality. He can say whatever he wants about this tech.

 

[AphexDreamer]

There are two possible outcomes to this tech
1. Its a scam and will be forgotten
2. Its real and the any one of the juggernauts in the industry buys it and buries it never to be heard of again

so dont get your hopes up

while OT: This looks amazing and has so much potential but i foresee problems. Mostly in the realm of directional natural lighting and physical interaction between objects. Honestly i think something like this has the most to gain in the medical field. Imagine a model of a human heart the becomes increasingly more complex the further a student zooms into it.

Yeah about your two points I agree and thats what I'm afraid of. As for the Physical interaction between objects I thought about that too, but I don't think its as big of an issue as we take it. Might actually be easer to do since these points can be taken apart and reassembled far easer than polygons can.

 

[Frick]

Interesting, but it seems the biggest quetionmarks are animation, physics and lightning. It will be interesting to follow though.

 

[AphexDreamer]

Interesting, but it seems the biggest quetionmarks are animation, physics and lightning. It will be interesting to follow though.

Yeah its in the experimental stage and is phenomenal still.

 

[heky]

Interesting, maybe we will see some good from it.

 

[arroyo]

Nothing new:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/voxel-ray-casting,2423-2.html

Probably it's just ray casting rendering, the same as in Outcast game.

 

[pantherx12]

2. Its real and the any one of the juggernauts in the industry buys it and buries it never to be heard of again

.

If it is real the guy seems to have enough sense to not just settle for a quick buck, he'd make far more money and continue to have control over the tech if he keeps hold of it himself.

 

[Mussels]

curiouser and curiouser.

 

[AphexDreamer]

If it is real the guy seems to have enough sense to not just settle for a quick buck, he'd make far more money and continue to have control over the tech if he keeps hold of it himself.

He says in one of his videos that he will either go with ATI or Nvidia with this and if neither of them want it he is going to go at alone.

 

[erocker]

We won't see anything from this for quite a while. I'm pretty skeptical on their "software" and "special super complicated algorithims". Of course, info coming out of the mouth of the person trying to sell it is going to be all magic and rainbows. We need a conciensious 3rd party to have a looksee at this tech. I'm definitely not holding my breath.

 

[AphexDreamer]

We won't see anything from this for quite a while. I'm pretty skeptical on their "software" and "special super complicated algorithims". Of course, info coming out of the mouth of the person trying to sell it is going to be all magic and rainbows. We need a conciensious 3rd party to have a looksee at this tech. I'm definitely not holding my breath.

Yup you have a very valid point, I'm just thinking man if what he shows in his videos are real

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I like how it makes the scenes, like a search engine. That seems more efficient than the current system.

Remember that Google has dozens of super computers around the world performing those searches on enormous banks of memory and hard drives. The exact number and exact power is a trade secret (it is known to be enormous, however).


Generalizing a pixel takes more processing power than rendering a polygon because to me, it sounds like the polygons are still there but that's not what it commits to the display. It is an extra step to an old method that basically has the same effect of anti-aliasing so, I agree with erocker. It is "magic and rainbows" until it has reached the market (assuming it does).


Oh, and it isn't "model swapping," it is "level of detail." Those are the same models but they are using fewer or more polygons depending on how large the object is on the screen.

 

[newconroer]

They'd do themselves a massive marketing favor, if they recreated scenes from popular games with this technology. A compare and contrast of something tangible and 'real world,' would be a lot more fruitful than yet another tech demo.

ATi and Nvidia have awesome tech demos, but the games don't look like that.

Generalizing a pixel takes more processing power than rendering a polygon because to me, it sounds like the polygons are still there but that's not what it commits to the display. It is an extra step to an old method that basically has the same effect of anti-aliasing so, I agree with erocker. It is "magic and rainbows" until it has reached the market (assuming it does).

Yes, I wonder if the polygons are still in place as some sort of base content.

This doesn't seem like something that can be independant and still drive graphics, but maybe in tandem or working simultaneously with current methods, they could bring things up a level.

For me, the graphics architecture we've become accustomed too, will not change until they can do active and real time vector type drawing, where each scene is drawn in real time, thus making the flexibility of things like physics, lighting and so forth, virtually unlimited.

 

[Super XP]

This software based technology looks very nice and promising. In order for this thing to take off 3 companies need to be involved.
1) Micro$oft,
2) AMD/ATI &
3) Intel.
If they climb on board and MS even puts out a OS update to further support this new tech into their Direct X technology, it may very well be one of the best breakthrough tech's for gaming in existence. And we gamers will enjoy some fabulous unlimited 3D graphical environments.

But something tells me this is going to get buried faster than you can say Polygon. :shadedshu

Is there a possibility to have this new software based technology integrated into games to perhaps take the load off massive polygon counts by redirecting polygons where they are most needed and just use this software for say backgrounds and such? There must be a way to combine both technologies IMO. Am I right?

 

[ctrain]

voxel demos already exist that do similar looking scenes (ie seemingly impossible amounts of detail, at least if tried with polygons)

stuff in quake 1 also turned into crude point clouds at distances as well if i remember right.

 

[Easy Rhino]

i am simply not buying into this concept until i see some real world examples...