PDA

View Full Version : Unlimited Detail Technology


JosephBroze
10-02-2009, 07:54 PM
www.unlimiteddetailtechnology.com (http://www.unlimiteddetailtechnology.com/)

A bunch of enterprising Aussie software engineers are re-inventing voxel-based graphics.

Check out the example pics (http://www.unlimiteddetailtechnology.com/pictures.php) (I can't hotlink any of it).

Picture Half-life 3 with that level of detail.......

amnesiasoft
10-02-2009, 09:01 PM
That site vaguely reminds me of Alex Chiu's website. That's not a good thing.

IcarusNine
10-02-2009, 09:41 PM
Picture Half-life 3 with that level of detail.......

It's not pretty. It's detailed, but it's not pretty. Besides that, I don't see animation or translucency, except for a few *gasp* polygonal tufts.

It's also not unlimited; therein lies the Alex Chiu rub. It looks like it'll have all the advantages and disadvantages of raytracing. Sure, polygons won't be the limiting factor, but other things will be.

DeathRay2K
10-02-2009, 10:11 PM
They're programmers, not artists. There's a reason programmer art has such a bad reputation.
They do have reflections, and it allows so much detail that you can use modeled leaves on trees instead of textures... That's pretty incredible.
I didn't see any mention of "polygon tufts" either.

IcarusNine
10-02-2009, 11:54 PM
I was referring to my imagination of Half-Life 3 with that level of detail.

From a distance the leaves on the deciduous trees (conifer trees? they certainly aren't palms) look more like they've been sorted on a plane, but it could probably just be the shape of the art. It was a stupid comment to make, but the lack of translucency (including transparency/alpha testing) seems odd, especially if reflection was already added.

AntiFritz
10-03-2009, 02:42 AM
What type of performance hit does this do though?

Azraelle
10-03-2009, 05:45 AM
Sure you can have millions of objects on-screen at a time with no real feasible hit on the memory, but all the things they showcased just happened to look like crap. I would hope, for their own sakes, that it's simply a matter of no one on the production team is an actual artist, and not a problem with the software itself.

It also didn't seem to be capable of handling any more complicated processes than simple reflection. Things like casting shadows, refraction, physics dynamics, volumetrics, etc. tend to add a serious amount of computation time per pixel.

NiteX
10-03-2009, 04:03 PM
It seemed to lack shaders. Was that just due to the early build?

JosephBroze
10-03-2009, 11:17 PM
As far as I know, this is an ongoing R&D project.