Hey CDPR, when you gonna make Witcher 3 maeby you gonna use this technology? :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gAbgBu8R4

No game producer would be foolish enough to base a product on this technology at this time. Even granted that it isn't vaporware, it does not do what a game engine requires, which is compute the visible surfaces of an animated scene in real time. It works only with a camera moving over precomputed static scenes.

The principal, John Carmack, is a known crackpot who has been pushing voxel rendering technology under multiple different names since 1997. That dog still don't hunt.

Hehe, awesome. :)

I think this is too far in the future to be used in The Witcher 3. But apart from that it's really a nice technology and, having watched the video, I'd like them to be successfull with it. :)

A far more available technology I'd like to see in The Witcher 3 is the facial animation system Rockstar uses in L.A. Noir. If you haven't seen it before look it up on youtube.

Because if the Engine in The Witcher 2 has one weekness then it's the faces in my opionion. They come out as too stiff imho; there are even some older games who can do this better...

It is the work of trolls, surely? Very ambitious and amusing, though. :)

What games? Oblivion? ;)

They're not perfect, obviously, but I really like the facial renderings in TW2. They work well as an in-engine feature, meaning they seem consistent with the rest of the game. L.A. Noire's faces are a little creepy, if you ask me. It's like the motion is too detailed for the textures or something. I find it a little jarring. Cool technology, but not perfect either.

Current methods of rendering are done something on the lines of brute force and everything based from lighting to shadows rely on this brute/primitive form of rendering to represent the graphics on screen.

Hell ya, Euclideon Technology... :) ... down with damn primitive rendering.

Games like Crysis, Crysis 2, Mass Effect 2. In The Witcher 2 there's hardly any facial animation besides the mouth. The rest of the face seems like a mask...

I skipped the Crysis games entirely. ME2 has a different style, but I don't really see the advantage.

Please people, stop being blinded by the claims and actually look at this stuff in game. Even if it converts to good animation, it overall look atrocious and over-exaggerated. Don't forget that there's no benchmark on that tech either, and thus you must record every time you want a piece of dialogue and risk discrepancies of the actors. Seriously, HL2's facial technology is so much better and more realistic.

Why, thank you, but please let me come my own conclusions. Did you think I made this up from thin air? Of course I looked at it and I like it. If you don't like it that's absolutely okay with me, everyones entitled to his / her opinion. That's a broad hint btw...

this is so 2010: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/03/10/unlimited-detail-wants-to-kill-3d-cards/
and 1 year later all they could get done is get better textures in the video demo? lol

voxels are teh shizzle ( http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam ) but this is vapourware

are you trolling or just stupid? hl2 better and more realistic? now you're being plain flat out retarded. sorry for being blunt, but i figure you should know the truth sooner or later.

the face scanning system is the most accurate, detailed and realistic looking system ever. it's been used for movies, and from what i've seen is perfect for videogames. the ancient source engine couldn't dream of doing anything close to that.

calling it exaggerated is like saying that human facial expression is exaggerated. have you ever spoken to people before, stupid? or do you just lock yourself inside your room all day? human faces are very animated.

but yes, the drawback is that you are dependent on actors and must use relatively expensive equipment to capture it...and you cannot do it procedurally anymore.

Yeah, no. Just because it takes a video of a person's face doesn't mean that the video is actually high rez. The textures on the faces of L.A Noire are nothing short of awful. Everything on the front blends together in a really weird mix, the eyes bleeding into the back of the head due to the poor placement of lights on the actor. I've seen far more convincing faces in many other games. Just because there's a wide range of movement on what the faces can react with does not mean it's convincing.

They are acting. Of course it will be exaggerated, but what really irks me about L.A Noire is that the actors are doing it live and on the spot. Not only does the audio quality suffer for it, but the actors have to make their expressions so clear as to basically say "I am smirking" when they do. Comapre that to say, Half-Life 2, there's a lot you can tell from the animation of NPCs and that without it being completely telegraphed. I'd point to the final talking scene in the Citadel to see what I'm talking about. L.A Noire has none of these moments. Actors I don't think are even given that much context for L.A. Noire and thus it's extremely disconnected.

I highly doubt this will be picked up by any majority of video gaming companies. Why? Because artists like to make stuff. Is there anyone in the world who looks like the Geralt we see now? No. Thus, the only solution to this is to make actual systems of joints within the game (or with mo-cap, if that's even possible) to create facial expressions. People vastly ignore the limitations of the L.A Noire tech and merely look at the benefits. Yes, it's fine for a game grounded in realism with a lot of money behind it but it's hardly and artistically friendly application.