It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
The Witcher 2Euclideon Technology(20 posts)(20 posts)
(20 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted August 03, 2011
avatar
wormholewizards: I also don't really like LA Noire facial animation. It is like 'scripted' and certainly not cost effective. They could use the budget better on other area.
I didn't like the facial animation of LA Noire too, it looked unrealistic with so much facial expressions. They looked more like over acting with exaggerated expressions....(looked painful, if you imagine the reenactment)
Posted August 03, 2011
avatar
wormholewizards: I also don't really like LA Noire facial animation. It is like 'scripted' and certainly not cost effective. They could use the budget better on other area.
avatar
Anarki_Hunter: I didn't like the facial animation of LA Noire too, it looked unrealistic with so much facial expressions. They looked more like over acting with exaggerated expressions....(looked painful, if you imagine the reenactment)
That's one of the drawback. Because they rely heavily on the actor / actress face expression and acting skill, it just doesn't look right at times. I do think HL2 facial expression is one of the best in modern gaming.
Posted August 03, 2011
Quickly back on topic before any more ranting.

I gotta say, when the creator of Minecraft calls out this new rendering technique on its complete non-viability to a user market, methinks that the idea of trying to go commercial with the extraneous tech will be just a tad bit hard.
Posted August 03, 2011
avatar
GoodGuyA: Quickly back on topic before any more ranting.

I gotta say, when the creator of Minecraft calls out this new rendering technique on its complete non-viability to a user market, methinks that the idea of trying to go commercial with the extraneous tech will be just a tad bit hard.
The basis of the hoax is, it's not even a rendering technology. It depends on a database of pre-rendered scenes. So what it does is reduce the problem of rendering an animated scene to the problem of determining the visible voxels in a static scene given the camera characteristics, then fraudulently claim it has solved the former.

It also (presumably by fraudulent intent) neglects the size of the database needed to pre-render any significant world. By rough order of magnitude, it's petabytes. I don't know about you, but I'm not Google or Yahoo or eBay or CERN, and I just don't have any petabyte disks lying about.
Post edited August 03, 2011 by cjrgreen
Posted August 03, 2011
avatar
cjrgreen: The basis of the hoax is, it's not even a rendering technology. It depends on a database of pre-rendered scenes. So what it does is reduce the problem of rendering an animated scene to the problem of determining the visible voxels in a static scene given the camera characteristics, then fraudulently claim it has solved the former.

It also (presumably by fraudulent intent) neglects the size of the database needed to pre-render any significant world. By rough order of magnitude, it's petabytes.
Oh, believe me, I did the research into it. I know exactly why it's total BS. Not to say it isn't amazing technology, but it's just not viable in any way shape or form. Anyone looking at this stuff can easily spot the flaws.

What I find especially laughable is their hits against rendering distance. How exactly is that amended by voxels? Why would I render a full voxel background against a skybox when using "a really flat piece of cardboard" still works fine? How will this tech reduce rendering in any way shape or form?
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2Euclideon Technology(20 posts)(20 posts)
(20 posts)