grass - theorie
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/grass - theorie Nice :)
by 2012 it might perhaps even be used within a game :)
by 2012 it might perhaps even be used within a game :)
And with per-grass collisions in 2022.
But anyways, one thing I'm disliking about any grass/foilage system is how bare they always make the ground itself look, as is the same problem in the screenshots provided in their theory. Is it just a major lacking of proper lighting/bumpmapping on the ground or something that's causing it?
(Oblivion has this problem to some extent)
But anyways, one thing I'm disliking about any grass/foilage system is how bare they always make the ground itself look, as is the same problem in the screenshots provided in their theory. Is it just a major lacking of proper lighting/bumpmapping on the ground or something that's causing it?
(Oblivion has this problem to some extent)
Demo videos are not worth anything.
Let's see a demo we can user-controlled walk through.
I have spoken - nothing more needs to be said. They need to hand over a demo - not some "Andy Pandy", woops I spilt my Smarties, video.
They simply must prove their grass is un-bent.
Let's see a demo we can user-controlled walk through.
I have spoken - nothing more needs to be said. They need to hand over a demo - not some "Andy Pandy", woops I spilt my Smarties, video.
They simply must prove their grass is un-bent.
If they don't have a playable demo, it's useless academic BS.
Not all theory is academic BS...
Most encryption technology is academic theory for a long time (until it gets evaluated as reliable).
Most encryption technology is academic theory for a long time (until it gets evaluated as reliable).
Too many thinkers, not enough doers.
I cant access the page, it must have been overloaded or something, what is all the talk about? what grass? are they gonna grow virtual grass in games or what???
http://www.irisa.fr/bunraku/GENS/kboulang/videos/grassLQ.avi
Download the little video (37MB) - the big one is bigger.
Download the little video (37MB) - the big one is bigger.
After watching the video puki linked it doesn't seem to me like the whole stuff is just theory. Seems like it's running pretty well on an experimental level, I coul imagine seeing that in a PS3 game near you in 2009 ^^
Too many thinkers, not enough doers.
Actually, some games out there make me think there are too many doers who aren't thinkers :). You need both, not one or the other.
Anyway, I've seen that paper several months ago. It's interesting, but not very practical (10 - 55 FPS on a 7800 GTX isn't exactly real-time, after you've added in all the other components of your game on top of that). Maybe in a few years from now, but honestly I think the old billboard-style grass can look just as good (if not better) when done right.
Edit: Actually that grass rendering technique might work very well if you were making a ant simulation or something :). But other than that, that level of detail (per-grass-blade rendering) is just wasteful.
It looks like it works pretty well yes.
But if you focus a whole demo on simple effect that makes 10% and less of the end performance consumption and scale this one up you need 4ghz oct core and quad 8800GTX to have it running at a usefull level
Chances that you see this stuff dropped totally, beeing replaced by shader driven voxel technology in a shader raytraced environment is larger than that this thing will make an appearance in anything higher than one of those lame shooters that crave for eye candy than for anything else.
Crysis 2 would most likely qualify for that. Trash game, great tech
But if you focus a whole demo on simple effect that makes 10% and less of the end performance consumption and scale this one up you need 4ghz oct core and quad 8800GTX to have it running at a usefull level
Chances that you see this stuff dropped totally, beeing replaced by shader driven voxel technology in a shader raytraced environment is larger than that this thing will make an appearance in anything higher than one of those lame shooters that crave for eye candy than for anything else.
Crysis 2 would most likely qualify for that. Trash game, great tech
It looks well manicured. :-D
I actually enjoyed the Crysis demo :-S
i enjoyed this grass demo, suddenly I feel like a buffalo, I want to eat some of that grass :D mm delicious
OT:
thevideogamer; would you consider making your signature image smaller? As it is now, I find it's cluttering up the screen.
thevideogamer; would you consider making your signature image smaller? As it is now, I find it's cluttering up the screen.
..im not impressed at all..
Well I find it impressive, and I've no problem with people experimenting with future technologies. While they're waiting for hardware to catch up, they can be refining the technology. Imagine this when the grass can be swaying naturally in the wind...
@LarsG: I made a smaller one for the blitzbasic. com forums...
It's useless because by the time technology catches up, there will be some new hardware technique that makes everything obsolete. It's just like the useless academics who were working on real-time lightmappers a few years ago, just waiting for the day when the hardware could handle it. Then deferred rendering came along and made their plans look silly.
A lot of graphics programmers seem attracted to abstraction that will never pay off, so they spend as many years as possible in an academic environment where they are protected from their failure to produce anything of value. They'll put out paper after paper of a technique that looks neat, but they omit to mention grevious errors when it is put into practice. Or they release a demo on NVidia's site that shows a technique that will only work in the confines of an extremely controlled environment.
Then I hire them to do something, they talk big, and the actual work they put out is horrible quality, but they think it is beneath them to correct their mistakes.
A lot of graphics programmers seem attracted to abstraction that will never pay off, so they spend as many years as possible in an academic environment where they are protected from their failure to produce anything of value. They'll put out paper after paper of a technique that looks neat, but they omit to mention grevious errors when it is put into practice. Or they release a demo on NVidia's site that shows a technique that will only work in the confines of an extremely controlled environment.
Then I hire them to do something, they talk big, and the actual work they put out is horrible quality, but they think it is beneath them to correct their mistakes.
All progamming/game technology/algorithms are built on the back of academic "BS". Stange attitude.
Who do you think invented/discovered deferred rendering?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_shading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Deering
Who do you think invented/discovered deferred rendering?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_shading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Deering
Dude, all these techniques are things that just naturally come about when the hardware is ready. Hundreds of people would have come up with the idea in the last year if it had never been published before.
90% of research is masturbation. There are only a few good researchers out there. Take it from an ex-scientist.
90% of research is masturbation. There are only a few good researchers out there. Take it from an ex-scientist.
Did you study CS?
If not I just count your rant as the usual rant of a "doer" that does not understand enough of the why and is just jealous.
Who do you think creates the GPU that support this kind of lazy attidu?
Hint: Its NOT god!
Its those academic "BS"ers together with the theoretic information science guys who invent such algorithms often mainly for proof of concept and the like. But this proofs of concepts are what becomes reality.
Without that you would still play with Matrox stuff and wouldn't have the least idea how to represent it usefully as you wouldn't have scene graphs or any of the well known and commonly used optimation algorithms like BSP trees and OctTrees
It needs many many good "little inventions" to make it possible for one genius to do the impacting invention so even those that don't contribute practically have their impact as their theoretical work is needed later on.
Thats at least is better than does that create masses of eye candy trash while yet having not the least understand of basic game theory and creating trash like Crysis or CoD4, that while beeing technically genius just is pure waste of diskspace and money game wise.
If not I just count your rant as the usual rant of a "doer" that does not understand enough of the why and is just jealous.
Who do you think creates the GPU that support this kind of lazy attidu?
Hint: Its NOT god!
Its those academic "BS"ers together with the theoretic information science guys who invent such algorithms often mainly for proof of concept and the like. But this proofs of concepts are what becomes reality.
Without that you would still play with Matrox stuff and wouldn't have the least idea how to represent it usefully as you wouldn't have scene graphs or any of the well known and commonly used optimation algorithms like BSP trees and OctTrees
It needs many many good "little inventions" to make it possible for one genius to do the impacting invention so even those that don't contribute practically have their impact as their theoretical work is needed later on.
Thats at least is better than does that create masses of eye candy trash while yet having not the least understand of basic game theory and creating trash like Crysis or CoD4, that while beeing technically genius just is pure waste of diskspace and money game wise.
I'm not sure I fully agree that techniques naturally come about when hardware is ready. I'm sure it's true that techniques fully mature when hardware is ready, but the groundwork (I imagine - I'm conjecturing here) is laid down theoretically first. I would argue that in part hardware design is driven by the demands of theoretical techniques, and then new hardware in turn inspires new theories. In any case, a technique that is of little use in the practical world can often inspire more practical solutions - and at the very least, can't hurt! And at the VERY least, I enjoyed the pretty movie!
well..Dreamora, I assure you that those GPU's you talking about, is not done by some BS academics...it was done by very hardworking engineers who use to hit wall after wall for year without exposing that as a 'step in development' but typical workflow..no talk no bs...just work...and I know that because Im working in Sony and I know many folks whos working 'down somewhere' and never ever been exposed for extraordinary work they did..usually exposed smartasses are always BS academics..
It's cool you guys are so interested on grass.... maybe a game called "Grass World 2008" will be out :P
(It's cool to have soooooo much grass in your/mine game!!)
(It's cool to have soooooo much grass in your/mine game!!)
Mmmmm grass.....
lol
I've tried the grass, it's virtual grass but it tastes good. It tastes like a chicken, I belive they have messed up something in the taste code, but it does not matter when you are inside that virtual word grass tasting like chicken is mmmm