Climax's next gen 3D engine ?

V3

Veteran
nxgenED_1.gif


here for the article

And here is the scan

Color me unimpressive o_O
 
YOu should note this which is right under the pic

This concept art is presented using effects and a level of detail expected in a realtime gaming environment on next-generation consoles

SO this is just concept art and should not be taken seriously .
 
wow, what a crap article... most of the effects I saw in there were basically stuff you can already fake or approximate on today's consoles and even already perform on xbox. The tree trunk looks like high res textures to me...

whomever wrote that article sure liked using buzz words. Bah, bezier curves/patches is somehting you can use on the current playstation 2, not all that useful.
 
I do not think this is an indication of what the new consoles will do. it can't be running on anything better than NV3x or R3xx. it isnt using the level of geometry possible on Broadband Engine+Visualizer or R5xx.
 
Ack those renders suck. As far as the "wow" factor there are games right now that are more impressive.
 
These shots also were in Edge this issue. Also, with a lot more background on those images. Eg. the trunk was to illustrate depth of fields. Nothing spectacular but it was a neat way to illustrate what immidiate effects we will see on these platforms. HDRL is awesome.
 
Re: ...

Deadmeat said:
The memory leap is only 6.5X for PSX3(40 MB -> 272 MB); that's not enough to store the kind of details present here.

PSX3 will be less of a leap over PSX2 than PSX2 was to PSX.

You seem to forget FMV. Even the first PS could do it...


:LOL:
 
The memory leap is only 6.5X for PSX3(40 MB -> 272 MB); that's not enough to store the kind of details present here.

PSX3 will be less of a leap over PSX2 than PSX2 was to PSX


I have to agree here, if in fact PS3 is limited to 256 MB main memory.
(the rest is obviously on-chip memory), it is *possible* that PS3 could be a smaller leap over PS2 than PS2 was over PS1. hopefully all the positive comments people have made regarding compression, streaming, increased efficiency, bandwidth & memory saving features/techniques, etc. will off-set the relatively "small" increase in memory.

still, I'd like Sony to just say "screw you MS" and put 1 GB memory in PS3. unlikely to happen, but I still hope for 512 MB.
 
Can't say those are very impressive glimpses at the PS3. In fact, I'm rather underwhelmed. Climax should've kept those to themselves. :(
 
The best part about the link to the gameradar article is that I found out their calling Rundown (movie with The Rock in it), "Welcome to the Jungle" in the UK :LOL:

The memory leap is only 6.5X for PSX3(40 MB -> 272 MB); that's not enough to store the kind of details present here.
What details exactly? And considering what I've seen the PS2 do with its mere 40 MB of memory, these pics look like the least I'd expect from a 6.5x memory leap.
 
But RAM is the only thing and ever matters EVER, doncha know? And you can instantly measure direct visual comparisons across from one thing to another just by knowing how much it gots.
 
Unimpressed or not - next generation games (at least PS3) will impress when being in motion, not necessarely still screens. Even if memory is limited on the next Playstation platform as Deadmeat keeps pointing out, there will be plenty of performance to do lots of physics to make the end result look decievingly good. I expect the real wow effect not to be in its texture detail - but in the overall experience and seeing everythig in motion. Like MGS2 tanker scene or GT3 wet/night tracks to a much greater degree!
 
ChryZ said:
Would procedural texturing ease the memory-requirement to a certain degree?

Yes, at least on the disk space required since textures would be generated on the fly by the CPU/VPU.
Streaming would also be reduced since you wouldn't access the disk to reload textures, with NURBS or other HOS models you can hand up with something really cool.
 
Ingenu said:
ChryZ said:
Would procedural texturing ease the memory-requirement to a certain degree?

Yes, at least on the disk space required since textures would be generated on the fly by the CPU/VPU.
Streaming would also be reduced since you wouldn't access the disk to reload textures, with NURBS or other HOS models you can hand up with something really cool.
Hm, I am really wondering how feasible it would be in terms of expense (load wise). There were lectures at previous GDCs (just checked google) and GDC2004 will host one with the topic "Simulation and Animation with Hardware-Accelerated Procedural Textures". I would love to see procedural texturing with all it's dynamic possiblities, it would be like switching from mono to stereo :D
 
Can't say those are very impressive glimpses at the PS3. In fact, I'm rather underwhelmed. Climax should've kept those to themselves.


what you need to understand is, that was not from PS3 at all. nor was it from Xbox2 or GCN2. it was almost certainly from a PC (or Mac) with a highend *current generation* video card, probably an ATI 9800 Pro/XT
(R350/R360) or the fastest GeForce FX (NV35/NV38) at best. It might have even been off of a slightly lower-end videocard from either ATI or Nvidia. the point is, it's not from any next gen console since silicon is not finished with any of them, in all probability.

the images you are seeing are from, at best, a highend PC videocard as I explained, with the engine being portable between all next gen consoles. this work was most likely done in 2003 or at the latest concievable time, early 2004 (the present). next gen console chipsets won't be going out to developers until late 2004 or early 2005 at the soonest ( I am talking about finished final silicon) ... So there is no way Climax can be working with the chipsets going into next gen consoles. I almost promise you that actual first generation and second generation software in 2005-2007 will look much better than the screens you are seeing of this Climax game engine. And as others have pointed out, the real magic will be seeing next gen games IN MOTION.
 
You're all crazy if you guys think next gen graphics will always look much better than that. Not all devs are created equal, therefore, not all games are going to be pushing systems to the limit. Once again, it's up to the developer to utilize whatever power and features are available, but that's not going to mean they are going to use them!

All I can say is that you guys are shaping yourself up for likely disappointment. I could be wrong, but at least if I AM wrong I'll be pleasantly surprised.
 
Megadrive1988 said:
Can't say those are very impressive glimpses at the PS3. In fact, I'm rather underwhelmed. Climax should've kept those to themselves.


what you need to understand is, that was not from PS3 at all. nor was it from Xbox2 or GCN2. it was almost certainly from a PC (or Mac) with a highend *current generation* video card, probably an ATI 9800 Pro/XT
(R350/R360) or the fastest GeForce FX (NV35/NV38) at best. It might have even been off of a slightly lower-end videocard from either ATI or Nvidia. the point is, it's not from any next gen console since silicon is not finished with any of them, in all probability.

the images you are seeing are from, at best, a highend PC videocard as I explained, with the engine being portable between all next gen consoles. this work was most likely done in 2003 or at the latest concievable time, early 2004 (the present). next gen console chipsets won't be going out to developers until late 2004 or early 2005 at the soonest ( I am talking about finished final silicon) ... So there is no way Climax can be working with the chipsets going into next gen consoles. I almost promise you that actual first generation and second generation software in 2005-2007 will look much better than the screens you are seeing of this Climax game engine. And as others have pointed out, the real magic will be seeing next gen games IN MOTION.

Or they can be stills rendered over the course of hours by current hardware .
 
I find it ironic that they say motion blur and depth of field will be such cool new effects, when it's already commonplace in PS2 games.
 
Back
Top