Nintendo and volumetric rendering.

[Urian]

Just a few minuts ago I remembered the famous patent of the volumetric rendering graphics that a lot of people without technical knowledge said that was a new form of making graphics when the patent was talking about the voxels.

Is possible to make a GPU around the Voxel+Shading and adapting it for this type of rendering, the vertex program isn´t a problem but for the rasterizer, fragment program and the memory is a problem because you need an huge performance for making graphics at real time.

Knowing that 0 games on the Gamecube haven´t used this type of graphics (Voxel+Shader) is possible that Hollywood could be a Voxel+Shader programmable graphics processor.

The question for making this possible is: how many power is needed?

 

[pc999]

Didnt that use a lot of memory (BW?), I mean a very very high riquirements in it ? If so being the memory the first/bigest limitation in consoles I dont see it as primary rendering (unless they had some kind trick under they hat, some kind of compression, I guess)

Anyway from what I heard it would have some pros like making the maps, physics/destructible environments (how would it be in interactive environments).

Anyway 1) can you show the patent, please (I dont knew about) 2) anyone know here I can find more info?

And I second that question: The question for making this possible is: how many power is needed? (compared with (eg) Xenos or X1900, 7800..)


BTW, it is Delta Force that use Voxels, right?

 

[Urian]

http://www.vis.uni-stuttgart.de/vis03_tutorial/hadwiger_gpu_volrend2.pdf

http://www.vis.uni-stuttgart.de/vis03_tutorial/hadwiger_gpu_volrend1.pdf
http://www.vrvis.at/via/resources/course-volgraphics-2004/slides/SIGGRAPH04_Part01.pdf

 

[Squeak]

If anything, I think there's a better chance of them using a another kind of primitive than voxels. As you mention the are really demanding on memory, and even if that disadvantage could be alleviated to some degree by procedurally generated objects, you would still have the problems with aliasing.
Maybe something like the old Synthavision system is more realistic. It used boolean logic, with basic geometric (not converted to polygons) shapes.
That technique augmented with offset-mapping , could look really good.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

I've never seen a voxel-based animated character before. As far as I know, technology for that simply does not exist...

 

[pc999]

Thanks, but I most confess that this is already beyond my undertanding, anyway thanks.

What is this Synthavision system

 

[pc999]

I've never seen a voxel-based animated character before. As far as I know, technology for that simply does not exist...

Could they do a mix, like Voxel environments and vertex character (or whatever that it is animated)?

 

[DudeMiester]

Well you can animate meta-balls, so I don't see why you couldn't animate a character. You would just have to represent it as a field/volume instead of a surface.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Theoretic stuff is one thing, but have you seen animation with metaballs? And voxels would be even more complicated. Like, manipulating a 3D polygonal/HOS object internally, then converting it to voxels for display... eck, it would be horrible.

Just think about how the characters in Wolfenstein looked like. They were 2D bitmap based, and when magnified, they looked quite ugly. Voxels would be the same, unless you'd have infinite resolution; they'd become pixelated in close-ups.


But what I just don't get here is once again the same as with raytracing. Why on earth do you believe that a radically different and unproven technology would be better than the continuing development of the existing and proven stuff, why do you think that voxels are the ultimate in 3D rendering?

 

[EndR]

Could they do a mix, like Voxel environments and vertex character (or whatever that it is animated)?

Outcast by Appeal mixed both Voxels for enviroments and polys for characters..

 

[Squeak]

What is this Synthavision system

Google Synthavision and MAGI.
Remember the Lightcycles in TRON? Not a single regular polygon.
The main advantage with the technique is that you can make basic curved shapes like cones, spheres and cylinders very much faster than with polygons. This means that it's not well suited for more geometrically complex shapes like living things and details in landscapes though. But with offset mapping that would change.
Maybe you could take it even further and rasterize complex curves directly, without having to convert them to polygons?
I very much doubt Nintendo/ATI ArtX team has anything like that up their sleeve though.

 

[London Geezer]

But what I just don't get here is once again the same as with raytracing. Why on earth do you believe that a radically different and unproven technology would be better than the continuing development of the existing and proven stuff, why do you think that voxels are the ultimate in 3D rendering?

Cuz teh raytracing end voxels sound so much kewler than old poleegoons and textyours!11

 

[Platon]

Outcast by Appeal mixed both Voxels for enviroments and polys for characters..

What a marvelous game it was. I think for me that has been the best gamming experience so far...

 

[Jabjabs]

Outcast and Delta force would have to be the last real major games to ever use voxels, it was around that time that games like Project IGI and Giants came along and showed that you could make large polygonal landscapes that looked good and ran fast, quite simply the voxel was doomed.

 

[Qroach]

What a marvelous game it was. I think for me that has been the best gamming experience so far...

This is one of my favourite games all time as well. Infact, i'm good friends with the lead game designer (he works in BC now and got married. he sent me the crazy video clip of his wedding proposal. it was pretty cool...). I never did get around to finishing it though and I also wish it had a high res patch.

 

[pc999]

Outcast by Appeal mixed both Voxels for enviroments and polys for characters..

That looks good for a 1999 game, but it seems that they also think that this is not the best method (unless it is because of PS2 particular architeture).

While the first game combined objects and characters consisting of polygons with voxel (volumetric pixels) technology that allowed for an outstanding draw distance, the sequel is being developed using polygons for all the environmental and foreground objects.

Google Synthavision and MAGI.
Remember the Lightcycles in TRON? Not a single regular polygon.
The main advantage with the technique is that you can make basic curved shapes like cones, spheres and cylinders very much faster than with polygons. This means that it's not well suited for more geometrically complex shapes like living things and details in landscapes though. But with offset mapping that would change.
Maybe you could take it even further and rasterize complex curves directly, without having to convert them to polygons?
I very much doubt Nintendo/ATI ArtX team has anything like that up their sleeve though.

Thanks for the info, that is interesting.

 

[_phil_]

I've never seen a voxel-based animated character before. As far as I know, technology for that simply does not exist...

Caviar voxel demo 1999 (?)

 

[Nesh]

Outcast by Appeal mixed both Voxels for enviroments and polys for characters..

That was one of the most underrated games ever.

It was a marvel to play and watch.Even for todays standards it doesnt look bad.One of the greatest PC games

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Caviar voxel demo 1999 (?)

Never heard about that. Link?

 

[Rodéric]

That was one of the most underrated games ever.

It was a marvel to play and watch.Even for todays standards it doesnt look bad.One of the greatest PC games

Outcast : Best PC game, period !

It had lots of features which only became broadly used in traditional rendering years later (bump mapping, water reflection & refraction, ripples; huge viewing range; all characters speaking [no text]...)
However, only the map/landscape was using voxel technology, the characters, animals, buildings... were all using triangles.