??? "Rendered in real time..." ???

[js1973]

I just watched the Mac/Doom3 vid and Carmack and the other guy (Jobs?) kept emphasizing that the Geforce3 was rendering things in real time. What did they mean?

 

[BenSkywalker]

Rendering it in real time is saying that it is doing it in a game type situation. Like you could pick up the mouse and play it.

The demo of the Pixar "movie" they showed was first rendered on a Cray Supercomputer that needed 75 hours for ever second of actual film(very much not real time). High end CGI uses a software rasterization that takes significantly longer then hardware based accelerators, though they produce end results that are very clearly superior(and by a wide margin).

For perspective- A GeForce3 is roughly two hundred seventy thousand times faster then a 1986 vintage Cray supercomputer at rendering tasks.

 

[js1973]

So those character models they showed up close would be exactly what we would see in a deathmatch game? I mean, if it were an option, you could swap out those Doom3 models with the models in Q3A and they would look that good running around? Or those models would be just for an intro video?

 

[loosbrew]

they made it point to say that those models werent just show piece models. they said that thats what the chracters would look like in the game. i really liked the environmental aspects behind what they were talking about. i like the idea of real time light and shadow rendering. looked nice!

loosbrew

 

[BenSkywalker]

"So those character models they showed up close would be exactly what we would see in a deathmatch game?"

Yes, that is what real time means Those ARE the models for the game, they are already designed(though they could well be changed around several times by the time the game launches, Quake3 looked quite a bit better by the time it came out then the early shots).

 

[js1973]

Wow.

 

[Sunner]

"Wow"?
"Looks nice"???

Am I the only thinking that demo looked friggin undescibably fscking gorgeous???
The details on the models for one thing, incredible!

And the second thing, the envoirmental effect, namely, the dynamic lightning, that was some seriously heavy $hit

Oh and mods, please, why cant we type $hit? really, its not like its a very harsh word, in fact its just a word for one of the most natural things out there

 

[Silhouette90]

I was also shocked when I saw the demo first. The engine is unbelieveable and the quality of the engine shines on the gf3 with no doubt. Bu the question here is the screen resolution of the demo. If they get this demo running at 640x480 in real-time(which might be the most probable case for the projection based presentation), does this new gf3 toy has enough power to deliver this quality at higher resolutions like 1024x768?

Best

 

[DefRef]

It's possible that the demo had ultra-complex models to show off the bells and whistles, but that the game may be simplified to allow high-speed action with tons of enemies (a la Serious Sam).

Q3 wasn't as good looking as it could've been because speed was the primary concern for fast action. Carmack has said that slower-paced games could reveal more of the eye-candy stuff.

Games like Heavy Metal: FAKK2 and Alice and Elite Force were stunning. Imagine what the DOOM3 engine will be capable of.

The future's so bright...

 

[RoboTECH]

DefRef, you make a very good point. Good map designers know that designing a deathmatch level requires a FAR different hand than designing a map for single player.

Doom3 is supposed to be primarily single player, so I drool at the thought of Carmack coding his engine for tomorrow's hardare without the constraints of needing 80-100 fps.

 

[Deeko]

<< Imagine what the DOOM3 engine will be capable of. >>


If I'm not mistaken, I don't think it is a totally new engine. I thought i read Carmack say somewhere that it was a completely reworked Q3 engine, not an entirely new engine. But hey, as is usual with me, i could be wrong.

 

[miniMUNCH]

All of the scenes in the demo were very dark, ie: easy to render at high res. and it looked like the game scenes were barely getting 30 FPS...also the faces being rendered and spun were getting less than 25 FPS by the looks of all the stuttering...

Of course, that was all on a MAC of course.

I'm not really that impressed...I want to see &quot;Mosaic&quot;.

 

[digim0rtal]

Everything looks good in a product demo. (<-period)

 

[Zak]

But this game is two-or-so years away, right? By the time it comes out it won't be as shocking I bet. UT2 (or whatever it was) demo was also impressive as hell. Skeletal animation and high detail plus the outdoors knocked my socks off...OK, OK I wasn't wearing socks at the time. I am tired of basements, dungeons and warehouses. I liked UT2 and Tribes2 shots more than Doom3 demo.

Zak

 

[JellyBaby]

All good but I hope game developers use some processor power for decent AI!

 

[BFG10K]

Those dymamic shadows were very impressive, as was that lumbering skeleton/zombie guy near the end of the demo. I just wish the movie was better quality so you could see things better.

 

[SendTrash]

was it just the streaming that I saw, or was the demo jerky? it wasn't totally smooth.. I know its a demo.. but where is the fluid movement?