I know that the site frowns on special "What could be in TES:V" topics, but this is too good to get buried in another topic.

Here is the Youtube demonstration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-ATtrImCx4&feature=player_embedded


If I was to sum up the possibilities of this tech I would say, "Imagine if Oblivion had the detail of Crysis in DX11 and Cyrodiil's landmass was the size of Daggerfall... or maybe even "if Cyrodiil was proportionate in accordance with the maps to the landmass as Hammerfell was in Daggerfall".

If you were to research that technology a little more you would see that it can only be used to make static worlds, no animations. So while it could have the detail of Crysis or even better, nothing would move. The creatures and NPCs could, but the world itself would be completely static. That technology may be good as a proof of concept with some other game, but not a game on the scale of TESV.

But there has to be a workaround of some sorts. I'm sure they realize that pretty much all games involve things moving in the gameworld. Either they would have to do some hybrid where the world is rendered in this way while PC/NPCs use polygons or where PC/NPC are animated through a process similar to stop-motion animation where successive frames show altered static images.

There may very well be a workaround, but Bethesda has been working on TESV since at least October 2008. To throw all of that progress away just to switch to an experimental engine would be a gigantic mistake on Bethesda's part.

Maybe they could look into it for future games, but certainly not for TESV.

True enough. I merely meant that since there is a wait for TeS:V anyway, were this in the end result, then the wait would be all the more worth it. It was more a figure of speech than a realistic request.

But I don't want to have to buy a PC more expensive than my house just to run it

great...so if Bethesda starts work on a new TES game using this technology right away........it'll probably be out by 2020?


engine stuff and fundamental rendering techniques are the first thing decided on before any work on the game begins.

At the end of the video they do say that it would take 16 months until we see it openly, I'm guessing that there are already people interested and someone has signed up for it, whoever made this is going to be very rich, something like this is going to break the boundaries for 3D video-gaming (as well as the boundaries of my wallet :flamed:

we should also remind ourselves that nothing visible in the demo video resembled anything more than moving a camera around a map. just because this technology can render lots of nurbs and organic shapes...it could be an absolute nightmare for devs to work with for all we know at this point...

i wouldn't expect Bethesda to experiment that much with their primary franchise anyway...


::looks around:: and where the hell are the other "substance over graphics" club-members?

Would a 'not here' suffice :homestar:

::raises hand:: Present.

Although I do believe they should upgrade the graphics from Fallout 3, I don't think they should go all-out and run a super-graphics engine "just 'cause"

I'd rather see many other things than super-graphics, but improved graphics would be very nice.

:drool:

As a tech demo I was totally in awe of what they can do!

Although it doesn't seem to be game ready yet. I have no desire to see TESV use this system. TES VI may have to!


Big thank you for posting this, although for my taste this would be better served in an off topic forum. :tops:

That is the beauty of this engine. You wouldn't. Think about what this engine does as just turning a pixel into a sprite. There isn't any virtual space, just a series of pictures of what a virutal space would look like at given intervals [the screen refresh rate]. Theoretically, any card that can fill a 1920x1200 screen with prerendered image @ 60 fps can do any game. Post processing effects aren't needed to make each pixel a certain color, the color can be predetermined and then they just tell the the GPU to make pixel "X" the color "Y". Even Tesselation would be rendered obsolete. Textures wouldn't exist. AA wouldn't either, but with GPU free of a lot of other work, they could go to very high resolutions relatively easier.

Think Impressionism.

The tech is genius, and I do think something like this will come to replace polygons, probably sooner than we think, but not this gen. Certainly not in time for TESV.

In any case, I'd love to have the patent for this

I agree with the post in the link... BULLL SHIIITTTTT.

Maybe its because im stubborn, but if you have a model of a tree, and its made of all points, and you want to mod that tree.... wtf do you do? Open up 3ds, get your point plugin, and make points to create a tree?

Sure it sounds good on paper, but creating these models has to be the biggest pain in the ass any game maker could ever hope for.

It appears that they were able to animate a little scorpion at 1:46 in the video. What is your feeling on this?

As I said, the world is static, not the creatures.

Maybe I'm just not tech savvy enough, but what's the big deal here? I could throw a million little items in the CS and come out with something like that.

Anyways, I wouldn't want the Elder Scrolls to go the Crysis route. I know the game is a technical marvel, well at least that's what the Internet has told me, but I didn't think it looked great. The environments were dull and teetering on the edge of the uncanny valley. It also seemed to be taxing on systems just for the heck of it.

TES really needs a streamlined system that can handle its massive open world gameplay, plus AI, plus everything else. Not a million billion polygons.

That's a very very small scale thing and does not represent at ALL a game world. Can't even compare the two scenarios.
It's just not possible to make a living breathing game world with this yet. No computer could handle it.

Just to add another of my two cents, the renders they showed in that vid look like crap. Everything looked fake, as if they were trying too hard to add too much detail.

Also, what they are doing is simmilar to what is already done, models not in your view are not rendered, they are merely taking it a step further and ONLY showing you the pixels of where things are to your screen, this would put a LOT more strain on your CPU rather than your GPU would it not? Its more calculations than rendering yeah?

I'm also going to tentatively call BS. Sure, it sounds great in prototype form (doesn't exactly look great, BTW), but they need to put their project where their mouth is before any real anolysis can be made. Just like any seemingly amazing claim in the tech world, I need to see a fully fleshed-out finished product with endorsemants and industry support. If they ever get to that stage, then fantastic. Until then, it gets filed under "Molyneux-Style Claims."

I'm pretty sure the idea of this technology is render extremely detailed scenes WITHOUT needing to do that.

But while it seems impressive, I think there will still be some time before this sort of technology can really be applied in video games. In any case, I don't think we'll be seeing it in the Elder Scrolls V, maybe in the sixth game, whenever that's going to come around, but when we don't even actually know if V will be released, I think it's a little too soon to be thinking of what might come after that.



It must be pointed out that the video is basically a tech demo, so they were probably more interested in demonstrating how much drtail they could show on s screen than creating good looking models. Besides, a lot of other new technologies in 3D rendering also suffered from similar problems when use of them first began. I don't think it's fair to denounce any new technology on the basis that the models rendered with it don't look good, when you've only seen one demonstration of it and that one showed what it was advertised for.



You can put lots of items in the game, but you might note that once you start adding too many items, the game will become slow, moreover, no matter how many items you add into the game, each one will still have limited amount of polygons in it, because the game can still only render a certain amount of polygons, the end result is that objects will look like they're made out of flat pieces (because they are.) and surfaces that are supposed to be round will look polygonal. Ideally, you can put enough polygons into something that you won't notice this unless you go out of your way to examine it in detail, the idea of this technology, from what I can see, is to overcome that limitation.



On this we can only disagree, for me, Crysis, was, and still is, the best looking video game I've seen on the market, provided you have the hardware needed to run it well, and that's the real problem, as impressive as it looks, it's very demanding on computers, to the point where it limits the amount of gamers who can play it. As much as I'd prefer to play an Elder Scrolls V that looks nice, I don't want the game to be as demanding, for its time, as Crysis (We must remember that before the fifth game is released, new computer hardware will also be available, by then maybe even Crysis will be able to run quite well on average systems.) Ideally, the game's graphics should be highly scalable, so that even those with relatively old computers can still run it and yet for those with the necessary hardware, it nonetheless looks quite good.

This is what beth might be doing:
purposefully dumbing down OB to appeal to more people. This would guarranty that more people would buy the game. With the extra money accumulated they could then spend it all on one uber ES that has both graphics and content.
But this might be called wishful thinking.

Yes, this sounds like wishful thinking to me too.

Oh sorry, I just didn't read your post properly or carefully enough.