Beyond next-gen graphics In this video I'll talk about what I expect
to be released after the next-gen consoles in the distant distant future.
They may be possible with next gen, or even today's hardware, but may require time to
become mainstream, and to replace existing technologies with no real drawbacks.
Voxels and raytracing are the two holy-grails in graphics as far as I’m concerned.
Both are possible in some form today, but not up to the level that’s really needed
to impress every-day buyers.
Raytracing is effectively bouncing light around the level in the same way as is done in real-life.
Current engines cheat and approximate light in various ways, which is required to get
convincing results with today's hardware, but being able to simulate it properly in
real-time will end up simplifying and improving the graphics in games.
Forget the stupid demonstrations where everything’s ridiculously reflective and has stencil shadows
everywhere.
I’m talking more about this.
It’s very intensive to do and at the moment produces a grainy effect since hardware just
isn’t up to the task of performing enough light bounces in a single frame.
It’s almost like a camera with the exposure set to too short a time.
Hardware advances will improve on this, but remember we will also need enough processing
power left over for everything else going on in the game.
For voxels, think of minecraft, only all of the blocks are much smaller.
This replaces the polygon method that is currently used in games.
This may be a good time to bring up Unlimited Detail1, who have a working prototype of something
similar to voxels.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that their method is the way to go.
Sure, the levels would be DETAILED, but they wouldn’t be that interactive and would be
a nightmare to make maps for.
We may end up seeing games for the upcoming generation of consoles utilising this technology
in conjunction with existing polygons.
Such a method could be useful for decorating rock surfaces and other static areas of the
map where the old polygon and texture techniques do not do so well.
They aren’t the first people to attempt voxels- they’ve been around for ages.
If you’ve ever played the older Delta force, outcast or Armoured Fist games you may have
noticed that the graphics were a little bit strange.
Personally I liked them, they were glitchy and had their problems but it gave a more
organic, mysterious feel to the world.
The other problem for Unlimited Detail is that the polygon method they seem to hate
so much is quickly catching up.
In one of the videos, he rips on the trees in Crysis2 and claims that polygon counts
are increasing by 22% a year3.
Tessellation will cause this figure to jump up drastically to the point where it doesn’t
need to increase further.
Once again, have a look at the trees in Crysis 3.
Oh, they are okay.
Polygons have a huge advantage in that everybody who currently develops games has a lot of
experience with them.
For all I know they could be around forever simply because they're good enough at doing
what they're supposed to do, and may be less time-consuming or costly than a completely
dynamic voxel-approach to graphics.
Not every game would benefit from destructible scenery.
Counter Strike, for example, relies on mastering the layout.
Mini-games utilise destructible scenery but they haven't replaced the core game styles.
The other reason I think that voxels could still be the future is, pretty much because
John Carmack says so.
Bear with me for a second.
He’s the brains behind Doom, Quake and the recent Rage game.
IDtech 5 is his latest engine, and is the one powering RAGE.
The way it works seems unconventional to say the least4.
It still supports the old polygon and texture model for levels, but instead of repeating
textures it uses one massive texture which is wrapped around the entire world, with bits
of it loaded as and when they are needed.
It had some teething problems when the game first came out, but I feel it’s worth a
chance.
The incredible thing as far as I’m concerned is that RAGE looks as good as any other console
game out there, but runs at 60 fps instead of 30.
The engine is the one behind Doom 4- I’m going to make a prediction here and I’m
going to say that it will look incredible.
Not only will it be running at 30 fps instead of 60, which means that it will look more
detailed than RAGE does, but it will probably be more enclosed.
Imagine the detail of the canyons in RAGE condensed to hallways and caverns.
I feel that it will play to all of the engine’s strong points and may well be one of the best
looking current-generation games out, a true testament to how effective thinking outside
the box can be.
Now you know about his current engine, I’ll try and explain his next-generation engine.
He spoke about it a couple of years ago but admitted that the hardware is a little while
off.
He pictures a world made out of voxels, each with its own mass and properties.
This kind of mirrors atoms in real-life and is ultimately the best way of simulating a
world5.
I have no doubt that it will throw up all sorts of problems but I don’t think that
there’s anybody better to tackle these problems than John Carmack.
Even if you disagree with his ideas he’s a great person who has contributed a lot to
the computing industry.
He seems to go against the methods that everybody else uses to make graphics in games.
I mean, the guy managed to get his ID tech 5 engine running on an iphone!
Not that I love him or anything, he's just brilliant.
One of his current projects is the Oculus Rift, a fascinating bit of hardware that doesn't
just support 3D glasses, but also has some kind of motion sensor built in, allowing you
to rotate your head to look around the environment.
This sort of technology is compatible with today's hardware, though I am unsure as to
when it will be adopted by a more mainstream market.
It has been shown running Doom 3 and makes me wonder if Rage's 60 fps is deliberate to
allow for 30 fps in 3D with the engine, on today's hardware.
We'll see.
Imagine wearing that bit of kit inside a huge hamster ball.
It would be like, real-life or something!
Only more lonely.