Euclideon small update and announcement

[Lavachyste]

Someone from Australia shoud go and check the office. Just to make sure it does exist.

[monstercameron]

Euclideon has done nothing except showcase a bunch of stuff that never released and has never been used. They were running demos in 2012, it's almost 2015, wtf happened? Why did everything go silent? It just makes me think they are a bunch of bullshiters.

they have had a website up for years and moved to point clouds versus gaming.

[monstercameron]

How about a tech demo....

http://potree.org/wp/demo/

point cloud rendering isnt that hard.

[LukeTim]

http://potree.org/wp/demo/

point cloud rendering isnt that hard.

 

Isn't traditional rendering basically based upon point clouds?

I mean you just cut out the unnecessary points (because the human eye probably won't notice once it gets past a certain point) and fill in the spaces with approximations in the form of a triangles... right?

In that respect it's just a more efficient application of the same principle...

Just a thought... I am no 3D rendering expert.

[monstercameron]

Isn't traditional rendering basically based upon point clouds?

I mean you just cut out the unnecessary points (because the human eye probably won't notice once it gets past a certain point) and fill in the spaces with approximations in the form of a triangles... right?

In that respect it's just a more efficient application of the same principle...

Just a thought... I am no 3D rendering expert.

tbh the underlying tech is above my head but from my limited understanding, they store the points in an octree and cull any points that arent visible.

[LukeTim]

tbh the underlying tech is above my head but from my limited understanding, they store the points in an octree and cull any points that arent visible.

 

Well, I was just thinking of it as analogous to the vertices in traditional 3D rendering.

[Hans Christian | Teri]

polygons feel more alive than actual scans or unrestricted models? I dont understand

 

Yes, its not finished yet. And scanning do make artifacts. Do you mean them, rugged edges, unscanned surfaces, reflections etc...?

 

Well how are you going to animate these scans in a realistic manner?

 

And please don't tell me you don't see the artifacts in the image in your original post. If you don't really need to take off your fanboy glasses. On top of that it was painfully obvious all throughout the video you posted (also before he mentioned it in the most sensational way possible) that the images he was showing was NOT real world.

[LAwLz]

Yaaawn

 

The snake oil salesmen are back I see.

Call me when I can download and run a tech demo on my computer. Oh and the tech demo has to include animations, not just static objects.

With the speed they are working I suspect that will be sometime in 2124. Or I could just play one of the many games already using voxels.

[monstercameron]

Yaaawn

 

The snake oil salesmen are back I see.

Call me when I can download and run a tech demo on my computer. Oh and the tech demo has to include animations, not just static objects.

With the speed they are working I suspect that will be sometime in 2124. Or I could just play one of the many games already using voxels.

its not impossible to animate point clouds, think about it like animating sprites.

[Manny Calavera]

How about a tech demo....

Media allread have it, and certain persons have it also ( or will get it ), and there is also some info, but its under NDA

[Manny Calavera]

Yaaawn

 

The snake oil salesmen are back I see.

Call me when I can download and run a tech demo on my computer. Oh and the tech demo has to include animations, not just static objects.

With the speed they are working I suspect that will be sometime in 2124. Or I could just play one of the many games already using voxels.

Yaaawn

First off, those are not voxels. I dont care if you call them voxels actually ; but they dont use same tech.

 

We will get playable demo sooner than games I expect, and you can expect also some pictures i will post on this forum soon also, maybe some other material or juicy info that i find.

 

THis is lighting, dont you think ? ( skip to 32: 35)

[AlwaysFSX]

Media allread have it, and certain persons have it also ( or will get it ), and there is also some info, but its under NDA

For 4+ years you'd think they'd have a consumer demo already.  <_<

[LAwLz]

Yaaawn

First off, those are not voxels. I dont care if you call them voxels actually ; but they dont use same tech.

Well actually they do. I am calling them voxels because that's what Euclideon called them 2 years ago.

 

 

We will get playable demo sooner than games I expect, and you can expect also some pictures i will post on this forum soon also, maybe some other material or juicy info that i find.

Yeah I've been waiting for a demo for nearly half a decade (4 years to be more precise). I heard the exact same claims back then as I am hearing today. Demos are coming soon. It is revolutionary. We totally have animations working. We have dynamic lighting working. Everything you want in a game works and we have internal demos which work just fine. So far we have not seen anything of that released to the public. If their claims were true, why hide it?

 

 

Are you in some way affiliated with Euclideon? Because if you are I would like to know.

[Manny Calavera]

Well how are you going to animate these scans in a realistic manner?

 

And please don't tell me you don't see the artifacts in the image in your original post. If you don't really need to take off your fanboy glasses. On top of that it was painfully obvious all throughout the video you posted (also before he mentioned it in the most sensational way possible) that the images he was showing was NOT real world.

Allways i have to play advocate One has to hahah.

 

I want to play stupid here. I told you 3 artifacts, and maybe there are more, you tell me. Where there are no scanned pixels, where there are some kind of windows or reflections/weird surfacer, fur(not displayed on this) and the rugged edges. I can explain.

 

Just tell me. If you cant tell me what artifacts you mean, i cant explain properly. I am playing stupid on purpuse. And also, maybe I AM stupid and cant see artifacts you mean.

 

And also, as i said, this is not finite version. This is just update. I am sure they will try to fix bugs and artifacts. Its not like they are realeasing half finished products ( like some companies do ).

 

And this is exactly why they do so long pause with no press releases. Everyone jumps on them like crazy.

"OMG ARTIFACTS, OMG SHADOWS ARE CRAPPY, DISGARD IN BIN!, they should finish ages ago"

[Manny Calavera]

Well actually they do. I am calling them voxels because that's what Euclideon called them 2 years ago.

 

 

Yeah I've been waiting for a demo for nearly half a decade (4 years to be more precise). I heard the exact same claims back then as I am hearing today. Demos are coming soon. It is revolutionary. We totally have animations working. We have dynamic lighting working. Everything you want in a game works and we have internal demos which work just fine. So far we have not seen anything of that released to the public. If their claims were true, why hide it?

 

 

Are you in some way affiliated with Euclideon? Because if you are I would like to know.

They also called them polygons in videos. They arent tho

But i agree they are more like voxels than polygons, thats why ppls say its voxels.

I just posted you proof btw. Watch video. Lighting and tire moving. Tree and tire is unlimited ( presumably ;P )

Right, again this question. At least you could read previous sarcastic comment i made on first site.

No, i am not affiliated. If i was, i would be way more knowledgable, and this would be such a noob post. I am a fanboy at most.

[Manny Calavera]

For 4+ years you'd think they'd have a consumer demo already.  <_<

Is that a wish or is that a fact ?

 

I am sure its first, but you have to know releasing something crappy, unfinished is against their interest.

If they released demo with no animation and crappy lighting -> death of euclideons reputation. They would be pissed on like a toilet bowl.

[Hans Christian | Teri]

Allways i have to play advocate One has to hahah.

 

I want to play stupid here. I told you 3 artifacts, and maybe there are more, you tell me. Where there are no scanned pixels, where there are some kind of windows or reflections/weird surfacer, fur(not displayed on this) and the rugged edges. I can explain.

 

Just tell me. If you cant tell me what artifacts you mean, i cant explain properly. I am playing stupid on purpuse. And also, maybe I AM stupid and cant see artifacts you mean.

 

And also, as i said, this is not finite version. This is just update. I am sure they will try to fix bugs and artifacts. Its not like they are realeasing half finished products ( like some companies do ).

 

And this is exactly why they do so long pause with no press releases. Everyone jumps on them like crazy.

"OMG ARTIFACTS, OMG SHADOWS ARE CRAPPY, DISGARD IN BIN!, they should finish ages ago"

 

Well a product that doesn't work deserves criticism, if they don't stand up for themselves and take it in how is it ever going to improve? Even if they're aware it should never be taken as hate. There may very well be reasons behind the artifacts (of course there), but it is yet another very valid reason why this is not usable as game tech. It's just not good enough.

[LukeTim]

Is that a wish or is that a fact ?

 

I am sure its first, but you have to know releasing something crappy, unfinished is against their interest.

If they released demo with no animation and crappy lighting -> death of euclideons reputation. They would be pissed on like a toilet bowl.

 

They don't really have much of a reputation to start with...

[Manny Calavera]

They don't really have much of a reputation to start with...

I agree on that point ha, ive been in the youtube comment section long enough to see that

They should kept quiet all about the gaming. They would have peace and nobody would know about them. They could market to geospatial only. But whats done is done, but I think Bruce Dell is good guy and deserves to be respected and given credit to. And he will i hope Ofcourse thats my point of view and we are here to discuss it.

 

I hope all of you now agree that companies allready use their rendering technology and its not fake. Lmao.

Do you agree its real, or you think its fake? We are talking only static point rendering here.

What we should be discussing here ( and this is main part of OP also ) is gaming / game rendering / limitations in games etc .

 

 

Well a product that doesn't work deserves criticism, if they don't stand up for themselves and take it in how is it ever going to improve? Even if they're aware it should never be taken as hate. There may very well be reasons behind the artifacts (of course there), but it is yet another very valid reason why this is not usable as game tech. It's just not good enough.

I would like to answer my question. PLEAS  However stupid i may sound, or i may be ( ) please, for the love of whatever you belive in (flying spaghetti monster) what artifacts you mean? I have answered ( i  hope) most of your questions and adressed your statements, quite exessively and made pretty long comments. I just need that

 

Its hate also, but we will ignore that. Haters gunna hate allways.

It does deserve criticism, everything does. But its not finished. They know whats right or wrong and they know lighting is shit as f*ck and there are artifacts that make games uplayable if not fixed/altered/whatever.

 

If they release now, people will be pissed and the company will get bad reputation as "Fakers" or "snake  oil salesmans" etc... like they allready dont have enough of that now

 

"1. There may very well be reasons behind the artifacts (of course there), but it is yet another very valid reason why this is not usable as game tech. 2. It's just not good enough."

 

1. Ok, you are going full retard here and i want you to admit you did it, because i dont want to be discredited .

Just because it is in development, doesnt make it unusable in game tech

 

2. Hooray, we agree on something, and euclideon does too i am sure! They are making it better.

 

Idk how many times i will have to repeat this but here we go again...

THEY WILL RELEASE WHEN ITS GOOD ENOUGH

[nicholaswillems]

The thing is there can't be dynamic lightning. That would require render farms or very high-end pc's. I like what they are doing and all, but it's all predetermined lightning.

[Hans Christian | Teri]

What artifacts? Every single one of them. It doesn't matter what nature they are of, be it f'ed up lighting, jagged edges or what ever. Looking back it probably wasn't the most wise thing showing off the tech 3 years again and then showing little to no improvement today. This is why people call them fakers.

[LAwLz]

The thing is there can't be dynamic lightning. That would require render farms or very high-end pc's. I like what they are doing and all, but it's all predetermined lightning.

They are claiming that it can run on the CPU alone (or at least they did in ~2011). That was at 64 atoms per square mm, which is A LOT.

So if their claims are true, you will be able to run a game with "unlimited detail" on for example an i3, no dedicated GPU needed.

[BallGum]

They are claiming that it can run on the CPU alone (or at least they did in ~2011). That was at 64 atoms per square mm, which is A LOT.

So if their claims are true, you will be able to run a game with "unlimited detail" on for example an i3, no dedicated GPU needed.

That's the part I'm having a really hard time believing. AFAIK, modern desktop GPUs are made to do the specific calculations in parallel on data in order to render things correctly, while the CPU is more of a 'jack of all trades'.

[LAwLz]

That's the part I'm having a really hard time believing. AFAIK, modern desktop GPUs are made to do the specific calculations in parallel on data in order to render things correctly, while the CPU is more of a 'jack of all trades'.

Yes but they claim they only need a small amount of processing power since they don't need to render entire objects, just the specific pixels you see. It just needs to calculate which particles you will see, and then display them.

To be fair though, their CPU only demo (and I use the word "demo" very loosely here) ran at 20 FPS, but that was many years ago so I assume a modern CPU would be able to push at least 30-40 FPS. They also claimed that they were working on a GPU accelerated test and my guess is that if the CPU alone can do 20 FPS, a low end GPU (maybe even an integrated one) should be able to do 120 FPS with ease.

[FabulousOtter]

Why on earth would you want to make a game with this technology?

 

Games aren't all about how beautiful it looks (as we all know already); it takes mechanics and narrative that have to be carefully crafted in conjunction with the game world itself to make it a complete package. You can't just scan an area and expect it to work; everything has to have a meaning and a purpose that makes sense within the context of the game in order to immerse the player. Otherwise you have a glorified tech demo...

 

 

Also @Manny Calavera, holy crap dude are you like their PR guy's tea boy or something, chill out man