PDA

View Full Version : Quake 4.... Raytraced!


Pages : [1] 2

jAkUp
04-23-07, 07:13 PM
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39101

einstein_314
04-23-07, 08:11 PM
Wow!

MaXThReAT
04-23-07, 08:14 PM
Badoink: http://www.idfun.de/temp/q4rt/screenshots/index.html
Bading: http://www.q4rt.de/
It's a boot time.

ASUSEN7900GTX
04-23-07, 08:26 PM
so waht is so wow about ray trace seems to me as all is metallic

well sorry if i donīt get it

Tork64
04-23-07, 08:42 PM
"in three, you will have to wonder why you need GPUs anymore. "

Seriously ?

MaXThReAT
04-23-07, 08:52 PM
"in three, you will have to wonder why you need GPUs anymore. "

Seriously ?

Seriously!

wollyka
04-23-07, 08:52 PM
Ray-tracing is excellent for photo-realistic 3D
check this (Freeware for rendering scenes): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POV-Ray

nutcrackr
04-23-07, 08:54 PM
Aside from the reflections quake 4 non ray traced looks pretty much the same to me.

NaitoSan
04-23-07, 09:11 PM
Wow!

SwedX
04-24-07, 06:24 AM
Impressive, so this is the future!

Mr_Maniac
04-24-07, 07:03 AM
Uhm... An University here in Germany is working on a Raytracing Accelerator for some Years now. They already showed off two prototypes that did render a few scenes in realtime...

I wonder if they made more progress... No news for two years now :(

Link: http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/SaarCOR/

So no more GPU but RPU ;)

wysiwyg
04-24-07, 07:06 AM
looks like shyte

http://www.idfun.de/temp/q4rt/screenshots/q4level_dispersal.jpg

harl
04-24-07, 07:14 AM
Future GPU's are supposed to do raytracing.
In fact now are almost general purpose vectorial units ...

In class we learn that actual rendering techniques based on Z-Buffer
are faster than Ray-Tracing but computation time grows exponential
with more complex graphics while Ray-Tracing grows linear.
(or linear vs logarithmic I can't remember)

So there is a point of complexity where Ray-tracing is faster

CaptNKILL
04-24-07, 07:22 AM
Yeah, I don't think this technology is going to be used in any real retail games (let alone become standard) any time soon. Like, not in the next 5-10 years...

Completely replacing a GPU with a CPU is a joke. Especially considering how many new things (that are actually becoming reality) are being done on the GPU, rather than using the CPU or other devices.

Yeah, ray tracing has a ton of potential and it is definitely the future, but currently it can't do what is required to compete with what a GPU can do (ie, make something look and run decent), and things that huge don't change in 3 years.

grey_1
04-24-07, 07:27 AM
looks like shyte

http://www.idfun.de/temp/q4rt/screenshots/q4level_dispersal.jpg

Looks good to me...







For Quake 2. :p

Banko
04-24-07, 07:56 AM
Lol that actually looks a lot like Quake 2. Maybe it was Quake 2 Raytraced and they said Quake 4? lol...

pxmm
04-24-07, 10:44 AM
Lol that actually looks a lot like Quake 2. Maybe it was Quake 2 Raytraced and they said Quake 4? lol...

Yeah, it looks like all the lighting and normal mapping is removed. Maybe the raytracing needs different lighting and material assets/definitions (or it ran too slowly with the lighting turned on:captnkill: )

kevJ420
04-24-07, 02:02 PM
Future GPU's are supposed to do raytracing.
In fact now are almost general purpose vectorial units ...

In class we learn that actual rendering techniques based on Z-Buffer
are faster than Ray-Tracing but computation time grows exponential
with more complex graphics while Ray-Tracing grows linear.
(or linear vs logarithmic I can't remember)

So there is a point of complexity where Ray-tracing is faster

They ought to just bring the w-buffer back. The Z-buffer isn't as good. Not only can the w-buffer make scenes immense and have infinite draw distance, it's totally performance free(not that I care about frame rate loss, but most do, so why not use it?) (the extra transistors are worth it.)

Head_slinger
04-24-07, 03:03 PM
looks like shyte

http://www.idfun.de/temp/q4rt/screenshots/q4level_dispersal.jpg

Its because that uses their own engine which does raytracing and supports loading Q4 maps and models, it isnt actually the Q4 engine from what i understand.

CaptNKILL
04-24-07, 03:48 PM
The worst part about those screens is the textures. They are horribly low-res, they are very washed out and it looks like they were reduced to 256 colors. If using high res textures is going to be a problem for CPU-based ray tracing engines, why bother? Decent texturing does a hell of a lot more for graphics than having more accurate lighting IMO.

Banko
04-24-07, 04:09 PM
There was a Quake 3 Raytraced demo somewhere and it looked a lot better thin this, and as far as I know they were also working on Quake 4.

WeReWoLf
04-24-07, 04:38 PM
The worst part about those screens is the textures. They are horribly low-res, they are very washed out and it looks like they were reduced to 256 colors. If using high res textures is going to be a problem for CPU-based ray tracing engines, why bother? Decent texturing does a hell of a lot more for graphics than having more accurate lighting IMO.

I agree. I mean, sure the nice reflective surfaces look cool, and the shading is nice, etc... but i still reckon that looks like nothing compared to crysis.

Mr_Maniac
04-24-07, 04:56 PM
There was a Quake 3 Raytraced demo somewhere and it looked a lot better thin this, and as far as I know they were also working on Quake 4.
Look at my Post #11 ;)
These guys also made a Q3RT.
Direct Link: http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/~sidapohl/egoshooter/
Other RT-Games (look at Oasen): http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/RTGames/

I really hope that those guys are making progress with their RPU.

I agree. I mean, sure the nice reflective surfaces look cool, and the shading is nice, etc... but i still reckon that looks like nothing compared to crysis.
But that's not a problem with Raytracing. It's just an problem with this Q4-Engine.
Imagine Crisis-RT :)
THAT would be graphics!

CaptNKILL
04-24-07, 05:59 PM
Here are some real time ray tracing benchmarks and demos:
http://www.realstorm.com/

I'm still not all that impressed with the technology. It doesn't look "that" great, especially considering the absolutely horrid performance. 10fps at 640x480 in a simple scene? :o

stjuart
04-24-07, 10:58 PM
The pic from quake 4 is a bad example and they are just using the same assets that came with quake 4 thats why it looks like its running on a voodoo 2 any way here is the potential. I would definitely give this technology a good 10 years to become popular in some form, it certainly has a lot of potential. notice no stupid fog to hide the terrain, hope this becomes the future.
http://www.openrt.de/Gallery/OliverDeussen_Sunflowers/Images/sunflowers_2.jpg
http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/~morfiel/oasen/gallery/043%20beware%20the%20shark.jpg
http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/Publications/2006/MLI/MLI_Landscape_1.jpg
http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/Publications/2005/Ecosystems/Ecosystems_Teaser03.jpg
http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/Publications/2006/MLI/MLI_Landscape_4.jpg
can you imagine things looking this real in the future
http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/Publications/2006/ART/ART_Teaser03.jpg