http://quakeone.com/forums/quake-mod-releases/finished-works/7337-high-quality-music-packs.html

Must be illegal, but I wouldnt complain...... 

> Saddam Hussein deserved to be hung

eep. Death penalty, human rights? Fair trial? Being better than them?

I read the Oslo killer's "manifesto", most of it actually. It is interesting to read because it contains the same stuff that many right wing conservatives are spouting all across the internet.

And it is pretty easy to point out the key places where his thinking doesn't make sense. A lot of it is assembled so it looked logical and irrefutable to him. But it isn't, by far not.

Good exercise, recommended reading. It's like a neoconservative "Mein Kampf" because it collects the fundamental ideas of many right wing propaganda spouters. Typical collection of typical "arguments".

Know your enemy. 

Actually, I think a lot of conservatives would agree with most of his ideas (Islamification, feminism, homosexuality, weakness, multicultural society are "bad"), apart from the killing people part. That makes it somewhat unsettling. 

Surely it's only unsettling because he killed people himself rather than getting a load of paid, sadistic brutes (sorry, honourable military gentlemen/women) to do it for him...

Also, this entire debate is deeply, deeply unsettling and no something I wish to discuss in an inflammatory environment other than to point out;
a) you can't make moral judgements unless you hold yourself to a moral code higher than the person you're judging (ie, don't condemn killing then call for killing) and;
b) the actual issue here is that we're having this conversation at all, if you wish to discourage future incidents of a similar nature then it requires a news media that doesn't instantly go overboard and provide rolling coverage of something that should only be reported calmly, briefly and dully.

Of course, the reason they do so is due to the desire of all of us to read new bloody stories to entertain ourselves with over breakfast and discuss at work/parties/internet forums. And then we can be suitably shocked and outraged when this demand leads to the hacking of murder victims' phones... 

link it. 

Some of you might remember about a year ago there was a tech demo involving not polygons as the basis of graphics but atoms. This is the one-year report.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKUuUvDSXk4 

 

they're trying to make money by being bought.

They're totally full of shit regarding poly counts etc (that's not what the focus of engine programming is anymore, is it? My GPU can render dozens of millions of polys without a problem), provide no technical detail, claim that they run in software... :o 

this looks a bit more down to earth but still interesting:

http://www.atomontage.com/?id=dev_blog

Unlimited detail engine seems like a nice viewer for high detail/point cloud data but it feels really awkward to mention games (and bashing game engines) that much while only showing static geometry and no signs of interactivity apart from camera control. 

maybe down to earth isn't the right thing to say about anyone claiming their tech to be the future but the guy at least seems a tad more realstic in his future projections...maybe in a a few years there will be some interesting "atomic" stuff out there anyway. 

levitating gravel! 

http://www.gamerfish.com/puzzle/not-to-scale/ 

While impressive technology, there was an amount of complete bullshit in that video also.

In all the footage I never saw one piece of moving environment either, everything was static, if that is a limitation of the technology then it just killed itself.

Also, everything looked very tile based, I didn't see any realistic looking landscape or natural angles to things. Now maybe (as the guy guys) they just don't have artists to do that stuff, if it is another limitation then again no thanks :)

I also find it quite funny, and pretty arrogant, that this guy thinks his company has found the holy grail of graphics technology that has eluded the likes of Carmack, Sweeney and the dudes at Crytek for decades. Come on now. 

I also find it quite funny, and pretty arrogant, that this guy thinks his company has found the holy grail of graphics technology that has eluded the likes of Carmack, Sweeney and the dudes at Crytek for decades. Come on now.

part of the sales pitch, i guess. :P

anyway, isn't voxel tech similar to this? 

he's talking 10minutes about physics, yet the demo doesn't even feature falling blocks ;-) 

A badly-lit entirely static Voxel Minecraft narrated by a smug whinier version of Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation. Yup that's me sold.

If there's any game that encourages me to crouch down and admire having 3465035960569450 polygons on a patch of dirt, I don't want to play it.

This isn't the future, or shouldn't be. The future should be in the BALANCE of graphics and gameplay and story and physics and feel and atmosphere and simplicity and depth and exploration - blending solid FPS gameplay with modern technological options. 

... will never be fulfilled :P

Come on.. it is impossible to please everybody, and having such balance in all the "parameters" you listed is impossible... so either you have a genius idea about what should be a FPS and you should start your own game company... or you are already complaining for the disillusionment you will face sooner or later... doh ! 

Animation with point cloud data is possible. At least it is with voxels according to some video I saw, so I imagine it's possible with atoms. I also assume it would be even easier to get less grid-like environments, I think they just added a bunch of assets purely for the sake of performance load.

Everyone at work is really skeptical. I couldn't care if it works either way, I find it incredibly interesting even just as a theory. 

But it's useful to consider where to aim for as an ideal. Unlimited Particle shit or whatever that is, they are aiming for the ultimate in detailed graphics (well in theory apart from the glaring deficits in what they've made so far). That's one sole direction, and not really one that needs to be aimed in on it's own. 100,000 times more detailed?? Who is going to notice that shit...

Modern games, the graphics have improved so much in recent years, games in general are so pretty and cool looking, who is looking at these trees thinking "OMG Polygons!!". That's not the shit people are noticing. There's so many areas to aim high for in gaming.

I posit to aim for the highest overall gaming experience... 

I have to admit you are not completly wrong: too much efforts have been spent on graphics and visuals only... Maybe less visuals and more fun/gameplay/puzzles/whatever would be better ;) 

the guy did miss the boat a bit on graphics, the really interesting things to solve these days are things like ai, player interactions etc.

Honestly, if graphics just stopped getting better right now for 10 years or so, I really wouldn't care that much, added another layer of post processing isn't going to make gameplay better, but some groundbraking ai just might. 

http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/~ritschel/Microrendering/

http://perso.telecom-paristech.fr/~hollande/manyview/ManyViewRasterization.pdf

http://www.seanet.com/~myandper/abstract/memo0801.htm 

http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam 

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/08/infinite-detail-and-euclideon-the-elephants-in-the-room/ 

I have two websites, both through the same host, both using the same DNS servers etc.
They all load fine for me. A friend however, can load one but not the other, returning a timed out/failed message from both machines he tried it on. He can't even ping it.

Anything obvious I'm missing? It was working fine for him until today :/