| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
 Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 10:02 Post subject: OTOY server-side 3D rendering |
|
 |
I don't know if this has been posted before, but this is the most impressive thing i've seen in years.
| Quote: | Imagine you could play video games - and immerse yourself in virtual worlds - with 3D graphics comparable to those found in blockbuster films like Transformers or WALL•E. And then imagine you could experience and control those graphics in real-time from any internet-enabled device, whether it be a desktop computer, set-top box or even iPhone.
Sound far-fetched? It doesn’t to Jules Urbach, founder and CEO of a Los Angeles-based company called OTOY, who has been working with microprocessor manufacturer AMD since 2006 to make the idea of server-side graphics processing a reality. If all goes as planned, 3D rendering will become just another computer task that jumps from the client to the cloud. Call it gaming as a service (GaaS) if you will. No more Xboxes, no more PlayStations, and no more souped-up PC towers. Just a monitor, some controls, and a way to receive and display frames generated by a powerful server farm. |
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/09/otoy-developing-server-side-3d-rendering-technology/
 Spoiler: | |
| Quote: | | LivePlace.com has posted a video displaying a very impressive render of a 3D virtual world called City Space. At this point very little is known about LivePlace, other than that the WHOIS lists the domain’s owner as Brad Greenspan, one of the co-founders of MySpace. Note: It appears that in the 20 minutes since I spoke to Greenspan about this post, someone was told to take LivePlace down (apparently nobody was supposed to find it). |
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/11/liveplace-to-launch-photo-realistic-virtual-world-rendered-in-the-cloud/
All i can say is GTA V!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 16:17 Post subject: |
|
|
As I said before, it's a stupid idea for games. It makes absolutely no sense, financially.
Correcting people since 2007 even if they're not wrong.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Gun
Posts: 3017
Location: My mother's womb originally. . .
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 16:28 Post subject: Re: OTOY server-side 3D rendering |
|
|
that IS pretty damned cool IMHO.
My god, those graphics are freaking AMAZING. And with NO end user hardware? Geez.
What an idea.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 16:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Not going to happen until North American ISPs stop fucking people around. Verizon gets the least-of-all-evils award for that FIOS stuff. Comcast, Rogers and Bell get the "please get cancer and die" awards.
Oh, and North American ISPs will never stop fucking people around, not enough laws in place to keep them from doing it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:10 Post subject: Re: OTOY server-side 3D rendering |
|
|
| compubrain3000 wrote: | | All i can say is Matrix! |
fxd
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| Cedge wrote: | | As I said before, it's a stupid idea for games. It makes absolutely no sense, financially. |
ORLY?
Can you say monthly fee?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crossmr
Posts: 2966
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:40 Post subject: |
|
|
it'll never work..it is difficult enough to get good remote desktop on a LAN let alone across the internet using 3D.
unless people have guarenteed 10 G to their homes and the server can support it for all users, it just won't work, not to mention lag. A platformer on that would be fucking stupid.
intel ultra 7 265k, 64gb ram, 3070
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:47 Post subject: |
|
|
And bandwidth requirement ;/
| sabin1981 wrote: | | Fuck you troll. Fuck you and your entire aids-infested family. Get cancer and die. Slowly. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:50 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mussolinka wrote: | | And bandwidth requirement ;/ |
| Quote: | | The 14 mins of real time rendering in this material is streaming live to a Treo 700 at 240 kpbs. This was captured on March 2007, the server was running an ATI RX 1900 GPU. The tech has improved massively since then (as has the HW we now run on). There was never intention to show any part of this to the public until we could include voxel rendering and Lightstage based characters. I think anyone who liked what they saw, will find the final project much more impressive. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| liansk wrote: | ORLY?
Can you say monthly fee? |
Do you have ANY idea how much they'd have to charge in fees to allow the user access to machines powerful enough to render visuals like that in real time, and break even? The kind of computer rendering these visuals would not be the same kind of gaming computer you and I own; they'd be render farms (the kind used to render CGI movies, by Pixar, Dreamworks, etc). And on top of that, the HUGE amount of bandwidth that it'd take to send the rendered gameplay back to the player in real-time, at decent resolution and bitrate?
Again, this is a retarded idea, and it has absolutely ZERO value for gaming. It's just a bunch of marketing propaganda (and this company has already stolen unrelated pre-rendered footage from a CGI artist who has nothing to do with them, so they're really full of shit).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 17:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The 14 mins of real time rendering in this material is streaming live to a Treo 700 at 240 kpbs. |
Bullshit. That wouldn't look much better than a fucking fullscreen youtube video. Lemme guess, these idiots are claiming that they've invented some sort of magical video codec that is 50 times more efficient than any other on earth?
| Quote: | | This was captured on March 2007, the server was running an ATI RX 1900 GPU. |
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit.
Just because it's in a server, doesn't suddenly make that card 10 times more powerful than it actually is. Seriously, you think they're rending that, on a 1900? What could make anyone fall for that?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 18:03 Post subject: |
|
|
| Cedge wrote: | | Quote: | | The 14 mins of real time rendering in this material is streaming live to a Treo 700 at 240 kpbs. |
Bullshit. That wouldn't look much better than a fucking fullscreen youtube video. Lemme guess, these idiots are claiming that they've invented some sort of magical video codec that is 50 times more efficient than any other on earth?
| Quote: | | This was captured on March 2007, the server was running an ATI RX 1900 GPU. |
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit.
Just because it's in a server, doesn't suddenly make that card 10 times more powerful than it actually is. Seriously, you think they're rending that, on a 1900? What could make anyone fall for that? |
That's what I thought.
Also in that video that was leaked, they claim to have real-time raytracing and global illumunation...yeah sure.. they'd need a whole network of computers just to calculate those real time in such quality for just 1 client.
It just doesn't make any sense.
If they need multiple servers to render the view of just 1 guy, then it doesn't seem efficient or realistic at all. They'd need to be able to render that for multiple people on just one server, and if you can do that, then you might as well just do it all client side again.
Maybe there's something I'm missing here, but it seems like a huge load of bullshit.
pretty bullshit, but still bullshit.
Also don't forget about what is mentioned on that news site as well. Part of the movie showing *LivePlace* is actually from another pre-rendered movie that you can see here:
http://3dblasphemy.com/personal/CITY.html
So if you ask me, this is all just lame concept shit of 'that's how we want it tol look', and maybe it will look like that, in 10 years, who knows. but OTOY still makes no sense.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 22:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't this what "internet 2.0" is all about.......HP is a huge funder....... they want to focus on services this time around.........this could be considered a service and heading towards the "internet 2.0" crap
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 22:12 Post subject: |
|
|
it's just a buzzword
it doesn't mean anything
whatever comes along and becomes popular, whatever it is, the buzzword people will point at it and claim that it is what they meant all along
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lutzifer
Modzilla
Posts: 12740
Location: ____________________ **** vegan zombie **** GRRAAIIINNSS _______
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 23:48 Post subject: |
|
|
looks like a honeytrap for investors that have seen or even played second life. If the above actually becomes marketable in the next five years (which i doubt at the moment) AND also runs on slow consumer hardware it could be a hit. Its highly doubtful that it ll replace consoles / pc-gaming in the next ten years though, even if it does deliver on some of the promises seen in that video.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Sat, 16th Aug 2008 23:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| Lutzifer wrote: | | looks like a honeytrap for investors that have seen or even played second life. If the above actually becomes marketable in the next five years (which i doubt at the moment) AND also runs on slow consumer hardware it could be a hit. Its highly doubtful that it ll replace consoles / pc-gaming in the next ten years though, even if it does deliver on some of the promises seen in that video. |
yeah. the only thing where I could see it actually beeing worthwhile, is mobile graphics.
The power they have is very limited and you can render high quality gaming in a very low resolution on a server then stream it to a handheld device. As the resolution is so small, you can render for multiple devices on a single server.
lowers the power consumption of the device while enabling high quality graphics similar to what you see on a highend pc nowadays (just a lot smaller)
but on a desktop pc? makes no sense.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lutzifer
Modzilla
Posts: 12740
Location: ____________________ **** vegan zombie **** GRRAAIIINNSS _______
|
| Posted: Sun, 17th Aug 2008 00:00 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah. And they could always go both ways with the "game". Have a server-side rendering for mobile devices and client-side rendering for access from pcs / console-hardware (would have to be next gen hardware though  ). With a mixed modell like that it could also be monetarily feasible
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
