Their technology is starting to show up in use.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/entering-the-next-dimension/story-e6frf7jo-1226500726186

As a refresher. Euclideon were the ones that came out about a year ago with the WIP engine claiming it could handle infinite detail. Just do a quick search and you will find the videos.

So far though, it looks like it's limited to geospatial marketing (ie maps / architectural use ect). Doubt they got anywhere with animation / collision detection and stuff like that. It seems like they directed their first video towards gaming in order to generate more hype, and then threw a curve ball, directing the software in another direction, probably after hitting a brick wall with the afore mentioned problems.

Technologically this isn't anything new, but wow. Those renders look amazing.

thats cool and all, but we already have 3d maps, and i've never found a use for them. woo, now with more 3-D

edit: oh so you were talking about this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gAbgBu8R4 that map shit threw me off into thinking you were talkin about some other company with an engine for 'infinite details'
how lame, im not really a fan of that company cause of this video they made, making it seem more useable than it was going to be, especially since it sounded stupidly unbelievable. and now all they have to show for it a year later is 3d static maps.

also for a video tryin to show off, it sure is a bit grainy, no?

The first video has 1080p version I think. The 2011 one doesn't though.

Yeah this is the sole reason I don't like where they are going. They still only have static 3d models. No animation, no physics, no collision detection, no particles ect ect. And I think that is the brick wall they hit and the sole reason they are now directing their efforts towards maps and shit. Hope I am wrong though.

yeah i watched in 1080p, i think its just cause they're satellite photos or some shit. and no, you're not wrong, lol. all that shit they said before was to garner more monies by looking plausible

Quote from 2-D

how lame, im not really a fan of that company cause of this video they made, making it seem more useable than it was going to be, especially since it sounded stupidly unbelievable.

Just because a gaming company hasn't used their technology yet doesn't mean it's not usable, and it doesn't really say anything about the company that created it. That video's just over a year old, even if a game was in development it'd take longer than that to finish it.

Quote from 2-D

and now all they have to show for it a year later is 3d static maps.

The demo focused on video games, but they even said in the video that they're not game developers or artists, they're just creating a new type of graphics rendering software. Now another company is successfully using that technology for commercial purposes. What's the problem?

Quote from Cronos

Yeah this is the sole reason I don't like where they are going. They still only have static 3d models. No animation, no physics, no collision detection, no particles ect ect. And I think that is the brick wall they hit and the sole reason they are now directing their efforts towards maps and shit. Hope I am wrong though.

You are. This is like criticizing Adobe for not adding audio/video editing to Photoshop. They're not making a complete physics engine, they're creating a development tool.

Did you guys even watch those videos? I don't know how you missed this.

well, i watched it a year ago, lol.

Quote from Exilement

Just because a gaming company hasn't used their technology yet doesn't mean it's not usable, and it doesn't really say anything about the company that created it. That video's just over a year old, even if a game was in development it'd take longer than that to finish it.

You are missing the point completely. The reason no gaming company has used or ever will use this technology is because it is literally incompatible with BASIC elements required to have a game.

The data that can be rendered with this engine doesn't store 3d graphics as individual objects, it stores the graphics by adding a huge number of points to a heavily fragmented database. This allows for seamless, real time rendering with "infinite" detail, but it also means NO objects can change position, change models, or change lighting/color. By virtue of the BASIC principles behind the technology it's impossible to apply to videogames.

The demo focused on video games, but they even said in the video that they're not game developers or artists, they're just creating a new type of graphics rendering software. Now another company is successfully using that technology for commercial purposes. What's the problem?

The issue is that they marketed the technology as a gaming tool to get attention when it is obvious that it cannot work like one. they spent most of the video criticizing current game rendering methods in comparison to their tool when they must have known full well that this can't be used for games.

You are. This is like criticizing Adobe for not adding audio/video editing to Photoshop. They're not making a complete physics engine, they're creating a development tool.

Did you guys even watch those videos? I don't know how you missed this.

Again, you're missing the point. The point is that the kind of point rendering the company advertised is NOTHING SPECIAL unless it can be used for videogames or other dynamic applications. And it IS nothing special and everyone who is criticizing them is rightly doing doing so because the company deceitfully misadvertised their technology to gain hype so they could make more money.

Which is an asshole thing to do imo

"Little digital atoms" would each be perceived by the operating unit as it's own object. That would slow down your computer, or even your console, to a staggering degree. I've got some experience in 3D modeling, and unless I'm completely missing a vital aspect of they're "new tech", that's what should happen. The demos that they've released could easily be done by using arrays of a pre-made model, which act as projections, and don't take up nearly as much memory if the model were to be copied and pasted. That being said, the program itself looks like it's able to reach an incredible amount of detail, just not what they're advertising.

Quote from Highly_Scented

You are missing the point completely. The reason no gaming company has used or ever will use this technology is because it is literally incompatible with BASIC elements required to have a game.

What the fuck? They were criticizing Euclideon for rendering 3D maps instead of making a physics engine. Even though Euclideon isn't doing it, it's another company using their development tools, and Euclideon never intended to create a game or engine in the first place.

It's right there in the article, did Cronos not read it before making this thread? I don't see where I'm "missing the point" by bringing that up.


There are demonstrations of animations done with Euclideon's software, so I'm not sure where you get the idea that it's impossible. They haven't even finished making the damn thing yet. Give it time and we'll see what happens.

What we are trying to say is that Euclideon made it seem as though what they were developing would be made primarily for gaming use. If you look at their first video, all they talk about it games, all they compare it to is game. If you look at the HardOCP TV interview (also shows real time demonstrations btw: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxtuZE5pOGA) all they talk about is its practicallity in games.

Obviouisly the software has multiple uses outside of digital entertainment, it's just that they continually stated that collision detection wouldn't be a problem, that animation is in progress, that dynamic lighting and texturing would be fine, that GAME DEVELOPERS WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE GAMES CHEAPER AND QUICKER (they actually said this). They have shown none of these things and it looks like they are diverging from gaming entirely which could possibly be because they couldn't achieve the above things. I really hope I am wrong and they are working on these features.

EDIT: I was directed to this video after someone posted on the Euclideon facebook page about it: http://www.mediafire.com/?q7z28a738qg146z

I think it's a presentation from Bruce Dell about the software. HAven't finished downloading it yet. You can find the link on page 13 of this pdf: http://www.imtamaps.org/docs/events/BIGFPresentationProgrammePagewithAbstractsfff.pdf