What I don't like with "Unlimited Details" is that Dell refuses to say what the engine can't do yet. We know it's a work in progress. We (the internet) are excited about it because it's an experiment that's on scale with what we could expect from that branch of 3D graphics technology. Trillions of atoms, whatever. Show us what's still in progress because the internet is skeptical about this, this and this.
Hacking reflexion by duplicating the scene is a good way to start, because no one can say whether it's a good or a bad solution to a non-trivial problem - it gets the job done for now - but can you have multiple coexisting versions of the world? like a vertical mirror, a horizontal body of water and an underwater section?
To Dell: just stop handwaving the questions already, we get it that you ignored the state of the art and built your own thing, just tell us what it can't do yet, show us your current progress and you'll be met with much less skepticism, and even help, even if you keep your trade secrets, at least show us your specs! You won't be struck down by lightning if you talk - no one ever died from reinventing/copying the wheel and making it so good that the wheel can fly.
> Dell refuses to say what the engine can't do yet.
I'll go out on a limb here, and suggest it can't do real-time animation, texturing, lighting, shadows, collisions, etc. All the maps / screenshots shown seem to be static, procedurally generated and not artist-created.
Dell keeps throwing around this 'Unlimited Detail' marketing phrase which is very offputting. Until it's seen in action in an actual game it can be nothing but snake oil.
The article says that polygon objects can exist in the engine and interact with the "atoms". The polygon objects can be animated, fly around, cast shadows and interact with the rest of the world, but the article did not say anything about the atoms being animated. So I don't think you're going out on a limb, especially considering what other people (like Notch) have said on the topic. It looks like the atoms in the engine are strictly static.
I agree with you 100% - my comment was mostly wishful thinking, a description of how Dell could make me change my mind.
This kind of marketing is one I can't quite understand. I mean, what is he after? Buzz? Funding? What's his endgame? Why & how is he paying people to work on it? Is his marketing strategy to troll the profession & the audience, and he really has something big up his sleeve?
Generate enough press to keep funding going, particularly from the Australian government? They already got one such grant, I believe. Are more possible if they can put together enough clippings?
Comments
What I don't like with "Unlimited Details" is that Dell refuses to say what the engine can't do yet. We know it's a work in progress. We (the internet) are excited about it because it's an experiment that's on scale with what we could expect from that branch of 3D graphics technology. Trillions of atoms, whatever. Show us what's still in progress because the internet is skeptical about this, this and this.
Hacking reflexion by duplicating the scene is a good way to start, because no one can say whether it's a good or a bad solution to a non-trivial problem - it gets the job done for now - but can you have multiple coexisting versions of the world? like a vertical mirror, a horizontal body of water and an underwater section?
To Dell: just stop handwaving the questions already, we get it that you ignored the state of the art and built your own thing, just tell us what it can't do yet, show us your current progress and you'll be met with much less skepticism, and even help, even if you keep your trade secrets, at least show us your specs! You won't be struck down by lightning if you talk - no one ever died from reinventing/copying the wheel and making it so good that the wheel can fly.
> Dell refuses to say what the engine can't do yet.
I'll go out on a limb here, and suggest it can't do real-time animation, texturing, lighting, shadows, collisions, etc. All the maps / screenshots shown seem to be static, procedurally generated and not artist-created.
Dell keeps throwing around this 'Unlimited Detail' marketing phrase which is very offputting. Until it's seen in action in an actual game it can be nothing but snake oil.
The article says that polygon objects can exist in the engine and interact with the "atoms". The polygon objects can be animated, fly around, cast shadows and interact with the rest of the world, but the article did not say anything about the atoms being animated. So I don't think you're going out on a limb, especially considering what other people (like Notch) have said on the topic. It looks like the atoms in the engine are strictly static.
I agree with you 100% - my comment was mostly wishful thinking, a description of how Dell could make me change my mind.
This kind of marketing is one I can't quite understand. I mean, what is he after? Buzz? Funding? What's his endgame? Why & how is he paying people to work on it? Is his marketing strategy to troll the profession & the audience, and he really has something big up his sleeve?
Why is he using the Vaporware approach?
Generate enough press to keep funding going, particularly from the Australian government? They already got one such grant, I believe. Are more possible if they can put together enough clippings?