Added: 2 years ago
From: binstream
Views: 451,432
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (488)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Then again even if all of what I have said does happen, in my opinion for the better, there's the problem of today's gaming in the form of disappointing, shallow and measly short single player campaigns simply tacked on because of shallow multiplayer in games which never needed it, DLC which robs you of content which should have been in the game day one, and games like CoD representing video games in the media.. which are quite honestly not the best titles to show how great games can be.

  • Maybe perhaps if people stop for a second and realise far above decent results can be achieved with tech that developers have tons of experience working with, gaming can be something to be excited for again. Not getting excited over new combinations of tech which console and other developers have yet to get to grips with, guaranteed to spurt out underwhelming results for the first few years, before this whole thing starts again with even more consoles and pc tech.

  • I think of consoles which could still pump out powerhouse games not in terms of just looks, but actual gameplay experience too. The 360 and PS3 aren't yet milked dry in terms of what people can achieve with them.. and yet people are demanding the next console releases speaking of games feeling done and done now on current systems, with this silly idea that anything bland with gaming today is going to be magically fixed with a new xbox or PS3.. it's just silly.

  • Games industry needs to slow down and make use of what we have now, not get over excited over new features that will end up being obsolete as soon as the next new thing comes a long. If current consoles can still do great games like Batman Arkham and Uncharted, games which have shown we can have truly immersive stories and engaging characters with lifelike animation, then I personally refuse to get excited over the wet dreams of designers with style over substance approach to games design.

  • Same cycle as always is happening. Tech demo hyping up new techniques and technology> excitement > underwhelming results due to gameplay remaining the same > repeat with hype of next gen

  • We'd just have the same core gameplay we've had the last two generations with fancier looks. Physics (one of my preferred areas for gameplay innovation a long with animation) wouldn't make things that much better either because I can guarantee anything innovative will probably be kept for quirky and 15 minute famer indie and puzzle games.

  • All that being said, even if we had tessellation, full 1080p, 60+fps, and the most advanced of visuals in modelling and textures as standard across all formats, it wouldn't suddenly make gaming much if any better than it is now.

  • Personally I find the whole argument of consoles holding games design back to be a bit of a grabbing at straws excuse. With the state gaming is in, bending over backwards for mainstream audiences, bigger game design costs, dumbing down of certain series.. the problem isn't with consoles. The problem is the developer and the audience. The latter accepts the most basic of stuff (same shooters with same gameplay and just nicer looks) and the former is lazy with pleasing the latter.

  • This technologhy is awesome.

  • I don't like how from a distance the dragon appears flat, but as you get closer, spikes magically grow from it. That kind of effect can be clearly seen in games like batman arkham city. spikes and other pointy stuff should be just 3 sets of tris each from far. Also i don't think you need that awfully huge amount of polygons to make a rock look like a rock.

  • Wait... I don't get it. I looked through some source code, and all this tessellation is calculated in the vertex shader. Nothing dx11 does by itself- it's completely developer-controlled. Why is this feature only dx11? Could they not simply do the math in the shader using dx9 or dx10? And why does it say it is 'hardware' tessellation? As if there is actually specialized hardware that does the tessellation?

  • @superkellerman8D Of course you can calculate everything even on the CPU if you want too, but then it would be a software renderer and that would hit like 2FPS on average. Its called "hardware" tessellation because THERE IS a specialized hardware for tessellation. For example, GeForce GTX 400 GPUs are built with up to fifteen tessellation units, each with dedicated hardware for vertex fetch, tessellation, and coordinate transformations.

  • @TheKuku09 yeah because they are trying to show what it does

  • i still don't get the advantage of tessellation over just modeling assets

  • @SincereDoubt I believe it allows them to just create basic level models with low polygon count and the tessellation will add more polygons automatically without somebody having to model every one by hand which would take a very long time. It also does this more efficiently than standard modelling.

  • @jarvis911 i don't know about that, if that was the case they would still have to deal with alpha channels and work out a system similar to normal or bump mapping... i might be wrong though thanks for replying

  • @SincereDoubt Difference between this and geometry assets is speed. What tessellation does is that it automatically adds vertexes using either depth maps or normal maps. This allows generating triangles in the billions (on Gf400 it can be up to 1.6bil) and that is why tessellation is used. If you had a model with 1.6bil triangles you couldn't draw it with any reasonable framerate (and would have a large bandwidth problems and so on). So what this does is "make the GPU do the work".

  • @TheExDeus Oh, that's very interesting. Are there any formats that are specifically for creating better tessellation?

  • On absolute maximum settings, DX11, it lags a bit on my pc :/

    core2duo E7400 2.8Ghz (running @ 3.5Ghz)

    4GB (4 x 1GB) ram

    GeForce GTX460 1GB

    win 7 x64 ultimate

    It runs @ 15-30 fps with tessalation. Without tessalation it's super smooth

    all settings maxed out @ 1280x1024

  • Two groups... One attack the other... But the original makers are at a friendship... LOL... What a game... Salute you both OpenGL and DirectX...

  • pretty cool!

  • This demo is bullshit, I demand they compare tesselation for relatively flat surfaces like these with Parallax mapping!

    Speaking of which... What ever happened to parallax mapping?

  • @ChrisXPZ Would it be better to have Parallax Mapping or Displacement mapping? Is it possible to have both?

  • gents,i cant find ANY info on how you actually turn tessellation ON.do any of you know what you do? i would really appreciate any answers,lol.

  • Imagine games only built for PC Gaming.

  • I just really hope Skyrim has tessellation, imagine a dragon looking like that...

  • @LethalAnesthetics Probably not, as both Xbox and Playstation don't support any tesselation technique (AFAIK).

    Currently, consoles are holding back game engine development for cross platform engines.

  • @DonOfTheInternet You know why right?

    They're stuck on DX9 I believe, MAYBE DX8 I'd lul at that

    Tesselation is currently DX11 exclusive.

  • @timendo215

    Consoles aren't bound to DirectX, but they don't support tesselation because the hardware isn't strong enough to ALSO use tesselation.

  • @DonOfTheInternet Apparently Xbox uses DirectX, but not Sony and Nintendo

  • AA x32 and tessellation is the future !

  • @LethalAnesthetics

    So if Resolution and Anti-aliasing are highly increased on the video card would that mean you'd be getting more naturally round polygons and objects if you've got tessellation enabled in DX11/ future exclussive games?

  • @pilebomber Well, yeah, the higher the antialiasing, the better it looks on bigger screens... But still we would have to get higher resolutions for big TVs and of course, higher quality textures... Even basic meshes would look good with this kinda tessellation... Although I don't think we'd be expecting something like that anywhere around 2012... Maybe along with DX12 or DX13 ;D

  • @LethalAnesthetics

    ofcourse having a higher resolution running would make pretty much everything sharper, clearer and less jagged to look at that and the higher textures would make for shimmering though a lot more to be processed I'll take your word for that. The strange thing is ... I'm still using 16 bit color depth and running under 320x200 resolution for All 3D games so that it would offload some of the processing that the Cpu has do for doing such things as Tessellation.

  • @pilebomber

    The only Problem for me is that it makes the text hard to make out so I have to use 2 or 4x AA and Anistropic filtering under 16x

  • @pilebomber You can't be serious... You play Crysis on 320x200... ?

    Just how big is your screen :o ?

  • @LethalAnesthetics

    By all means of seriousness the current screen Size display I have is 15.6 and the highest resolution to run on it is 1366x768 meaning i'm using a lapt from hewlette packerd. They're not necesserally good for gaming but i did notice quite a few Polygonal Differences just by eliminating graphical bottlenecking to that much when playing older stuff from the fifth generion everything looks pretty damn smooth it take lot more processing though because I could totally feel

  • @pilebomber

    when i put my hands under it gets pretty damned warm but yeah take my word for it Inotice when my moving my character of some of the textures looked a lot more realistic in there movement compared to playing it under the actual console.

  • @pilebomber You mean aspect ratio... 15:6 ? 1366x768 is 16:9, you've made a mistake somewhere

    I m using 1366x768 too and I can run Mafia 2 medium-high on my Samsung QW411-W01

    No offense meant but I don't really see the point of your last 2 messages...

  • @LethalAnesthetics

    I'm not even a graphic's whore I just play the damn games. But In theory I still have to support my own belief that with the available amount of processing cores and memory without running anything else in the background of the desktop you'd actually have the potential to do the tessellation without out a tessellator on older games before Directx 11

  • @LethalAnesthetics

    Actually let me correct my last statement I suppose that Cpu and video card both work harder in unison if you choose to have all of the graphical settings set to max with highest resolution available.

  • @pilebomber

    Thus making this conversation almost pointless.

  • The fractal-like effects that occur to the wireframe grids at 0:22 are awesome all on their own and should be used in a game.

  • no 1080p?...

  • I really wish more games would make use of tessellation, it's such a giant leap. I guess I can't expect too much, the tech is really taxing on a system even in a benchmark demo.

  • @LordsSky Although the visuals are a giant leap, so is the raw power you need to keep up with it. I mean my GTX 460 can run this benchmark at 1080p with about 17fps, and thats a pretty decent card compared to what the average gamer is using.

    My next system will be Bulldozer 8core CPU, 16gb RAM, 7000 series AMD dual GPU card. Can't wait for the day when games will take advantage of this!

  • @Exgaves The thing about this tech however is how well it scales. If your card isn't up to it you can lower the effect or disable it entirely. It isn't something that replaces current polygons, you'll be able to just it off. So in that regard there is nothing to lose from having it as an optional, which a lot of PC titles are starting to do.

  • @LordsSky Yeah, I think metro 2033 was the first to actually use tessellation? I mean theres been others to use DX11, like Dirt2 but it wasn't full DX11...

    But still. If if you know about DX11, you know you want it maxed. Which is why I'm gonna go large on my next build. :D

  • @Exgaves 16gb RAM? Most game don't use that much and your set up seems more for gaming not rendering. I own a render PC that has 32gb RAM and uses ALL the ram during complex rendering. You should go for 6-8gb RAM.

  • @DarkAnimeWindSlayer Oh, i forgot to mention im taking up alot of AutoDesk applications like AutoCAD, Revit Architecture, and also alot of game design and coding nd stuff, and I enjoy editing videos, so thats why Im goin so large on ram.

    As for the GPU I know very well that its a gaming GPU, because im a gamer but I know that it will also assist in alot of proffessional workstation type loads, obviously not as good as a 16core CPU quad sli Quaddro setup, but it means i can still game.

  • @Exgaves Its a decent build for rendering and autodesk program but preform exceptionally well in the video editing software. Unfortunately my computer preform terrible in video editing because my GPU is actually a GPGPU which never render or offload graphical process (Laggy preview window). However, my set up lower rendering time of complex scene using mental ray to that of rendering simple box in scanline. (Figure of speech) Hope I can save money to buy a true gaming computer. ._.

  • I'm certain that much of this could have been done under their own prowess on earlier cards. Most of what you see is still from the amount of operations and polys the new card can push, and therefore, is a showing of the card instead.

    True its more efficiant, but again, if you gave the same tools to the cards prior to these new ones, perfectly compatable, the tessellated areas would lag it worse than the halving in this video.

    The additional polys from the dip cover the tessellated areas.

  • I think DX11 tessellation is taken out of context.

    You still need a beefy card, as DX11 is simply an environment of tools. If you gave DX11 to any card that used DX10, it wouldn't save it any. In fact, my card lags at the base without tessellation already. Take that ps2 and game cube had Jak1-3 and StarWars:RS use a similar per vertice smooth morphing transition wall, just like the DX11 demo, for simpler subdivision/bezier patches at simply just above 50% of their overall prowess.

    .

  • Tesselation is nothing more than adding a lot of polys from texture information...

    So then it's just a displacement-mod for games. I've got a GTS250 with DX10 and when i render something in 3ds max with a displacement, it looks just the same. So why the fuck should i have a DX11 card?!

  • @1stKarkan Umm, because DX11 cards are really efficient at it. You might as well ask why they bother using a displacement map if they can just model those details (effectively what 3DS Max is doing). Using tessellation is (comparatively) extremely efficient than adding all those details into the mesh by hand.

  • @Maholain

    Yeah, you're right. Since i play oil rush i'm just looking forward to the release version. It will support water tesselation which looks really sexy. Maybe i'm going to by a new PC

  • @1stKarkan By the way, I specifically answered you question because I have a GTS250 too :D

  • @1stKarkan Also remember that Tesselation can simply take cues from underlying geometry. Imagine modeling an object as a poly in 3DS, with the intent of using NURMS on it and then collapsing the stack at the end. Now you can export the mesh without NURMS on, and have the card re-compute NURMS-like data real time in the game. Less vertexes to save, and better LOD control for real time stuff.

  • all those polygons and they still cant make stable shadows...

  • @TheRobin1232 Not always, most of the time for stuff like rocks, I may model a few, then take the displacement maps in photoshop and use difference clouds to generate many variations, I would go nuts modelling each stone in z-brush, then retopologizing it, then taking it to Xnormals.

    Depending on the time and tools I have avaliable i may use crazybump or pixplant to create it from a photograph.

  • @TheRobin1232 Amen!

  • w.youtube.com/watch?v=s41yPePA­GPo

    DirectX-11 vs UDK DirectX-9

  • Why look at the untesselated version as anything other than a "base" version of the main mesh? It's seems to me that it's there to show you what can be ADDED to a scene, not enhanced in one.

  • @roxahris it basically show how tesselation can reshape normal poligons.

  • @1r0zz

    So it does not do any further shaping when there are textures? present on the modle

  • @pilebomber as I know it, tesselation do not give orther things than poligony information. this make it awesome for render rugged surfaces and also for add more details on roundish surfaces. all of this without a heavy hardwere request.

    so many differences on the surfaces will be real and not the "Illusion" like in games before this. I whould like to know if it can have a "negative" value so subtract from a entity not only add information as showned in the demo.

  • @1r0zz

    Man That's what I thought about it only working with polygons but I was also thinking that maybe it would work with textures by Guessing the height and volume of the colors shown that it would engrave into the model or make it protrude like the Thorns seen on the dragons underbelly.

    Right now Dx11 Hardware tessellation in recent Games the Notices are very few or are used sparingly on what's suppose to be round depending on the artist before the CPU was probably doing all the guessing

  • @pilebomber yes actually very few games are using Dx11 tessellation and hardly good. even Crysis when using this actually drop down the fps without much improvement. not that I need an another "realistic" fps like BF3...I whould like to see this tecnology for some more fantasy Idea...

    I just hope that when doom 4 will be out id will make an eye-candy like good old times.

  • @1r0zz

    But yeah we have reached pretty far in graphics in the past when Pre-rendered back grounds ruled on Resident Evil 1-3 for the psx

  • meh

    

  • how does this differ from say steep parallax mapping?

  • @cr4zyw3ld3r From parallax mapping quite strong 'cause it didn't add any geometry to the object, I'll rather ask what's the difference between this and displacement mapping.

  • so how does tessellation decide which rock is deeper 0or more protruding? you got some heightmap doing it? isnt this just fancy parallax occlusion ?

  • @Isaiah6517 this and parallax mapping use a heightmap

  • ***FROM BELOW*** (Correction in my paragraph below) ***"Since when can properly shaped stairs not be rendered by DX10 but can by DX11?"***

  • @BigJoeWR17 It's becaause the scene was made for DX11, and was lazy-modelled.

  • Seems to me like this benchmark program is some bullshit. DirectX 11 didnt make the graphics any better, it just made the rock bulkier. Like the other guy before me said, the stairs was basically a damn ramp in directx 10. Since when can properly shaped stairs be rendered by directx 11. And it seems to me that it just changes the models of the rocks and walls. If directx 10 could support the rocks in the wall sticking out about and inch then why not sticking out 9 inches (like in dx11)?? IDK?!?!

  • @BigJoeWR17 It's a new tool for the artists. Think about this: The artist has about 8 hours to model. ¿Would you like him to spend those 8 hours modeling a rock, or a character?

    Ease of development, means better games ;-)

  • I'm replacing my obsession with parallax mapping with hardware tessellation.

  • WORLD'S BEST OF THE BEST MSI.COPYPASTE AT SEARCH

    >>>> MSI GX640 directX 11 tesselation

  • another generation or two and polygons will never be a problem again, heck, 10million polygons per frame could be in our near future!

  • aha! now i understand why in most games the grounds where flat! :D

  • I'm going to make this clear to gamers!!!

    Tessellation lower the production time of making games. It is easier to add details using displacement maps then to model it. I tried making parallax map but it was a pain in the ass to make for a complex scene. Displacement map is easier for most people to make. :3

  • I'm satisfied with parallax map + manually created meshes. Why would I need this?.. I'm focused on gameplay and I don't care about how detailed is tile somewhere on a roof...

  • @alexgrinkov : With a parallax map, those bumps wont shadow correctly. With tesselation, its real geometry, so shadows are correct. I used to think tesselation was stupid too, until I realized that they are using a heightmap to generate the complex tesselated geometry. So for example, if you want awesome terrain, all you need is a single quad, and a heighmap. Tesselation does everything for you. It subdivides based on camera position, and perturbs the height values based on the heightmap.

  • @jeffgooloolie

    what about LODs? with them you get proper shadowing too... tessellation is just about being lazy...

  • @alexgrinkov Only the top level LOD casts accurate shadows. With the lower levels, the shadows pop with the geometry. But tesselation is better than LODs because it doesnt take away detail, it adds detail as you get closer. Its better than LODs. Instead of say 5 levels of LOD, tesselation has an almost infinite number of levels of detail.

  • Oh, is that going to be waisted on another Unreal tournament game?

  • so many triangles

  • 4x aa, max tesselation my i7 950 at 4, and gtx 470 gets some good frames with this. Would love to see a game developed in a world like this. A new crysis, perhaps rpg related.

  • Looks good with OpenGL4.x as well. Stop pushing DX11 and give OGL some credit would you guys? ;)

  • @0rmick I totally agree, I just bought an Asus ROG Matrix GTX 580, and Heaven looks much less "cartoonish" in Opengl 4.1 than DX11.. takes me back to the good ol days of Opengl vs Direct3d in games (Opengl always won).. reflections and lighting are better too (performance is roughly the same between APIs) SO.. OpenGl looks better, is totally cross platform, and developers are stuck on Directx.. I get it tho, less time to develop = faster prod. time = more money for devs on dx11

  • @0rmick right now DX is just better, eventually OGL might beat it again like it used to, but for now, DX > OGL

  • The dragon that is

  • The glows white from the tessellation lol.

  • Distance based tesselation! Genius!

  • looks awesome! unfortunetly in-game grapichs like that will be out in around 2012 on my guess.

    first we need an engine and a computer that can create grapichs like that (since ''heaven'' only is a benchmark, and not a actual game engine)

    and then we need grapichs cards, who can handle this with around avrg 45 fps, else no1 wanna buy them.. waste of money. so yeah we have a lot of work to do, but i think the dx11 will be ''it'' when it's full potiential is used, like the dx9c is today :)

  • @fuelofmil0

    We need cards at about $140 that can do it really well.

  • @Usul573 yeah, else it wont sell :) looking forward to the 6900 series from amd. cause the 6800's are only midclass. they dont run games much better than the 5000 series, they just have better tesselation rendering ^^

    -what a great time we were born, right?- :D :D

  • @fuelofmil0

    I still have fond memories of the SNES days and PC gaming in the 90s, but that's me.

    Then again, kids born these days might know nothing but 1080p and DX11.

  • @fuelofmil0 Umm i thought Haven was -built with- the Unigine game engine. Thats just what their in-house programmers cooked up to show off said engine, and advertize "hey everyone, heres what OUR engine can do!". Its not something that's just optimized coding for such a benchmark..

  • @mystica55121234 you have a point there -and i have to admit, i havent checked out their website. but an engine and a game is not the same.. what im saying is: ofcourse its awesome to make such a game engine, but its first when i see the game. believe me, no computer wont be able to handle this very good :) but yes u are right.

  • How does this work, is it "automatic" using existing normalmaps or do you need quite high res models?

  • @voxar you need tesselation formed textures 

  • @voxar ill say its just an option in the videosets/gfxsets

  • i like tessellation but IMO it makes the graphics look abit too doughy

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @DasHausAnubisFan1000 english: interesting

    interisting ist glaub ich garkein englisches wort :D

  • But Direct X 9 may have a greater number of vertex?

  • I just heard that the new The Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword will use Tessellation, can anyone confirm this??

  • @IgorNboyMota Only if its on PC, which I doubt.

  • Good to see that the Engine jerks during playback.

    I have the same Problem with a i7860 and a HD5970.

  • Why does this need to be a feture of directx 11 couldent they just program the driver to do it with direct 10/9 or even the game programer could add it whats up with directx 11 needed

  • @happygamestvfun1 From what I gather it is done on the hardware. Software tesselation would hurt performance like a bitch - much like why shadows in software are a killer.

  • @stoobert1981 why couldnt they do it on hardware before? and what part ecactly does the driver, the directx and the game engien do?

  • @happygamestvfun1 There is tessellation on 10.1 but thats through software and it drags your PC down.DX11's tesselation is tessellated on the hardware meaning it's more efficient and your PC can do other things like AA. And only the newer cards support tessellation. Vista has DX11, your card just needs the DX11 capability. DX11 wasnt on XP because thats how MS gets you to move on.

  • @Dnizzle7 and because win7 and vista are far better then XP ever was win7 is loads customisable

  • Why this is so exelent is that now, without major performance, what we dreamed 3d graphics could do, is finally here in real time and without major framerate problems. This would make worlds alot better. Bump mapping lookd very good, but this is the next step in equaling probably better then movie cg.

  • That said, i'm certain that with whatever ps3/360 has for tessellation and displacement maps can work out a pretty similar thing, even if it is the more traditional older poly morphing technique.

    I hope they would be inspired to do something similar in the last gen rather then think they have NO means to do something like it at all.

  • What excactly is tesselation doing?

    to me it seemed like it made the graphics more vibrant by adding polygons/modificate full or parts of polymodels... is that so?

  • @REVLEX321 it kinda pushes out the textures to make them 3d, for eg the way the rock in the ground is coming out, it used to be all flat now it comes out.

  • @OCSmoke8

    Excactly what it looked like, thanks for clearing it out. :)

  • Тасселяция впечатляет только в бенче Unigine , а в играх сдесь показанных - полная фигня - особенно в AWP - где хреновые текстуры и их никакая тасселяция не спасёт =)) , бесит то что какую-то 1 фишку вводят, и сразу целая линейка новых видеокарт выходит, лучше бы освещение в играх сделали как в Vray, чем баловаться с тасселяцией..

  • I don't get the dragon scene. Would the spikes be a matter of character design instead of graphics rendering?

  • They should come up with some "tessellation cards" so that rather than pay a huge amount of money to keep a graphics card up to date, you'd have a graphics card that can run the game, and a tessellation card for the tessellation.

    Don't know if it's possible, but it's annoying to pay for graphics card that won't be able to handle a game on full and the tessellation at the same time.

  • Could someone explain too me what tessellation is?

  • that is pretty amazing

    really really cool but fuck wht kind of rig r u gonna need to run that shit to work well

  • @GraemeDrummer ATI 5700 series or nVidia 400 series or better, I think.

  • It's 3D able too! Too bad i don't have any 3D-Glasses xD

  • Heaven benchmark

  • That's some crazy shit. Best get an ATI Radeon HD 5870 pretty quick!

  • @Colethecon the nVidia cards can handle tessellation so much better...unfortunetely :(

    --> watch?v=3XdsEblVhkc

  • @Rusher0 Fortunately they have a MASSIVE power drain and heat output. ATI 5000 Series cards are safer and cheaper. And as a 480 costs $520+, I think I will get a 5870 and overclock it, or just a 5970.

  • @Colethecon however I prefer the 5800 series, too. Just bought a Sapphire HD5850 Toxic ;D

  • @Rusher0 Amen friend.

  • now i know this is pureawesomeness

  • Pretty awesome, hope this was made not on graphic station and common computers could ever process that

  • this very cool!

  • i am impressed oO

  • can someone explain me what tesselation is for?

    i dont understand is this just subdividing?

  • AMAZING

  • pffft... i does look awesome... except for one major thing. THE SHADOWS! if they are going to keep adding polygons, then something needs to be done about the shadows. stop me if i'm being completely ignorant

  • I guess parallax mapping would have also yielded good results in this case.

  • does anyone know if i can enable DirectX 11 and tessellation with tri-8800 Ultras????

  • @tambo3lite no, your 8800s cannot be DX11 at all,

    these new cards were designed to conform to DX11 specs, whereas your 8800s were designed only for DX10 specs...

    in other words, you can never make a DX10 video card DX11.

  • This is a milestone in graphics capability.

  • Hmm, now I'm starting to get it.

    Combine this with complex physics and the latest type of water and it would be pretty cool.

    Maybe not a total game changer, but cool.

  • Tesselation is cool and all, but this is absolute abuse of the technology when parallax shaders are very old and more cheaper than this for the flat surfaces.

    Intersecting depth is a realistic possibility with parallax shaders.

  • is it just me, or does this tesselllation crap kind of b.s.? Why don't they just wire frame the stones into the game? Is directx 11 making the stones like that? Because that's impossible. How does it know the stone's proportions? I don't know... Portal runs on DX9 and it looks 10,000x better than without "tessellation".

  • @godwhatafatty look man. it is possible. its just using the bump maps an normal maps as a guide. if you want to understand it. look it up...

  • What's to understand? What's the difference between generating the geometries via tess. and just hard coding them in the first place. The graphics card still has to process them. It's not like it's putting less strain on the GPU if it has to interpret geometries. I looks to me like video game designers are getting lazy and graphics card companies are trying to find some other means of advertising their products.

    Whatever. Modern games don't focus on integrity nowadays anyways, only graphics.

  • @godwhatafatty Pay attention from 0:22 to 0:32 and you'll see how the level of tessellation increases the closer you get to the object, thereby only using the amount of polys necessary to get the quality. If you had tessellated everything into the actual models to begin with, the performance would be horrendous even far away.

  • @Domsy1201 ooooh... well, my mind has been changed... thanks. I guess I didn't consider/realize that it built more geometry the closer you got to it. That's actually kinda cool.

  • @godwhatafatty If you have to send the models vertices over the bus to the GPU, then using millions of polygons is out of the question. Even if the models are loaded into the GPUs RAM, animating them in real time when there are millions of polygons in each one is out of the question. The reason this is such a big deal is that you can send a low res mesh to the GPU and animate it, tesselate it, subdivide it, displacement map it, and the model quality will be outstanding for real time.

  • @godwhatafatty it is quite simple. How does it know the stone's proportions? With the displacement map. The model gets several textures: A diffuse, bump/normal map (which won't be needed after displacement) and the displacement map, to name the major ones. The displacement map tells directx 11 what to do. Just as normal maps once did. It's more expensive to have the actual polygons.

  • @Thundermaned These are the ACTUAL polygons.

  • This put parallax mapping into shame. Parallax is just a graphical effect that give you the illusion of depth in flat surfaces whereas tesselation actually yields more geometry. This is the real deal. The dragon on this demo is perhaps the most impressive example.

  • so is it the same performance or what?

    why can't they put the FPS counter near the corner?

  • @EzarKun

    because its to show tessallation not show how powerful a graphic card is.

    of course ur fps will drop if tessallation is on. it has to render the graphics many times more

  • Metro 2033 with tess on seemed the same than what is shown in the unigine thingy

  • when it doens't say Tesselation ON, it's OFF :P