Quake 3 Raytraced

[Demoras]

That's cool :) Raytracing and point cloud data are probably my favourite modern graphical techniques. The possibilities are endless! It's just a shame you're actually limited by the Quake 3 meshes now, which aren't really detailed enough to show the possibilities of raytracing. Still, really cool to see :)

[MrPlachtacek]

These graphics may look good but you can re-edit your graphics right in quake3 settings graphics mode :)

[superkellerman8D]

very nice! Can I get a download?! DOWN-LOAD! What? DOWN-LOAD!

[JohnnyK98k]

Amazing... Q3A is still pleasing to the eye after more than 10 years! I'd really like to see more of this 'raytracing' for Q3A in action.

[shotgunmasterQL]

@JohnnyK98k

i wouldnt call that much amazing because of the fact its doesnt run like quake 3 should.

sure it looks good from some view points but i think i would stay wit basic engine instead of that.

besides if you want better graphics for your quake 3 just check "Berserker @ Quake 3" project. it did magics already for Quake 2.

or wait till we have the tecnology and improved raytrace in the future :)

[JohnnyK98k]

@shotgunmasterQL

Yeah, I understand what you mean. I agree! I always prefer games in their 'natural' state. The way they were intended to play... A good example is people modifying DOOM to look like some next-gen game with crazy textures and colourful lighting... Looks ugly if you ask me! But I'll check out Bererker mod for Quake 2, sounds might cool!

[shotgunmasterQL]

@JohnnyK98k

its ofcourse fun to see example DOOM looking like current (or last) gen game but i prefere old "2.5D" gfx.

berserker is on both quake 2 and quake 3 :P both are quite awsome but berserker @quake 3 is much more rare. there is only 2 videos on youtube (or 3)

[LivingdeadMetal]

Can you download this?

[LivingdeadMetal]

Lots of lighting and shadowing errors.

[defrag34]

q3bers is awesome....

[nooblet911]

hey, can anyone tell me if there is a mod for quake 3 that gives it bump mapping?

[CTPEJIOK22]

berserker@q3

[nooblet911]

can you tell me where to download it or give me the homepage?

[mov0001000]

Those hard-edged shadows could be buffer shadows as well, with much less CPU load.

And reflections could be dynamic environment maps, instead of ray-shit.

So what's the point of ray tracing when there are no caustics, soft shadows nor blurred reflections/distortions?

[Smokinjoewhite]

I think the point of these projects is to advance the techniques used for ray tracing and optimize them, Without people experimenting with different ideas, evolution comes to a halt very quickly.

[VCat2006]

Nice, but how do these scenes compare to the original Quake 3 engine? The mirror effect should be doable, or does that only work with static environments?

[rlinfinity]

wow. it really does add a fluid realism to graphics . combine this with advanced textures and there could be somethin g big here.

[bvindh]

1:25.....disco version of quake??LOL!!

[irlrp]

HD plz !! :)

[Joroshira]

.....

Can someone tell me whats different? Sorry I can't tell the difference

[raywaldo06]

Ray tracing is a much more realistic version of rendering than traditional scan conversion, and is much more processor intensive. It allows for more complex shading and lighting effects like reflections, caustics, refraction, etc. It's amazing.

[Decenium]

So if we want to use it for games, modern day Graphics cards wont do?

And future one's need to be more CPU like?

[Atx777]

Neat but impractical :|

[p3on]

maybe impractical for another year or two

[qwertymac93]

too bad quake 3 sucks balls, but we would get like, 2fps in crysis with ray tracing, it would still be nice to see though.

[rifleman0123]

cool but where i can download it please tell!

[pocholo66]

se ve de pena por favor que alguien encienda los plomos...parece el kakadoom3

[skylarg717]

is this a command in quake 3??? it REALLY creeps me out..

[ermonski]

woohoo! It's dm7!

the plasma gun looks like firing snowballs lol

but still I love this vid

[kraelen]

Sigh... You really should cut down on the porn if you have seen THAT much.

[kraelen]

You really are trying far too hard. Calm down before you burst the veins behind your eyes. Surely you don't wish to be blind before your 17th birthday?

[kraelen]

Not as stupid as you it seems.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

I can't deny that raytracing has it's advantages - but so do all rendering techniques. In my oppinion, raytracing simply isn't worth the overhead. Sure, clipping problems á la today's 3d engines are annoying, but not impossible to fix, and about the reflection of a reflection issue - there are only so many reflections of a reflection the human eye can see. A modern renderer can simply approximate the number of reflections the eye reacts to and simply not render the redundant ones.

[qwertymac93]

so can ray tracing.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Yes, but at a fraction of the speed a normal rasterizer does it in. Again, I'm not saying raytracing is useless, I can just find a million better ways to make use of the transistors on the CPU than doing completely accurate per-pixel lighting (sparse voxel octrees, for one). I mean seriously, how often do you encounter a hall of mirrors in a game?

[qwertymac93]

would you rather get 150 fps in a game or get 60fps with slightly better lighting?

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Well, if you're talking about a rasterizer vs. a raytracer your question should be rephrased: "would you rather get 150 fps in a game or get 1 fps with slightly better lighting?".

My answer is I would rather have 150 fps with comparable graphics.

These are the official specs for this demo:

about 20 fps@36 GHz in 512x512 with 4xFSAA as found on the link above.

[qwertymac93]

the difference is NOT that great and you know it, stop putting ray tracing down, and get over rasterization.ever heard of hybrid ray tracing?

[JontheJonathanJNT]

It's not like I would know, having written a raytracer and all. But go ahead, if you don't believe me just read the specs for _this_ demo as found on the link posted by MrSpontaneous in the info for this movie.

[qwertymac93]

modern dx10 level hard ware takes a much smaller hit from ray tracing, and the r600 architecture handles it best i would say, of course r600 gpu cards are much more powerfull then their competitors anyway. and again, i say ever herd of HYBRID raytracing?

[JontheJonathanJNT]

1. Raytracing is not hardware supported. It's all software, run on the CPU, not the GPU.

2. The performance hit is still too great, sorry.

3. If you still don't believe me, read the interview on raytracing with John Carmack by PC Perspective. He should be credible enough for you.

[qwertymac93]

look up cinema 2.0, amd, as you know is pretty big, and well, just look it up.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Good argument, but I've already seen it and I know it uses a conjunction of voxels (not polygons) and raytracing. But as I've stated before, raytracing isn't all evil as long as you don't waste your time trying to get 100% accurate lighting and shadowing. And the Cinema 2.0 is targeted at future hardware that supports raytracing (current hardware does not).

[qwertymac93]

the demo was run one 2 4850 gpu's, come on, please stop. its not hear now, but you cant deny that ray tracing will be added to most games by 5 years.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Yes, using custom ATi API's. And no, I can't deny that raytracing will be added in games in 5 years. But raytracing is still much slower than the conventional rasterizer. And when it's finally supported through hardware I can think of alot of better ways to put that power to use.

[qwertymac93]

omfg its already supported by the hardware, its the api that dont suport it, as shown by amd with cinima 2.0!

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Everyting is supported by hardware, since it all just comes down to number crunching. But the API is the only pipeline you can work through when programming the graphics card. If it's not supported in the API, it's not supported by the graphics card even if it has the theoretical cababilitiy of actually tracing rays. And you can come with all the CUDA-based arguments you want, because the FUTURE is just that - a completely programmable graphics pipeline.

[qwertymac93]

i know nothing of cuda, only that nvidia owns it. and now your just changing your argument, if you meant it was supported by the hardware, you would have said so.i dont give a shit if current hard were isnt powerful enough to run full ray tracing, its the FUTURE, NOT NOW.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

No I'm not changing my argument. Raytracing is not supported by hardware since the API is the only thing a programmer has to work through to run calculations using the graphics card. So what if ATi can do their own API? You can't run that same code on nVidia cards.

If it's not in the API, you can still implement raytracing on the CPU, but as you've seen - 20 fps @ 36GHz = not viable.

[qwertymac93]

but 30fps at 750mhz is(1600sp X 750mhz=2.4teraflops)

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Those numbers might be right, but there are several factors to consider e.g. number of processors and threading capabilities etc. If you're talking about Cinema2.0 you also have to consider the monster CPU in that setup that can crunch through the raytracing code like there's no tomorrow.

Just to make things clear, I'm not in any way implying you're wrong even if I might have come across that way in previous posts. Our oppinions simply differ, so no hard feelings?

[qwertymac93]

nope, no hard feelings. just so you know, amd used a phenom 9850(2.5ghz quad core), so i believe that once 3.0 nehelem cpu's are mainstreme, and we have 1800 sp at 800mhz, we may see ray tracing become normal.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

Yes, we just might. Rumour has been around that Intel is actually optimizing their future CPU architectures for raytracing. In my oppinion that is a pretty smart move.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

I really don't get raytracing. Sure, running it at an acceptable speed such as shown above IS in fact impressive, but when compared to a non-raytracer, such as the Doom3 engine, it really loses all of it's purpose. Doom3 has with it's comparable graphics proven that it's not viable to make a graphics engine that is a 100 percent accurate in lighting and shadowing when you can achieve the same basic result with less accurate calculations but with the benifit of 100 times the speed of a raytracer

[MrSpontaneous]

The advantages of raytracing don't just lie in the graphics (where you can do reflections of reflections of reflections at an insanely reduced cost), but also in collision detection and clipping. How many times have you played a game and been able to see a part of a character actually bouncing through a closed door or a wall? Ray tracing eliminates that.

[JontheJonathanJNT]

At about 1:50 through the video - is the wall occlusion mapped or is the geometry actually polygonal geometry? Because if it is occlusion mapped then I have to say that the light interacts in such a way I haven't seen implemented in a game yet (except for STALKER in which case was just half assed). Kudos!

[Agret]

Well ray tracing is what they use for CGI movies, it provides incredibly accurate per-pixel lighting and scene mapping so I imagine that it would be occlusion mapping.

[qwertymac93]

yup, i agree.

[cyborgtroy]

@MrSpontaneous - No it doesn't. Proper physics will eliminate that, but raytracing and rasterizing just draw whatever's thrown at them.

[rouncer81]

@MrSpontaneous Its mainly for the true glossy reflections id say.

[dying2l]

@MrSpontaneous wow I didn't know that.

Would you still need a fast cpu to handle ray tracing or can new video cards do all the work?

[dying2l]

@MrSpontaneous wow I didn't know that, so with ray tracing you can do all this in one swing?

Would you still need a fast cpu to handle ray tracing or can new video cards do all the work?

[rouncer81]

@MrSpontaneous not only that, but more experimental effects are possible, like possibly model morphing with distance fields, and visual csg.

[toastjam]

@MrSpontaneous How can raytracing solve solid body collision detection directly? That is, when rendering rays out of the camera's viewpoint, how does it do anything that a sufficiently precise z buffer will not? many times if the body parts clip through walls it's simply because the character model deviates from the collision model. Ray tracing will do nothing for that.

[TheESCALADO]

@JontheJonathanJNT Raytracing is really only for Jewboys and Snirds

[Song0Seven]

q3 engine still looks good. I understand this is a modded form of it, but still.

[rudcrustage]

JOIN US AT Q3

THE GODS OF RAILS

an intense instaunlagged ctf server

be sure to download threewav pak, and have autodownload on.

Server IP is 67.18.231.166

If you need help, let me know.

see you there :P

[t3hh0r53]

yes, and toy story was 1995

[MrSpontaneous]

Toy story wasn't rendered in real time.

[t3hh0r53]

i am sorry, did not realize this was real-time

[jixification]

And toy story used REYES, not raytracing

[phoenixan]

It's pretty cool, but the only problem is that some weapon fire that should be lighted, isn't... actually pretty much destroying some of the realism.

[KingTulip]

*yawn*... UE3 plz. Radiosity is my concern.

[Smokinjoewhite]

I found the ue3 engine to be a disappointment myself, after all the hype, and seriously, why are you comparing current tech with the q3 engine, it makes no sense.

[Zionyde]

Is this Battletoads?

[stokes91]

at 1:30 it looks like some huge battle frozen in time, awesome

[KRAFTWERK2K6]

Cool!!! Tenebrae Quake 3 ;)

[LeoDJ1992]

DOOM 3!!!

[671Detroit]

Hell yeah Dude

[t3hh0r53]

it's a load of raytraced objects in the old engine. why didn't they play back a demo from the original game instead of having crappy scripted model paths? what about global illumination? i rekon most of these effects could be aproximated in real-time on modern machines. pretty disapointing.

[theevilunholyzach]

Agree.

[Siriaan]

Some, not most. Those reflections would be impossible on current gen pixel shaders. Also the point of raytracing is that it scales far better than current tech - a thousand reflecting entities isn't much harder to render than one.

[t3hh0r53]

"reflections" - you mean that spinning chrome thing? this can be done using render targets. expensive, but possible - see water in hl2... in fact many modern games have much *better* quality graphics than this. they don't have clip and draw bugs either ;)

[Siriaan]

If you can't understand the value of ray tracing vs the kludgy, ugly hacks that are current pixel shading technologies I really don't know why you're even commenting here.

[t3hh0r53]

i consider this to be a "kludgy, ugly" hack. so the calculations here are correct, but the result is poor, and equal quality could be achieved with real-time approximations.

[Siriaan]

Go read about OpenRT, these algorithms are beautiful. Raytracing will supplant current gen tech because it can do far more with far less effort and cycles are getting pretty damn cheap these days. Consider that these are university researchers and NOT a hi-tech company with hundreds of millions of dollars behind them.

[t3hh0r53]

Note that I am refering specificly to this hacked up quake engine, and not ray-tracing in general.

More in less cycles? I think you should go read about algorithms ;)

[Siriaan]

Baby steps, luddite :)

[pingskill]

jesus, that video was shot back in 2001 mate :)

[thumperings]

cool i hate quake 4 i want quake 3.5 etc