PDA

View Full Version : New graphics. What should they do?



dxfan94
21st Sep 2008, 20:59
Ok so my last post wasnt even worth peoples while. But i was looking around and it looks like companies need to start thinking about this whole intel thing.

Heres the link to the article. It may change the gaming community forever and what Eidos needs to do to.

http://rss.feedsportal.com/c/669/f/9809/s/1ef3469/l/0L0Stechradar0N0C465590A/story01.htm

hopefully you all can get to it if not go google TechRadar In depth: game over for graphics cards

K^2
21st Sep 2008, 21:26
It all depends on what kind of support they'll get form MS and their DirectX and with the OpenGL. If at least one of these libraries will be compatible with new CPU architecture, then yes, it has a chance of making graphics cards obsolete. This did happen once with math co-processors. We'll see how it goes.

jordan_a
21st Sep 2008, 21:33
When I got to see the game working during my visit in Montréal, it was already very beautiful, yet a guy from the staff told me it was nothing compare to the final result!

K^2
21st Sep 2008, 22:05
When I got to see the game working during my visit in Montréal, it was already very beautiful, yet a guy from the staff told me it was nothing compare to the final result!
Do you happen to know, and if you can disclose this, was it running on under DX9 or DX10?

imported_van_HellSing
21st Sep 2008, 22:08
Who cares, as long as it's not DX10 only.

Jerion
21st Sep 2008, 22:43
Who cares, as long as it's not DX10 only.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it's DX10 only- by 2009 DX10 will be more commonplace. And face it- there would be zero animosity to DX10 if it wasn't tied to Vista and Vista didn't have so many unrelated issues.

imported_van_HellSing
21st Sep 2008, 22:48
I said it before, I'll say it again. I haven't seen a single game that looks significantly better in DX10 than in DX9. At best, a bit different. Not better.

DXeXodus
22nd Sep 2008, 04:11
I think sometimes it is not only a visual improvement, but a performance improvement that one gets by using DX10.

Absentia
22nd Sep 2008, 14:11
I think its astounding that even by the time jordan came to visit, they were developing prototypes for the actual engine implementation. Considering how long they now have in their schedule to spend on actually making the game, that gives me some new-found positivity.

I love it but also can't bear to think that the new DX story, characters, perhaps even dialogue, has probably been created already. It's exciting and annoying at the same time =P OCTOBER 9TH GUUUISEE

FrankCSIS
22nd Sep 2008, 14:24
About the OT; Considering Intel's past experience and partnerships with the industry I wouldn't bet all my stacks on this horse just yet, and I'd hate to be the first developers to sign a co-sponsor bill with them!

gamer0004
22nd Sep 2008, 15:58
I think its astounding that even by the time jordan came to visit, they were developing prototypes for the actual engine implementation. Considering how long they now have in their schedule to spend on actually making the game, that gives me some new-found positivity.

I love it but also can't bear to think that the new DX story, characters, perhaps even dialogue, has probably been created already. It's exciting and annoying at the same time =P OCTOBER 9TH GUUUISEE

Remember DX:IW? They had a lot of time left for actually designing the game as well.

















Until they decided the UT 2000/2001 wasn't fancy enough for our lovable graphics loving console colleagues. Which of course cause at least some minor delays and definately cause huge framerate problems which they then "resolved" by making the maps smaller.

K^2
22nd Sep 2008, 17:24
I think sometimes it is not only a visual improvement, but a performance improvement that one gets by using DX10.
If you want performance improvement, you don't use DirectX at all.

imported_van_HellSing
22nd Sep 2008, 17:33
gamer0004 - That's wrong. Flesh (the new renderer) was far from perfect and did cause some framerate problems, but it was not the reason for cutting the levels. That was because of the Xbox' limited RAM. No matter what renderer they used, the textures etc. for a larger level still wouldn't fit into the Xbox' memory.

Jerion
22nd Sep 2008, 18:25
If you want performance improvement, you don't use DirectX at all.

Nicely done.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

IH-Denton
22nd Sep 2008, 18:27
Like one man said: it's just numbers
Lets count smth...

near 2010 Intel will show us their new processor named Larrabee.
Larrabee containes 24 cores (although i think there will be more)
1 core will be tuned to 1 Teraflops of its performance
It means 24 Teraflops in one processor

Currently one graphics card (i talk about Ageia) has about 100 Gigaglops of performance
It means, that ONE Larrabee will show us performance approximately (24 000 / 100) of 240 graphics cards.

So, Nvidia and ATI will be pretty dead... soon

K^2
22nd Sep 2008, 18:31
Look, every chip-manufacturer has developments several generations ahead of what is out there. Intel will need to build new factories for Larrabee. ATI and NVidia will simply have to drop some cash into building new factories for designs they have been holding back to make more money on things they already have on production.

Sure, it will be a loss to ATI and NVidia, but they will be far from bankrupt. They will keep making chips that will do as well or better than Larrabee, and have full OpenGL and DirectX support, which is still an open question for Larrabee.

Either way, of course, this is very good news for gamers, because we'll either get better tech or same tech for a lot less.

dxfan94
22nd Sep 2008, 22:39
Like one man said: it's just numbers
Lets count smth...

near 2010 Intel will show us their new processor named Larrabee.
Larrabee containes 24 cores (although i think there will be more)
1 core will be tuned to 1 Teraflops of its performance
It means 24 Teraflops in one processor

Currently one graphics card (i talk about Ageia) has about 100 Gigaglops of performance
It means, that ONE Larrabee will show us performance approximately (24 000 / 100) of 240 graphics cards.

So, Nvidia and ATI will be pretty dead... soon

THANK YOU OMG !! SOMEONE ACTUALLY SAYS IT BETTER THAN ME

minus0ne
23rd Sep 2008, 07:50
Like one man said: it's just numbers
Lets count smth...

near 2010 Intel will show us their new processor named Larrabee.
Larrabee containes 24 cores (although i think there will be more)
1 core will be tuned to 1 Teraflops of its performance
It means 24 Teraflops in one processor
A single 1Ghz Pentium core doing 1 Teraflops :lol: You should go work for The Inquirer.

Currently one graphics card (i talk about Ageia) has about 100 Gigaglops of performance
It means, that ONE Larrabee will show us performance approximately (24 000 / 100) of 240 graphics cards.

So, Nvidia and ATI will be pretty dead... soon
I'll just slap you out that weird dream you're having and tell you straight away that Larrabee is made to perform 2 Teraflops, or about the same as a Radeon HD 4870 X2, and it's a bloody miracle considering they're just taping together old 1Ghz Pentium cores onto a single chip. Larrabee is just Intel's way of getting into the GPGPU market (dominated by nVidia and AMD) and trying to push it to the masses.

Jerion
23rd Sep 2008, 15:53
A single 1Ghz Pentium core doing 1 Teraflops :lol: You should go work for The Inquirer.

I'll just slap you out that weird dream you're having and tell you straight away that Larrabee is made to perform 2 Teraflops, or about the same as a Radeon HD 4870 X2, and it's a bloody miracle considering they're just taping together old 1Ghz Pentium cores onto a single chip. Larrabee is just Intel's way of getting into the GPGPU market (dominated by nVidia and AMD) and trying to push it to the masses.

Ditto. :)

IH-Denton
23rd Sep 2008, 17:31
All that info about 2 Tf is just another piece of unproven rumours, which was appropriately spreaded in blogs. The official presentation has been made only ones - on 7 march 2006 whith tiny bit of details (few-words-discussion on Siggraph on august 2008 was barred to public). Maybe i was wrong and 20 Tf is too "hot" for GPU at present day, but 2 Tf is too worthless and unrealistic for its 300W of TDP in 2010. Lets simply wait for a first release and tests of this proc. I dont want to play holywar here (=

ps: for people, who have some interest in formula for performance calculation:
F x n x i /1 000 000 = R
(F - frequency, n - number of processors, i - number of instructions, R - Teraflops)

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 17:53
If you want performance improvement, you don't use DirectX at all.

I think sometimes it is not only a visual improvement, but a performance improvement that one gets by using DX10.
I've bought two virtually identical laptops (the second had an extra 128mb of RAM). The first ran on XP, the second on Vista. DirectX10 does make a difference, notso much visually, but rather, on the speed as eXodus mentioned. There were a few games that barely ran on my first laptop (such as Supreme Commander), while on the second, ran very smoothly, almost never slowing down in framerate, save for when there were hundreds of units at once. And most games these days require DX8 or higher, so K^2, your comment isn't overly well thought out...

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it's DX10 only- by 2009 DX10 will be more commonplace. And face it- there would be zero animosity to DX10 if it wasn't tied to Vista and Vista didn't have so many unrelated issues.
I doubt it will require DX10. Most games either had a low required DX, or provided you with a better DX anyways. Seeing as how DX10 wont run on XP, I don't think they could do that, as they'd cut their market down only to gamers running Vista or on console. Which is another good point, the 360 has DX9 (so assuming it's on consoles current-gen, you should be fine) and I don't know what the PS3 has. Long-story short, many, many people are still on XP, which means there's no way Eidos will cut themselves off from that market.

Jerion
23rd Sep 2008, 17:57
I've bought two virtually identical laptops (the second had an extra 128mb of RAM). The first ran on XP, the second on Vista. DirectX10 does make a difference, notso much visually, but rather, on the speed as eXodus mentioned. There were a few games that barely ran on my first laptop (such as Supreme Commander), while on the second, ran very smoothly, almost never slowing down in framerate, save for when there were hundreds of units at once. And most games these days require DX8 or higher, so K^2, your comment isn't overly well thought out...

I doubt it will require DX10. Most games either had a low required DX, or provided you with a better DX anyways. Seeing as how DX10 wont run on XP, I don't think they could do that, as they'd cut their market down only to gamers running Vista or on console. Which is another good point, the 360 has DX9 (so assuming it's on consoles current-gen, you should be fine) and I don't know what the PS3 has. Long-story short, many, many people are still on XP, which means there's no way Eidos will cut themselves off from that market.


I think what he was saying is that OpenGL 2.x is superior to Direct3D, not that D3D 10 is superior to D3D 9.

What you say sounds reasonable. But XP is an aging OS, and it won't last forever.

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 17:58
Oh, undoubtedly. But there's always a couple of years worth of overlap, and Vista is still in it's infancy. It wouldn't make sense cutting off the estiblashed market and hope for the emerging market. That's all I'm saying.

Jerion
23rd Sep 2008, 18:09
Oh, undoubtedly. But there's always a couple of years worth of overlap, and Vista is still in it's infancy. It wouldn't make sense cutting off the estiblashed market and hope for the emerging market. That's all I'm saying.

Agreed. Halo 2 Vista made that mistake and it cost MS dearly.

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 18:15
Yeah, I don't even understand how one of the richest companies on Earth makes such a juvenile mistake like that.

Jerion
23rd Sep 2008, 18:19
Yeah, I don't even understand how one of the richest companies on Earth makes such a juvenile mistake like that.

Politics, Bureaucracy, Mismanagement. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? :whistle:

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 18:29
*Sigh*

What was once an art form is now an industry. I hate this species...

Tracer Tong
23rd Sep 2008, 21:04
It all depends on what kind of support they'll get form MS and their DirectX and with the OpenGL. If at least one of these libraries will be compatible with new CPU architecture, then yes, it has a chance of making graphics cards obsolete. This did happen once with math co-processors. We'll see how it goes.

Also happened with SPUs. CPUs turned so fast there was no need for external sound processing (unless it's professional). My guess: High-End GPUs and PPUs will eventually merge into CPUs by being cores (while CPUs will be comprised of general-purpose cores, vectored op cores (graphics-driven) and some other types of cores).

Romeo
23rd Sep 2008, 22:27
And eventually quintiple cores, and EDPU cores, and... Apple cores... And corsettes...

K^2
24th Sep 2008, 02:24
I want a quantum computing core in my CPU. I don't care if these things are still pretty much useless, I just want one.

Romeo
24th Sep 2008, 04:29
Speaking of new cores, there's supposed to be some Vancouver company that found a way to double and even triple the speeds of existing CPU hardware. That should also provide a nice boost to computer speeds. =P

K^2
24th Sep 2008, 20:06
IBM managed to build transistors that can run at up to 300GHz. Of course, they require some crazy cooling, consume a lot of power, and they still have trouble integrating them into CPUs at sufficient densities. But maybe they'll find some workarounds.

dxfan94
24th Sep 2008, 20:59
See some people like my posts. YEAH! sorry just kinda happy i did something right.

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 05:37
IBM managed to build transistors that can run at up to 300GHz. Of course, they require some crazy cooling, consume a lot of power, and they still have trouble integrating them into CPUs at sufficient densities. But maybe they'll find some workarounds.
...DOPE!

See some people like my posts. YEAH! sorry just kinda happy i did something right.
You is phail. Make like a tree... And get out.

Jerion
26th Sep 2008, 07:06
You is phail. Make like a tree... And get out.

Your insult is fail. :p

Romeo
26th Sep 2008, 07:09
UR LIEF IZ PHAIL! Roflroflroflcopter.

dxfan94
27th Sep 2008, 04:04
UR LIEF IZ PHAIL! Roflroflroflcopter.

and here i thought you where semi nice. wow people on here (yes here on this forum) are such a**es. Get a life all. You dont need to make me and other people feel like crap for what we say. Grow up

dxfan94
27th Sep 2008, 04:07
Rule #6: Treat members and their opinions with respect.

The Eidos Forums are a place to discuss things in a friendly manner. This does not mean that everyone always has to agree on certain subjects. Natural difference of opinion can lead to quality debates and conversations; however these topics and debates get out of hand when people do not respect different opinions.

All members and reference to social groups should be treated with respect. Although this is similar to rule #5, this also extends to pushing your own personal beliefs on other people. Not everyone believes the same thing, and as long as you respect other people's opinions, you should be fine.

Igoe
27th Sep 2008, 05:27
I will say this in terms of graphics:

Above all else. Above ALL ELSE. The game just has to work.

I recently took up Oblivion. Good game. GOOD GAME. Jaw dropping graphical environments, the best skyboxes I'd seen since UT99. The game was stunning. But It had a game-crushing glitch, in that it corrupted savegames.

I consistently lose WHOLE HOURS of gameplay because a saved game gets corrupted. It happens on a DAILY basis. This seemingly small flaw totally ruins the game for me, and because of it, I can hardly stand to play this masterpiece of a game.

Above all else in DX3, above the fancy graphics and awesome polycounts, make sure the game works. Let the saves take a few seconds to process. Let the levels take a few more seconds to load as long as the data is verified.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE polish the game like it's a Nintendo game.

I'd GLADLY take a loading time hit to prevent corruption and the likes. No matter what the game looks like, I just want it to work. I don't want to have to worry about whether or not my save game will load next time I start the game.

I have complete faith in you EM. All signs point to the fact that you have your s#!t together. You have a guaranteed $60 from me when this game comes out. Please make sure I don't have to worry about petty things.

Many thanks, signed, a dedicated fan

-Igoe

Romeo
27th Sep 2008, 05:49
...DXFan, hopefully after some further time spent in these forums, you will come to realize hardly anything I say (especially when incorrectly typed) is serious at all. 99% of the time, I side with the underdog, relax. ;)

dxfan94
27th Sep 2008, 13:50
thank you and sorry. i was on a rant. People all day (not even on here) where being retarded immature kids. Im not saying you where. It just seemed to me like even my good posts got people treating me like some b**l s**t

3nails4you
27th Sep 2008, 16:30
There will always be ups and downs in competition...no one stays on top for long because companies like AMD, nVidia, etc. will always be there to copy and improve on others' technology. Ex. nVidia came out with there 2-together graphics card system, and not much longer there's a Radeon card with more power than 2 cards put together, all on a single chip. No such thing as an end to graphics companies just because Intel comes out with something.

Romeo
27th Sep 2008, 22:01
Yes, technology has a achieved such a rate of evolution, that at this point, "the next big thing" rarely has a long lifespan.

K^2
28th Sep 2008, 01:03
Except for lasers.

Jerion
28th Sep 2008, 01:17
Except for lasers.

My XT2300 Internet-enabled blowdryer laser totally outclasses the GX1800 Robot Phone laser.

Romeo
28th Sep 2008, 04:55
Shazam.

But how can lasers possibly stand up to... BLOOM EFFECT LIGHTING!

3nails4you
28th Sep 2008, 13:55
That is true...based on DX and IW, lasers have indeed become a successful industry...seems like EVERY. SINGLE. BAD. GUY. has some sort of laser-armed defense system...that's it, here on out, I'm boycotting lasers.

Jerion
28th Sep 2008, 18:48
Shazam.

But how can lasers possibly stand up to... BLOOM EFFECT LIGHTING!

Lasers cut apart the light. no more bloom! :rasp:

El_Bel
28th Sep 2008, 18:48
Well its easy to protect your home with lasers with less then $20.:rasp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0FTzUhdg3w&NR=1 :D

Jerion
28th Sep 2008, 18:53
Well its easy to protect your home with lasers with less then $20.:rasp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0FTzUhdg3w&NR=1 :D

Dood. That's cool. :D

K^2
28th Sep 2008, 19:05
Well its easy to protect your home with lasers with less then $20.:rasp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0FTzUhdg3w&NR=1 :D
That schematic is very bad. Note that the two of the leads to potentiometer are essentially shorted. That thing will drain your power supply for no good reason.

I recently moved to the first floor, and I was actually planning to build something like this to be placed on the windows. So if you want proper schematics for this, let me know.

Romeo
28th Sep 2008, 19:26
If you want home security, just invest in a flamethrower anti-theft system, routinely found in South African vehicles. =D

3nails4you
28th Sep 2008, 19:53
Or rig the door so when it opens it pulls the pins on some grenades stacked up in a wooden crate under some TNT...that thief won't get ANYTHING from your house.

Romeo
28th Sep 2008, 20:01
Yeah, but then there wont be a house to rob. Besides, what if accidentally forgot to disarm you're system one day?

3nails4you
28th Sep 2008, 20:24
The Ultra ExplosioAnti-Theft Security System is not reliable for any damages caused to homes, pets, cars, human beings, or other potential hazards. System only guarantees no theft and is not responsible for any other losses.

;)

iWait
28th Sep 2008, 21:13
Booby-trapping is illegal in most countries.

Nevertheless, if you take a .50 machinegun and mount it on your roof, hooked up to a motion detector so that the barrel trains on anything that moves, I doubt anybody would try to rob you. Functioning or no the police will probably raid your house if they see anything that resembles a gun on your property. (Atleast where I live.)

K^2
28th Sep 2008, 22:02
I wonder if it would still be illegal if you use a Tazer gun instead of any lethal weapon. Imagine a Tazer turret guarding your property.

3nails4you
28th Sep 2008, 23:04
Booby-trapping is illegal in most countries.

Nevertheless, if you take a .50 machinegun and mount it on your roof, hooked up to a motion detector so that the barrel trains on anything that moves, I doubt anybody would try to rob you. Functioning or no the police will probably raid your house if they see anything that resembles a gun on your property. (Atleast where I live.)

I should hope so...what happens to a car passing on the road? Doh!

http://webpages.charter.net/ccsoftware/index.html/shotvette.jpg

DXeXodus
29th Sep 2008, 04:10
If you want home security, just invest in a flamethrower anti-theft system, routinely found in South African vehicles. =D

Good old South Africa. Unfortunately I am yet to see one of these in action over here. I don't know how successful the concepts was. Think the government thought it was unconstitutional or something or other. lol.

And... back on the topic of new graphics.

Romeo
29th Sep 2008, 05:59
I should hope so...what happens to a car passing on the road? Doh!

http://webpages.charter.net/ccsoftware/index.html/shotvette.jpg
Why would you put bullet-hole stickers on a 1955 Chevrolet Corvette? That person deserves to be clubbed in the head, and robbed of his car. Gosh...

Good old South Africa. Unfortunately I am yet to see one of these in action over here. I don't know how successful the concepts was. Think the government thought it was unconstitutional or something or other. lol.

And... back on the topic of new graphics.
There is a handful. Unfortunately, the system's extravagant cost keeps the majority from buying (it costs more than most of the the kit cars from South Africa do). This is besides the fact that you don't notice it when installed (it's underneath the car).

3nails4you
29th Sep 2008, 14:30
Why would you put bullet-hole stickers on a 1955 Chevrolet Corvette? That person deserves to be clubbed in the head, and robbed of his car. Gosh...


Stickers?! Nono, that's what happens when you drive by a house with a roof-mounted motion-detecting machine gun.

Wow...this really HAS gotten away from graphics, huh?

Romeo
29th Sep 2008, 20:29
Stickers?! Nono, that's what happens when you drive by a house with a roof-mounted motion-detecting machine gun.

Wow...this really HAS gotten away from graphics, huh?
The metal looks like it's splaying outwards, away from the direction the bullet's would be travelling. It's a bunch of dollar store stickers a beautiful machine. Now excuse me while I go off and vomit from this disgraceful act on an american classic. lol

K^2
29th Sep 2008, 20:40
The metal looks like it's splaying outwards...
That's because it was shot through-and-through from the other side. Duh.

3nails4you
29th Sep 2008, 21:18
That's because it was shot through-and-through from the other side. Duh.

Got 'em. Good work.

DXeXodus
30th Sep 2008, 03:51
Now lets sing the back on topic song....

All together now ;)

minus0ne
30th Sep 2008, 23:10
Back on the topic of.. what? :scratch: How Eidos Montreal should keep in mind DirectX 13.1-compatible GPGPUs will be released in 2014? :p

DXeXodus
1st Oct 2008, 04:03
I didn't make the topic man... ;)
All I know is we should be on it.

dxfan94
2nd Oct 2008, 20:55
yeah umm how did graphics cards get to lasers. Really? should i make a laser post for you fans out there of the red shiny things.

K^2
2nd Oct 2008, 21:07
Red lasers are passe. Even blue lasers are getting old now. Lets talk about fission-pumped X-Ray lasers.

El_Bel
2nd Oct 2008, 21:21
Red lasers are passe. Even blue lasers are getting old now. Lets talk about fission-pumped X-Ray lasers.

Can we really do that? :nut:

I want one for my birthday!!!

dxfan94
2nd Oct 2008, 23:00
no we cant the point was to get back on topic speaking of which techdar came out with another post so heres the link

http://rss.feedsportal.com/c/669/f/9809/s/205abf0/l/0L0Stechradar0N0C472973/story01.htm

3nails4you
3rd Oct 2008, 00:25
http://www.visualwalkthroughs.com/deusex/battery/DeusEx-2003-11-11-15-06-25-.jpg

Lasers.

Graphics.

Deus Ex.

On topic.

;)

K^2
3rd Oct 2008, 01:03
These aren't lasers. Don't you remember that science dude from IW explain it? You cannot see the laser beam. What you see is the holographic projection marking the beams, which is used with security lasers to avoid innocent bystanders accidentally walking into them.


no we cant the point was to get back on topic speaking of which techdar came out with another post so heres the link

Apologies about this, but TechRadar has taken this story down for the moment as we're informed there are a couple of inaccuracies in the original article, which we would like to follow up on. We'll update on Friday.
That speaks volumes.

SubTonic20
3rd Oct 2008, 01:11
Matters not to me. By 2009, I will have a computer that can give even Crysis an absolute run for its money, so I say: Go as heavy as you want with the game, E-Mont.

Romeo
3rd Oct 2008, 03:11
That's because it was shot through-and-through from the other side. Duh.
No...

Got 'em. Good work.
...Banned...

Now lets sing the back on topic song....

All together now ;)
...And no...


Well, glad we all cleared that one up. lol

Romeo
3rd Oct 2008, 03:23
And on the topic of graphics, as long as they're at least this good I wont care:

:cool:
-|- <-- Paul Denton.
./\.

K^2
3rd Oct 2008, 04:12
And on the topic of graphics, as long as they're at least this good I wont care:

:cool:
-|- <-- Paul Denton.
./\.
Anyone up for writing a Deus Ex fan text adventure? I'll write the engine if someone is going to do the story, puzzles, etc.

Romeo
3rd Oct 2008, 04:15
Um, hello, didn't you just see my graphic novel? Aptly titled, Paul Denton. lol

K^2
3rd Oct 2008, 19:36
Um, hello, didn't you just see my graphic novel? Aptly titled, Paul Denton. lol
Masterpiece. The use of simple form to convey such a complex message.

So I'm going to put you in charge of the scenery. Things like: "You are in a dimly lit room. The exit to the North is blocked by a series of laser beams. There is an electric box next to the beam emitters. A lockpick was left behind on a table adjacent to the Western wall. 'Cake is a lie.' states the fluorescent graffiti on the Eastern wall." Erm... Wait, that's the wrong game.

By the way, I am absolutely serious about this. If there are people who want to write the story, scene descriptions, etc, I'll make it all tick. I think it would be very interesting to move all the augmentation and gunfight mechanics to text-only form.

Romeo
4th Oct 2008, 01:55
Count me in brother, feel free to PM me what you want specifically, and I'll hop to it (Seeing as how Bethesda's stupid Constuction Set is being difficult at the moment, I have nothing to do).

K^2
4th Oct 2008, 03:25
I'm going to start work on an X-bar language parser. Once I have that running, I'll probably start a thread to recruit some more talent.

minus0ne
4th Oct 2008, 06:39
I'm going to start work on an X-bar language parser. Once I have that running, I'll probably start a thread to recruit some more talent.
You are of course aware there are a million and one perfectly good free text adventure creators/editors out there, right? ;)

http://www.google.nl/search?q=text+adventure+creator

K^2
4th Oct 2008, 07:22
And all of them have very poor linguistic parsers. Nothing that goes beyond <verb><direct object><indirect object>. I want to write one where you can have a very simple dialog with another character. I've written a very simple inference-based Knowledge Base before. I'd like for each character to have such a KB with potentially useful information, which you could "access" by asking various questions. So if a character has an entry Location(Bridge) => Guards(Present) in the KB, a question "Are there any guards on the bridge?" needs to trip that particular entry to produce a positive response.

Slightly more detailed, the KB entry, in terms of basic operations is:

NOT(Location(Bridge)) OR Guards(Present)

The question tests by contradiction ("If bridge then guards", contradicts "bridge and no guards"):

Location(Bridge) AND NOT(Guards(Present))

Multiplying two statements:

[NOT(Location(Bridge)) OR Guards(Present)] AND [Location(Bridge) AND NOT(Guards(Present))]

=

[NOT(Location(Bridge)) AND Location(Bridge)] OR [Guards(Present) AND NOT(Guards(Present))]

=

False OR False = False

KB evaluated to False, implying contradiction, meaning that there really are guards on the bridge. Further evaluation can be done to determine whether character should be truthful, but these are details of implementation.

All this system needs is a parser that can take a question and turn it into a query. Note that queries can also be used to update a KB, so with a parser in place, "teaching" characters wouldn't be difficult either.

ikenstein
11th Oct 2008, 06:31
this is cool! -


http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw

El_Bel
11th Oct 2008, 23:51
No, this is way cooler.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_AO0F5sLdVM



Masterpiece. The use of simple form to convey such a complex message.

So I'm going to put you in charge of the scenery. Things like: "You are in a dimly lit room. The exit to the North is blocked by a series of laser beams. There is an electric box next to the beam emitters. A lockpick was left behind on a table adjacent to the Western wall. 'Cake is a lie.' states the fluorescent graffiti on the Eastern wall." Erm... Wait, that's the wrong game.

By the way, I am absolutely serious about this. If there are people who want to write the story, scene descriptions, etc, I'll make it all tick. I think it would be very interesting to move all the augmentation and gunfight mechanics to text-only form.


I am in too, if you ever need any help!!:D

piippo
12th Oct 2008, 03:09
Ok so my last post wasnt even worth peoples while. But i was looking around and it looks like companies need to start thinking about this whole intel thing.

Heres the link to the article. It may change the gaming community forever and what Eidos needs to do to.

http://rss.feedsportal.com/c/669/f/9809/s/1ef3469/l/0L0Stechradar0N0C465590A/story01.htm

hopefully you all can get to it if not go google TechRadar In depth: game over for graphics cards

Well, I don't know how much you know about GPU's, so I suggest you read the last paragraph there with care:

"Impressive as that sounds, what we don't know is how good this battery of general purpose and x86-compatible cores will actually be for graphics processing. Sure, it will be much more programmable than any graphics chip before. But that doesn't mean it will be fast. Roll on 2009."

Intel hasn't shown anything concrete of the said Larrabee card, and I can't see how this ties with Deus Ex 3 since Intel has said - it will support the major API's - meaning Direct3D(DirectX) and OpenGL. That doesn't change.

Eidos should do the game, let Intel worry about larrabee and it's compability. I've would have written more in-depth, but I doubt this forum is the right place for tech discussion :)