Does anyone have any ideas how it will work?

I''ve heard the term "3D texture". I don''t know what that means, yet... is it a 3D model defined totally in texture??

Not so fast on my k6III-450 with TNT2U
hehe!

===========================
UNKNOWN caused an invalid page fault in module unknown at 0000:bff80eb6
: win98 with multiple sclerose

I would imagine a 3D texture is one that contains the actual volume pixels ("voxels") that define an object. I think mapping such a texture to the exterior of an object builds an accurate representation of its surface texture. Any ideas about the engine''s structure? I would imagine they are sticking with the BSP though id seems to indicate that the same rendering technique applies to static geometry and dynamic objects.

Doom 3 Engine Specs

It says they''re dropping the BSP algorithm.....

3d textures:
same as 2d textures or 1d textures. an array of data (colors). this time 3d. that means you can see it as a volume, but the mapping is at the end a simple texture mapping, nothing fancy. this means instead of cutting out of a 2d-texture a triangular piece and map this onto the triangle, you will specify 3 texturecoordinates per edge and cut out a triangular piece and mapt this onto the triangle..

wow..

why he uses this? simplyfies lighting very much (read up papers about perpixellighting and you''ll see.. but take you time its a lot of stuff if you''re "newbie".. took longlong time for me as well..)

about the rest:
he drops bsp, oh well. bsp''s are crap anyways, at least on todays hardware they are not at all for fast rendering.. simply drawing geometrie sorted by textures/statesetups/shaders is much faster for most of the data, with only rough culling of chunks..

and why does everyone has to post in every little forum how had they done this?
you _could_ have read infos about it since months, as carmack is giving out very detailed information on what he is doing, testing and such, like for example shadow-volumes, wich he "solved" for every situation, a robust shadow-method.

how he does the high-detailed meshes, is simple as well. just read up informations instead of blindly ask..

and hey, it looks cool, but at the end, its just some little polygonpusher with perpixellighting and shadowvolumes. nvidia promoted perpixellighting now 3 years ago, its about time to get a game really using it.. ([NOTE]and no, its not perfect accurate perpixellighting yet, as no geforce can actually do this[/NOTE])

"take a look around" - limp bizkit
www.google.com

I don''t think anyone''s blindly asking anything. It''s a forum, people come here to have discussions. Why is it that this is always discouraged on this forum?

----
"Caw, caw, BANG f**k I''m dead!" --The Crow

He doesn''t cut out BSP Tree. Bulls**t!!!
He needs them to create the Beamtrees for the lights and for col-det. BSP trees can used very good with modern hw, but you don''t add detail geometry to it.

quote:

---

Original post by s3202
I don''t think anyone''s blindly asking anything. It''s a forum, people come here to have discussions. Why is it that this is always discouraged on this forum?

----
"Caw, caw, BANG f**k I''m dead!" --The Crow

---

discussion is not discouraged. however, reading and research is encouraged. many people highly regard john carmack''s work.... he increases his skill through research .


To the vast majority of mankind, nothing is more agreeable than to escape the need for mental exertion... To most people, nothing is more troublesome than the effort of thinking.

i''m just reacting like this because now the wonderful fantastic and so special new revolutionary doom3 screenshots and videos are out, and everyone is crying this is awesome, impossible technique and everyone wants to knew how its done.

its a wellknown fact that doom3 is in development for quite a long time now, and that its lightingsystem is awesome, means just updodate to todays hardware, in fact. carmack lets us know nearly all the features he implements and explains them well, too. i don''t know why people now got so "shocked" about things like he does not use bsp for storing levels, or others are talking about he combines lightmaps with shadowmaps and shadowvolumes as HE TOLD HE USES SHADOWVOLUMES ONLY etcetcetc

first: how good it is we see when its out
second: the rest you _can_ know you _can_ know yet directly from carmacks .plan, wich is free for everyone..

i have nothing against discussions, i just dislike that now everyone got so impressed and interested because of the new information about doom3. we can officially see now screenshots and movies, wow. gives an impression yes. but how the technique will look like is wellknown yet, and there are demos out using at least parts of this technique.

"take a look around" - limp bizkit
www.google.com