How come this grass is so great yet no games seem to have such well done grass? Maybe it uses too much memory with the characters and all?
On another note: can this be done in unity?
How come this grass is so great yet no games seem to have such well done grass? Maybe it uses too much memory with the characters and all?
On another note: can this be done in unity?
You don’t see grass like that in games because it takes up too much time to render. The PS3 game Flower had grass similar to that, but that’s pretty much the only thing it did have. The whole game was built around the novelty of the realistic grass.
Although I’m sure all games will use grass like that one day…
As for Unity being able to do it - I don’t see why not.
I am guessing this is only a demo of their technology or engine. Well yeah, models isn’t going to eat up the memory, maybe the simulating physics part and the textures will be very high resolution.
Well i don’t really see a need for beautiful grasses in game. For a second, i thought it was real grass.
Why don’t games have grass like that in em? Until evidence to the contrary as been provided you have to assume:
That’s the skeptic.
Not saying it will never happen or anything - but these are the things to look for if you’re wondering why no-one has done it.
It’s the same as the ‘fluid’ gpu demo’s. $500 GPU for 1 cup of water relatively well animated. I’ll wait for Moore’s law to expand that bit thanks.
That game should have been called ‘Grass’.
It’s not a problem to make realistic grass when your game’s main focus is grass. Having grass like that in Grand Theft Auto wouldn’t leave much time to render the buildings and cars.
Haha, it sure has a lot of grass!
I don’t know, though… seems to run pretty smooth for having such vasts areas of grass. Almost as it could handle a little more stuff going on there.
I mean games don’t even need to be ALL grass like this one, they could have a little less grass, and a bit more of everything else.
Maybe AAA devs don’t include such grass because it’d require time to develop it, and they’re always on the verge of deadline? Maybe once a couple of games include the super grass, all games will suddenly have it too!! ![]()
It seems you’re thinking that the grass is a magic trick of DirectX 10 and somehow takes up little rendering time.
Where I believe the grass is made up thousands (even millions) of polygon blades of grass, and it’s using a vertex shader to animate each blade. The game Flower may seem like it’s taking it easy, but inside the Playstation there’s little hamster with a purple face trying to keep up.
It’s not a trick. It’s brute force. Just like the water simulations you see on youtube aren’t a magic trick, they’re brute force.
It’s the same with hair. People still use alpha meshes for hair where possible.
It’s slower than me getting out of bed in the morning.
But DX11 could fix it if only due to the tesselation or correct alpha blending.
Naw man I don’t think it’s magic, I think I saw it on that video I just posted! …haha!
lol @ purple hamster. I thought it was purple when the frames per second were below 30, maybe the hamster is just sweating a little, can you explain to me how can something be up to the cpu limit and run at 120 fps?
…I guess I’m still not convinced that it’s impossible, or that it’d take way too much cpu power. Mainly because of the example I posted, lol. I know what you mean about those other (hair/water) benchmarks, but those probably did take raw cpu power to run; but that flower game is on the ps3, running smoothly.
That game is running at 120 fps or something, my logic says it can have less grass and more gameplay elements. Unless the ps3 has an incredible processing speed, I must think that grass is optimized, right?
I don’t think I could ever figure out myself, as in replicating that grass in unity and run it on my computer. But I do think the ps3 could handle actual games using that sort grass.
not billboard grass, cool!,
i like turtles