He’s experimenting with it for Tech 6, which he has also hinted will be his last engine. Bear in mind that Tech 5 is imminent, but that it has been 7 years since the last one - which puts any Carmack engine with this approach in 2018. If it’s feasible at all, there’ll be a lot more cycles to work with at that point.
I think we are coming at the same question from opposite sides re optimization. These days optimization is not that important as models are just built in a certain way (new tech like DX 11 tesselation helps as it negates the need for normal maps (thus detail),- although again, Carmack is not convinced DX 11 is going in the right direction, he always has a soft spot for OpenGL!).
Yeah, I do have some experience but am not claiming to be the expert. I only wanted to challenge the notion that more polys == more work. It’s not linear like that.
I suppose the level of work would depend on the game, but a FPS or RPG would make heavy use of art assets that are close up to the player and under constant scrutiny. I think its still a case of art overload if every object has to be modelled high poly- detail still needs to be modelled- take for example this helicopter (image from Wikipedia):
Now that we could model everything exactly, it means greater care must be taken in making sure the details are correct (look at the high poly forums and follow people making cars and planes from blueprints: it takes ages to make then to that level of detail). Although you dont have to optimize it, you still have to build it! Take the latest Gran Tourismo as an example- the development time mostly went on modelling, I believe.
Yeah, we might be going back to the time in movies before CGI - if you wanted a helicopter in your shot, you needed to rent / borrow one.
This, and just the pressure for higher detail in traditional engines, might lead to more standard assets, object libraries and the like. Need a helicopter in your game? Buy a stock one built from actual blueprints, repaint it and fit it with a few extras. Need London in your game? Buy the hi-def topographic data from a traditional map company, slap in some extra set details. Or rent space for your players in a continually updated / streamed super-Google-Streetview type system.
That would be awesome, and might even lead to the sort of scrap-heap creativity that the original Star Wars and Blade Runner prop designers used. Put parts of a vacuum model and a car transmission together, add stock, spray paint it black = blaster rifle.
But hey, time will tell. If this technology takes off it will be interesting to see how the skills mix in game studios changes, if low poly artists become a thing of the past (assuming this tech can be transferred to mobile devices and web browser based players, which I think are the future of games platforms). Like you suggest, will studios even use the full potential of this? These days single player, intense FPS or RPGS are getting rarer ( as I sit waiting for my copy of Deus Ex to arrive:evilgrin:), as there is no money in them in comparison to games like WoW.
Yeah, I think different tools are needed. Procedural generation, simulated concrete pouring & setting, simulated paint / sand / weathering. Think of how awesome it would be as an environment artist to WASD around in-engine. Ask for a stone wall yea high, then using your interactive weathering brush to paint the passage of time. The simulation of decay would take place before your eyes until you were satisfied, then it would be time for the moss brush. Sprinkle some simulated moss colonies on there, grow them a few generations, presto. Then fast-forward through a simulated day-night cycle and different weather to see how it looks in different conditions.
I’d much rather to that than fiddle around with unwrapping and manual light baking.