I quite like Meshes of the Afternoon. Though I originally watched it with the resoundtrack by Dr.dts, which I actually prefer (perhaps because of the mysticism, perhaps since it feels like something Edward Artemiev would do*, or perhaps just because it's the version I watched first).

*even though it's very different in structure.

From what I can gather, yes.

Seems to be a lot of fellow swedes here for some reason.

Anyhow, welcome! I hope you'll feel at home here. Don't worry, we don't hate games. Games are perfectly fine for what they are and you'll find other people here who love games as well. The problem isn't that there are games; the probem is that they're pretty much the only territory we have yet explored out the vast field that is the interactive medium. We can do so much more!

I think 'massive hate' is a huge exaggeration. As ghostwheel said, there seem to be just as many positive comments on Tale of Tales' work as there are negative.

They're all missing the point, though. This is not about Tale of Tales or their work. It's about the entire European game industry (and the potential of video games). Who says it is irrelevant.

64 atoms per cubic millimeter = 4x4x4. So if the ground is merely one atom thick, that's still 54/4 = 13.5 TB.

You mean 15.3 MB

No? 10^12 * 4^2 / 1024^4 = ~14,55 TB (yeah, different from 13.5 but that's because 54TB was rounded)

Regardless, this way of calculating the "filesize" is irrelevant.

Why?

So let's assume it's just 1 mm of ground and no other objects exist. That's still 64.000.000.000.000 atoms.

I doubt they store their data at a constant resolution ( at least in compressed form ). Regions of molecules that have the same content ( air, soil etc. ) don't have to be stored individually. A 2D representation ..

64 atoms per cubic millimeter = 4x4x4. So if the ground is merely one atom thick (which we've seen it isn't*), that's still 54/4 = 13.5 TB.

* In case it is, then they lied about it when comparing it to bumpmaps.

[very]

It's not nearly "virtually unlimited" either, though. Virtually unlimited would mean that it would suit all regular needs without you having to compromise (you could of course not make an infinitely huge world, but you could make a regular sized game world as they are now without problems). It won't do that; to achieve good results you're going to either have to limit the play area (or at least the number of unique objects) significantly or combine it with other technologies to achieve certain things. E,g. it won't be able to do terrain with smooth height-curves (since you can't store that much unique data); however, you could use it almost as you use a texture now by applying it to a (polygon) heightmap and let the polygons do the curves whereas the point-cloud data stands for grass and texture of it. You could use it like "tiles" (like they've done themselves, though without a heightmap like I'm talking about). Granted, I'm not that great of a programmer so I don't know if there are problems with this that I haven't thought of but it seems like it could work to me.

Notch calculates the data under the assumption it's stored as a constant volume, while all you really need is the hull of geometry ( skipping anything inside & outside ). Something that isn't rectified in his http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8423008802/but-notch-its-not-a-scam post either.

So let's assume it's just 1 mm of ground (less than they showed in the video) and no other objects exist. Just one mm of plain ground (a very moderate guess considering we are shown ground with geometry more complex than that). That's still 64 000 000 000 000 atoms. One byte per atom (which is very low for voxels, let alone impossible for point-cloud data) means 58,2 TB of data. And those are very generous approximations for the ground alone (so, no grass, rocks, etc.).


Now, what they have done (as far as I can see) is amazing. That's not the point I'm making. The problem I have is that I know they're lying. If they simply would have told the truth I'd be amazed, but now I don't know what other statements I can trust and what statements I can't. (Can I trust that it's now running on software only and not GPU considering I know they're dishonest about other stuff?)

[anything]

And as he also said: it is voxels.

I'm not being overly cynical at all. What they CLAIM to have done is something UNLIMITED. No one can ever do anything unlimited. It's not unlimited and it never will be. Not unless they break the laws of physics, it's not.

You should probably actually take and read Notch's analysis: http://notch.tumblr.com/post/8386977075/its-a-scam . It's the one mentioned in the video but never actually adressed (he also goes on to completely misrepresent what Notch said).

What this system might be good for is video games that take place in a small enclosed environment (like a couple of rooms or something) or environments that constantly repeat. It's not going to work for open-world environments or any game that includes a lot of non-repetitive enviroments, e.g. terrain.

[claim]

Everything they claim in the first video (and in the second, for that matter), is pure unsubstiated bullshit. What they claim to have done is absolutely impossible. What they have done is nothing new. It's perhaps more efficient than previous voxel-codes, but no revolutionary breakthrough.

What they actually show you in the demo is a very small amount of voxels (compared to how many they say there are) in chunks repeated all over the place. Notice how all of the world is flat and structured in the same way, constantly repeated? Notice how all big structures face the same direction? They're just the same chunks repeated.

What they've done is very impressive but they keep lying about it for reasons I can't exactly understand. If you've got the funding, if this isn't a scam, why not be honest about it?

(Always beware of claims of anything unlimited, they're always lies.)

The engineer in me screams when anyone uses the word 'unlimited'.

Regarding GTA, this is a very interesting article:
http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/AwesomeExMachina/no-clip-grand-theft-auto-iv-188760.phtml

A guy tries to play the game without breaking the law and suddenly the world of the game dawns on him. Previously, because of the stupid gameplay, he had never been able to fully enjoy it.

Here's an amazing article with the same premise (though in Swedish).

So I've read almost the entire first issue now and can say that I'm quite impressed. A very interesting read.

My main issue is that I find the long (and I do mean long) article about Alexi questionable. That poor woman is in serious need for help, not giving her more attention which will only further her problems. But I guess she's more or less a lost case.

Oh, and Aueria, I find

10 PRINT "♥"
20 GOTO 10

incredibly beautiful. Not the outcome, mind you, but the code. Perhaps it's that my first language too was of the BASIC-family. Perhaps it's the simplicity of it, or the way it mixes human emotion with the cold processing of the machine. I don't know, really. I just know I want to print that out and hang it on my wall (which I would have done already were my printer in working condition).

[Edit:]

Fallout 3 is no S.T.A.L.K.E.R. but I find it enjoyable. However S.T.A.L.K.E.R. doesn't make the immersion breaking mistakes F3 does, it's also more attractive.

I was referring to the movie Stalker moreso than the game S.T.A.L.K.E.R., though the game would also be an example of the kind of environment i prefer (though not as much as the movie).

I haven't gotten really deep into Eufloria. I approach it like a casual game. I do find it relaxing. I heard a more recent patch they made the game faster and more difficult, though you can set it to the old version.

Perhaps that's why. I'll see if I can do that. (Or perhaps I just suck.)

Edit: Ok, so took another shot at Eufloria. Turns out it was just me who sucked. I did much better now.

I've also been playing Picross 3D, which is quite a charming puzzle game. It's essentially nonograms in 3D. However, it does the thing I hate most in puzzle games: it has a timer. I want puzzle games to be thoughtful and relaxing, not stressful.

On recommendation of some random Internet-acquaintance I've been playing 999: 9 Hours, 9 Persons, 9 Doors. It pisses me off to no end with all its pure and utter bullshit (that it somehow tries to pass off as science), bland characters and ridiculous story.

I found Fallout 3 to be really... boring. Brown, repetetive environments that look exactly the same toppled with storylines and quests that I really don't care about. I like post-apocalyptic landscapes, but of the lush, vibrant style (ala Stalker or Fragile Dreams), not the brown mud style (ala every modern game).

As for me, I've been playing far too much Starcraft II. Mostly because I have a lot of friends who play it and because having a game in common with my father is quite interesting. (He only ever plays RTSs, which I mostly find boring but Starcraft's ok.) I've also learned that achievements are evil but irresistible.

I've also been playing Eufloria. The initial levels were great. A really calm and relaxing experience. But now things are getting hard and it feels conflicting. On one side I've got tough, stressing gameplay with lots of difficult decisions and on the other side I've got calm, relaxing music and graphics telling me to slow down.

I like the way you reinterpreted Walk or Die, giving it a very different context. The animation felt really fluid (or well, as fluid as low-res stick figures can get). I like Jónsi, but I think the music can sometimes be a bit grand whereas the actions on screen are quite uneventful for the most part, creating a contrast between the two.