Real or fake?
http://www.gamingnexus.com/Images/News/fswpbk14711/1.jpg
| Quote: |
| NVIDIA today talked about their cloud computing product in RealityServer. RealityServer leverages the GPU and the computational power that's available in providing what I would like to call a cloud based rendering farm. Basically, NVIDIA will be able to provide or produce the hardware needed to enable you to create machines that compute photorealistic images and send them to clients. Clients can use something as simple as a web browser or an iPhone to view these items. We're talking very detailed 3D, computed off site, and sent to the client to be viewed through the Internet. |
Source
Pretty sick, huh? First, it was ATI working on face rendering technology, now nVidia taking the ball and running with it. It might be awhile away before they can make this possible on video game consoles, but when it happens where do we go from there?
EDIT: Click the source link. I believe the website has some sort of anti-leech coding implemented on their server.
Last edited by QrafTee on Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:26 am; edited 1 time in total eh the link you posted isn't working bruh.
Yeah it is pretty sick... because I can't see anything with the link you posted. I am interested to see what you found out, so I hope it gets fixed soon.
the posters links are someone dead, but you can view the details here as well, http://www.nvidia.com/object/realityserver.html
wow thats really something, realityserver, cant wait for more developments from this one 
So, if I understand this correctly, the rendering is done elsewhere, and then sent back to the client computer. If that is the case, then people would need very high speed internet connections to get the best picture. If this kind of technology was implemented into gaming consoles it also might mean that the console itself wouldn't need the best GPU since the image could be rendered elsewhere but I feel like that would lead to some pretty laggy gameplay until internet connections became extremely fast as a standard.
Fair enough technology, but I would much rather a high end home PC for all the offline, single player games I play.
| Magicman wrote: |
| So, if I understand this correctly, the rendering is done elsewhere, and then sent back to the client computer. If that is the case, then people would need very high speed internet connections to get the best picture. If this kind of technology was implemented into gaming consoles it also might mean that the console itself wouldn't need the best GPU since the image could be rendered elsewhere but I feel like that would lead to some pretty laggy gameplay until internet connections became extremely fast as a standard. |
Right, I can't imagine this being too useful, except for maybe places that are low on resolution (and lower on processing power), like handheld devices. I could even imagine a DS-like handheld connecting via wifi to a local computer which is running a more graphically-intensive game.Looks very nice, can't wait
Looks realy great but as people have said if u need to get it send to you from another computer unless u have a great internet connection this wont be good at all.
broken link mate. Is this about virtual reality?
This is mostly for use in web applications. So I doubt anyone using it will have an issue with having to be online to use it. :p
But yes, there is potential there for the adaptation of this technology to create relatively inexpensive consoles that require an internet connection to run. The possibilities this opens up should not be underestimated. Essentially they're replacing hardware with bandwidth. Bandwidth most people already have.
A potential downside would be that if it were used in gaming it would further decrease ownership of games and be nothing more than a rental service.
I'd rather have the more effort put into the gameplay than the eye candy. Pretty graphics don't make a game good.
| achowles wrote: |
This is mostly for use in web applications. So I doubt anyone using it will have an issue with having to be online to use it. :p
But yes, there is potential there for the adaptation of this technology to create relatively inexpensive consoles that require an internet connection to run. The possibilities this opens up should not be underestimated. Essentially they're replacing hardware with bandwidth. Bandwidth most people already have.
A potential downside would be that if it were used in gaming it would further decrease ownership of games and be nothing more than a rental service. |
If this type of product took off, I think I probably would try to buy most of my games physically instead of renting them on an online service. But a good plus would be that if a service like this took off, internet services would probably need to increase in capacity to handle them, making faster internet standard. | eday2010 wrote: |
| I'd rather have the more effort put into the gameplay than the eye candy. Pretty graphics don't make a game good. |
You're right, but you can't deny great graphics can be just the thing to set the "perfect" atmosphere for a game that already has good gameplay. It can also be that extra "oomph" needed to push a "good" game into the "great" category.
You can't have bad gameplay and there's no denying that. But you can't have last-gen graphics on current-gen consoles either; not when a standard has already been set. | QrafTee wrote: |
| eday2010 wrote: | | I'd rather have the more effort put into the gameplay than the eye candy. Pretty graphics don't make a game good. |
You're right, but you can't deny great graphics can be just the thing to set the "perfect" atmosphere for a game that already has good gameplay. It can also be that extra "oomph" needed to push a "good" game into the "great" category. |
Quoted for Truth. Poor game play and nice graphics still makes a poor game, whilst good game play and average graphics still make a good game. It just so happens, that great game play and great graphics make some extra special.
