All that yet no footage done in real, natural speed.

Where's the friction?

How original, cubes falling, i wonder what they will think of next, thousands of spheres in an invisible box.

I see nothing here that couldn't be done in realtime using Cryengine. How many FPS was this rendered in, 1-2? Super high tech when low tech would do it better

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I'm not a 3d graphics expert, but I think the cool thing about this is not that they have so many object modeled at the same time- but that the interactions and movements of the objects seems more natural than in other demos.

Real-time physics engines have to "cheat" a lot to get enough speed. This isn't real-time so it can use loads of processing power to get better precision and use more advanced calculations.

Solid cubes and spheres are probably the easiest objects to simulate. I want to see some fluids and soft squisy stuff.

Yeah, like others have noted, this is "just" rigid body simulation, which is relatively easy to do, it only really gets interesting when we get into fluids, smoke, gun-to-face physics.

Still, it looks nice.

Yup, a whole bucket load of yawn from me I'm afraid. Nothing I haven't seen a LOT already.

It must take so long to put back the littles dices in between takes, eh ?

who said anything about this being "raytraced"? looks like regular rendering to me.

also all that computing power and they couldn't simulate friction between cubes themselves?

Is it really timeshifting when it's not real?

Granted, the channel description is rather vague...

"Whether it is time-lapse or slow motion, as long as it is altered time perception (and looks COOL!), this is your channel."

I guess it falls under "looks cool".

Meh, carry on.

This is incredible, how exactly?

This isn't revolutionary, but it is impressive.

A common problem in physics engines, especially involving large numbers of interactions, is unintended behavior. Most objects may behave correctly, but you may have a few that act strangely or accelerate inappropriately when impacting multiple other objects.

This isn't impressive for its complexity, it's impressive for its consistency. CryEngine could handle situations like this in real time, but not with quite the same level of precision.

Besides, I think this was just someone playing around with the program rather than an actual tech demo.

>> ^Psychologic:

... impressive for its consistency...

They apparently switched physics engine, as a lot of the objects used to have a "popcorn" effect in their old engine; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4haZqAz1lI&feature=related

For the second demo did anyone else think "JENGA!" ?

This one?

>> ^lucky760:

For the second demo did anyone else think "JENGA!" ?

Meh, no explosion at 0:20... it was obviously an inside job as no planes even crashed into that building!
It's a conspiracy! I say to you: Conspiracy it is!

>> ^Psychologic:

This isn't revolutionary, but it is impressive.
A common problem in physics engines, especially involving large numbers of interactions, is unintended behavior. Most objects may behave correctly, but you may have a few that act strangely or accelerate inappropriately when impacting multiple other objects.
This isn't impressive for its complexity, it's impressive for its consistency.

Back in 1990 basic interpenetration issues would have made this example seem impressive. Today, just about any 3D suite can pull this off, without needing to adjust any of the default settings.

>> ^Psychologic:

This one?
>> ^lucky760:
For the second demo did anyone else think "JENGA!" ?



now this is a more impressive demo. they simulation friction of those sticks and even internal mass and air resistance since you can see balls falling faster than wooding sticks.

also this video proves it, 9/11 was an inside job.

*electronica

Adding video to channels (Electronica) - requested by LarsaruS.