Originally posted by Volgore What we get is games with age old crap engines providing 7fps in a open world scenario, objects popping into your face at 20meters (both Rift), fog of war artificially restricting the view (ESO) or the silhouette of a 2D mountain ridge painted on a skybox (Wildstar) as long distance view.
There is far more that is needed for games than just the world and trying to hack together two different engines to perform the complete job isn't sensible or easy.
Now, if they turned it into a game engine, that would be interesting, until then, it is nothing more than an interesting tech demo.
Originally posted by bdew A Minecraft world can be up to 3,600,000,000 square kilometers in size... that's ~7 times bigger than earth... beat that
Show me the machine that's actually rendered that world, and I would allow you the win.
**
At one block deep, a scale map of the Earth in Minecraft takes up 464TB of space. With an average depth of sixty-four blocks instead of one block, the storage space is much, much larger.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
A world rendering engine is not a game engine.
There is far more that is needed for games than just the world and trying to hack together two different engines to perform the complete job isn't sensible or easy.
Now, if they turned it into a game engine, that would be interesting, until then, it is nothing more than an interesting tech demo.
Show me the machine that's actually rendered that world, and I would allow you the win.
**
At one block deep, a scale map of the Earth in Minecraft takes up 464TB of space. With an average depth of sixty-four blocks instead of one block, the storage space is much, much larger.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I think there is a game in the works that uses this kind of engine.
Although i dont remember the name