Hi Jason

> the best quality games out there and that is where the big bucks are.
> But a good PC has 5x the power of any console yet few PC conversions of
> top games exist. A lot is politics (like any XBox game should run on a

Well but he can only rely on that about 5% of potential customers has this
top-notch hardware. So to sell big the games still have to work with
hardware which is 1-2 years old. This means the 5x power really doesn't
give him more advantage. And I don't really think that PC-hardware right
now has 5x the power of a PS2/Cube or Xbox.

> You'll not see J3D on a console anytime soon, there just isn't the
> memory to run it. So you won't see the big buck companies developing in

Right! I don't really think they are interested in this either.

> J3D either. The handheld micro Java devices might help there when a
> J3Dme gets released.

Well as Justin mentioned on this list or OpenGL2.0 Java bindings.

> > Well IIRC Quake3 came 99. And still even games coming out
> > now or in a few months still use the Q3-engine. So where's your
> problem?
>
> Maybe that I'm not aware of anyone making a J3D game *today* that has
> Q3 engine abilities and runs okay on the same hardware. Okay in a years

Me neither. But I don't really see this as a problem. As many of the most
popular games right now (for example CounterStrike (who knows why)) are
based on engines which are 3-5 years old. Of course J3D will always behind
the current technology line but I don't think that's really a big problem.

> it'll be a reality, but not just yet (and then Doom3 engine will be
> spawning new games).

Which won't be out before the end of 2003. At this time J3D1.4 will
hopefully be arround the corner. With the required functionality to produce
a similair engine. The advantage with J3D you can start right now and at
the end only have to include the sfx-parts like shaders. But your
base-engine doesn't really require this. Okay the shadow part can be tricky.

> > not the right way. I think transfering raytracing-technology to gfx
> > hardware might be the real way to get cinema-feeling to games.
>
> Again I agree there, raytracing like features in hardware would
> certainly go along way to providing real world graphics, current polygon
> racing advancements haven't done much to remove the 2D feel of

Yes but that's because that was SGIs strategy for years and now finally
things are changing.

> Not sure I agree with Sony on this, consoles have never been internet
> dependant and are only just starting to utilise online gaming
> advantages. I think they'd at least add a memoryStick slot like every
> other Sony gadget. :)

Well I'm not here to argue about Sony's strategies if their right or not.
But I can see a certain chance for Java in this strategy. Why
build on complex or new APIs when I can use a language with a rich API set
which has been approved for many years now.

EOF,
 J.D.

--
Explore SRT with the help of Java3D
(http://wwwvis.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/relativity/minkowski)
(http://www.antiflash.net/java3d/relativity (mirror)

===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST".  For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".

Reply via email to