the future of Clouds .

[Jotaele]

BTW, Cobra, what do you mean what you described like a poor usage?Do you mean graphically? ore process consuming? or implementation? I have read the yutube video descriptión and looks very promising.
trueSKY™ is a C++ library which generates weather system data and updates it in real time. trueSKY™ creates volumetric cloud data, and provides realtime access to that data via a lightweight API. The cloud system generates pure volumetric data, it is cross-platform and renderer-independent. The sample applications that come with the SDK show how realtime clouds can be rendered using the generated cloud data, in various graphics API's

[Cobra8472]

Originally Posted by Jotaele

BTW, Cobra, what do you mean what you described like a poor usage?Do you mean graphically? ore process consuming? or implementation? I have read the yutube video descriptión and looks very promising.
trueSKY™ is a C++ library which generates weather system data and updates it in real time. trueSKY™ creates volumetric cloud data, and provides realtime access to that data via a lightweight API. The cloud system generates pure volumetric data, it is cross-platform and renderer-independent. The sample applications that come with the SDK show how realtime clouds can be rendered using the generated cloud data, in various graphics API's

Both SilverLining and Nimble are simply not good looking enough for Flightsim usage. They are very easy to implement and use, but both are very lackluster for the area of utilization required of a Sim.

They are, however, good solutions for sky rendering for a ground-based game.

I have personally not used TrueSky, alas from what I can see it is a rather decent alternative. There are, as mentioned, many many examples of solutions like this, and creating your own is not too difficult due to the amount of research and public material available on the implementation.

[Jotaele]

Originally Posted by Cobra8472

Both SilverLining and Nimble are simply not good looking enough for Flightsim usage. They are very easy to implement and use, but both are very lackluster for the area of utilization required of a Sim.

They are, however, good solutions for sky rendering for a ground-based game.

I have personally not used TrueSky, alas from what I can see it is a rather decent alternative. There are, as mentioned, many many examples of solutions like this, and creating your own is not too difficult due to the amount of research and public material available on the implementation.

Thx for the answer!

[CRO_Adriatic]

Nice topic...

[Heliocon]

Second video looks bad, first one looks ok because of the advanced lighting features. I am going to say this again and I know I know... DX11

Why? Because volumetric clouds that interact with light and weather physics would only be possible using DX11 tech for both cpu and gpu reasons. (it would also run faster).

[Cobra8472]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Second video looks bad, first one looks ok because of the advanced lighting features. I am going to say this again and I know I know... DX11

Why? Because volumetric clouds that interact with light and weather physics would only be possible using DX11 tech for both cpu and gpu reasons. (it would also run faster).

This is certainly NOT true.

An implementation of cloud rendering based on basic light scattering through clouds (or particles.. basically), is possible, and perfectly viable using DX9.
(and older versions too)
on a sidenote, I believe I have an old demo on my other PC from a whitepaper implementation from 2002, that looks amazing.

Again and again I see people overestimating the capabilities of DX11 or DX10 vs DX9.

It MUST be noted time and time again that while these DX iterations are more powerful, they do not drastically improve the amount of things that you can actually do on the GPU.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by Cobra8472

This is certainly NOT true.

An implementation of cloud rendering based on basic light scattering through clouds (or particles.. basically), is possible, and perfectly viable using DX9.
(and older versions too)
on a sidenote, I believe I have an old demo on my other PC from a whitepaper implementation from 2002, that looks amazing.

Again and again I see people overestimating the capabilities of DX11 or DX10 vs DX9.

It MUST be noted time and time again that while these DX iterations are more powerful, they do not drastically improve the amount of things that you can actually do on the GPU.

DX9 vs DX11 does. I have already explained why in many post from a base level pov with pipelines all the way to a graphics designer pov that makes it more efficient, better looking and easier to create.

So DX8 had sub surface scattering, and advanced particle physics/light interaction? Care to back that up with pics/evidence?

[CharveL]

Been reading some more wiki's I see.

DX11 is a great incremental improvement in many different areas, especially visual quality and efficiency of certain effects (among other stuff) but much like DX10 it's hardly the panacea you always make it out to be.

Good topic though, and I'd love to see some developer input although I'm also just as sure you'd be telling Ilya what he really should be doing with DX11, or assume he's just lying.

If we're not seeing a lot of implementation of cloud systems like that first video by now after 4 years it's a pretty good indication it's not all it's cracked up to be.

Other systems like SpeedTree have caught on and are being used in CoD (I'm pretty sure) and many other games.