Brad Wardell's site for talking about the customization of Windows.
Published on October 23, 2013 By Frogboy In PC Gaming

OxideLogoI love Stardock. I really do. But I’ve been seeing someone else for the past year or so…

I don’t know exactly how it started.  But I was talking to friends of mine in the industry and we’ve all been frustrated with the direction of 3D game engines.   The hardware has been there for awhile that would allow us to have some amazing looking visuals and performance for strategy and role playing games but the software just wasn’t there. They’ve been focusing on first person shooters to the point where even RPGs now have to be made as first person shooters in order to have decent visuals (which if you think about it, is ridiculous).

Remember the huge battles in Two Towers and Return of the King? We should be able to have those kinds of visuals in our games. Today. Your modern video card is capable of it. You take 64-bit, DirectX 11 (or Mantle) and a modern video card and you can do amazing things in theory. Unfortunately, the software has tended to focus on first person shooters. In those games, the player only sees a handful of units at the same time.  Ask someone at Nvidia, AMD or Intel and they will tell you how frustrating it’s been to create this amazing hardware only to have it sit there idle most of the time.

imageSo what could we do about that? That’s where I started talking more and more to Dan Baker, Tim Kipp, Brian Wade, Marc Meyer and later Nathan Heazlett.  What would it take to develop a new type of 3D engine that we could use and others could use to power strategy games and role playing  games where you could have thousands and thousands of high fidelity objects on screen at the same time. 

That’s where the idea of Oxide was born.  If we could bring together some of the industry’s top talent, put them in a room and provide them with enough resources, we could create something amazing. We’re calling the engine Nitrous and it’s spectacular. If you look at the the Oxide press release you will see quotes from AMD, Intel and Nvidia in there. They’ve seen it. And soon, so will you.

Today, we are finally ready to tell the world about Oxide. Mainly, we have to because some of the things we’re working are are about to get shown by our partners and people would wonder who and what Oxide was and where it came from.

Most game developers, especially ones involved in graphical game development, know, or can imagine, exactly the kinds of things Oxide is working on. But for everyone else who is reasonably technical, imagine a brand new, built from scratch, 3D engine designed with multicore processors and 64-bit from the ground up. No legacy code. No baggage.  Just pure awesome. 

To learn more about Oxide, visit www.oxidegames.com


Comments (Page 2)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Oct 23, 2013

sins uses the iron engine by ironclad.

harpo

on Oct 23, 2013

Is this just graphical engine, or does it concern things like AI, physics and other stuff? And how about Iron engine for example? If you hypothetically collaborated with Ironclad on Sins 2  (and you should). would that game be based purely on Nitrous or some combo of Iron Engine (or its successor) and Nitrous handling graphics?

I am not a programmer, but i am genuinely interested how it works, obviously at certain level of abstraction, so i can actually comprehend it.

EDIT: Anyway, congrats. Looking forward to see some techdemo or something showing its actual capabilities. 

 

on Oct 23, 2013

looks neat.

 

it's a bit puzzling that something being presented as a fit for strategy or RPG games only solves a problem which would make the games less about strategy or role-playing...

 

it's like saying Total War is a better strategy game if you have to control 10 times as many units in a battle.

 

on Oct 23, 2013

I just saw this on GI.

It's the Civ V team combined with Frogboy! That's insanely awesome!

on Oct 23, 2013

The_Biz

looks neat.

 

it's a bit puzzling that something being presented as a fit for strategy or RPG games only solves a problem which would make the games less about strategy or role-playing...

 

it's like saying Total War is a better strategy game if you have to control 10 times as many units in a battle.

 

I sure wish Total War games didn't look like crap though. Strategy Games are so far behind first person shooters in graphics quality. 

on Oct 23, 2013

so.. given the multi core focus, how would the extra cores on amd compare to the intel quads?

on Oct 23, 2013

*drool*

on Oct 23, 2013

I'm cautiously optimistic.  There were a lot of disappointments with Civilization V ... I think the biggest buzzkill of the game for me, though, is it doesn't efficiently multi-thread.  In late game on large maps, end turn processing can take over a minute (!) to process, taxing out one core at 100% while my other cores sit idle.  Taking a minute to complete a turn is atrocious ... I was hoping Firaxis would have noticed GalCiv2's notion of processing AI rivals while the human player is taking his/her turn which is why (as Brad has earned the right to boast about) GalCiv2 doesn't have end turn waits (aside from waiting for unit automoves to complete).

on Oct 23, 2013

Well ...... if the reality lives up to the Theoretical Outline .... this will be an Industry Game Changer on the same scale of change as when the world moved from 32bit to 64 bit. Its not just an enhancement, its a Big Generational Level Change. Lets hope all the current Partners retain enthusiasm, turn theory into practice, and marketing preamble into reality.

Nice one

on Oct 23, 2013

I think strategy games and complex simulators (like SimCity .... ugh, don't get me started on five ... :/) would both benefit greatly from 64 bit CPUing.  I guess it was too much to hope this new engine could apply to GC3 ... but hopefully it could be a place to test some things out, and maybe a future GC3 expansion could make use of it .... though that would probably not be realistic either, since expansions tend to just use relatively minor enhancements to the original engine.  Maybe the next Elemental expansion/game/iteration/title/buh-wut-do-you-wanna-call-eet?

on Oct 23, 2013

This engine looks like it will turn the strategy genre on it's head. I'm looking forwards to see this in action, eventually.

Frogboy
Sins 1 uses the Iron engine.

Sins 1 eh? Does that mean there's plans for a Sins 2?

on Oct 23, 2013

Lavo_2

This engine looks like it will turn the strategy genre on it's head. I'm looking forwards to see this in action, eventually.


Quoting Frogboy, reply 15Sins 1 uses the Iron engine.

Sins 1 eh? Does that mean there's plans for a Sins 2?

 

Poke a frog hard enough, things leak out

on Oct 23, 2013

Chibiabos

I'm cautiously optimistic.  There were a lot of disappointments with Civilization V ... I think the biggest buzzkill of the game for me, though, is it doesn't efficiently multi-thread.  In late game on large maps, end turn processing can take over a minute (!) to process, taxing out one core at 100% while my other cores sit idle.  Taking a minute to complete a turn is atrocious ... I was hoping Firaxis would have noticed GalCiv2's notion of processing AI rivals while the human player is taking his/her turn which is why (as Brad has earned the right to boast about) GalCiv2 doesn't have end turn waits (aside from waiting for unit automoves to complete).

Yea, that's a different thing entirely.  The main problem with most 3D engines is that they still rely on a "main thread".  But Nitrous implements SWARM which is blind to how many cores. It just uses whatever the most free core available. The more cores, the faster.

on Oct 23, 2013


Well ...... if the reality lives up to the Theoretical Outline .... this will be an Industry Game Changer on the same scale of change as when the world moved from 32bit to 64 bit. Its not just an enhancement, its a Big Generational Level Change. Lets hope all the current Partners retain enthusiasm, turn theory into practice, and marketing preamble into reality.

Nice one

 

Exactly.  The difference isn't subtle. It's not like when you see a demo of something and you go "I...think that looks better." It's a much bigger leap.

Let me give you an example:

The Kumquat engine, which is a DirectX 9 engine, can handle something like 3 point lights.  A current, state of the art 3D game can handle say a hundred or so.  The Nitrous engine can handle thousands.  The same is true on 3D objects.  You get above a couple hundred and even a modern rig will start to crawl. But Nitrous can handle tens of thousands.

The reason it can do that is because it inherently uses all the cores on both the CPU and the GPU. It's the result of an engine that's been designed and programmed by people who've been making this stuff for decades being able to begin, from scratch with multicore and 64-bit configs as the starting point. That's the main reason why Intel, AMD, and Nvidia are backing it so publicly.  They've seen it in action.  

on Oct 23, 2013

When I see my highly detailed minions dieing by the thousands I will laugh. 

4 Pages1 2 3 4