summarize the text:  In this video I'll talk about what I expect to be released after the next gen of consoles in the distant, distant future. They may be possible with next gen, or even today's hardware, but may require time to become mainstream, and to replace existing technologies with no real drawbacks. Voxels and ray tracing are the two holy grails in graphics as far as I'm concerned. Both are possible in some form today, but not up to the level that's really needed to impress everyday buyers. Ray tracing is effectively bouncing light around a level in the same way as it's done in real life. Current engines cheat an approximate light in various ways, which is required to get convincing results with today's hardware. But being able to simulate it properly in real time will end up simplifying and improving the graphics in games and programs. Forget the stupid demonstrations where everything's ridiculously reflective and has stencil shadows everywhere. I'm talking about this. It's very intensive to do and at the moment produces a grainy effect since hardware just isn't up to the task of performing enough light bounces in a single frame. It's almost like a camera with the exposure set to too short a time. Hardware advances will improve on this, but remember that we will also need enough processing power left for everything else that's going on in the game. For voxels, think of Minecraft, only all of the blocks are much smaller. This replaces the polygon method that is currently used in games. This may be a good time to bring up Unlimited Detail, who have a working prototype of something similar to voxels. Unfortunately, I don't think that their method is the way to go. Sure, the levels would be detailed, but they wouldn't be that interactive, and would be a nightmare to make maps for. We may end up seeing games for the upcoming generation of consoles utilising this technology in conjunction with existing polygons. Such a method could be useful for decorating rock surfaces and other static areas of the map where the old polygon and texture techniques do not do so well. They aren't the first people to attempt voxels. They've been around for ages. If you've ever played the old Delta Force, Outcast or Armored Fist games, you may have noticed that the graphics are a bit... strange. Personally, I liked them. They were glitchy and had their problems, but they gave a more organic, mysterious feel to the world. The other problem for unlimited detail and the crew behind it is that the polygon method that they seem to hate so much is quickly catching up. In one of the videos, he rips on the trees in Crysis, and claims that polygon counts are increasing by 22% a year. Tessellation will cause this figure to jump up drastically to the point where it doesn't need to increase further. Once again, have a look at the trees in Crysis 3. Polygons have a huge advantage in that everybody who currently develops games has a lot of experience with them. For all I know they could be around forever simply because they're good enough at doing what they're supposed to do, and maybe less time consuming or costly than a completely dynamic voxel approach to graphics. Not every game would benefit from destructible scenery. Counter-Strike, for example, relies on mastering the layout. Many games utilise destructible scenery, but they haven't replaced the core game styles. The co- The core game- The core game styles. I swear someone doesn't want me to make this video. The other reason I think that Voxels could still be the future is pretty much because John Carmack says so. Bear with me for a second. He's the brains behind Doom, Quake and the recent Rage game. ID Tech 5 is his latest engine and is the one powering Rage. The way it works seems unconventional to say the least. It still supports the old polygon and texture model for levels, but instead of repeating textures it uses one massive texture which is wrapped around the entire world, with bits of it loaded as and when they are needed. It had some teething problems when the game first came out, but I feel it's worth a chance. The incredible thing as far as I'm concerned is that Rage looks as good as any other console game out there, but runs at 60 frames a second instead of 30. The engine is the one behind Doom 4. I'm going to make a prediction here, and I'm going to say that it will look incredible. Not only will it be running at 30fps instead of 60, which means that it will look more detailed than Rage does, but it will probably be more enclosed. Imagine the detail of the canyons in Rage, condensed into hallways and caverns. I feel that it will play to all of the engine's strong points and may well be one of the best looking current generation games out, a true testament to how effective thinking outside the box can be. Now you know about his current engine, I'll try and explain his next generation engine. He spoke about it a couple of years ago but admitted that the hardware is a little while off. He pictures a world made of voxels, each with its own mass and properties. This kind of mirrors atoms in real life and is ultimately the best way of simulating a world. I have no doubt that it will throw up all sorts of problems, but I don't think that there's anybody better to tackle these problems than John Carmack. Even if you disagree with his ideas, he's a great person who has contributed a lot to the computing industry. He seems to go against the methods that everybody else uses to make graphics and games. I mean, the guy managed to get his ID Tech 5 engine running on an iPhone. Not that I love him or anything, he's just... brilliant. In fact, one of his current projects is the Oculus Rift, a fascinating bit of hardware that doesn't just support 3D glasses, but also has some kind of motion sensor built in, allowing you to rotate your head to look around the environment. This sort of technology is compatible with today's hardware, though I am unsure as to when it will be adopted by a more mainstream market. It has been shown running Doom 3 and makes me wonder if Rage's 60 FPS is deliberate to allow for 30 FPS in 3D with the engine on today's hardware. We'll see. Imagine wearing that bit of kit inside a huge hamster ball. It would be like real life or something, only more lonely. something, only more lonely.