Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There's some really big innovations happening in e.g. rendering like that; I wouldn't be surprised if the complexity and work involved in just Nanite is 10x that of the whole Quake engine.

Similarly there's the work nvidia is doing, using AI technology to upscale graphics instead of rendering things at 4K.



The idea is that, the derivative came after the virtuoso. Of course what came after is more complex costs more takes more is more impressive blah blah. Dismissing those that thought the thought or solved for a problem before it was, is such a dumb thing people do.


Hobbyists have already made their own implementation of Nanite. It's not that complicated.


It has been over a year since the algorithm has been explained in quite a bit of detail.

Hobbyists make complicated things quite regularly, although I don't know about 10x quake.

10x a quake for modern hardware, maybe (could be quite simple)

10x software rendered dos quake with loads of asm, probably not.


In that sense, neither is the quake engine.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: