Love your videos!

Cool videos!

That extremely well put together and entertaining - and the final result is amazing. Any ideas on how you are going to optimize it? Since you are already doing basically everything on the GPU, what other optimizations exist? Thanks!

That looks absolutely stunning! You inspire me so much😄

It looks awesome, I would like to know if it would be feasible to actually simulate the clouds as they are in real life (as in simulate condensation, evaporation, etc.). It would probably be too much for a GPU to handle so my suggestion would be to hand it off to a server that would then stream the simulation and it's just a matter of rendering.

subbed to you awesome content on your channel.

Hello fellow DCS player

@@level5822 Thanks a lot for mentioning that game name I've finally found the kind of game I've been looking for since months ^-^

@@Beengus I know english. you know not

@@lukelader It was a joke you fool. Couldn't you tell, you tool?

Programmer yells at cloud

I thought this was an inspirational quote

Lol

We all saw the video. Dingus

@@radthadd no need to be mean

Scary as hell when going through zero visibility near terrain. Avoid whenever possible. Had to go through some thick fog up in Indonesia once and basically had to trust the console with my life

@@leaderofcommunistchina1427 man, you have some hardened steel balls

It better be, the rendering technique he's using is pretty close to physically accurate for how light behaves when passing through a cloud. (He could upgrade his raytracing to photon mapping or even path tracing, which would make it as close as possible, but his GPU is already visibly struggling.)

@@ClokworkGremlinwould it be possible to write a shader like this in blender and make it look really good?

@@motsgar probably. I dont know much about Blender, but hes got most of the theory in the video so if you follow along and look up the right equations you should get a similar output. The thing I'm not sure about is the shader runs using the compute-shader raytracer he wrote a few videos previously and then upgraded in a subsequent video.

Came here to say this! He should definitely try this!

once terrain generation is done the weathered terrain does not affect performance much...

Imagine when he makes the clouds Interact with the mountains...

Lol GPU*

The interstellar survival game he has the tools to make will be amazing.

Quantum Physics

~~I'd pay to watch that~~ I'd pay to install that

"With a little bit of C# coding using a generation function, I've created New York in the year 2021, a pretty relative look back to what it actually looked like using only coding."

Depends on what you are emulating but it's entirely possible

"Coding Adventure: Life" xD

Is this supposed to be funny, relatable, quirky or whatever you normies think is cool nowadays.

Aqua Armour are you okay?

@@aquaarmour4924: when my face when tfw'd me: pikachu pogger emoji

@@gblawrence034 The question is are you ok? All I see on the internet nowadays are stupid kids using this "meme" format in places where it really doesn't make sense just to act cool. Ever heard of using normal sentences?

@@aquaarmour4924 you seem extremely angry at literally nothing

Same

same man this guy make feel waaay too stupid

I believe in you guys, we can do this :D lets stop watching youtube and start coding (wich is basicly watching youtube browsing stackoverflow for code help, ow and apparently reading papers)

He is impressive as hell, but most of the stuff he does takes a lot of planning and a shit ton of math. He is definitely confident in his math abilities, but nothing he was programming was too outlandish.

@@xjonnyd93x Agreed. The programming itself isn't so bad. Its really the math and knowing how to approach the problem, which is gained by years of experience.

Well, keep in mind the fact that he dedicates a LOT of time into these. No matter your coding skill, if you put effort amd time into it you can achieve your goal.

MrMusAddict Interesting ideas, thanks!

i would love to see this implemented. love the video @sebastian

can't wait for Coding Adventure: Clouds 2

@@SebastianLague Would love to see a follow-up in later videos!

You managed to turn something I thought was pretty hard to implement and even understand the papers related is quite hard, into something really easy to follow and achieve with some good patience and tweaking, I also vote for a part 2!

Samewise Gamgee. Super duper impressed.

Except this is a huge plane that is placed on the scene, and won't generate realistic, indivual clouds. Can't create other weather phenominons. Good for demo, but does it work for actual games? It does give me an ides though. Using the same method, but individual 3d planes/cubes, but the plotting at and offset from the edge so the fluff doesn't cut off. Then with these individual clouds, different types of clouds can be places near them, and blend them. ... all very heavy effort. Easy to say, hard to do.

There was a short clip of the real clouds in the mountain in this video. The clouds were behaving very differently (they had physics) while this is just a 3D texture and not simulated with molecular precision (🤓) (or just acting like real clouds and have physics). There is new techniques (🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓) that have better performance and have better clouds. I hate myself.

- ᔕጠጠ ᓬェᗆ⊣ ⤙o⊂ ᗜ-ᗜ ェጠᓓጠ Hint: look sideway.

he's been doing this stuff for over 10 years

Do you have a portfolio? If no then there's no chance

Just get zhe Flammenwerfer.

hans 1. These are all a part of a technical showcase of coding techniques 2. These are complicated because he is using hard mathematics 3. These are difficult because he is using C# 4. These are not the work of a hobbyist 5. These shouldn't discourage you 6. These aren't fun games 7. You can do better

I actually didn't notice that

@@kurtisgibson2929 me either.

12:18 and 12:22 are where it's visible. I don't know if that came with the plane/controller simulation, or if Sebastian did that himself.

lol, yeah me: writes a script where all it does is spawn a cube when you click the mouse, which has literally more errors than there are lines of code also me: "let's look up how to code clouds!"

I started with BASIC, print loop: "Hello world!" Now Im not allowed to use GOTO anymore :( I GOTO clouds and dream. Syntax error

Lol

hahahaha i deinstalled cisual studio because i got so much errors with hello world xD (and on vs u get a sample of hello world code xD)

This is too real!

microsoft flight simulator

Would destroy any computer we could have 😂😂😂

look at microsofts flight simulator, it renders the entire Earth without loading screens.

@@Danuxsy yh, but it doesn't have animals or ecosystems does it? That was the main point I was getting at

@@bobthedeleter no but it does have all the other things you mentioned.

Would be nice, yes, but very GPU-intensive. Would need to map the procedurally generated clouds onto the terrain, which essentially means the cloud sampling fragment shader is running on every pixel. Perhaps just running it per vertex and filtering it would be enough...

Nice find

Just rendering the noise to a texture (2d slice of the center of the clouds (densest area)) and then instead of rendering a shadow map as usual directly projecting the noise onto the terrain as occlusion values in the terrain shader should work out nicely.

Baker... Odd finding my favorite call of duty editor back in the day (the one who taught me AE nonetheless...) on a unity video hahaha

@@timh.6872 one way to do that is to just continue the ray down the light source in the shadier instead of just stopping at the intersection, then update the ground textures alpha color where the ray landed.

I totally agree with you!

and sometimes one of your fails is good enough to maybe be a feature in something else (;

Sorry but I can't like ur comment bcs.. it will ruin the number

Ok great

i know why you are crying

420 likes lol

@@rfisty what?

Oh man. You will have a blast with the new flight simulator Microsoft is making. Check out the videos

I think he deliberately made it crude due to real clouds taking a lot of computational power

Point in gamedev is to fake cloud movement and not to simulate them.

​@@Foxtrot2F Which is a shame, though understandable due to limitations in users' computational power. In interactions we can usually detect the difference between something that's physically simulated and something that's visually faked, and it has a huge impact on immersion.

@@Dystisis Not if you're clever about it.

At least I finally got to know how to make an edge detection effect.

Hey!! There is a website called Kattis that you can use to improve your programming skills, I definitely recommend it. Also will help with lateral thinking.

@@committedcoder3352 ill try it

To be fair, I dont think this has anything to do with "being bad at coding". Coding/Programming itself is accually quite easy. However, the context or problem and the required math and libraries probably makes this hard to understand and follow without any prior knowledge. Which is to be expected.

lol same.

I know, right?!

Go to Google and type in 'C# docs tutorial'. Same with UKposts, and you'll find a series of tutorials showing you how to programme in C#, and when you get a base underatanding (this takes time) you can play with Unity for free, which also has free tutorials on how to C# code with Unity.

Lol

@@paulvinova thx!

lol

Microsoft flight simulator: I don't think so.

eh... maybe, but you'd probably be better off using something closer to voxel terrain. I believe one of the (PS2-era) Virtua Fighter or DOA games had levels with snow on the ground that would get mashed and deformed by the fighters' footsteps, and it just used a simple heightmap that got knocked down whenever something passed through it.

​@@ClokworkGremlin yeah, a dynamic heightmap sounds like the cheapest solution for sure especially that rudamentary implementation. for a bit more razzmatazz stencil type of shit, you could just project whatever is colliding striaght from the bottom up in orthographic with a hard Z distance limit about as far as you want the deform to be deep. map the things that are further away in Z distance with darker shades of grey to make a heightmap (or lighter, depending on which way you want to go), and map them across the whole rgb range (something like "int color=Math.round(vector.z/zmax)*255"), not overwriting any already set values (essentially projected Z -> B/W color mapping to be short about it). you could even use lookup tables (read: more bump/heightmaps) to make it even cheaper, or or go the other way, and pimp it even a bit more, and allow it to deform terrain other than striaght down,by calculating the inverse angle at which the object approaches it (IE: "player.velocity*=-1" for every axis, and using the outputs to decide where to project the object from, and the factors to which each axis on the target plane should be deformed. (read: the intensity factor for moving the vertices) just mix the 2 maps with regular 2d, as in poking in the pixel data arrays with basic maths (multiplication) could even do with addition/subtraction alone, or even hard setting values, but add/sub wouldn't respect the form of prior deformations as much, unless you made some conditions you can completely avoid using multiplication, and the other (setting) wouldn't respect any old data at all, obviously. but that's merely a matter of preference the geometry may get a bit busy at some point if you want it to look good though, but that's why these things almost always had a hard count limit with modulo on the array index for good old last-in-first-out. or a decay time. tackling that may be a bit more complicated, but i'd opt for something like introducing a view distance falloff for geometry simplification, by keeping multiple mesh/vertex datasets at varying degrees of detail/complexity at hand, using precalculated positions, and bounding boxes of the deformations outside of the range as texture position and size, to fake your way out of it even dynamic unsubdividing is pretty easy if you stick to planes, not harder than calculating pixel or tile array position from X,Y values using the width and height maximums in 2d, as planes have no complexity in the Z dimension whatsoever, it's all still 2d under the hood (akin to "index=(ob.x%w)+Math.floor(ob.y/w)" , or "coord_x=Math.round(ob.x/tilesz)*tilesz" and so on...) all i know is, i would avoid dynamic geometry complexity like the plague, changing from anything but a plane will mess up the heightmap mapping unless you use a ton of witchcraft, and just duplicating geometry as a seperate object is entering a minefield of z-fighting and collision detection problems, easily the 2nd hardest approach (and not even all that cpu friendly either if the whole process is to be done in real-time) they may be more balls to the wall once said and done, but getting there... ugh, i'd rather die of natural causes

@@dutchdykefinger you're getting deep into risk of over simulation there, honestly. Depending on the snow depth you're looking to simulate, what kind of deformations, and the level of dynamics you're looking at, one of the linked particle simulations 2-Minute Papers has featured might work.

Snow on the ground is an extremely difficult simulation. Physically accurate simulations of snow on the ground is an unsolved problem.

Yes ! snow simulation, and also water simulation. This can be great.

This is actually a really out of the box good idea, did you come up with this or did you see this done somewhere (no offense)

@@SirMonkeybutt10 I thought of it myself, and I realized later that its actually a bad idea for clouds (technically, I realized it halfway into writing it, as the last note shows, but by then I had already invested effort in writing it). Granted, the idea is sound if you want a continuous morphing geometry, but that is decidedly _not_ how clouds move irl :p I also have no idea how it would actually look, as you would either have 4-dimensional triangles that would somehow need to be rendered, or be treating the fourth component as solely a time-axis (and in that case need to re-generate the geometry each step in time).

@@feha92 The clouds aren't using geometry here though.

@@TestSubject06 this is a bit of a necro, so my memory is probably wrong. But was this video not about using cubemarching over 3d noise to generate geometry enclosing volumes where the noise passed a certain threshold? And then using this geometry/mesh to render "clouds"?

This is actually how many graphics softwares evolve noise so that it smoothly changes to a different look, though I'm impressed you came up with it on your own.

Well how else are you going to keep the right hand free for pressing backspace until you get the characters you need?

Wait, how do you type?

I hate it when that happens

@@josephhacker6508 "I hate it when he does that"

The flight sim he made is not: -superior to Microsoft's: it has a very limited area, only one plane which only has one function, very monotonous terrain, etc. -from scratch (he said he took a premade plane model and controller from the internet and he used his own premade terrain generation) It does have amazing visuals though, on which an asthetics-based (rather than function-based) sim could work on.

@@gnupfo You must be fun at parties.

@@gnupfo I meant it as a joke XD Although I think the clouds actually surpass the ones of micr. flight sim (Yes, I do know that the graphic power needed is too much to integrate into a flight sim) have nice day or should I say, cheers

S t r e t c h the clouds Honestly, I think that's the easiest solution to make other clouds (You could also play around with transparency)

@Greenpixel ah, that would really help. Good idea!