Java-Gaming.org Hi !
Featured games (83)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (526)
Games in Android Showcase (127)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (593)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: [1] 2 3
  ignore  |  Print  
  Unlimited Detail Update  (Read 7217 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline bobjob

JGO Knight


Medals: 10
Projects: 4


David Aaron Muhar


« Posted 2011-08-03 03:18:56 »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gAbgBu8R4&feature=player_embedded#at=23

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVB1ayT6Fdc

My Projects
Games, Webcam chat, Video screencast, PDF tools.

Javagaming.org with chat room
Offline counterp

Senior Devvie


Medals: 11



« Reply #1 - Posted 2011-08-03 03:36:17 »

:O I hope I don't have to break my wallet buying a computer to play these games.

But is it real?

http://notch.tumblr.com/
Offline JL235

JGO Coder


Medals: 10



« Reply #2 - Posted 2011-08-03 07:02:27 »

In an interview after the first video, the creator did say they compress voxel data on the fly, and I also get the strong impression there are only around a dozen unique objects in the new video. So the memory usage could be acceptable for that particular demo.

They claim that you need to understand the games industry today; I actually don't think they understand it, and this comes across as a very 90s way of thinking about game technology. The reason why the polygon count has barely gone up over the last 5 years is because companies care about it less now. Graphics cards manufacturers have focused on shaders, GPGPU and other improvements. Geometry shaders also aim to solve (or at least mitigate) this issue, by allowing you to simply generate more detail on the fly, and these will become the norm (along with other procedural techniques) in the future. For example how clothes and skin move and reflect light is more important then it's polygon count.

If/when they get an SDK out, or a working demo, it'll be interesting to see how usable this is in the real world.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Z-Man
« Reply #3 - Posted 2011-08-03 07:03:50 »

I'm with notch, I will believe it when I see a game made with it.
Offline Bonbon-Chan

JGO Coder


Medals: 12



« Reply #4 - Posted 2011-08-03 07:39:40 »

Still no animations in there video...

No animations = useless. It is the only point I see  Grin
Offline bobjob

JGO Knight


Medals: 10
Projects: 4


David Aaron Muhar


« Reply #5 - Posted 2011-08-03 11:42:45 »

Still no animations in there video...

No animations = useless. It is the only point I see  Grin
Not if you render to an image, and at the same time render the distance to a depth buffer.
Then pass the scene to DirectX or OpenGL for character handling.

But I honestly dont think animation would be much different then scene handling. When a bone moves, a new bounding box would need to be calculated. And when casting the ray in the call to render, you would need to do an extra calculation on the likely group of pixels.

My Projects
Games, Webcam chat, Video screencast, PDF tools.

Javagaming.org with chat room
Offline bobjob

JGO Knight


Medals: 10
Projects: 4


David Aaron Muhar


« Reply #6 - Posted 2011-08-03 11:57:16 »

As for data storage. If all models are stored as cube maps with a cubemap for its depth buffer. Object geometry detail would be dependant on distance, and not noticeble by the eye. Photo quality graphics.

Get ready for a Porno Industry revolution.

My Projects
Games, Webcam chat, Video screencast, PDF tools.

Javagaming.org with chat room
Offline erikd

JGO Ninja


Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


Maximumisness


« Reply #7 - Posted 2011-08-04 15:22:57 »

Although I share a few of Markus/Notch's concerns, I do think he's jumping the gun blatantly calling this a scam, based on little more than assumptions and oversimplified calculations. A "wait and see"-attitude would suit him better IMHO.

I don't really like the hyperbole in those videos either, but I'm still interested in seeing where this is going. Although I've seen voxel engines that look better, they might be on to something that actually is useful, even if it will not completely revolutionise the industry.

Offline namrog84

JGO Ninja


Medals: 46
Projects: 4


Keep programming!


« Reply #8 - Posted 2011-08-04 15:32:36 »

There are other examples of fairly developed engines or voxel prototypes. Aside from whats in the OP video.  If you poke around, there is at least 5-10 that I found within minutes.
Here is just 1
http://www.atomontage.com/
http://www.atomontage.com/?id=gallery

specifically
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gshc8GMTa1Y

I honestly think the debate shouldn't be even be Voxel vs Polygon
but once voxel is a little more polished/developed is a hybrid model of polygon and voxels.

To me its like 2D vs 3D,  then we see these 2.5D or 3D worlds rendered in 2D.  You use what works for your particular application, even if it involves both systems.  Same way many game engines nowadays utilize 2-3+ programming languages.


I think voxels serve a great purpose for terrain and other applications. but as others have pointed out, a character model that moves a lot would probably be better to be polygon.  As shown with Atomontage, you can have both in the same engine.  So things that require a lot of dynamic movements and can easily be solved with polygons. Use polygons.


You could even have some really advanced hybrid system that substitutes back and forth between polygon/voxel depending on level of detail and view distance.

Like all models be polygons but if you zoom into a particular part of something, have it seamlessly and not noticeably visible) switch to a more detailed voxel system.


Edit:
Although its not being released this or even next year. I think sometimes its overlooked that although, sure you may not be able to edit voxels or polygons in certain numbers,  billions+ or whatever the number is. The technology that utilizies more power, needs to still be developed before we have the power to fully utilize it. We have seen an incremental increase in computing performance power.   There are a lot of really neat technologies that are in research and potential soon commercialization that wont increase your processor by double digits % but by increasing the power potential exponentially in the thousands.




"Experience is what you get when you did not get what you wanted"
Offline Cero
« Reply #9 - Posted 2011-08-04 15:38:24 »

Although I share a few of Markus/Notch's concerns, I do think he's jumping the gun blatantly calling this a scam, based on little more than assumptions and oversimplified calculations. A "wait and see"-attitude would suit him better IMHO.

I agree.
Now, Notch criticizes that the developers hype their product and don't talk about what it cannot do; and that it isn't revolutionary.
A company will hype a product so people know it and only talk about what it can do very good; thats business and obvious.
I think this whole thing could be one major step towards this kind of graphics.

It gets refined, developed, refined, someone else funds them or buys it, improves it.
Then imagine ID things its interesting, invests, and so on and so forth. Then in 3-4 years you have something that actually works for games beautifully.

Also a note: There is a lot of data, which is one of the main concerns. Well many people know that "soon" almost all games will be cloud-based, like the on-live software/console. And that point, this concern will be even less critical.

It's not a SCAM, it's a STEP, into the future. Nobody said we were already there with this product.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Bonbon-Chan

JGO Coder


Medals: 12



« Reply #10 - Posted 2011-08-04 15:41:58 »

Still no animations in there video...

No animations = useless. It is the only point I see  Grin
Not if you render to an image, and at the same time render the distance to a depth buffer.
Then pass the scene to DirectX or OpenGL for character handling.

I don't agree on this point... It does static background. It is a big regression. When grass and tree doesn't move it is sooo dead.

But I honestly dont think animation would be much different then scene handling. When a bone moves, a new bounding box would need to be calculated. And when casting the ray in the call to render, you would need to do an extra calculation on the likely group of pixels.
I double it is that simple. You have to do interpolation on pixel that are commun to several bones so your casting will not be stray.

Well that's not the point, until there is real animations (what ever is the technical solution) in their demo (grass, tree, vehicul, toon, ...) The feeling will be the same that it doesn't fit for a game.
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 425
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #11 - Posted 2011-08-04 16:00:34 »

I have a feeling nobody here actually knows what they're talking about, that is, the Infinite Detail people. They have figured out something new and clever that no-one has quite done before, and they're rather excited about it. Everyone slating them is doing so from the basis of some technology that's been tried before but hasn't quite worked out. For a start they don't have a voxel engine, they use point cloud data, which is different. Do they use raycasting? We don't even know. For all we know it's a completely new technique. The fact that it does what it does already is pretty remarkable and makes the rather lame looking voxel examples bandied about here somewhat tame.

I suspect what they have figured out is how to compress vast amounts of data in to tiny amounts of memory bandwidth in order to render it, and also they are probably going to use a few tricks in order to do instanced deformation which as people have pointed out is quite crucial and when they demonstrate this I think they'll have made their point.

If OpenGL had been so massively derided back at the stage when it was in its infancy ("Pah! It doesn't even do shadows or raytracing reflections!") where do you think the graphics industry might be today? So let's just see where this develops. I think it is probably important to bear in mind that this is currently all running entirely in software as seen in the videos at 25fps, and they're really looking for funding to get their stuff encoded into silicon to see just how much more amazing they can get it to look.

Cas Smiley

Offline erikd

JGO Ninja


Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


Maximumisness


« Reply #12 - Posted 2011-08-04 16:16:07 »

I have a feeling nobody here actually knows what they're talking about, that is, the Infinite Detail people. They have figured out something new and clever that no-one has quite done before, and they're rather excited about it. Everyone slating them is doing so from the basis of some technology that's been tried before but hasn't quite worked out. For a start they don't have a voxel engine, they use point cloud data, which is different. Do they use raycasting? We don't even know. For all we know it's a completely new technique. The fact that it does what it does already is pretty remarkable and makes the rather lame looking voxel examples bandied about here somewhat tame.

I suspect what they have figured out is how to compress vast amounts of data in to tiny amounts of memory bandwidth in order to render it, and also they are probably going to use a few tricks in order to do instanced deformation which as people have pointed out is quite crucial and when they demonstrate this I think they'll have made their point.

If OpenGL had been so massively derided back at the stage when it was in its infancy ("Pah! It doesn't even do shadows or raytracing reflections!") where do you think the graphics industry might be today? So let's just see where this develops. I think it is probably important to bear in mind that this is currently all running entirely in software as seen in the videos at 25fps, and they're really looking for funding to get their stuff encoded into silicon to see just how much more amazing they can get it to look.

Cas Smiley

+1

Offline Mads

JGO Ninja


Medals: 26
Projects: 3
Exp: 6 years


One for all!


« Reply #13 - Posted 2011-08-04 20:05:05 »

I have a feeling nobody here actually knows what they're talking about, that is, the Infinite Detail people. They have figured out something new and clever that no-one has quite done before, and they're rather excited about it. Everyone slating them is doing so from the basis of some technology that's been tried before but hasn't quite worked out. For a start they don't have a voxel engine, they use point cloud data, which is different. Do they use raycasting? We don't even know. For all we know it's a completely new technique. The fact that it does what it does already is pretty remarkable and makes the rather lame looking voxel examples bandied about here somewhat tame.

I suspect what they have figured out is how to compress vast amounts of data in to tiny amounts of memory bandwidth in order to render it, and also they are probably going to use a few tricks in order to do instanced deformation which as people have pointed out is quite crucial and when they demonstrate this I think they'll have made their point.

If OpenGL had been so massively derided back at the stage when it was in its infancy ("Pah! It doesn't even do shadows or raytracing reflections!") where do you think the graphics industry might be today? So let's just see where this develops. I think it is probably important to bear in mind that this is currently all running entirely in software as seen in the videos at 25fps, and they're really looking for funding to get their stuff encoded into silicon to see just how much more amazing they can get it to look.

Cas Smiley

Well, even with all the great compressing of data, there has to be a limit of exactly how much unique data you can possibly get per byte. Normally that's not alot, if you need to define even simple stuff, such as positioning in 3D space. For what we use now, that's 12 byte per unique point.
They also need to color things (and I'm not saying they're necessarily coloring each point independantly), and that's also some bytes lost there.
I can't imagine a way to get that much data out of the eight on/off's we have got per byte. It just runs up into too much data to handle on a normal computer.  Clueless

Offline Riven
« League of Dukes »

« JGO Overlord »


Medals: 833
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years


Hand over your head.


« Reply #14 - Posted 2011-08-04 20:09:19 »

Just take a look at Atomontage. The developer talks about compression levels of less that one bit per voxel.

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings
Offline ra4king

JGO Kernel


Medals: 355
Projects: 3
Exp: 5 years


I'm the King!


« Reply #15 - Posted 2011-08-04 20:12:30 »

Just take a look at Atomontage. The developer talks about compression levels of less that one bit per voxel.
How is that even possible?!? O_o

Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 425
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #16 - Posted 2011-08-04 20:18:05 »

That's how compression works Wink

Consider also that this is not voxel technology. It's point cloud. Each point describes a sphere. You can make them as big or as little as you like. Then you can do all sorts of things to make it look like you've got loads more graphics than people think. Consider blending two textures using perlin noise for example. It's procedurally generated so a tiny amount of memory can be used to make infinite texture. They're going to need to do something similar; for example the cactus: that's several simple models drawn on top of each other and rotated and scaled. It doesn't take a genius to figure out if they can do that they can probably also figure out how to deform and move them in realtime too.

Cas Smiley

Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 425
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #17 - Posted 2011-08-04 20:21:05 »

In fact the smart money is probably on some sort of bone technology animation. I can't wait to see it working.

Cas Smiley

Offline Bonbon-Chan

JGO Coder


Medals: 12



« Reply #18 - Posted 2011-08-05 07:21:58 »

It is a typical discussion between a technical point of view and an industrial point of view there.

If OpenGL had been so massively derided back at the stage when it was in its infancy ("Pah! It doesn't even do shadows or raytracing reflections!") where do you think the graphics industry might be today?
Wrong question  Wink There was no competitor of OpenGL at that time that was doing shadows or reflections.

The question should have been. When the first version of DirectX came out, was there anything that can be done in OpenGL that wasn't do able in DirectX ? If no, DirectX should be still used now ?

I don't say that the engine have to have it now, but it have to have it in there first version.

I think it is probably important to bear in mind that this is currently all running entirely in software as seen in the videos at 25fps, and they're really looking for funding to get their stuff encoded into silicon to see just how much more amazing they can get it to look.

There is the right quetion in fact : what do they want to do ?
- a personnal project : not problem
- a research project : great !
- an industrial project : there's the problem

If their demo was not real time but with all functionnality of comperitor. I should say : yes ! if they add hardware compression and optimization, there is a high probability to have something great.

At this point, no one can say if they will be able to do something usable.

They are looking for funding for silicon stuff ? It seems to cost a lot... If they look for bank or professional investor, what will be there first question ? Almost none about technic beside the fact they will be able to be competive against other engine, business plan, patents, ...

Don't forget that there is a big thing against them... there are doing something really new and people will have to change the way they are doing things.

Sorry to be too pessismistic, but recently I have seen to mush money (with so mush 0) be wasted because some people don't undestand that the aim of an industrial project is not to use new technics but to make money. It was really depressing...

Ok, let's try to be optimistic.
There is no double there are doing great on a technical point of view even if I don't like the 'none continuous' approche of the model.
I hope they will be able to add animaltion in the next video (I didn't see in this one anything really new).
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 425
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #19 - Posted 2011-08-05 11:26:22 »

Where they will succeed I think is in next-gen consoles if they're going to try silicon. If Sony get interested in what they're doing...

Cas Smiley

Offline JL235

JGO Coder


Medals: 10



« Reply #20 - Posted 2011-08-05 11:56:29 »

Well according to their new website, we only have another year to wait until they will have a working demo available for people to try. I'll be staying tuned for that.

Offline gouessej
« Reply #21 - Posted 2011-08-05 12:16:08 »

This discussion is strange. Nothing is unlimited in computer science and I completely agree with Notch, his objections are plausible. Moreover, it is already difficult to find money for research projects on mesh optimization whereas it would be very useful in near real-time visualization for geoscience, finding money for such a vaguely described project is even harder. They don't need anything in silicon to show at least a tiny animation and some people here are underestimating the difficulty of adapting point cloud based solutions for dynamic meshes.

Offline bobjob

JGO Knight


Medals: 10
Projects: 4


David Aaron Muhar


« Reply #22 - Posted 2011-08-05 14:39:18 »

This discussion is strange. Nothing is unlimited in computer science and I completely agree with Notch, his objections are plausible. Moreover, it is already difficult to find money for research projects on mesh optimization whereas it would be very useful in near real-time visualization for geoscience, finding money for such a vaguely described project is even harder. They don't need anything in silicon to show at least a tiny animation and some people here are underestimating the difficulty of adapting point cloud based solutions for dynamic meshes.
Its not technically unlimited. Just like Google doesnt technically hold all the data on the internet. Its just a advanced culling algorythm done on ever pixel. Instead of the Hardware Buffer approach, its all software.

Also I dont see how hard it would be to store meshes broken up into (rgb)cube diffuse maps + (grayscale)cube depth map + (rgb)cube normal map. As all meshes are basically 1 sided hollow objects.
Not saying this is how the engine does it. (Just exploring ideas)
Using this method: objects can be scaled down without problem, they are given a bounding box by default. the processor challenge comes when firing the ray into the depth map, It shouldnt be hard to group data in a cleverly indexed way.

My Projects
Games, Webcam chat, Video screencast, PDF tools.

Javagaming.org with chat room
Offline gouessej
« Reply #23 - Posted 2011-08-05 15:05:37 »

Its not technically unlimited.
Therefore they have to give it another name.

Also I dont see how hard it would be to store meshes broken up into (rgb)cube diffuse maps + (grayscale)cube depth map + (rgb)cube normal map. As all meshes are basically 1 sided hollow objects.
Not saying this is how the engine does it. (Just exploring ideas)
Using this method: objects can be scaled down without problem, they are given a bounding box by default. the processor challenge comes when firing the ray into the depth map, It shouldnt be hard to group data in a cleverly indexed way.
In my humble opinion, point cloud algorithms fit well for some kinds of data, voxels are fine for some others, it is the same for polygons. Therefore, such an engine should convert point cloud objects into polygons or the opposite, known algorithms to do that cannot be applied in real-time.

Why is there absolutely no animation in their demos? They are not credible.

Offline Roquen
« Reply #24 - Posted 2011-08-05 15:07:09 »

Strange that nobody has mentioned that Id tech 5 is a non-polygonal voxel like technique.  WRT unlimited:  Up the the precision of ones representation procedural techniques are 'unlimited'.  I could easily generate more unique images than anyone could look at in a lifetime...so I think it would be reasonable to call that unlimited image generation.
Offline bobjob

JGO Knight


Medals: 10
Projects: 4


David Aaron Muhar


« Reply #25 - Posted 2011-08-05 15:11:18 »

Quote
In my humble opinion, point cloud algorithms fit well for some kinds of data, voxels are fine for some others, it is the same for polygons. Therefore, such an engine should convert point cloud objects into polygons or the opposite, known algorithms to do that cannot be applied in real-time.
Wouldnt it depend on the resolution of data. If pixels (atoms) are storred at a further distance from each other, and a ray collides between pixels with a normal facing towards the ray, it would make sense that the resulting color would be a gradient between the atoms.

Quote
Why is there absolutely no animation in their demos? They are not credible.
I think it makes sense that static objects are going to be easyer when developing an engine. But like I said before, even if scenes were static, you could always send a texture buffer, and depth buffer to hardware to handle post polygon rendering.

My Projects
Games, Webcam chat, Video screencast, PDF tools.

Javagaming.org with chat room
Offline JL235

JGO Coder


Medals: 10



« Reply #26 - Posted 2011-08-05 15:19:01 »

Strange that nobody has mentioned that Id tech 5 is a non-polygonal voxel like technique.  WRT unlimited:  Up the the precision of ones representation procedural techniques are 'unlimited'.  I could easily generate more unique images than anyone could look at in a lifetime...so I think it would be reasonable to call that unlimited image generation.
I believe your thinking of Id Tech 6, and John Carmack has said that the technology needed to power it (in the mainstream) does not yet exist.

Unlimited Detail would be unlimited if it was generating more detail on the fly, and the amount of data needed to be generated was based on the number of pixels. I'm thinking like a fractal, you can zoom in infinitely on one of them (within reason).

Quote from: bobjob
I think it makes sense that static objects are going to be easyer when developing an engine. But like I said before, even if scenes were static, you could always send a texture buffer, and depth buffer to hardware to handle post polygon rendering.
There have been games in the past that have mixed very different rendering techniques, and they often end up looking odd. For the floor and far away scenery, it would probably look fine, but if you have low-poly people next to high-poly buildings then it would look strange.

Offline Roquen
« Reply #27 - Posted 2011-08-05 15:44:43 »

Yeah...I think it is 6 now that you mention it.  When has Id (at least since Quake) released an engine that runs on mainstream hardware?  Huh??  My attempted point is that a lot of people are thinking non-polygonal these days...so it's far from insane.  I have no opinion on the "tech" of the original post (seeing I'm too lazy to watch a video).

I haven't looked at it but Nvidia has a demo here of sparse voxels: http://code.google.com/p/efficient-sparse-voxel-octrees/
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 425
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #28 - Posted 2011-08-05 18:56:24 »

One specific aspect they draw attention to is how they can model each grain of sand on a beach down to what they say is sub-millimetre scale. That's pretty unlimited relative to what is currently possible even with voxels let alone fudging with bump maps on triangles.

The way they are doing this is clearly not storing every single grain of sand in memory. They have maybe one grain of sand, and then they have an ingenious way of recursively referencing it to make bigger objects out of smaller objects out of smaller objects out of smaller objects, which appear to be overlappable and scaleable and rotatable. This I surmise merely from looking at their video. How they do it is of course the big question. As nobody here has even the faintest clue really it's best just to wait and see what they do with it because it's just brilliant looking.

Also: I have seen animation from them, over a year ago. I think it was a very badly modelled hummingbird. As they say, they're not artists Smiley

Cas Smiley

Offline JL235

JGO Coder


Medals: 10



« Reply #29 - Posted 2011-08-05 21:01:09 »

The way they are doing this is clearly not storing every single grain of sand in memory. They have maybe one grain of sand, and then they have an ingenious way of recursively referencing it to make bigger objects out of smaller objects out of smaller objects out of smaller objects, which appear to be overlappable and scaleable and rotatable.
I fully agree, as I said above I can only see about 10 distinct items (maybe less). I think that is what might be key here. Having a couple of point cloud objects, that might work ok on a modest PC, but for any real game you would need hundreds.

Pages: [1] 2 3
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 
You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

toopeicgaming1999 (72 views)
2014-11-26 15:22:04

toopeicgaming1999 (62 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:36

toopeicgaming1999 (15 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:08

SHC (29 views)
2014-11-25 12:00:59

SHC (27 views)
2014-11-25 11:53:45

Norakomi (32 views)
2014-11-25 11:26:43

Gibbo3771 (27 views)
2014-11-24 19:59:16

trollwarrior1 (40 views)
2014-11-22 12:13:56

xFryIx (78 views)
2014-11-13 12:34:49

digdugdiggy (56 views)
2014-11-12 21:11:50
Understanding relations between setOrigin, setScale and setPosition in libGdx
by mbabuskov
2014-10-09 22:35:00

Definite guide to supporting multiple device resolutions on Android (2014)
by mbabuskov
2014-10-02 22:36:02

List of Learning Resources
by Longor1996
2014-08-16 10:40:00

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-08-05 19:33:27

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:20:17

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:19:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:29:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:26:06
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!