Talk:SpeedTree
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] NPOV
"Virtual foliage solution?" Can we NOT use buzzwords in articles that aren't about buzzwords themselves? I tried to de-solutionify the article. Maybe it will be less appealing to marketing types ... sorry. User:Elmwood 06:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
- This definitely looks as though it was written by a marketing company or something. I did a Google search, but it seems that the material is at least unique to Wikipedia. The one who's done most of the work on the page, 24.199.188.146, has an IP that traces approximately to Georgia, which means that this person probably lives very close to IDV's headquarters in South Carolina (which adjoins Georgia). So I'm guessing this is a corporate shill. The info is still useful to some extent, however; I think Wikipedia is better off with this page POV but clearly flagged as such than with this page not existing at all. —Simetrical (talk) 02:59, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm Kevin Meredith, the corporate shill in question, although my business card says director of sales & marketing for SpeedTree. I never intended to keep my identity a secret and in fact my name is available both as an editor of the SpeedTree Wikipedia page and as the salesman listed at the SpeedTree website. I'm disappointed to hear my role with SpeedTree places the content I provided in a doubtful light, as I tried to match the tone and content of other middleware articles and believe I avoided marketing hyperbole and stuck to facts. Given that Wikipedia features articles about other game development middleware, including Havok and Unreal, and other Wikipedia articles include references to SpeedTree, it was our feeling an article about SpeedTree was called for and we were best qualified to write it. Had someone stepped forward from the Wikipedia community to write about SpeedTree, we would have been happy to support their efforts, or to simply accept what was written as long as it was accurate. But no one volunteered, so we hoped that a factual article devoid of marketingese would be accepted at face value. Not so, unfortunately. So how do we resolve this? Because you seem to agree with us that an article about SpeedTree is a net positive in Wikipedia, is there anything we can do to get the notice removed from our page? Should we seek a neutral writer to prepare a new article about SpeedTree? Is there a place to solicit volunteers? Or should we just hope the Wikipedia community will step forward when the time is right? 4.235.63.82 03:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
- You can sign your name (or in your case, IP address, since you aren't logged in) and the date by typing four tildes: ~~~~ This makes it easier to follow discussions.
- There's a Wikipedia policy of no original research. This includes not adding "data, statements, concepts and ideas that have not been published in a reputable publication". If the article were to be rewritten to reflect only things stated somewhere such as the company's website, and these facts were clearly labeled with sources as being from the company itself, then there would be no question of bias. As it is, I felt it necessary to share potential sources of bias with the reader, who has presumably come here expecting an informative and neutral encyclopedia article and may or may not have gotten it, depending on how neutrally you actually wrote the article.
- On that score, I'm not in a position to fully judge your work, but you made a number of questionable, rather un-encyclopedic statements. For instance, you mention that SpeedTree "is best known for its realistic wind effects, natural foliage aesthetics and a variety of techniques that enable placement of large numbers of trees and plants in a virtual scene". "Realistic", "natural"? Compared to what? On what basis are you judging this? How can those statements be neutral? Realism and naturalness are inherently opinions.
- I'll clean up the article a bit and remove the tag. It is a useful addition to Wikipedia, in my opinion. Also, as a gamer, I'll be very impressed if I see images such as in the screenshots rendered in real time. :) —Simetrical (talk) 04:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm Andrew Le Conte, a games design student in the UK. I have no connection to SpeedTree so my point of view is unbiased. As part of my research for a new game I looked into many different vegetation creation programs including SpeedTree. I have made trees myself so I have an informed view on the subject. SpeedTree is by far the best solution for computer games and other real time applications at this time. SpeedTree trees are “realistic” and “natural” compared to any current real-time alternative.
The only problem I see with the article is that the picture has no frame rate, specifications, or details about the whole scene size. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.133.220.154 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC).
[edit] What's so special about SpeedTree?
How difficult can it be to simulate trees efficiently? --Jeolmeun 21:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
> Do you really need someone to answer that for you? Thx! --Mboverload 07:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Does "very" suffice? I mean, really, you may as well ask what's so special about the Havok physics engine, or any game's code altogether. It's difficult, yes, very difficult to put together a way to efficiently display numerous complicated models while maintaining variety. It requires talent, effort, and expense. If any old hack could do it, after all, there would be no market for SpeedTree, but there is. QED. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 05:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article Needs to list Games that Use it
For gamers, this is really what we want to know. A list of developers tells us little. I didn't know that Rise of Legends uses Speedtree, as do Oblivion and Gothic III (which I knew of the former and guessed of the latter). I added a section listing games taken from Speedtree's list on their website.
DavidBeoulve 13:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)DavidBeoulve
[edit] Article still sounds like an ad
The article still needs cleanup. Bits of it sound like they were cribbed from a corporate press release. One example:
"At the 2005 Game Developer's Conference, SpeedTree was named the sole foliage middleware partner of the Xbox 360 next generation game platform, and the software is featured in two of the first games to be published on Xbox 360[1], as well as four more to be published on the platform in 2006. In October 2005, IDV concluded a Tools & Middleware License agreement involving SpeedTreeRT for PlayStation 3 with Sony."
"Sole foliage middleware partner"? Come on, this is an encyclopedia, we try to use a neutral point of view. :-) Even the words "Tools & Middleware License agreement" are marketing-speak. If the technology will be used on PS3, tell us so in simple English. There are many other examples in the article. Regards, --unforgettableid | talk to me 03:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well if it is true that they are the only technology to be allowed to produce trees on the fly, that is somewhat noteable. However I agree that it is too markety. I am at a loss for how to fix it, though. --mboverload@ 03:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Paragraph in question has been rewritten/shortened and a few others changes have been made which hopefully make the page conform better to Wiki's standards. KMeredith, 09:24, 24 May 2006
Removed "advertisement" tag in the absence of any further complaints about content since modifications had been made one week prior. KMeredith, 2:25, 31 May 2006
