PDA

View Full Version : Should they drop the Goldeneye engine?



digit
26th Mar 2003, 20:13
Should Free Radical drop the Goldeneye-like engine and go for a new one? If they are going to, I think it should be kind of like Halo. ONLY kind of, not exactly. Halo had an acceptably good engine. So TS3 should have an engine that's like a cross between Halo and the Timesplitters engine.

And there should be full customization for your multiplayer games. I mean FULL. Modify damage done to each body part, that sort of thing. I hated the fact that a shot to the head in TS2 wouldn't kill them. And there should be a "Realistic" option!

That's just me.

So, should they drop the engine and go for a new one?

LithiumTS2
26th Mar 2003, 20:36
I VOTED FOR....

what an engine?
seriously though all FPS look the same
create a character would be nice

AB-109
26th Mar 2003, 21:25
I dont really wanna vote because although I would like parts of the engine to change, I only want it to change alittle.

I think the engine is pretty good and is just different enough to be different from others I mean what other fps has ricachet(sp?) which actually hit people! Maybe if you could have slightly more control over them that would be cool.

I think a 'make your own character' option would be great, even if it was using parts from all the other characters I think it would be wicked!

Ab ^_^

-JaSoN-
26th Mar 2003, 22:13
I voted no! i dont think they should just ditch the whole engine. They should improve it.:p

Reaperbot
27th Mar 2003, 03:53
Yeah I think so!
They should for TS3.

Some of the textures and objects kinda seem old.
And also they'd be able to make it cel-shaded.:D

invizegoth
27th Mar 2003, 07:12
Originally posted by Reaperbot
And also they'd be able to make it cel-shaded.:D

Erm.... What's cel-shaded, if I may ask? :confused:

Reaperbot
27th Mar 2003, 07:15
Makes it look like a cartoon.

Examples of cel shaded games, jet set radio, XIII, Auto Modellista.........

Cel shading would make the game look like the concept art characters.

harry_tippers_love_child
27th Mar 2003, 08:55
Originally posted by Reaperbot
Cel shading would make the game look like the concept art characters.

I'm all for it.

But I think I'm in a minority. However, having seen Zelda - The Wind Waker in action at the weekend, I have no doubts that cel-shading, when done properly, can look absolutely amazing.

I don't think they need to change the game engine though... it works just fine. It doesn't need to be like Halo, because it is TimeSplitters, and not Halo... :rolleyes:

:D:D

tangers75
27th Mar 2003, 13:42
Don't all FPS's run on a modified version of the Doom engine?

gamedev
27th Mar 2003, 16:07
I was curious, are they currently using RARE's goldeneye engine? The first level really gives you a bond feel, but I loved every minute of it. The time travel idea is cool, though sometimes lacking story content, and the multiplayer rocks. Why hasnt t his game gotten more attention? Goldeneye was the father of nice console FPS's, and this looks to be a another installment. Theres a lot of FPS crap out there these days, and it was nice to play something so smooth and recognizalble from the start. Keep the engine, build a new renderer and particle effects.

-Tyler

El-Spaz
28th Mar 2003, 16:28
Did they really use the GE engine? I don't remember eidos or freeradical saying anything about that. The people that made GE made TS2, but i don't know if the engine is the same. It kind of looks like it, but it wouldn't make much sense to use an engine from a game that old. It just wouldn't work right on the newer systems. But then i don't know for sure one way or another, i'd rather have a moderator or someone form FRD tell us directly that it was the GE engine than jumping to that conclusion.

As for the cell shading *cough* CRAP!!! *cough*. It can be done uniquely and well, but as i have stated before, i see it as one of the worst "new" technologies out there. I want my games to be more realistic, not more super nintendoish. This cell shading fad is really annoying! There is no way that i would ever own the new Zelda game and as much as i loved Dark Cloud, i doubt that i will ever get the second one because of the cell shading. Automodelista, and possibly Sly Cooper are the only cell shaded games i would even consider.

gamedev
28th Mar 2003, 18:56
Wait... members from the RARE team are working @ Free Radical? Your right, the Goldeneye engine is old, but some of the technology, movement and what not could be used. The rendering engine is different, no doubt.

-Tyler

Reaperbot
28th Mar 2003, 21:55
Originally posted by El-Spaz
[/B]As for the cell shading *cough* CRAP!!! *cough*. It can be done uniquely and well, but as i have stated before, i see it as one of the worst "new" technologies out there. I want my games to be more realistic, not more super nintendoish. This cell shading fad is really annoying! There is no way that i would ever own the new Zelda game and as much as i loved Dark Cloud, i doubt that i will ever get the second one because of the cell shading. Automodelista, and possibly Sly Cooper are the only cell shaded games i would even consider. [/B]

You wouldn't buy a cel-shaded game even if it was a sequel to your favourite series or it was a really cool game. What if they changed TS3 in to a cel-shaded game? Would you buy it?

Btw, cel-shading is there to make the game play more like a cartoon, not like an old nintendo game. Some developers concentrate on the graphics *cough*Auto Modellista*cough* but do you think Free Radical would only concentrate on graphics? NO! They'd concentrate on the gameplay! Eh mapmaker monkey!

Quall
1st Apr 2003, 02:13
Originally posted by tangers75
Don't all FPS's run on a modified version of the Doom engine?

if they did that, then there would be no layered rooms

The doom engine is more basic, it isn't a "true" 3d engine.

Reaperbot
1st Apr 2003, 03:45
Originally posted by Quall
if they did that, then there would be no layered rooms

The doom engine is more basic, it isn't a "true" 3d engine.

he wasn't serious :rolleyes:

Quall
1st Apr 2003, 11:23
lol, didn't notice he/she was the moderator.

El-Spaz
3rd Apr 2003, 04:18
Originally posted by Reaperbot
You wouldn't buy a cel-shaded game even if it was a sequel to your favourite series or it was a really cool game. What if they changed TS3 in to a cel-shaded game? Would you buy it? IF TS3 came out as cell-shaded, i would have to see the game and try it before i would concider buying it. I bought TS2 on opening day after having never played the origional because of how the demo looked and played. Since then it has become my all time favorite FPS (beating out 007:GE by a hair). So my saying that i would be hard pressed to buy the game cell-shaded really says alot about how stupid looking cell shading looks and how much it turns me off.

tangers75
10th Apr 2003, 08:41
There's a trailer for XIII which is a cell-shaded game on Splinter Cell and I thought it looked cracking. Obviously I'll wait for a demo or the OPS2 review to make sure but I can see me buying it.

DaveT
13th Apr 2003, 19:17
in my opinion, they should drop everything and create something completly different, make their own engine if they need to! then the next timesplitters would get a good review and stand out and not just be another standard fps! i agree with the first post about the different damage, that would be a nice change to the game!

AB-109
13th Apr 2003, 22:31
TS2 got amazing reviews and I dont know anyone who thinks its just "another standard fps!".

Ab ^_^

Blood_Havoc9674
15th Apr 2003, 20:25
I voted NO but I think they should add more to it! The realistic factor would be a great idea. Cause if you shoot somone in the head they should die. But it should be an option. It would be cool if arcade mode would be more like story.

Tijdsplijter
20th Apr 2003, 11:11
If you shoot someone in the head with the sniperrifle they die!

Reaperbot
21st Apr 2003, 06:53
Originally posted by Blood_Havoc9674
I voted NO but I think they should add more to it! The realistic factor would be a great idea. Cause if you shoot somone in the head they should die. But it should be an option. It would be cool if arcade mode would be more like story.

You'd die faster and it'd be kinda like rainbow 6. ONE SHOT KILLS!!! ARGH!!!! It wouldn't be that bad if they had it as a mode.

Realistic Mode

AB-109
21st Apr 2003, 09:58
They do have one shot kills :confused:

I think its fine the way it is (the head shooting thing) I mean if you shoot someone in the head the loose twice as much and if you shoot them on the foot or hand they hardly loose anything what more do ya want :p


Ab ^_^

Cooolcorey
25th Apr 2003, 22:34
Actually, the part about how much damage you recieve being determined by where you hit them isn't in the engine. It's in seperate files, so they could change that without doing anything to the engine. And I doubt Rare would just let them use the GE engine, I mean, that's not how it works. They are competitors to a certain extent.

sheeps
21st May 2003, 10:01
There is no way that they used the Goldeneye engine..

At least I highly doubt it..

Just because the game runs very similairly doesn't mean it uses the same engine..

*sigh*and I'm sure Rareware or someone would have some issues with them using that engine..

anyhoo..

digit
21st May 2003, 19:48
What I meant was that the engine feels like Goldeneye, like no jumping, the way your view bobs, and mostly how your weapon eases left or right when you tilt your view.

gretal mkIII
21st May 2003, 19:53
Who cares about goldeneye, i played it one and hated it

gretal mkIII
21st May 2003, 19:56
by the way i agree about having create a character but think cell shading would be wrong:mad:

sheeps
23rd May 2003, 07:08
jumping would be nice :)

Reaperbot
23rd May 2003, 11:16
what's so bad about cel shading???

GhostXL
23rd May 2003, 11:44
There's nothing BAD about cel-shading, I think it's refreshing to see something else then the "realistic" look, which i'sn't realistic because the consoles (or PC's) aren't able to create realistic graphics.
If all games would try to look "realistic" they would all look kind of the same.
Any way it's just a matter of taste! A game's not about graphics but about gameplay!

And I just love the look of the new Zelda!!:D

About the engine, I couldn't care less what they use as long as the game's GOOD!

gretal mkIII
30th May 2003, 19:23
cell shading makes it look too "cartoony", and ts2 isn't a cartoon. don't get me wrong, i love cell shading for some things (sly racoon looks great) and should make XIII a great game because it is cartoony. It has stuff like chairs to attack with but ts2 is more of an arcade blast than a "funny" shooter.

gretal mkIII
30th May 2003, 19:25
god my grammers crap!:( :mad: :confused:

e_mcgoey
30th May 2003, 19:29
Way to self-flagellate - but you've mis-spelt "grammar". :D

gretal mkIII
30th May 2003, 19:38
soz

woknokmokpok
22nd Jul 2003, 15:15
I agree with sheeps
This can't be the Goldeneye engine. The Goldeneye engine was realistic in every sense of the word. The Timesplitters engine is cartoonish and just plain weird. And to that guy who said he didn't like Goldeneye.--Seriously, if you let your eyes adjust to the lower resolution, you will see that it is a MUCH MUCH better engine than Timesplitters.--Goldeneye moves realistically, and and the enviroments look about as realistic if not more realistic than Timesplitters. I don't know this for sure, but a good friend of mine(who is good with his sources) tells me that Free Radical has almost everybody from the Goldeneye team EXCEPT the guy who built the Goldeney engine. I am all for Free Radical.--I just think that they deserve a much better engine.
wok

sheeps
23rd Jul 2003, 07:55
Originally posted by woknokmokpok
I agree with sheeps
This can't be the Goldeneye engine. The Goldeneye engine was realistic in every sense of the word. The Timesplitters engine is cartoonish and just plain weird. And to that guy who said he didn't like Goldeneye.--Seriously, if you let your eyes adjust to the lower resolution, you will see that it is a MUCH MUCH better engine than Timesplitters.--Goldeneye moves realistically, and and the enviroments look about as realistic if not more realistic than Timesplitters. I don't know this for sure, but a good friend of mine(who is good with his sources) tells me that Free Radical has almost everybody from the Goldeneye team EXCEPT the guy who built the Goldeney engine. I am all for Free Radical.--I just think that they deserve a much better engine.
wok

Actually the engine doesn't determine whether it looks cartoony or not. The Timesplitters 2 engine could put out a realistic looking game, it just doesn't, it's the models that are cartoony.

I mean, look at siberia, if the player models looked more realistic it could be goldeneye.

Talking about realism does not concern the engine, just how the engine is manipulated.

woknokmokpok
24th Jul 2003, 03:14
Hmmm
Its a little late and I don't feel like looking now, but I will search the web and find the definition of "game engine". Not that I'm saying your wrong, but I always thought of a game engine as the enviroments AND the the characters.--And I'm not just talking about how the enviroments and characters look, I'm talking about how the characters physically move and how that feels when you play it.--For instance, I think when you play Quake 3 and Wolfenstien, you can tell that Wolfenstien uses the same engine. Sure the textures are different(one is a hell like enviroment while the other has a World War II backdrop), but the character bobs back and forth the same way when he walks. It does make a difference what we think when we talk about games, but I don't know the definition for sure.--I will look up some sources later, and tell you what I found Sheeps
later
wok

sheeps
24th Jul 2003, 07:04
Originally posted by woknokmokpok
For instance, I think when you play Quake 3 and Wolfenstien, you can tell that Wolfenstien uses the same engine. Sure the textures are different(one is a hell like enviroment while the other has a World War II backdrop), but the character bobs back and forth the same way when he walks. It does make a difference what we think when we talk about games, but I don't know the definition for sure.--I will look up some sources later, and tell you what I found Sheeps
later
wok

The engine is the code that holds everything together, that draws the models, the environments..

The way someone bobs can be changed through code/animation..

Different engines tend to draw environments differently, so you look at quake 3 compared to half life, it uses different style of crosshairs and huds which makes them more blurry (I think it's because the crosshairs and huds are anti aliased in quake 3 where as in Half life they aren't and my computer is just so crap that when I play quake 3 they don't look very good, because I run specs down low, but my comp can't play any games anymore, but that's another story I'm not going to go into).

harry_tippers_love_child
31st Jul 2003, 12:59
Originally posted by woknokmokpok
Hmmm
For instance, I think when you play Quake 3 and Wolfenstien, you can tell that Wolfenstien uses the same engine.

how much crack have you been doing recently!!!!????

That is the single most stupid thing I have ever heard on this forum. And that takes some doing, mate. Congratulations!! You're a winner.

EDIT
Oh right - you're probably talking about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, aren't you?? In which case I apologise, but as an aging fan of the original Wolfenstein 3d, it's easy to confuse me.

Sorry;)

KittenCeleste
31st Jul 2003, 13:02
Language, Harry!

sheeps
1st Aug 2003, 07:23
I still think you're an idiot, if it means anything.. :D

gretal mkIII
1st Aug 2003, 19:07
is there any point in going on about this. who cares where the engine came from as long as it came. we should all be thankful that we have such a great game to play. in fersponce to the origional question i think that they should try out some new engines to see if they came go faster or have more players or bots, and if they cann't then stick to this great one.

woknokmokpok
5th Aug 2003, 04:14
Hay now what’s with the name-calling? This is simply a discussion on game engines and if Free Radical should replace their Timesplitters engine. I was talking about Return to Castle's engine harry_tippers_love_child, and I accept the appology.--I'm not angry but why feel the need for name calling even if I did mean to refer the orignal Wolfenstien? Oh, well, now that I'm off of my soap box, I did do a little research(and I stress little) for everybody. I found this http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~u0kg/Gamebots/Game%20Engines%20explained.doc document that goes into some depth on game engines. I don't know if its the property of 3DActionPlanet or not but its seems ligit. Check it out.--It seems to confirm everything I have always believed a game engine to be. In any case, I basically think that Free Radical SHOULD replace the Timesplitters engine, because the realistic enviroments mixed with the cartoony characters has always bothered me.

sheeps
5th Aug 2003, 09:48
*BIG SIGH*

macheath
5th Aug 2003, 12:54
Sure let's have an engine like Halo that slows down and skips frames all the time. Seriously, I read somewhere that GoldenEye on the N64 runs at higher frame rate than Halo.

The timesplitters 2 engine is just fine. Im an old fan of GoldenEye and love it. I didn't love Halo and don't think timesplitters should cheapen itself by imitating it.

AB-109
5th Aug 2003, 22:45
Originally posted by macheath
Seriously, I read somewhere that GoldenEye on the N64 runs at higher frame rate than Halo.

I'm not suprised since Halo has alot more things to deal with than goldeneye and sure you'd expect it to do fine bein on 'the most powerful console around' but it really has THAT much more to deal with and even TS2 has its moments of slow down.

Ab ^_^

sheeps
6th Aug 2003, 06:44
I highly doubt that halo runs slower than goldeneye, goldeneye had quite a few lag issues and probably only ran at 25 fps, and it wasn't consistant.

Halo runs at around 30 I reckon.. it's fairly consistant too..

gretal mkIII
5th Oct 2003, 12:15
And to that guy who said he didn't like Goldeneye.--Seriously, if you let your eyes adjust to the lower resolution, you will see that it is a MUCH MUCH better engine than Timesplitters.--Goldeneye moves realistically, and and the enviroments look about as realistic if not more realistic than Timesplitters.

I don't mind the graphics, there not a problem 2 me, its the single stick controls and the manual aim is too hard to do well, other than that i like the game. I also think that (understandably, its an old game on an old console) the levels aren't that good a design(basic shapes of rooms ect. there like ts2 custom maps, made out of lots of squares

sheeps
6th Oct 2003, 03:12
Originally posted by gretal mkIII
I don't mind the graphics, there not a problem 2 me, its the single stick controls and the manual aim is too hard to do well, other than that i like the game. I also think that (understandably, its an old game on an old console) the levels aren't that good a design(basic shapes of rooms ect. there like ts2 custom maps, made out of lots of squares


That's why you get two controllers.. yes, dual stick control isn't as new as you think!

gretal mkIII
6th Oct 2003, 18:45
Thers only one control stick on the n64