PDA

View Full Version : Deus Ex 3 engine pics! Well sorta ;)



Unstoppable
1st Feb 2008, 10:31
Most of you know us fans of Deus Ex are hungry for new info. However we really don't need new info from Deus Ex if we can find games that will be built around it.

Therefore here are some very nice Tomb Raider: Underworld pictures.
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/169705.html

I notice bump mapping, possible dynamic lightning, weather effects, awesome shadows/lighting, and smooth/beautiful character models.

Now this is the engine Deus Ex 3 will use and they're tailoring it for the Deus Ex universe. What does this all mean really?

It means it's time to get excited if you haven't. It means that Deus Ex will get the treatment it deserves. I for one look forward to seeing more Tomb Raider: Underworld stuff as a glimpse to what Deus Ex 3 will offer in the graphical department.

Also this engine will be scalable I'm thinking. Which means a variety of computers will run the game and run it well. So far everything thing is on the right track.

:)

Tracer Tong
1st Feb 2008, 21:37
Meh, the quality ain't that good.

Here's an image worth viewing:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fb/TRUnderworld.jpg

I really hope DX3 would turn out to look even better than that. :cool:

But looks isn't what DX is about, so I really won't mind them using the same old models (maybe just a bit)

AaronJ
1st Feb 2008, 21:57
There better not be any focus on breasts in DX. Any.

humbug
1st Feb 2008, 23:24
I have high hopes for this engine, and I'm sure the devs will do a good job in programming it for the deus ex game!
This has to be my fav screenie from TRU
http://uk.media.ps3.ign.com/media/142/14224307/img_5233406.html

jd10013
2nd Feb 2008, 00:06
I'm not so concerned about the engine. Looks are nice, but I'm much more interested in game play.

Unstoppable
2nd Feb 2008, 00:17
Yes the visuals are not as important as game play however visuals drive sales for people who know nothing about Deus Ex.

Good visuals with a good engine mean good performance. Then the game play will be easier to handle since the engine is not limiting like Invisible War.

Fixed from above
http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3/image/article/848/848767/tomb-raider-underworld-20080130053257735.jpg

jd10013
2nd Feb 2008, 00:19
I do like that it can render water. cough,invisible war,cough

Unstoppable
2nd Feb 2008, 00:27
If you download the demo for Tomb Raider
http://www.fileplanet.com/162043/160000/fileinfo/Tomb-Raider:-Legend-Demo

You'll see some amazing water effects. The water actually runs down Laura's skin and you can see the drops etc. Very convincing and unique way to do water on a character.

Angel/0A
2nd Feb 2008, 01:15
Cool beans. Although they aren't using exactly the same engine, it's good to see the potential of it (without dying horribly in a fire).

xundonex
2nd Feb 2008, 09:28
Hard to beat the water in Crysis, however. After getting a good video card, and running on DX10, the water looks absolutely real. While standing in the water, you can almost feel the gentle waves...

RedFeather1975
2nd Feb 2008, 09:31
I drowned for real in Crysis. :(

Actually I am lying. My computer blew up trying to render the title screen. :( :(

No, that's another lie. I cannot stop lying due to my behavioural disorder. :( :( :(

Again. Not true. :confused:

jd10013
2nd Feb 2008, 13:12
Hard to beat the water in Crysis, however. After getting a good video card, and running on DX10, the water looks absolutely real. While standing in the water, you can almost feel the gentle waves...

and as long as you have a $5000 computer made by alienware you play it and see the cool water effects.

rhalibus
2nd Feb 2008, 22:41
and as long as you have a $5000 computer made by alienware you play it and see the cool water effects.

I've actually got a pretty good frame rate on a $1200 box with 3GB RAM, a nVidia 8800GT, and an Intel 6600 Quad...Most everything is at high, except medium shadows and very high physics...

But DX3 should definitely have water...

matches81
3rd Feb 2008, 00:46
and as long as you have a $5000 computer made by alienware you play it and see the cool water effects.
I'm sorry, I don't get why everybody seems to bash Crysis. I have a pretty decent machine, but nothing out of the ordinary. You could easiliy put that together today for about 1000€ I guees, and it plays Crysis well playable at 1920x1200 with everything on high. Given the visuals, Crysis performs pretty good. The only thing one could complain about that lower-end systems are almost completely left out because the low settings do look pretty awful.

That said:
I've played both recent Tomb Raiders using the Crystal Dynamics Engine. While Anniversary performs a lot better than Legend on my system, its performance still isn't good. Seeing how I can run Crysis fine and I have occasional slow-downs in TR:Anniversary, I'd say the engine still needs optimizing. The visuals in Anniversary are decent overall, but nothing mind-blowing and definitely nothing justifying that poor performance. And I definitely hope that the facial animations in DX3 will be far more detailed than those seen in Anniversary, because those wouldn't cut it for a game with hopefully lots of dialogs. I don't know whether that's an issue with the engine or the artists, I just hope for improvement in that area, too.

minus0ne
3rd Feb 2008, 01:13
I'm sorry, I don't get why everybody seems to bash Crysis. I have a pretty decent machine, but nothing out of the ordinary. You could easiliy put that together today for about 1000€ I guees, and it plays Crysis well playable at 1920x1200 with everything on high. Given the visuals, Crysis performs pretty good. The only thing one could complain about that lower-end systems are almost completely left out because the low settings do look pretty awful.
Same here, I don't get that either. Especially with Crysis, people KNEW what to expect. I just don't see someone with a a low-end machine coming home from the store having just bought Crysis and being surprised and disappointed by the fact that it barely launches/plays.

Though with DX3, I want them to make it as scalable as they possibly can (within limits, of course). DX3 is far from the beefed-up techdemo that Crysis is, so that wouldn't be appropriate anyway.

That said:
I've played both recent Tomb Raiders using the Crystal Dynamics Engine. While Anniversary performs a lot better than Legend on my system, its performance still isn't good. Seeing how I can run Crysis fine and I have occasional slow-downs in TR:Anniversary, I'd say the engine still needs optimizing. The visuals in Anniversary are decent overall, but nothing mind-blowing and definitely nothing justifying that poor performance. And I definitely hope that the facial animations in DX3 will be far more detailed than those seen in Anniversary, because those wouldn't cut it for a game with hopefully lots of dialogs. I don't know whether that's an issue with the engine or the artists, I just hope for improvement in that area, too.
TR's performance had nothing to do with the engine, but the way the developers coded for it. I assume the devs will get a decent facial animation engine though, because that's very important to any DX game (and it was one of the things that ruined IW).

RedFeather1975
3rd Feb 2008, 01:52
I just want them to be able to do fabric. :)
Even a game like Guild Wars can have 100 capes flowing all over the place on a low end system. :eek:

jd10013
3rd Feb 2008, 02:45
decent facial animation engine though, because that's very important to any DX game (and it was one of the things that ruined IW).

I'm a bit confused. the facial animations were non existent in DX. In fact, the character animations and textures were the lowest point of the game.

minus0ne
3rd Feb 2008, 03:33
I'm a bit confused. the facial animations were non existent in DX. In fact, the character animations and textures were the lowest point of the game.
No they weren't. Although DX's facial animation was minimal (though it was one of the first games to attempt it with some success) but they used it to its fullest potential. In fact, even though IW had character models and faces consisting of a whole lot more polygons and animations than DX had, because it was so incredibly poorly implemented and used it felt like no NPC had any emotion (ie their lips moved and eyes blinked, but that's just about it).

It's important and integral to Deus Ex though, because of the use of third person dialogue (they should DEFINITELY hold on to that, Oblivion-style first person conversation SUCKS).

Tracer Tong
3rd Feb 2008, 08:56
There better not be any focus on breasts in DX. Any.

There was, a lot, on DX1.

RedFeather1975
3rd Feb 2008, 09:06
Then they need to think about equal opportunity and put in some man boobs. :nut:

humbug
3rd Feb 2008, 11:28
Then they need to think about equal opportunity and put in some man boobs. :nut:

:lol: :lol: They did it fight club!

As for facial expressions apparently Lara has a lot more expressions up her sleeve than in previous games. ;)

RedFeather1975
3rd Feb 2008, 13:47
It's funny because when I posted that I was thinking of Meatloaf in the meetings from Fight Club. :rolleyes:
Pop culture has branded our minds!