PDA

View Full Version : Deus Ex graphics.



Anachronos
25th Jan 2009, 05:20
I recently discovered this forum and l am amazed by the amount of active people in the community so early on in development. While Deus Ex was an amazing game it strong point was it's plot and gameplay.
Since this is a cyberpunk game and after seeing some amazing concept art of the game l saw the amazing potential this game has if the team in Montreal can pull it off.
While l searched l couldn't find anything about the engine this game will be using since l hope that can use something that will allow the artists invlolved in the project to deliver something as close as what they envisioned.
From what l remember the first and second game used UT engines so probably Deus Ex 3 will use a modified UT engine. In addition since the game is developed for XBox 360 and PS3, while being aware that both those systems are quite powerful are somewhat limited in what their GPU's can support since both chips in those consoles are DX9 chips. This means that probably Deus Ex 3 will be a DX9 game. Now there is a slight chance that the PC version of the game might use DX10 or DX 10.1 technology like Assasin's Creed. That would be great news and l hope until the game is released that both Nvidia will have their DX11 cards out thus allowing the developers to use Dx10.1 if they decide to do so.
Furthermore any speculation about the Physics in the game? From what l remember Eidos produced TWIMTBP games meaning that is working closely with Nvidia so we might probably see some PSYSX or even Havok being utilized in the game.

While gameplay and the plot are the things that the developer team must work the hardest on for Deus Ex 3 to be the game we are dreaming it to be all the elements that consist it must be top notch in order for it to be an amazing game.

For me an engine that supports many cores would be the way to go allowing multiple instances for complex AI, physics(if they use HAVOK) making the game more immersive.

I know all the above facts are just speculations and stuff that l think might be nice to include but since this is a discussion board it would be nice to hear what people are thinking about.

Either for the developers to focus mostly on gameplay and storyline and gurantee a worthy spiritual successor to the first game allowing people with less powerful PC's to enjoy the game and thus making the game more accessible for people with lesser systems or make a game like Crysis(graphical wise) that will make people spend to get the latest hardware in order to be able to play the game but at the same time deliver a better product that is aesthetically closer to what the artists envisioned.

For me since l am planning to upgrade in Q4 of 2009 l wish to for for the latter option but lets hear what does the majority of people think about this.

Popp
25th Jan 2009, 05:27
If you're asking me wether I'd rather have good story/game, or good graphics... I don't know. I say game I suppose, but I'd be lying if I said I never spent 2 hours looking at screenshots of DX10 games when they came out(Conan)...

I don't know!

Jerion
25th Jan 2009, 07:32
I'll take both great story/gameplay, and great graphics. :cool:

Mindmute
25th Jan 2009, 12:35
I'll take both great story/gameplay, and great graphics. :cool:

Same.
However, if I had to pick which one to ditch, I'd ditch the graphics.

Radius86
25th Jan 2009, 12:39
Same.
However, if I had to pick which one to ditch, I'd ditch the graphics.

Couldn't agree more.

It's what drew me more to this game. Bad graphics does not a bad game make.

Nathan2000
25th Jan 2009, 12:58
While l searched l couldn't find anything about the engine this game will be using since l hope that can use something that will allow the artists invlolved in the project to deliver something as close as what they envisioned.
From what l remember the first and second game used UT engines so probably Deus Ex 3 will use a modified UT engine.

You're so uninformed.

Deus Ex 3 uses modified in-house Eidos engine, that was used in Tomb Raider Underworld. The developers haven't decided the platforms yet (at least it was true in October 2008), only PC is confirmed.

Dead-Eye
25th Jan 2009, 23:19
I vote for great gameplay, great plot and good graphics!

WhatsHisFace
26th Jan 2009, 01:39
Since when were "good graphics" and "good anything else" mutually exclusive?

Jerion
26th Jan 2009, 03:45
^^ It's just been a strange general perception created by the mass of crap games with shiny graphics released over the last 3 years.

Necros
29th Jan 2009, 11:25
Gameplay and story > graphics, any time. :)

And yes, I want a good physics engine too, that's a must.

WhatsHisFace
29th Jan 2009, 15:04
Gameplay and story > graphics, any time. :)

And yes, I want a good physics engine too, that's a must.

Deus Ex 3 doesn't need a physics engine any better than what was in Deus Ex 2, honestly. It's just not the kind of game that needs to devote a lot of resources into making boxes bounce around.

jamhaw
29th Jan 2009, 19:54
Deus Ex 3 doesn't need a physics engine any better than what was in Deus Ex 2, honestly. It's just not the kind of game that needs to devote a lot of resources into making boxes bounce around.

Deus Ex had a lot of that though. I personally have never really liked stacking crates however, so I suppose that was something which IW did right.

Blade_hunter
29th Jan 2009, 21:13
The Havok were badly used in IW HL2 used the same and the physics were much better.

http://www.havok.com/content/blogcategory/44/84/

look a this page

Gameplay must be the strongest point of the game for me, but a great part of the gameplay can be impossible to do if we doesn't have a good physics engine, if I want to throw a grenade to eject a pile of heavy crates from it's place to fall them in a group of NPCs in DX 2 it was impossible to neutralize NPCs by this way.

why we don't need a better physics engine, I think we need a better physics engine than previous games, I don't care so much about the graphics, most games have good graphics on nowdays, since they use a pretty style, in some old games we can see a good style by the design without to be great in the graphics engine point.

The story for me comes after the gameplay, because if we doesn't have the gameplay we can use a max payne gameplay or even bioshock with a great story and players would be happy ?
I don't think so, because the true strength of DX was it's gameplay that allow many players to use their own style even if it's a bit difficult at the beginning but we can choose how we deal with an enemy and where is the most appropriate way that allow us to be advantaged against our enemies.

The graphics since they are correct and well animated because I prefer a good animation than a lot of polygons.

and the story must be a part of the gameplay and the story must allow a great amount of possibilities ...

I think the main focus is the gameplay and the other elements is turning around like a sun with planets in a solar system

GmanPro
29th Jan 2009, 21:26
To me, its much more so about the art style than it is about the number of polygons and pixels on the screen. IMO Morrowind looked better than Oblivion, and DX1 looked better than DX2 etc.

ZylonBane
29th Jan 2009, 22:03
Since when were "good graphics" and "good anything else" mutually exclusive?
Since finite budget.

imported_van_HellSing
30th Jan 2009, 08:56
ZylonBane makes me stabby.

Jerion
30th Jan 2009, 08:59
^^ If you'd like a very sharp sword, I have a nano-tech one right here. :D

ZylonBane
30th Jan 2009, 22:22
ZylonBane makes me stabby.
Yes, I can see how people being right would be irritating for you.

Frraksurred
1st Feb 2009, 07:12
Unfortunately for this game, with the expectations as they are, it will need to have great story, great gameplay and great graphics. Not because I say so, but becasue that is what the original had, and that is the game DX3 will be measured against most.

Eabin
1st Feb 2009, 10:14
Except that the original had okay-ish graphics at best.

Jerion
1st Feb 2009, 10:25
Unfortunately for this game, with the expectations as they are, it will need to have great story, great gameplay and great graphics. Not because I say so, but becasue that is what the original had, and that is the game DX3 will be measured against most.

By you, perhaps, but by me it will be measured against FO3 or even Crysis graphics-wise.

I think I might be mis-interpreting your post though. :scratch:

Blade_hunter
1st Feb 2009, 16:18
The thing is I preferred to see better animations than photorealistic graphics, and more I want to see the moves done by our character in the internal view.
When I interract with the world I want to see my hands my fingers doing what I do in the game, to give a sort of immersion We can got the best graphics but if the animations are crapish we loose the immersion quickly, in old games I think that's normal, and when I talk about animations it's more about the body than the face.
some modern games got that en even TR underworld is well animated, even if in third person games the triggers are big compared to some first person games

ZylonBane
1st Feb 2009, 22:56
When I interract with the world I want to see my hands my fingers doing what I do in the game, to give a sort of immersion
Deadly Shadows tried this. The result was the horrible "body awareness" system that was constantly dragging the player around and locking them in place so that the hand animations would look correct. And before that there was the infamously awful Trespasser, with its ghastly remote-control arm simulator.

And no matter how good the tech gets, it will always be a terrible, terrible, horrible, awful idea. Whuh?, you ask. Because this sort of thing inherently degrades the responsiveness of the control system. In a current FPS, if you click on something usable, it *instantly* gets used. Under the system you propose, you'd have to wait for the animation to play out. This would suck.

There's a reason most games don't do this, even though the technology to support it has existed for over a decade.

Laokin
1st Feb 2009, 23:39
Deadly Shadows tried this. The result was the horrible "body awareness" system that was constantly dragging the player around and locking them in place so that the hand animations would look correct. And before that there was the infamously awful Trespasser, with its ghastly remote-control arm simulator.

And no matter how good the tech gets, it will always be a terrible, terrible, horrible, awful idea. Whuh?, you ask. Because this sort of thing inherently degrades the responsiveness of the control system. In a current FPS, if you click on something usable, it *instantly* gets used. Under the system you propose, you'd have to wait for the animation to play out. This would suck.

There's a reason most games don't do this, even though the technology to support it has existed for over a decade.


There are many triple A titles that do this well. Fear, Crysis, Far Cry 2, Mirrors Edge, Left 4 Dead... ect... ect.

Full Body awareness has been done and successfully too. Kudos for mentioning Trespasser. The infamously bad Jurassic Park game that had you look at your breasts to see your life. LoL, nothing like a little boobage for a health gauge.

Also, Deadly Shadows was third person. So, in that regard Tomb Raider proves it can work. Don't really see your point.

Larington
1st Feb 2009, 23:56
It is my belief that a game designer should not only seek balance in gameplay but also in all elements of a game. Visuals, core gameplay, narrative/story, level design, audio/music, interface design, etc. etc. should get equal amounts of attention to ensure a balanced overall game (Not merely in terms of gameplay). Gameplay should not be regarded as more important than graphics, nor vice versa.

Well, thats my view anyway. There are plenty of films that are 'made' by their soundtrack, and this applies to several games as well.

It is also my opinion that it is unwise to release this game opposite christmas releases like CoD6 or whatever it is they'll be on when the game is nearing gold status, mostly because you'd need to compete with the marketting budgets these games get - I'm not convinced that'll be cost effective. Besides, I'll have more time to play the game if its released in the Summer or Easter holiday periods.

I can understand you missing the info on what graphics engine will be used to make the game as I'm not 100% sure what search terms I'd use to find that info out myself. Its a variant of the Tomb Raider Underworld engine that was built in house by Eidos Montreal (I think) and is probably versatile enough that it can be efficiently repurposed for other games without significant issues.

ZylonBane
2nd Feb 2009, 00:11
Also, Deadly Shadows was third person. So, in that regard Tomb Raider proves it can work. Don't really see your point.
No, Deadly Shadows allowed you to choose between first and third person.

Blade_hunter
2nd Feb 2009, 22:12
Modern games make the moves well why it can't be in DX 3, and lara in the last TR underworld is correctly animated, and body awareness is the best thing initiated by modern FPS games, this increase really the immersion, even if it takes a little time to play the animation, I am conscious about that but it's not because a game did something wrong with a system that would mean the system is bad, the firsts games with body awareness have that and it was more useless than actually.

WhatsHisFace
2nd Feb 2009, 23:40
Modern games make the moves well why it can't be in DX 3, and lara in the last TR underworld is correctly animated, and body awareness is the best thing initiated by modern FPS games, this increase really the immersion, even if it takes a little time to play the animation, I am conscious about that but it's not because a game did something wrong with a system that would mean the system is bad, the firsts games with body awareness have that and it was more useless than actually.

Whaaat? Do you speak-uh the english?