Page 1 of 11 12345 ... Last

Thread: Game engine & physics

Game engine & physics

  1. #1

    Game engine & physics

    Deus Ex 3 Engine Revealed

    I just dont understand...

    Actually THIS link might be of more interest.

    Still a dumb idea....
    It is not god that kills the children...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    5,865

    Thumbs Up Interesting!

    Thanks for posting.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Xcom
    Thanks for posting.
    'S'aright. Interested to see what others think of this though. Not exactly my "engine of choice", but at least it is free I suppose...

  4. #4
    Well, that answers a question I had in another thread. Didn't expect that. At least we can more or less expect DX3 to look/run better than IW did

  5. #5
    It makes sense to me. If other current projects in the company are using that engine, why not use it across the board? It makes it easier to swap coders around when necessary. It may not be the best choice for engines, but it does save the company costs in other areas. As long as they can do what they need to do with this engine, then I don't see any problem using it.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Kneo24
    It makes sense to me. If other current projects in the company are using that engine, why not use it across the board? It makes it easier to swap coders around when necessary. It may not be the best choice for engines, but it does save the company costs in other areas. As long as they can do what they need to do with this engine, then I don't see any problem using it.
    It makes fiscal sense, sure. Not having to shell out for your starter engine is a great idea. The only obvious concern is that the engine is very limited and, flatly, a little bit sucky going by what it has done so far.

    Tomb Raider: Legend may have saved the TR franchise, but as a PC game it was a nightmare. Hideously unoptimised, a massive resource hog and, flatly, a lot less good lookng than its counterparts.

    Sure they have stated that they will be "developing" the engine, which is a good sign, but they only have 2 years to knock this game together, so I find myself wondering....

  7. #7
    I agree there. Developing the engine just takes so much time. Not just to code it, but to go through a bug stomping process. Let's take Source for examble. Valve has been updating the engine for years now, but in between the major updates to the engine, we only ever see bug fixes. And the major updates to the engine are usually graphical.

    I wonder what direction will be taken by Eidos. Will they improve the engine so the graphical aspects are better, or will they improve it so you can do more things in game? Will they even find a middle ground?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9
    A nextgen version of the engine used in Project Snowblind should be ok assuming they iron out the various hyperthreading and multicore bugs that plagued the PC version.


  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Godot
    A nextgen version of the engine used in Project Snowblind should be ok assuming they iron out the various hyperthreading and multicore bugs that plagued the PC version.


    Project Snowblind used Ueng 2 - LAST gen technology....

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9
    Originally Posted by StormFront
    Project Snowblind used Ueng 2 - LAST gen technology....
    It was certainly last gen tech, but are you sure it was Ueng2?

    The game's Wikipedia article says that the game's developer, Crystal Dynamics, used their own "GexOmen" engine.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Snowblind

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by Godot
    It was certainly last gen tech, but are you sure it was Ueng2?

    The game's Wikipedia article says that the game's developer, Crystal Dynamics, used their own "GexOmen" engine.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Snowblind
    Sorry I missread your post - thought you said Project Snowblind WAS a next gen engine. Doh...

    As to being Ueng 2 - I thought that GexOmen was a modified Ueng2 Engine. Might be talking crap of course.

    As to using that engine - Gotta say it was one of the ugliest engines of its time. The character models were simply dire and the fake lighting was hideous

  12. #12
    Yeah, it's weird but I'm not gonna bury the game just yet. It is an unusual choice but I'll wait for the first screens with my judgement. Just because it was used for a TPS it doesn't mean it can't be good for an FPS/RPG too, with heavy tweaking of course. And hopefully the devs there aren't newbies, so they might pull it off.

  13. #13
    There is a rumor going around that the next TR game is going to be rated mature, whether this is true remains to be seen. Anyhow if this is the case I should imagine the the graphics will be less 'fluffy' and probably a more suitable engine for Dues EX. If this is how it works? I'm no expert in how graphics are created from engines, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
    http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/6...newfavehf7.png
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken- Tyler Durden

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,129
    In the latest "Play Magazine", Crystal Dynamics (engine creator) have THIS to say about a few of the engine enhancements...

    Commenting on one of Lara's locations, PLAY says, "In the level where Lara explores Southern Mexico, she leaves footprints in the mud, but it's raining so they wash away. The bodies she leaves behind in combat encounters will stay, however, as will the debris from any destruction she causes."

    On an immersive and epic environment and weather system, Eric Lindstrom says, "we developed a hybrid lighting model that combines dynamic lights with carefully created light maps to make our world look stunning in ways that none of the available methods could achieve alone."

    Crystal Dynamics have also given Lara full motion capture "to bring a more natural fluidity to her movements, with proper weight and secondary motion." Moreover, when Lara kneels on a muddy outcrop, only her knee will be covered in dirt and this will gradually dissipate as she continues on her journey.

    The game has been tentatively pencilled in for a 2008 release and is expected to court Xbox 360, Sony PS3 and Windows PC.
    It's a good step up. Surely not the full extent of the engine updates but certainly a good sign of things to come.

  15. #15
    Personally, I'm not worried about graphics quality. Not one bit. I'm sure, it will be good. If it doesn't have super-duper effects, it won't make any difference.
    The only question, that concerns me is: Will there be any level editor for that engine available? Will we be able to create mods? With Unreal Engine 3 it would be obvious, but now?

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by Nathan2000
    With Unreal Engine 3 it would be obvious, but now?
    Exactly, like the one that came with IW.
    Wait, I mean the one that came with Bioshock.
    I mean...uh..

    The SDK hasn't been confirmed or ruled out yet. Just wait.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    184
    Really should have went with something else.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,129
    Originally Posted by CarloGervasi
    Really should have went with something else.
    The one benefit they have from working with an in-house engine is that they will have all the support they need at their fingertips and whatever changes they need to make can be done without loads of paperwork.

    Silicon-Knights lawsuits avoided.

  19. #19
    Yeah, good for them. They'll tweak it to tailor it to the game's needs.

    And frankly, I think we're coming to times where having high resolution texture and photorealistic will be a given, and the only way for devs to cut it will be to really work on the graphical aspect, rather than cramming in more polygons - something DX1 did kinda well.

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by CarloGervasi
    Really should have went with something else.
    Uh, why? Please reason your posts, because that makes no sense. Why should they buy a new engine when they have one that's perfectly capable for free?

  21. #21
    Originally Posted by Dave W
    Exactly, like the one that came with IW.
    Wait, I mean the one that came with Bioshock.
    I mean...uh..
    Maybe you mean the editor that came with Devastation. Or Gears of War. Or RoboBlitz. Or America's Army. Or Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Brothers in Arms, Dead Man's Hand, Pariah, Postal 2, X-Com Enforcer and dozens of other games.

    BTW, I heard somewhere, that DX2 devs wanted to release SDK as well, but they didn't make it before ION Storm was dissolved. I may be wrong, though.
    Originally Posted by Dave W
    The SDK hasn't been confirmed or ruled out yet. Just wait.
    Have no choice. But waiting is so nerve-racking!

  22. #22
    Originally Posted by Dave W
    Uh, why? Please reason your posts, because that makes no sense. Why should they buy a new engine when they have one that's perfectly capable for free?
    Because the engine in question has not proved itself to be perfectly capable at any point. On what are you basing the assumption that it is?

    TR:Legend was notoriously badly written on PC. There were armies of technical issues from day one and many of them were simply never fixed (unfixable?). The engine does not offer anything particularly useful or impressive, it is merely free. I acknowledge that they have stated their intention to "upgrade" it, but altering poor existing code fundamentally takes longer than writing new code.

  23. #23
    They dont need to make the graphics too amazing. But you need the proper gameplay with branching decisions, choice and consequence. Ion Storm raised the bar very high for gameplay. Good luck.

  24. #24
    Originally Posted by midna1
    They dont need to make the graphics too amazing. But you need the proper gameplay with branching decisions, choice and consequence. Ion Storm raised the bar very high for gameplay. Good luck.
    And again with the "gamelplay", that great undefined quantity.

    If we all say gameplay enough we will sound like real gamers, not half arsed 360 owners with no clue

    I will choose to ignore your comments about GFX as you are clearly uninformed...

    /end drunken abuse <giggle>

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,554
    Why don't you understand what people mean with "Gameplay"?
    Yeah, there are parts of games hard to classify as "Gameplay" or "Graphics" or "Sound". Footsteps in DX were great for the gameplay but it was great sound too. Physics can be great for gameplay and great as graphics.
    Gameplay is everything that influences the game play-wise. A photo has great graphics but zero gameplay (because there is no interactivity with whatever is displayed in the photo). A game with no graphics can't exsist because you need graphics to be able to play a game (unless it's some kind of sound-based game for blind people). Graphics are important, but when the gameplay sucks the game isn't fun. When the gameplay is great but the graphics aren't very good (euphemism) the game can still be fun to play (like DX). So that's why gameplay is more important than graphics, although graphics (and sound too, don't forget that one!) is still quite important.

Page 1 of 11 12345 ... Last