Jump to content

Why NOT the Unreal engine?


Koriel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Have to say ummm...no after the RvS fiasco.

Exactly what I was commenting on in the original post, judging an engine by a game produced on it rather than on the technical merits of the engine itself. I would guess that just about every engine that was not "single game" (such as GR) has managed to be screwed up by one developer or another. Actually, now I think about it, some of the single game engines have led to pathetic games as well! (GR obviously excluded) :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope Redstorm works with whatever engine they are comfortable with.

But beyond the whole eye candy thing i think a realistic, interactive environment is very important to consider. Like in Desert Siege you can't shoot through the palm leaves on the trees for example. I like some of the physics i've seen in such games as Far Cry and Stalker. I also liked being able to shoot out lights in Splinter Cell. I think stuff like this is just as or more important than eye candy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are performance issues with the UT engine, one of them is blocking of graphics chip at lower main cpu speeds. See:

http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/2000...3dbench-02.html

The sound in GR rocked! From the sounds you could EXACTLY get the direction of enemy fire. And the sound quality was like in no other game I have seen.

In Raven Shield(which was built on the UT engine), you can not even tell left from right in most cases. Remember that sounds are also part of a graphics engine, and I am very disappointed with the sound in Raven Shield.

"Netcode". It was good in GR. I am not sure if it depends on the graphics engine, but I strongly believe so. In Raven shield the netcode is a joke.

But most important are the developers. If the master minds from GR can take care of GR2 I do not doubt that the game will be the best MP game ever made.

Just my 5 cents.

May the infinite uncertainty power be with us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't read that article the same way. Seems to me that all this is saying is that your main CPU speed will affect your frame rates within a game, with UT2K3 used as an example.

If they were saying that this was a problem with the Unreal Engine (which as I say, isn't how I read it), I would have liked to see some comparisons with other engines to make it clearer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have 37 peeps in my squad and all are playing FarCry. One is using a P4 2.0 and a GForceMx400 vid card. His vid settings are to low but he plays online w/us all the time and he more than carries his weight. FC will play on a lower end machine. The FarCry engine modified to make it more "gritty" looking would be awesome. This would give us a great looking game, awesome physics (vehicle and player) and get us the game faster.

Edited by ruggbutt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have 37 peeps in my squad and all are playing FarCry. One is using a P4 2.0 and a GForceMx400 vid card. His vid settings are to low but he plays online w/us all the time and he more than carries his weight. FC will play on a lower end machine. The FarCry engine modified to make it more "gritty" looking would be awesome. This would give us a great looking game, awesome physics (vehicle and player) and get us the game faster.

I do not see how those with a GF 4 MX 400 card can play FC. I tried the demo with my old GF3 Ti 500 (faster than any MX card by far) and even on the lowest setting, I had garbled grahics. There were big blocks of a texture that wasn't applied to anything is the best I can describe it. The only thing I could see with any clarity was the sky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...