| Page 3 of 33 |
|
|
 Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 04:12 Post subject: |
|
 |
Thing I'm looking forward too.
Streaming technology. Fuck yeah pop in.
Terrible mouse input options. Controller all the way baby.
Shit house net code. SP for the win.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 06:12 Post subject: |
|
|
Not trying to defend Epic or a shitty engine here, but I am just getting tired of people bashing Epic or the UE just because it gets optimized for consoles.
IMO you can't really blame them. I know, PC is  and all consoles are 
But come on, I am also a PC gamer from the bottom of my heart, but I also like my consoles.
Fact is, that the console market is just the largest one out there. Games sell way more for consoles than for the PC, and I don't think you can blame them for trying to get a hold of that market and make money out of it. I don't know enough about that technical stuff to make my own opinion about this (and I doubt most people here do, but bash the engine anyways), but I don't think Epic makes a "watered-down" engine on purpose.
Sure, consoles are much weaker hardware-wise than PC's, and that will also be the case with the next console generation. But that market is so huge and makes so large profits, that in the end this allows Epic to put more production costs into the engine overall.
If Epic really made a PC-only engine, they probably couldn't afford to put nearly as much money into it as they are now, simply because the returns would be lower. So in the end a well-running console engine also has benefits for PC gamers.
I know most people here would love to have an engine that was developed purely for the PC, so that the 2,5% (or whatever) of people with the latest hardware rig can see the ultracrispsupermegaclear textures. But for most PC gamers, a great PC engine wouldn't make much of a difference because they are running on older hardware anyway.
So yeah, I can see why people would be disappointed that UE4 isn't pushing boundaries as far as they would like it to, but in the end I think Epic is doing a pretty good job with their engine, and I can't see why so many people would complain about it.
I'm not saying stuff like "program it yourself if you know it better" because I hate that fucking Nazi-argument, but if you want a more PC-oriented engine then please just explain where the money for that should come from...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 12:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| bringiton wrote: | Not trying to defend Epic or a shitty engine here, but I am just getting tired of people bashing Epic or the UE just because it gets optimized for consoles.
IMO you can't really blame them. I know, PC is and all consoles are
But come on, I am also a PC gamer from the bottom of my heart, but I also like my consoles.
Fact is, that the console market is just the largest one out there. Games sell way more for consoles than for the PC, and I don't think you can blame them for trying to get a hold of that market and make money out of it. I don't know enough about that technical stuff to make my own opinion about this (and I doubt most people here do, but bash the engine anyways), but I don't think Epic makes a "watered-down" engine on purpose.
Sure, consoles are much weaker hardware-wise than PC's, and that will also be the case with the next console generation. But that market is so huge and makes so large profits, that in the end this allows Epic to put more production costs into the engine overall.
If Epic really made a PC-only engine, they probably couldn't afford to put nearly as much money into it as they are now, simply because the returns would be lower. So in the end a well-running console engine also has benefits for PC gamers.
I know most people here would love to have an engine that was developed purely for the PC, so that the 2,5% (or whatever) of people with the latest hardware rig can see the ultracrispsupermegaclear textures. But for most PC gamers, a great PC engine wouldn't make much of a difference because they are running on older hardware anyway.
So yeah, I can see why people would be disappointed that UE4 isn't pushing boundaries as far as they would like it to, but in the end I think Epic is doing a pretty good job with their engine, and I can't see why so many people would complain about it.
I'm not saying stuff like "program it yourself if you know it better" because I hate that fucking Nazi-argument, but if you want a more PC-oriented engine then please just explain where the money for that should come from... |
I'll try to make it simple
You have an engine where at lowest settings you need a 2.0ghz processor.
The console might be a 1.5Ghz processor.
You change major parts of the engine to so that slower processors can handle it, but at the same time major features that were meant to be apart of next gen gaming don't work the same.
I know people just assume that because of Consoles the textures just don't look as good, this is simply wrong.
You can take any console game and put textures from the year 2030 in it, what people fail to understand is that textures mean very little in terms of how good a game is.
All of this applies to both engines and games, and most of the time instead of watering down the game/engine, they make it with consoles in mind.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51399
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 12:49 Post subject: |
|
|
I don't hate epic for UE3.
Got no problem with the engine aside from stupid developers "cooking" the ini files (looking at you BiowarEA). You know, those files that allow you do to "small" things like disable that stupid mouse acceleration, improve mouse movement, remove retard intro movies that you cannot skip, etc.
But I do hate epic for what they have become, developer and publisher wise.
Going from Unreal, UT99 and UT2004 to Hurrs of Cover series and forgettable trash like bulletstorm...
That and having some flashy asshole like DerpyD as the representative for your products... how the mighty have fallen. 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 12:54 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51399
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Tue, 28th Feb 2012 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletstorm
Bulletstorm was developed by people can fly(the majority of the game anyway) AND epic.
And it was produced by DerpyD too, as if it wasn't clear enough.
And I won't even start with the grim-gritty grimmy Hurrs of Cover series...
Sure there are worst games out there, but when you consider the glory that were Unreal and UT and then see epic's game developing skills reduced to that...
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51399
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 12:53 Post subject: |
|
|
Well they got UE3 going already 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 12:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah for some reason engines are starting to target flash as a development platform, same as they would xbox or ps3 (first Unity, and now Unreal). I haven't worked with flash in recent years but I'm guessing it now has a very decent underlying API, and acts as a sandbox. Which makes it a decent solution to run on browsers and mobiles.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
russ80
Posts: 4679
Location: Romania
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
russ80
Posts: 4679
Location: Romania
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 14:37 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 15:04 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 16:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, I'm an nVidia user myself.. but I agree with Werelds. I have a very hard time believing they managed to get Samaritan running on a single Kepler + 200W PSU, when just a year prior it required 3 580s and the monstrous PSU that requires. It's too.... egh. Something had to give.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 18:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I can believe the single kepler with a lot of optimization and some cutting but not the 200w psu.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 18:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh I can believe the single Kepler. It's just not the same demo as last year
Engine's been improved, no MSAA (they used FXAA ) and probably different settings. It really just isn't the same demo and I'd really like to see an actual side-by-side comparison, because I'm pretty sure last year's demo will look better if you looked closely 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 19:36 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tonizito
VIP Member
Posts: 51399
Location: Portugal, the shithole of Europe.
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 20:13 Post subject: |
|
|
| Pl@tinum wrote: | | I can believe the single kepler with a lot of optimization and some cutting but not the 200w psu. |
Could it be some unveiled, er, next-next gen derpsole prototype...? 
| boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote: | | i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 21:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Still looks awesome, even if they possibly cut some corners.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ixigia
[Moderator] Consigliere
Posts: 65078
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Thu, 8th Mar 2012 23:16 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mister_s wrote: | | Still looks awesome, even if they possibly cut some corners. |
True, even if there could be less polygons and "special effects" the art-direction is just fantastic. It's a shame that very few developers have managed to use such a powerful engine in the right way. We've had dozens of UE3-powered games but you can count the good looking ones on one hand (Arkham City , Mirror's Edge, Alice: Madness Returns for example). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 9th Mar 2012 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
Eh, I like UE3 a lot, myself. I especially think that UDK is awesome, both the tech, and the licensing deal.
And I still like CliffyB, so, whatever. He's a funny guy.
Correcting people since 2007 even if they're not wrong.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Fri, 9th Mar 2012 10:50 Post subject: |
|
|
UE3 is fine. Most games on it aren't because the developers are too lazy to update to a build from the last 3 years and set up proper config files for each platform.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 11th Mar 2012 00:48 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Sun, 11th Mar 2012 01:38 Post subject: |
|
|
That in response to me? Bullshit.
Batman: AA = 576.21, AC = 805.101
ME2 = 512.130, 3 = 684.194
Same timeframe, but Rocksteady don't suck, also shows in the quality of said games. I could point out more, but it's really not that time consuming with UE3 unless you fucked up to begin with. Just look at all the indie games, they manage to use recent builds, why not the big studios?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 3 of 33 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
Derps of war is among my favourite this gen(with 3rd game being a bit too derped and cliched but still fun as a relaxing omfg explosions shooter)
and second, it was made by people can fly who derped themselves by not making Painkiller2 
