Source Engine Holding Its Own

Am I the only one that feels the source engine is still one of, if not the most, beautiful engine? I play crysis, and bc2, and they still haven't beaten DoD source or the Half Life 2 series for me. Sure they're more realistic, but for me, the source engine still just looks better somehow; cleaner, more optimized. Anyone agree, and opinions?

i wouldnt say the source engine is better than those, but i will say this,

It does adapt/age/evolve nicely, there have been changes done to it over the years, but it has taken them on nicely.

it is very very optimized, look at L4D2.. very optimized game.. (great deal too $20 for another 15 minutes on steam)

the other engines all have their pros and cons..

Even to this day, the source engine looks, and performs great. (and is easily one of the most modded engine, that has had some of the most builds from)

And I think its still got life left in it for another couple of years, especially with a few minute improvements here or there.

Yup, I can't wait for HL ep 3 with L4D2 graphics or better. If they actually make another Ravenholm-esque part looking that good, might actually scare me a bit.

The Source Engine is unique in that it has aged very well... better than any game engine I can think of. Here we are almost 6 years after Half-Life 2 was released, and the engine is still in fairly heavy use. There was a very clean, smooth, refined feel to the engine from day 1, and it's still there. In my opinion, it gets the feeling, the grittiness of reality across to the player somehow without pushing the most polygons, boasting the best textures (although they have been seriously upgraded in recent years), or the best special effects. A very impressive achievement.

The Source Engine is unique in that it has aged very well... better than any game engine I can think of. Here we are almost 6 years after Half-Life 2 was released, and the engine is still in fairly heavy use. There was a very clean, smooth, refined feel to the engine from day 1, and it's still there. In my opinion, it gets the feeling, the grittiness of reality across to the player somehow without pushing the most polygons, boasting the best textures (although they have been seriously upgraded in recent years), or the best special effects. A very impressive achievement.

hartsickdiscipl

Because its visuals are coherent.AAllxxjjnn

I think Source is starting to show it's age a little since HL2 doesn't look as great as it used to, but it still doesn't look bad. And if there's one thing that Source still excels at it's facial expressions. Granted the newer engines released these days, like CryEngine 3, are able to do facial expressions pretty well now too, but the fact that a six year old engine can still best out most others in that regard is simply amazing. On top of that it's also one of the most optimized engines ever released. Even back when it was new it was still considered extremely well optimized.

i agree, source is from 2003 yet can still look great in 2010, The games capture a sort of "realistic" feel in their visuals that few engines can even though it is not as detailed. Not to mention it is one of the most optimized engines out there today. Most people consider it aging because of its bsp reliance that gives buildings and interiors the blocky feel. I just wish that valve go to a suburban area and look at a house and realize that houses arent built with the type of corners valve puts in their houses.ferret-gamer

I still like the look of the new Source Engine. L4D, L4D2 and HL2 Episode 2 have this polished look to me. And the Source games are definitely well optimized, one hell of a good and important thing.

The Source Engine will definitely age well. It also has one of the most impressive usages of physics in-game.

I think that since DX11 is picking up good pace now they might be considering making a new engine.

I think that since DX11 is picking up good pace now they might be considering making a new engine.

Daytona_178

Let's just hope that that isn't what's taking Episode 3 so damn long. It's about to become the new Duke Nukem Forever if Valve doesn't announce something soon.

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]

I think that since DX11 is picking up good pace now they might be considering making a new engine.

gameguy6700

Let's just hope that that isn't what's taking Episode 3 so damn long. It's about to become the new Duke Nukem Forever if Valve doesn't announce something soon.

The source engine will not date before.. well.. a new version of it is released. I somewhat hope that's whats making EP3 taking so long. But as someone above me said I don't think it will become another duke nuken forever.

I disagree with the TC. HL-2, first Source game, had a great art design and was a milestone in SOME technical aspects, but was a engine unable to render more than 40 yards without a loading screen pause. Of course, the engine improved a lot in latest years, adding some new cool features, but while Valve and IW rely on old technology with some tweaks and enhancements other developers as Epic (Unreal Engine 3.0) DICE (Frostbite) GSC (X-Ray) Crytek (CryENGINE 2) were able to deploy totally new engines that makes Source to look outdated. And Frostbite or the UE3 are as fast in terms of performance.

UE3 should be called PE3 (Plastic Engine 3)

UE3 should be called PE3 (Plastic Engine 3)

ventnor

Not at all, it's one of the worst engines alive. It should have died by the time TF2 came out.RichardStallman

[QUOTE="RichardStallman"]Not at all, it's one of the worst engines alive. It should have died by the time TF2 came out.Daytona_178

Indeed, in what way it is bad? It is actually one of the best, because it can be easily moulded. Meaning that there are so many mods for it, you can say that it is "community driven".
RichardStallman, I think you hate Source just because of TF2 and L4D (Games that I don't play very often). It is not the most powerdul, but it don't mean it's crap

the latest source engine game i have playes is HL2 EP2 and i have seen the likes od team fortress 2 and L4D. 2 things have taken its tole on the engine imho. 1) time...there are better engines out there now. source is a very modular engine which is nice....but its old and alot of it doesnt seem to have seen significant improvements since HL2. 2) it runs on a vast array of hardware...everything from a geforce 2 upwards. on the one hand its great to have such a scalable engine....but things liek texture detail take a hit since the bottom line is so low. not that HL2 and the like are bad looking games.....but theres room for improvement. mind you one area where source still excels is in facial animations.osan0

ahh, but alot of engines are all flash, hardly any substance,

the source engine i can say is not one of these.

sure there are better engines out there... But the Source engine, is still one of the best out.. (ages well, more builds off of it than just about any other engine)

its optimized well now, meaning you dont need Icore7, 6gb ddr3 ram, hd5870 just to play it with 30-40 frames per second... {like several games/engines out now that ARE NOT OPTIMIZED hardly at all, and were Rushed to meet a deadline...(no the engine is actually well optimized)

zzzz right, whatever the engine is old and it clearly shows that its dated, sure it looks good for its time but please spare me the excuses, the only reason why its "otpimized and you dont need an i7" is because its a 2003 engine. Besides every engine uses tricks to result to optimazation often those tricks lead into problems like the infamous hl2 stuttering issues that is still unsolved since the release date of hl2. So no thanks there are better game engines than source.dakan45

well i guess we just both have our OPINIONS...

I think its an excellent engine, that has excellent uses for it, sure it can do for some upgrading no doubt.

but it still holds it own very well against the so called more-modern engines.. (may not look as good, but thats not the only defining quality)

and maybe engines have the ability to optimize, but alot of times, the devs won't take the time to do it, or they have publishers down their back to Rush the crap out.

the source engine will be used for a while longer..

IF YOU DONT LIKE IT... you dont have to play games built off of it..... simple as that my friend. (there are plenty other engines you may find to your liking, bro) or you can go back to catching your ZZZZZs

2003 engine true, but went thru many changes since then.

and some modern engines aren't even worth mentioning.

The Source engine was next-gen before next-gen was even really on the market. Now 6 years later it's still current-gen. Anybody who bashes this engine deserves to have his/her PC gaming license revoked.

The Source engine was next-gen before next-gen was even really on the market. Now 6 years later it's still current-gen. Anybody who bashes this engine deserves to have his/her PC gaming license revoked.

hartsickdiscipl

Or just publically embarassed of a forum board. I'm just throwing that out there since we don't have like...licenses and stuff.

Anyway, the engine itself is nice, but it's starting to age...and in the past few years I've seen more improvement with the Unreal 3 engine than I have with any other save for Source. It's time for Valve to move on, because there's one major problem with the Source engine.

Every game feels exactly the same. You can go into semantics, but the movement in every game is pretty much the same, the way weapons perform, just all of it is too similar. The whole reason I hated L4D was because of the fact that the weapon selection was poor and every automatic weapon performed the exact same way. Valve is a great company, but man, they really need to do something different with their next release to get all of those who are disillusioned with CS-style gameplay back.

I like the fact that my old rubbish computer can run hl2 and will still look good whilst my gaming pc will make it look sweet. Either way win win the source engine is an amazing engine I hope the next one does not go too far from it.

People are confusing optimization with inferior graphics tech its an engine from 2004 that has seen some minor updates over the years but nothing major of course it gonna good on newer hardware if not osmething is really wrong. I won't lie the visual design of alot of source games are top notch like tf2 and zeno clash so it still looks nice but haven't been really amazed by anything on it for 6 years now I hope valve is finally gonna give the engine a big overhaul for episode 3 as its showing its age.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

The Source engine was next-gen before next-gen was even really on the market. Now 6 years later it's still current-gen. Anybody who bashes this engine deserves to have his/her PC gaming license revoked.

theafiguy

Or just publically embarassed of a forum board. I'm just throwing that out there since we don't have like...licenses and stuff.

In 2004 I was more impressed with the open environments in Far Cry or with the lightning features of Riddick (and this last one reached HL-2 in atmosphere and clearly surpassed the Valve game in characters).

@Crimsader: the HL-2 physics are from Havok engine, a third party middleware that has nothing to do with Source itself. Not to mention that compared against some of the current competence Havok is a bit primitive.

Source is awesome because it's completely modular. That means they can update it to be as good as any new engine if they want to. They can add new graphics effects, new sound processing, improve the physics system, add native 64-bit support, and really whatever they want. Other game engines are made to be replaced. They are one solid unit. If the company wants to improve it, they have to start over from scratch with a brand new engine. Best of all, developers that use the source engine automatically get all those improvements as long as they still have a license. Also Source has built-in integration with Steamworks, so it's to put their game on Steam with achievements if the developer wants to do that. It's true that newer game engines are better, but only because Valve chooses to focus on making games over updating their engine. They try to do more with less, and it has worked out for the most part.

The Source engine is a jack of all trades, master of none.

However, I believe that is selling it short because it does a whole bunch of things extremely well. While it may not be the best visually or technically, it more than compensates for that in other areas, including: performance, modability, support, and many other things.

It is by far my favorite engine, and while it has proven extremely long-lasting and great, I definately think it is time for Valve to release a new engine in the same vein as Source Engine 1 (orwhatever the term for it is lol). Part of me hopes that is why Episode 3 is taking so long; because theyre developing a new engine from the ground up.

[QUOTE="dakan45"]zzzz right, whatever the engine is old and it clearly shows that its dated, sure it looks good for its time but please spare me the excuses, the only reason why its "otpimized and you dont need an i7" is because its a 2003 engine. Besides every engine uses tricks to result to optimazation often those tricks lead into problems like the infamous hl2 stuttering issues that is still unsolved since the release date of hl2. So no thanks there are better game engines than source.Lach0121

well i guess we just both have our OPINIONS...

I think its an excellent engine, that has excellent uses for it, sure it can do for some upgrading no doubt.

but it still holds it own very well against the so called more-modern engines.. (may not look as good, but thats not the only defining quality)

and maybe engines have the ability to optimize, but alot of times, the devs won't take the time to do it, or they have publishers down their back to Rush the crap out.

the source engine will be used for a while longer..

IF YOU DONT LIKE IT... you dont have to play games built off of it..... simple as that my friend. (there are plenty other engines you may find to your liking, bro) or you can go back to catching your ZZZZZs

2003 engine true, but went thru many changes since then.

and some modern engines aren't even worth mentioning.

It runs better but it doesn't look better.

Am sorry did you just insulted frostbite and cryengine 2? There is no way source looks better than them not even in the slightest.dakan45

He didnt insult them, read his post. some people just like sources bsp design type over some other ways. as mentioned it makes it look "cleaner" just not as detailed.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]zzzz right, whatever the engine is old and it clearly shows that its dated, sure it looks good for its time but please spare me the excuses, the only reason why its "otpimized and you dont need an i7" is because its a 2003 engine. Besides every engine uses tricks to result to optimazation often those tricks lead into problems like the infamous hl2 stuttering issues that is still unsolved since the release date of hl2. So no thanks there are better game engines than source.dakan45

well i guess we just both have our OPINIONS...

I think its an excellent engine, that has excellent uses for it, sure it can do for some upgrading no doubt.

but it still holds it own very well against the so called more-modern engines.. (may not look as good, but thats not the only defining quality)

and maybe engines have the ability to optimize, but alot of times, the devs won't take the time to do it, or they have publishers down their back to Rush the crap out.

the source engine will be used for a while longer..

IF YOU DONT LIKE IT... you dont have to play games built off of it..... simple as that my friend. (there are plenty other engines you may find to your liking, bro) or you can go back to catching your ZZZZZs

2003 engine true, but went thru many changes since then.

and some modern engines aren't even worth mentioning.

but there have been problems with the Unreal engine.. AA with HDR issues... creative driver issues with UE3 games (not all but some) though that has alot more to do with creative labs being lazy than the engine itself to be fair.

EVERY engine has its pros and cons. GOOD WITH THE BAD, no engine is an exception... some Age well, some improve well, some just arent well at all.

the source engine has proven to last, though it may not be the best contending with new higher-tech engines.. even so, it does pretty well.

but i will say this, if the source engine is to continue to last, it will need improvements.. ANY engine falls under that..

I play HL2 now, even after i have played Crysis, and still find it to be the most realistic looking game. Before HL2 and Doom 3 came out, there was a huge debate on the forums here on gamespot about which was better. Doom 3 was super detailed with extreme lighting, and HL2 was super realistic and the fanboys were all arguing over which made a better looking game. Most games now are in the "super detailed with extreme lighting" boat, and that is why HL2 is still one of the best looking games today. HL2 is realistic, not cartoonish like 99% of other games out.

I play HL2 now, even after i have played Crysis, and still find it to be the most realistic looking game. Before HL2 and Doom 3 came out, there was a huge debate on the forums here on gamespot about which was better. Doom 3 was super detailed with extreme lighting, and HL2 was super realistic and the fanboys were all arguing over which made a better looking game. Most games now are in the "super detailed with extreme lighting" boat, and that is why HL2 is still one of the best looking games today. HL2 is realistic, not cartoonish like 99% of other games out.

hoola

Yeah, Source and id Tech 4 are cool, but in my opinion CryEngine 2 (and soon to be released CryEngine 3) really is a lot better in terms of graphics, physics and reliability.

[QUOTE="hoola"]

I play HL2 now, even after i have played Crysis, and still find it to be the most realistic looking game. Before HL2 and Doom 3 came out, there was a huge debate on the forums here on gamespot about which was better. Doom 3 was super detailed with extreme lighting, and HL2 was super realistic and the fanboys were all arguing over which made a better looking game. Most games now are in the "super detailed with extreme lighting" boat, and that is why HL2 is still one of the best looking games today. HL2 is realistic, not cartoonish like 99% of other games out.

p00zer

I somewhy can't get myself to say source engine is mature at all after playing garry's mod, god some weird things you can do with that. On the HL2-ish aspect I have to agree tho'

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]

I think that since DX11 is picking up good pace now they might be considering making a new engine.

gameguy6700

Let's just hope that that isn't what's taking Episode 3 so damn long. It's about to become the new Duke Nukem Forever if Valve doesn't announce something soon.

i'd bet money that's exactly why ep3 is taking so long