http://thepowerreview.com/blog/2009/05/23/unreal-engine-3-epics-fail/ Its a good read. It kinda explains how the PS3 multiplats are still lagging behind the 360s but its first parties (Killzone 2) look better. The Unreal Engine is responsible because it runs very poorly on the PS3.
http://thepowerreview.com/blog/2009/05/23/unreal-engine-3-epics-fail/ Its a good read. It kinda explains how the PS3 multiplats are still lagging behind the 360s but its first parties (Killzone 2) look better. The Unreal Engine is responsible because it runs very poorly on the PS3.gamefan274
[QUOTE="gamefan274"]http://thepowerreview.com/blog/2009/05/23/unreal-engine-3-epics-fail/ Its a good read. It kinda explains how the PS3 multiplats are still lagging behind the 360s but its first parties (Killzone 2) look better. The Unreal Engine is responsible because it runs very poorly on the PS3.nmaharg
IMO it runs poorly in general. Looks nice though. Are you joking about it running poorly in general? Most systems that have decent components from the past 2-3 years can max it out with 60 FPS+.
[QUOTE="gamefan274"]http://thepowerreview.com/blog/2009/05/23/unreal-engine-3-epics-fail/ Its a good read. It kinda explains how the PS3 multiplats are still lagging behind the 360s but its first parties (Killzone 2) look better. The Unreal Engine is responsible because it runs very poorly on the PS3.EXLINK
IMO it runs poorly in general. Looks nice though. Are you joking about it running poorly in general? Most systems that have decent components from the past 2-3 years can max it out with 60 FPS+. Consoles, not PC. UE3 has crazy pop in on consoles.
[QUOTE="gamefan274"]http://thepowerreview.com/blog/2009/05/23/unreal-engine-3-epics-fail/ Its a good read. It kinda explains how the PS3 multiplats are still lagging behind the 360s but its first parties (Killzone 2) look better. The Unreal Engine is responsible because it runs very poorly on the PS3.EXLINK
IMO it runs poorly in general. Looks nice though. Are you joking about it running poorly in general? Most systems that have decent components from the past 2-3 years can max it out with 60 FPS+.i think hes talking bout 360 not pc :| and yes it isnt the best but i love the facials in mass effect
LOL BLOG=FAIL look at this quote from that blog I mean, look how Halo 3, which was built on a proprietary engine to take advantage of the 360's architecture, out shines Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 1 & 2, which both run on UE3 AHAHAHAHAHAHAH, rainbow six character models are much higher polygon than those found in halo 3.
Halo 3 engine was made ground up for the original xbox but then upgraded slightly. Did you know that Snake was made of 10k-15k polys? (MC is 10k). I found that amazing snake looks really good.
Epic's Fail? they are rolling in the dough because they always make an easy and powerful engine to work with that looks good and runs well. It may not be as powerful as CE2 or as good as developing your own engine, but it allows developers to make games faster and cheaper with proven tech and plenty of support
[QUOTE="gamewatereddown"]let me tell you halo 3's halo 2.5 engine really takes advantage of 360's hardware lmfao!hockeyruler12
IMO Halo 3 makes up for its models with excellent textures and HUGE environments. It's also one of the most fun online games out there.Halo has always had a good art style too, its real and cartoony at the same time, makes for a good mixture that is a joy to play.
let me tell you halo 3's halo 2.5 engine really takes advantage of 360's hardware lmfao!gamewatereddown
I know, it sucks doesn't it. Maybe if it had an engine built for the 360 it could've got higher than 94% on metacritic and maybe sold another 10M copies or so, right?
UE3 is so popular because it was specifically designed for cross platform development, regardless of its downfalls developers use it because it saves them money and time.
UE3 has a bit of a monopoly in regard to that, but more cross platform oriented engines are hitting the market now.
let me tell you halo 3's halo 2.5 engine really takes advantage of 360's hardware lmfao!gamewatereddown
Halo 3 is an awesome looking game so you fail. it has one of the best textures, lighting and a lot of other stuff, only the character models suck (enemy models are fantastic its just ur team mates look crap)
[QUOTE="gamewatereddown"]let me tell you halo 3's halo 2.5 engine really takes advantage of 360's hardware lmfao!Quintinius
I know, it sucks doesn't it. Maybe if it had an engine built for the 360 it could've got higher than 94% on metacritic and maybe sold another 10M copies or so, right? halo combat evolved built for xbox 9.7 halo 3 9.5 LOL fail
I agree with him on the blurry texture popping downsides of UE3, but really, what's the option? Making a whole new engine for every game just isn't efficient and would somewhat counter the edge 360 has as the "easy to develop for platform".
Of course it's possible that next gen Microsoft will have Epic make UE specifically for their console but that would just open up the door for a new "UE3" from another developer, easy to use middleware engines are always needed.
And 360's problem isn't that the exclusives use UE3, I mean the only AAAE that does is Gears which is made by friggin Epic themselves, the problem is the lack of exclusives in general, having to make your own engine from the scratch isn't gonna help.
A lot of awesome looking game use it (Gears, Bioshock, UT3, Mirror's Edge, Gears 2). I would not call it "fail" after that. just because it "runs poorly on the PS3".
what sucks is unreal engine supposibly supports dynamic lighting like doom3 or crysis engine, but no games seems to really use dynamic lighting. its all lightmaps basically
what sucks is unreal engine supposibly supports dynamic lighting like doom3 or crysis engine, but no games seems to really use dynamic lighting. its all lightmaps basicallygamewatereddown
Its not the best engine out there for other devs to utilize. Just look at how Mass Effect turned out :?
Stringerboy
Really good?...
Did you even play it? It was littered with framerate issues and graphical hitches. Having said that it was Bioware's first time using the unreal engine, i just hope things are improved in ME2.
Its not the best engine out there for other devs to utilize. Just look at how Mass Effect turned out :?
Vandalvideo
Really good?... With lots of visual bugs. You know this is Bioware, right? They've *never* made a 3D game not loaded with visual bugs. Heck, even their in-house engine used for NWN was full of bugs. Why blame the engine and not a developer with a proven track record of being kind of inept on the technical side of visuals? In fact, this was probably their most impressive looking (for the time) 3D game, complete with the side order of visual bugs that is the norm for all 3D Bioware games. If anything, they did better with UE3 than they did with their in house engine...
Its not the best engine out there for other devs to utilize. Just look at how Mass Effect turned out :?
Stringerboy
Really good?...
Did you even play it? It was littered with framerate issues and graphical hitches. Having said that it was Bioware's first time using the unreal engine, i just hope things are improved in ME2.
I remember reading an article, Bioware said that Me2 will suppossedly fix all the bugs and run smoother. Hope that's true. Anyway, 2010, so they have time.
[QUOTE="Shafftehr"][QUOTE="Stringerboy"] I'll just repost what I said to Vandal. [QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Shafftehr"][QUOTE="Stringerboy"]
Its not the best engine out there for other devs to utilize. Just look at how Mass Effect turned out :?
Stringerboy
Really good?... With lots of visual bugs.
I'll just repost what I said to Vandal...
You know this is Bioware, right? They've *never* made a 3D game not loaded with visual bugs. Heck, even their in-house engine used for NWN was full of bugs. Why blame the engine and not a developer with a proven track record of being kind of inept on the technical side of visuals? In fact, this was probably their most impressive looking (for the time) 3D game, complete with the side order of visual bugs that is the norm for all 3D Bioware games. If anything, they did better with UE3 than they did with their in house engine...
So again, why are we blaming the engine when it's probably their best looking (for its time) game, and is not at all novel for them with its bugs?
*Shrugs* first time I saw Gears of War on TV my mouth dropped. Badass looking game is badass, with great grafix.
But now, I just generally don't like the look of the unreal engine anymore. It has a really "plastic-y" and "gel-like" look to it whether you're playing Bioshock or Gears... maybe you disagree. As for it phailing, no way, not commercially as loads of games use the engine and most people think they look damn good (I still think Gears 1&2 look amazing). I'd say the PS3 is really to blame, what with apparently being a tw@ to program for.
[QUOTE="Quintinius"][QUOTE="gamewatereddown"]let me tell you halo 3's halo 2.5 engine really takes advantage of 360's hardware lmfao!gamewatereddown
I know, it sucks doesn't it. Maybe if it had an engine built for the 360 it could've got higher than 94% on metacritic and maybe sold another 10M copies or so, right? halo combat evolved built for xbox 9.7 halo 3 9.5 LOL fail So you're saying that the combined 19.3M sales between two games is fail? That's more sales than the PS3 has had with most of it's AAAs put together. Also, link to these figures?
*Shrugs* first time I saw Gears of War on TV my mouth dropped. Badass looking game is badass, with great grafix.
But now, I just generally don't like the look of the unreal engine at all. As for it phailing, I wouldn't say so, not commercially. Loads of games use the engine. I'd say the PS3 is really to blame, what with apparently being a tw@ to program for.
mr-krinkles
Yeah, that is kind of true. Epic has been making the Unreal engine along the same general lines since not long after the first Playstation was released... They've basically just run with the same technology, updating and adding to it since then. There were no surprises with it - and it wasn't a surprise that it would be a hugely popular engine among developers. Sony, once again, insisted on making a console that throws regular programming methods for a loop. It worked great for them last gen when they were in the lead and it left other consoles either getting garbage ports of games designed for PS hardware or having to redesign games completely - but this gen, it's biting them in the arse. I daresay it's as much Sony's fault for not bending to the norm as much as it is Epic's for not catering to the PS.
It would be nice to see some new graphical feats on 360. I think the UE3 engine is just about tapped out it's been quite a while since we've seen anything eye popping with a UE3 game on any system. The article has a point. MS did make that statement about how some games coming for the 360 will the KZ2 look last gen or something...maybe they have something waiting at e3? o_o I hope say...I love graphics.
I'm not getting at all sick of UE3. It has a huge variety of games and looks on it (from Mass Effect to Lost Odyssey to Gears, among other things) so, really, what's to get tired of? I would get tired of it if really did produce the same droll look and game type consistently, but it simply doesn't. What it does do is give developers that aren't able to make their own engines a very powerful resource for making their games..
I think it's funny that everyone thinks Bioshock is done with with UE3. It actually uses UE2.5 while implementing some features from UE3 (water effects).
UE3 is one of the most flexible engines around. Sure, it has weaknesses, like every other engine, but just look at the broad range of games using it.lhughey
And look at how many fail with it. Only good games on UE3 are bioshock and gears, and gears IMO was a pretty bad game.
Log in to comment