Game Engines.. HL2/Doom3/U3

She

She

Newbie
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
770
Reaction score
0
First: No, i dont hate Valve, Idsoftware..Lets discuss this shall we..

The problem with FPS games now a days is that they have to have an "ENGINE OF THE FUTURE"..

Did mariobros have an engine of the future?
doom2??.. golden eye or Super Metroid??
What about Halo... Nope..
still.. those games were experiences for me.

If you design a game to follow an engine.. "you fail at games"..
First.. you design the game, then all your ideas must have an engine, so those ideas would work... there you go.. start programming..

( thats how i do it )

Valve seems to do it the other way around.. so did Doom3 and U3..
all iv'e seen from U3 is ( what you can do in the engine )..

Nothing about the game in that "trailer"..
beacuse there isn't any game yet..
I just saw what the U3 engine could do in it.. cool.. whatever..

Do they sell engines to us.. or games??
Ok.. shure.. game designers buys engines and uses them to make games.. So why dont they show of their "FUTURE" engines to the developers.. and some Game for us.. the PLAYERS..

Again: No, i dont hate Valve, Idsoftware.. im not a Nintendo fanboy.. or PS2 / XBOX geek.. Lets discuss this shall we..

I just CANT WAIT for the new Mario game... you can grab flowers and push boxes.. and look at those AWESOME physics in marios HAT!!! ISN'T THAT AMAZING!!! I LOVE THE ENGINE!!!
 
Why do we need another Game comparison thread, why Why WHY!
 
Actually rumor has it those creatures in the U3 techdemos will be in Epic's next game.

Halo and Goldeneye had revolutionary engines on the console side of things.
 
Why do we need another Game comparison thread, why Why WHY!
Click to expand...

i dont compare games here.. where do i compare games?
i compare the development of games.. not games..
 
you do make a valid point, but valve and id both made their own engines for the games, to make the game as prefect as they can. They didnt get the latest engine and find that most of their ideas cant be put in and churn out a rubbish game (like most developers do... but we dont buy them games ;)).
thats the way i see it anyway.
 
Btw.. if you knew about the development of Doom 3, Carmack put in features that he thought would make Doom 3. For the most part he was right. Now of course he put in some other stuff, but that only makes sense since id makes a large share of their revenue from engine liscencing.
 
Valve didn't do it the other way around, as I recall they had ideas for HL2 and looked at other engines, including Doom3, to be used for HL2. They decided that these engines did not have what they needed so they built their own engine. There is some e-mail in the "info from Valve" thread confirming this.

I just hope that the Source engine can be upgraded over time as they say it can to match the capabilities of new engines.
 
im not gonna write out a huge post, ill let someone else, but:

a) quake2, halo and im sure some others that you mentioned were amazing at the time with GREAT graphics

b) valve DID make a game then an engine, didnt they ?

c) as far as i know, epic arent making another game, theyre just licensing engines, and as such are making an engine

d i like how games have ultra graphics nowadays and keep getting better. they DO make a game better imo. they still need good gameplay, but good graphics are an added bonus.





jethro tull - aqualung
 
She, the graphics for all the nostalgic, "remember when" games you mention were cutting-edge and revolutionary at the time those games were released. Side scrolling used to be THE feature. Then it was animated sprites. Then it was 16-bit color. On and on it goes. It's easy to forget this if you haven't been gaming for a long, long time, but it's true.

I agree that focus has shifted more toward technology than gameplay in recent years, but this is because technology is now becoming so advanced that it is actually a part of gameplay. Would DOOM 3 be DOOM 3 without convincing, real-time, true black shadows? Would Half-Life 2 be Half-Life 2 without a fully integrated, convincingly implemented physics engine? Nah.

Incidentally, the first legitimate, inexpensive implementation of side-scrolling on PC was created by John Carmack for Commander Keen.
 
quake2, halo and im sure some others that you mentioned were amazing at the time with GREAT graphics
Click to expand...

Did they market their NEW AMAZING ENGINE??.... no

valve DID make a game then an engine, didnt they ?
Click to expand...

ok.. shure... but why just SPRAY us with " LOOK AT THOSE GRAPHICS/PHYSICS "

as far as i know, epic arent making another game, theyre just licensing engines, and as such are making an engine
Click to expand...

really... where did you read that.. :)
 
The answer is quite simple. They had the mod community in mind when they made the engine. This game was practically made for the mods.
 
I apologise, I was getting a bit jumpy when i saw HL2 and Doom3 next to each other again.

I often hear valve refering to Miyamoto, one of my favorite games of all time was Zelda 64, it was a bit childish on the outside and wouldnt usually be my first choice in a game, but the mechanics of the gameplay and the overall fun factor was extremely well balanced, it had brilliant pacing on the story and almost scripted the emotional responses to certain events.

Ive always been more into gameplay mechanics than the engine side of things, somtimes im shocked by some of the debates and conversations i see people having, cause i just dont understand how, a shaddow for instance, effects the game.

Half-Life 1 had a very solid and well paced gameplay to it, it focused most of its story telling through visual and interactive events, as opposed to direct dialouge, and i really see them pushing this further with HL2 by focussing more on the features important to doing that, Marc Laidlaw is alot like a screenwriter to me, Only instead of adapting a story to a movie, he adapts it to gameplay.

Obviously im focusing on half-life and being bias, but you get the idea :O
 
This game was practically made for the mods.
Click to expand...

isn't that just... sad?

She, the graphics for all the nostalgic, "remember when" games you mention were cutting-edge and revolutionary at the time those games were released.
Click to expand...

they didn't SPRAY you with " OUR AMAZING ENGINE IS THE FUTURE "
 
She said:
isn't that just... sad?
Click to expand...

What the heck are you on about?

Mods are important for longetivity. Most engines are made, keeping that in mind.
 
She said:
Did they market their NEW AMAZING ENGINE??.... no
Click to expand...

Um, they sure did. How long have you been playing games, exactly?
 
What the heck are you on about?

Mods are important for longetivity. Most engines are made, keeping that in mind.
Click to expand...

if they are aiming to sell the game to mods..
they are missing out on the fuel of the developers... the Players
 
She said:
isn't that just... sad?

they didn't SPRAY you with " OUR AMAZING ENGINE IS THE FUTURE "
Click to expand...
Sad? Maybe. True? No.

The engine was made to be mod-friendly.. but it was not made for mods.

And Valve spent a total of ten minutes pumping their engine back in 2003. Doesn't seem like a ton of bragging.
 
dumb thread

1. U3 is techdemo

2. U3 comes not before 2007

HL2 ,D3 released 2004
 
She said:
if they are aiming to sell the game to mods..
they are missing out on the fuel of the developers... the Players
Click to expand...

Because successful mods like counterstrike and the likes can become retail, and valve can make some cash.
 
dumb thread

1. U3 is techdemo

2. U3 comes not before 2007

HL2 ,D3 released 2004
Click to expand...

how old are you and what are you doing here?
 
There are several different communities for any game, a group of people who want a good singleplayer, a group of people who want a good multiplayer, a group that want to see the next best engine, and the group who want to create there own mods.

I think HL2 will have an excellent singleplayer, prossibly the best FPS SP ever, the mods and the multiplayer go hand in hand and will pretty much self replicate, as for the engine nuts, they probbally wont be as gob smack impressed, but they only represent part of the overall community, and ultimately for the individual player, (which is all we are) theres absaloutly no reason to give a crap.
 
She, you seem like you want to argue more than you want to listen and discuss. I've refuted your points quite cogently and that's all I can do.
 
Just want to say, Doom2 only came out a couple of years after Doom, and the graphical jump from previous games to that was very big (yes there was Wolf3D but ) and that game is probly one of the biggest "jumpers" of our times including HL. Also THeGraphics for GoldenEye were very good at the time and were indeed pushing "boundaries" at the time.
 
She, you seem like you want to argue more than you want to listen and discuss.
Click to expand...

How can you say that i want to agrue... when i state in my first opening post that we shall discuss this.. ??
 
Dude, you must be a girl, cos you're makin no sense at all. I don't understand what you're trying to argue. From what I can deduce, you are complaining that game's should be designed without a games engine's limitations. Am I right? You musn't design games to follow the engine, but the developers visions, right?

Well, newsflash pal, because all the FPS games you have been playing since you were 7 are all based on engines, whether sofisticated or not. They are all built on top of the underlying engine! You cannot build a skyscraper without foundation, you cannot manufacture a sport car without an...engine.

The only reason you have been seeing flashy engine demos recently is because they are getting more and more sofisticated and moddable. They are becoming game design tools. Soon, some kid is gonna pick up one of these tools and design for himself a level from farcry in five minutes. These engines which you so happily write off, handle complex problems for the developer from shadows, to AI, to physics. All the games developer has to do is program what levels he wants and what the bad guys look like (it's not that simple but u get my point).

The completion of the UE3.0 is a milestone in 3d games, and it will blend the beautiful shadows of Doom3 with the dynamic environments of HL2. It's design imposes relatively few restraints on the developer and offers elegant solutions without the huge price of frames/sec. You can even develop non-FPS type games with it, like sports games and RTS.

Without engines like these, you won't have your game and you definately won't have your fun.
 
The Source engine was built after planning for HL2 (which started shortly after HL1). It is specifically designed for HL2 and to be mod-friendly (something they learned from HL1).
Source was not meant to be the engine of the future but an engine to last the next five years and allow us to play the kind of game Valve wants to make (HL2, CS2, TF2, etc).
 
She said:
How can you say that i want to agrue... when i state in my first opening post that we shall discuss this.. ??
Click to expand...

Im not quite sure what you want to discuss.

Are you saying developers focus to hard on developing the engines instead of the gameplay? i think anyone here can say valve are focusing very very hard on the gameplay side, they always have done.

Are you saying the developers only ever promote there engines? i dont see how u can tell what is being promoted more when most of the promotion includes gameplay footage anyway.
 
I don't understand what you're trying to argue.
Click to expand...

i want to discuss this..
HOLY CRAP! cant you read or something??
I state in my first post that i want to discuss this...
where do i state that i want to argue about this..

So what if i am a girl?!?!? does it matter!?
 
Ruuustar said:
Dude, you must be a girl, cos you're makin no sense at all. I don't understand what you're trying to argue.
Click to expand...
Here we go. :O
 
I would just accept the fact that any opinion you want to discuss in a civil fashion on this forum will be bashed and flamed from the onset due to the anonymity of the internet. *shrug* just my opinion. This is not a good place for constructive debates, despite what many will say.
 
As far as I can tell Valve comes up with an idea and builds the technology to make that idea come to life. They want emotional storyline so they build the facial animation technology required to pull it off. They wanted an interactive world, so they licensed Havok, and when that wasn't good enough, rewrote it to suit there game. They want immersing environments, so they focused on creating amazing, sound, visual, and artificial intelligence systems.

As far as I know id came up with the technology, and then decided that the time was right, and the tech ready, to create Doom 3. They used the brand new lighting model John had built to give the environments a rich, dreadful atmosphere. They used brand new sound technology to bring things to life on an aural scale. They created the interactive GUI surfaces to add yet another layer of realism to the experience. They crafted an engine that would not only look stunning, but provide the tools needed to craft a frightening game.

Epic was showing off their technology at E3 which, believe it or not, is a trade show for developers. It wasn't necessarily geared towards any of us gamers, but rather developers working on the next generation consoles, or with next-gen PC hardware in mind. UE3 will most definitely be a AAA engine, and is certainly going to be the next big thing when it does finally hit in 2006. Epic used E3 to get their product out there. It was just a case of Epic advertising their product to potential customers.

Unlike the days when Super Mario was king, graphics play a very important role in games today. With game like Half-Life 2, or Doom 3, the visuals are just as important as the gameplay. With the case of Half-Life 2 you have a game that is trying to tell a story, create a certain mood, and provide an enjoyable playing experience all at once. If you have horrible sound, terrible voice actors, terrible music, crappy visuals, or anything like that, you've killed your mood, and you could ruin the story. Since the mood and story tie together so closely with gameplay, you may have just killed that as well. It's for reasons such as these that todays games put such a focus on technology. They try to provide an experience more akin to a film than Super Mario Brothers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

-smash-
Valve at GDC 2019
Replies
0
Views
25K
-smash-
-smash-
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
12K
Barnz
B
Back
Top