New gamespy Unreal 3 pics !

[NikolaX]

http://media.pc.gamespy.com/media/670/670283/img_2723609.html
some are old but just scroll next...
:O

 

[lePobz]

http://media.pc.gamespy.com/media/670/670283/img_2686916.html

the days of non-human-looking NPCs are over ... would be freaky meeting a character in-game with this much detail, if the AI was detailed enough to make the character seem believable ... I'd think twice before filling their head full of lead.

 

[Murray_H]

What sort of collision detection are they using for characters? I hope it's really accurate, it would be so cool to see bullets bouncing off that guy's (the guy from the UTs, forgot his name) body armour and some hitting the unarmoured bits.

Well it looks fantastic, can't wait for some videos from E3

 

[DEATH eVADER]

What sort of collision detection are they using for characters? I hope it's really accurate, it would be so cool to see bullets bouncing off that guy's (the guy from the UTs, forgot his name) body armour and some hitting the unarmoured bits.

Well it looks fantastic, can't wait for some videos from E3

That would be Malcolm, forgot his name the other day myself. Epic don't have an E3 listing though, but its most likely they will be demonstrating the physics in the Ageia booth

 

[Solver]

I hope they calculate all lights dynamically, as in Doom3. With that, Unreal3 Engine will look far better than anything before.

 

[CREMATOR666]

DOOM 3 now looks like a dated engine

 

[Solver]

Yup, both Doom3 and Source. Well, Doom3 and Source will stay the dominant engines still for the next 2-3 years, before the U3 engine comes out.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Next year. Not 2-3.

 

[Asuka]

Those are not new. They were released alittle less then half a year ago. Got me all excited and now im down again.

 

[Asknoone]

Pfft old.

 

[Qhartb]

I hope they calculate all lights dynamically, as in Doom3. With that, Unreal3 Engine will look far better than anything before.

# Advanced Dynamic Shadowing. Unreal Engine 3 provides full support for three shadow techniques:

* Dynamic stencil buffered shadow volumes supporting fully dynamic, moving light sources casting accurate shadows on all objects in the scene.
* Dynamic characters casting dynamic soft, fuzzy shadows on the scene using 16X-oversampled shadow buffers.
* Ultra high quality and high performance pre-computed shadow masks allow offline processing of static light interactions, while retaining fully dynamic specular lighting and reflections.

# All of the supported shadow techniques are visually compatible and may be mixed freely at the artist's discretion, and may be combined with colored attenuation functions enabling properly shadowed directional, spotlight, and projector lighting effects.

So UE3 is capable of Doom 3 shadows, but if a more computationally friendly alternative exists, you can do that too.

 

[Recoil]

Omfg...

 

[Icarusintel]

my computer will have a triple hernia

 

[Cole]

Remember people, Source can produce graphics just as good as UE3.
Why dosn't HL2 look as good as UT2006?

Like....only the insanley rich could run it ^_^.

UE3 is quite a great engine, and will make Epic super rich, but that does not mean that when games using it's engine start coming around, other games will not match in the graphics, shading, lighting, and physics department.

 

[ray_MAN]

Remember people, Source can produce graphics just as good as UE3.
.

I hope you were being sarcastic.

 

[J_Tweedy]

Source can come close, with HDR and the like, but my computer can run source smooth as butter- im gonna need a fire extinguisher for unreal 3.

 

[Pesmerga]

Unreal engines have always been the best of the best. Unreal 3 is no different. And whoever said Source *could* look just as good as Unreal 3, you're wrong. It can't and will never look as good as Unreal 3. But that doesn't mean Unreal 3's engine is easily played on, I heard that even on the latest GPUs and Procs, Unreal 3 gives really poor performance and nasty fps

 

[Computer5k]

I hope you were being sarcastic.

UE3 doesn't really have anything that Source doesn't. As of now the only thing is has better than source are dynamic lighting, and paralax mapping. If i remember correctly, Valve plans to add parallax mapping at some point, and dynamic lighting is semi-supported by source, just no dynamic shadows yet

 

[<RJMC>]

I hope that new engines to bew something more that a normal engine but whit better testure resolutions and more polygons

I mean some technology that can make the videogames to looks cooler

for example the bump maping technology is one of them vuz it give to a ingame-model a lot of detail whiout add many many polygons

so I hope to find something trully new gen in this engines

 

[satch919]

Epic is doing some really amazing stuff. They have one hell of a talented team in order to pull off the stuff we've seen.

Im gonna register to go to E3 this week so hopefully I'll be able to take some video or pics for you guys.

 

[SFLUFAN]

Hey Satch! Xcellere is going to E3 too!

 

[torso boy]

The only significant advance past doom3 that UE3 has is HDR. I dont really see what all the fuss is about besides the fact that they have good artists.
Source is totally killed by it though.

 

[Direwolf]

The shear power this engine is capable of handling is what puts it past DOOM, or any other current engine. It's built from the ground up for computers that no one's really got their hands on yet, so it's capable of combining so many effects of such detail that its rather astounding.

 

[Sparta]

If the hottest chick on the planet was a video game, this would be it

 

[torso boy]

The shear power this engine is capable of handling is what puts it past DOOM, or any other current engine. It's built from the ground up for computers that no one's really got their hands on yet, so it's capable of combining so many effects of such detail that its rather astounding.

the fact is doom 3 is the minimum of what the doom 3 engine can do... they only use 1/4 of the supported texture detail, and very low poly models so that people on mid range cards (of last year even) can play it.

The only reason UE3 looks better is because what they have shown is only being limited by todays highest end cards, while doom 3 had to be playable on cards it supports all the way back to geforce 3s. If they were to run the exact same content UE3 wouldn't look that much better.

 

[Solver]

If any of this is released next year, who will be able to play it? Anyone at all? It currently takes a monster computer to run Doom3 at the highest visual settings - including a 512 MB video card. And some graphics effects, if enabled (such as dynamic lighting on the plasmagun) can make even 2.8 GHz processors choke.
Point is, U3 engine seems even more resource hogging than the Doom3 engine. Doesn't look like anyone is going to be able to run games on that in 2006.

 

[satch919]

If any of this is released next year, who will be able to play it? Anyone at all? It currently takes a monster computer to run Doom3 at the highest visual settings - including a 512 MB video card. And some graphics effects, if enabled (such as dynamic lighting on the plasmagun) can make even 2.8 GHz processors choke.
Point is, U3 engine seems even more resource hogging than the Doom3 engine. Doesn't look like anyone is going to be able to run games on that in 2006.

Well, how do you know what kind of hardware will be out by that time? ATi and Nvidia should be coming out with their 512MB cards late this summer or by the end of the year. Dual processors will also be released around the same time. The computers that the devs have now are obviously able to run it decently. I don't see what the problem is.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

The computers that the devs have now are obviously able to run it decently.

Don't count on it.

 

[Solver]

Well, how do you know what kind of hardware will be out by that time? ATi and Nvidia should be coming out with their 512MB cards late this summer or by the end of the year. Dual processors will also be released around the same time. The computers that the devs have now are obviously able to run it decently. I don't see what the problem is.

The problem is that those computers will definitely not be the standard then, we're still talking top-of-the-line here. You don't expect the average comp a year later to have a 512 MB video card with a dual 4 GHz system, do you?

 

[ray_MAN]

UE3 doesn't really have anything that Source doesn't. As of now the only thing is has better than source are dynamic lighting, and paralax mapping. If i remember correctly, Valve plans to add parallax mapping at some point, and dynamic lighting is semi-supported by source, just no dynamic shadows yet

Yeah, just forget about the insanely high detail and high polycounts. Source is not a next-gen engine like UE3, so you can't compare.

 

[Computer5k]

Yeah, just forget about the insanely high detail and high polycounts. Source is not a next-gen engine like UE3, so you can't compare.

Surece can handle high poly models, and hi-res textures just fine(largest texture in HL2 is 2048x2048 from what I heard. its the G-mans head normal map). Valve just didn't put it in because eveyones computer woul explode

 

[Direwolf]

So would their artisans. I imagine those working on UE3 have built the engine with tools in mind for making such massive artistic workloads bearable. (Shortcuts for texturing and mapping effects etc.)

 

[satch919]

Don't count on it.

Well, from the videos that I've seen, it runs a lot better than I expected. Since you're in the know Pi Mu Rho,(that rhymed ) what kind of computers are the devs running? Come on Rho, we know you've got the goods.

 

[Pesmerga]

I heard even with the dev level stuff, Unreal 3 ran on 16fps :|

 

[Alig]

Just because the engine will be finished by 2006 does'nt mean a game will be using it straight away...not to mention, 2006 has 365 days! :monkee:

 

[Direwolf]

Well, from the videos that I've seen, it runs a lot better than I expected. Since you're in the know Pi Mu Rho,(that rhymed ) what kind of computers are the devs running? Come on Rho, we know you've got the goods.

Those vids aren't necessarily rendered realtime. I'd love to know whether or not they were.

 

[Korgoth]

i have faith in the unreal guys, they can make even the lowest in pcs get decent graphics and steady frame rates.. They know a thing or to about optimisation tricks, so I don't doubt when all is said and done that they will not only have a great looking engine, but an optimised performing engine as well.

 

[Ennui]

ooh, and all of it's taking place at Epic Games... 20 miles from my house!

 

[satch919]

Those vids aren't necessarily rendered realtime. I'd love to know whether or not they were.

Why wouldn't they be in real-time? Last year at E3, the 6800 Ultra was running it at about 30fps. This year with the buggy/city demo and such, it was more complex and yet it still seemed to run at a decent framerate. Besides if you look at the latest Unreal 3 tech demo vids, I think there's a guy on stage "playing" it.

 

[satch919]

ooh, and all of it's taking place at Epic Games... 20 miles from my house!

Why don't you go pay 'em a visit? Say that you're a huge fan and you are looking to see how their latest game is coming along. I'd try if i were you.