Problems with source ports (HL3)

[froghawk]

Ok, so valve decides to port the original HL over to the source engine to come with HL2. Sounds like a great idea. But what happens when HL3 comes (They've stated that it will) and is on a completely new engine? Are they going to port the first two HL games over to that engine? It seems to me that they're taking on a lot of work by deciding to keep all of their games "up to date." Then again, if HL2's MP ends up becoming CS:S, at least we'll have HL:SDM. And I'd imagine it would be pretty simple to port OpFor as well after HL:S.

So what does everyone think? Will they decide to constantly port their games onto the newest engines like they've done here in the furture?

 

[No Limit]

They don't have to port anything, they are simply doing this for the community. If HL3 will exist it is way too far in time to even think about it; this game is coming out about 6 years after the original.

 

[brightgreen]

Who said that there will be a new engine for HL3?

I think the implication of the highly scalable/modular nature of Source's design is that it will be changed and will evolve over time

Meaning, HL3 will most likely use 'Source' also, but by then, many advancements and enhancements will be implemented into it.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I'm pretty sure valve said somewhere that HL3 will just use source, only a super-upgraded mega-future-version.

So, now that all the old games are in source, all of valve's games will use the engine, and it will be continuously upgraded forever, if everything goes by the plan.

 

[Prince of China]

Half-Life 3 probably use a new engine. After seeing the Unreal Engine 3.0 and knowing the fact that Valve keeps their graphical standards up to date, Valve probably will make an engine better looking than the Unreal Engine 3.0.

 

[yadalogo]

if that were possible! :|

 

[Vegeta897]

And they aren't "keeping their games up to date."

HL Source isn't going to be the next patch for Half-Life. It's an entirely new game. It was mainly made for mod developers.

And besides, the way they did it (no new textures, models, etc.) it didn't take them more than 3 months I'm sure.

 

[UndeadScottsman]

There is two reasons for Valve to port Half-Life over to the Source engine, that I can think of. The first, of course, was to see how difficult it would be to port HL1 content over to HL2.

The second, (And this is just my speculation) is that now Valve can have all of their games on their own engine, and not only no longer have to worry about paying royalties to id software, but also allows for the compatibility between the programs to smooth out. (The HL engine runs better with OpenGL, the Source runs better in Direct3D.. The HL engine had Steam tacked into it WAY after the fact, the source engine was designed with Steam in mind.)

 

[ShadowFox]

Half-Life 3 probably use a new engine. After seeing the Unreal Engine 3.0 and knowing the fact that Valve keeps their graphical standards up to date, Valve probably will make an engine better looking than the Unreal Engine 3.0.

It's doubtful. Unreal Engine 3 is just a continuation of Unreal Engine 2. The Doom 3 engine was built off the the Quake 3 engine.

There is no reason to scrap code that is perfectly functional.

 

[Intel17]

It's doubtful. Unreal Engine 3 is just a continuation of Unreal Engine 2. The Doom 3 engine was built off the the Quake 3 engine.

There is no reason to scrap code that is perfectly functional.

Unreal Engine 3's renderer was completely rewritten. Doom 3's renderer was also rewritten.

HL3 doenst have to be cutting edge tech, its just gotta be fun, Source engine will be able to power games for years to come.

 

[Intel17]

Half-Life 3 probably use a new engine. After seeing the Unreal Engine 3.0 and knowing the fact that Valve keeps their graphical standards up to date, Valve probably will make an engine better looking than the Unreal Engine 3.0.

"engines" cant look good. Games do.

Unreal Engine 3 is, in many ways less advanced than Doom 3's renderer, but honestly, the content is better and higher quality, so the game built of UE3 looks better.

By the way, Epic is the #2 engine developer in the world, and Valve has yet to release their own engine, so lets not jump to conclusions.

(And if anyone, who isnt a fanboy wants to know why D3 engine is more advanced than UE3, PM me)

 

[JFry]

Don't you think that statement kinda contradicts itself? I have essentially no knowledge of UE or its engine, but lets assume its content is indeed better. Wouldn't that same content look even nicer rendered on the d3 engine?

Further exaggerating this example, let's say we took the textures from d3 and switched them with the textures from d1, and vice versa. I think the d3 textures rendered on the d1 engine would look crappy compared to the d1 textures rendered on the d3 engine, not to mention all the nifty lighting fx, bump mapping, etc.

Clearly the engine plays a huge role in how good the game looks, tho I will agree that content is the more important of the two... to a point.

 

[flupke]

Ehm? It's clearly stated by Valve that HL3 will be coming, that HL3 will be on an enhanced Source Engine & that HL3 won't take another 6 years. And that's logic, because for HL2 they had to make an entire new engine ; for HL3 that won't be the case.

 

[Vinnie_NL]

"engines" cant look good. Games do.

Unreal Engine 3 is, in many ways less advanced than Doom 3's renderer, but honestly, the content is better and higher quality, so the game built of UE3 looks better.

By the way, Epic is the #2 engine developer in the world, and Valve has yet to release their own engine, so lets not jump to conclusions.

(And if anyone, who isnt a fanboy wants to know why D3 engine is more advanced than UE3, PM me)

But the D3 engine doesn't support soft shadows, and Unreal Engine 3 does. So at least the lighting system of UE3 is more advanced than the one of D3 is.

 

[The Dark Elf]

But the D3 engine doesn't support soft shadows, and Unreal Engine 3 does. So at least the lighting system of UE3 is more advanced than the one of D3 is.

It's not more advanced, it just does it differently. id set out to do something with the doom engine, prove it could be done for a start, which they did. Epic have other goals and using different methods. id could have used DX and had soft shadows if they'd wanted to, they wanted to use OGL and prove they could do it.

 

[Cole]

Source is made to be heavily updated. I don't believe they can add in a whole new lighting system or anything but. Things like Fliud Physics, etc i believe can be added in easier than it would with other engines.
Im not sure on this. Dark Elf might be able to tell me. *Starts thinking Dark Elf is a god\goddess*
*Bows down to Dark Elf*
*Becomes Dark Elf's Slave*

 

[ComradeBadger]

Op4:S is gonna be pure win

 

[Bigcheese]

sense i am the only one here that fallows unreal as close as you guys fallow HL i have some things to say.

UE3 has a far superior lighting system than any other engine (that we know of) because it uses LightFunctions which are vary easy to code/setup and you can do anything with them. also you have full real time caustics and real time envioenmental mapping.

also its the first game to have real time soft body phyicis and a much better phycis engine than Havok, its using novadex which is faster and easer to manipulate.(yes i have seen and edited with both)

but UE3 is not coming out till 2006 for the first game so its not like you can compare them...

 

[Trinityxero]

They don't have to port anything, they are simply doing this for the community. If HL3 will exist it is way too far in time to even think about it; this game is coming out about 6 years after the original.

i dont think it is... i think HL3 = a very upgraded source engine

 

[Kadayi]

The HL engine had Steam tacked into it WAY after the fact, the source engine was designed with Steam in mind.

From www.valvesoftware.com/projects.php

Steam is a broadband business platform for direct software delivery and content management. At its core, Steam is a distributed file system and shared set of technology components that can be implemented into any software application. With Steam, developers are given integrated tools for direct-content publishing, flexible billing, ensured-version control, anti-cheating, anti-piracy, and more. Steam consumers enjoy the benefit of starting their favorite applications within minutes of confirming their purchase. They can access their applications from any PC. They are no longer challenged to find the latest updates for these applications. And they no longer need to wonder if their device drivers are compatible with the latest software.

Steam is much more (potentially) than a game delivery platform, (if other software developers pick up on it as an alternative option to box sales). Next week Adobe could start selling photoshop via steam if they wanted to, perhaps even renting it to you for a monthly fee.

Bigcheese

HL² physics are way better than Havoks, they (heavily) rejigged the havok engine, and also introduced material weighting into the process. The physics in CS:S are not representative of the physics you get in HL² itself, they are more 'fun' physics (this was stated sometime back my Gabe or Chris) because it would cause too many problems in multiplayer to have inch perfect physics calcs.

I was impressed by the tech demo stuff I've seen on UE³, but my concerns for it are the same as my concerns were for D³ (and sadly was proven right) and that is about the amount of content the engine can deliver/handle in a map at the same time. Super realistic models and lighting are great, but if it restricts a game to having a maximum of 50 entities on a map at the same time, then it severely narrows down the actual storyline opportunities that an engine is capable of delivering.

DX:IW was a game that was crucified by it's choice of game engine. As a sequel it begged to be grounded in a realworld environment, but because Ionstorm opted for Dynamic lighting and physics (neither of which actually impacted on the game play) the game levels and the numbers of civilians were severely curtailed (compare seattle to Hong kong from the first game...).

i dont think it is... i think HL3 = a very upgraded source engine

Yeah Valve said they would like to have less of a gap between HL² and HL³. Source was the engine they felt they needed, to deliver the sort of gameplay experience they originally wanted to with HL¹. Aside from ramping up the textures and maybe some new features, I doubt HL³ will be particularly different.

 

[random.hero]

i heard that HL3 is planned to come out much sooner after HL2 than HL2 did after HL1...if that makes sense. and i also heard that one of the main reasons they've spent so long on developing Source is so they only have to make a few adjustments to it, to release HL3 on.

 

[The Brick]

to release HL3 on.

...and Team Fortress 2, and all the other games that valve will make.