Unreal Engine 3.0 -The Next Evolution In Gaming-

[Kschreck]

Unreal Engine 3.0 has either not been talked about or not been talked about much. First off why do I consider it the next evolution?

Because at lease half of the most popular games are based on the Unreal Engine. A huge wave of games were bases on Unreal Engine 1, then the new Directx 8 and 9 games started using Unreal Engine 2 (Things like Splinter Cell and Rainbow Sixe 3). The Unreal 3.0 engine is litterally a work of art. If anyone has been keeping up with it's annoucement you will know exactly what I'm talking about. Unreal Engine 3.0 has been in development for about 18 months now and utilizes every special effect that the latest graphics cards have. Not only does it support Pixel Shader 3.0 and Hight Dynamic Range Lighting, but it uses a HDR64 Bit Color display now among many other new features. The Unreal 3.0 Engine blows even the most anticipated games such as Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry and Stalker, out of the water. They are already working on a title which is due to ship in early 2006. Major rumors say that it's a sequel to "Cannon Fodder" due to the Cannon Fodder looking creatures in the tech demo displayed at E3 2004 and Nvidia's 6800 Launh Event. They are working on an Unreal Tournament 2005 and 2006 on the regular Unreal Engine 2.0 however Unreal Tournament 2007 will utilize the Unreal Engine 3.0 technologies. Sadly at the time they have no plans to do an unreal 3, but they promise to make one eventually. You will see this engin most likely used on both PC and all next generation consoles. Below are some sites where you can see screenshots, a trailer, and a new interview that was released on July 15th.



The Sites:


http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html/technology/ue30.shtml (Images And Tech Break Down)

http://www.fileplanet.com/files/140000/140731.shtml (The Trailer) -Yes I know it's File Crappit but they have the best version of it. It's definetly worth the wait. You can find lower quality crappy versions on sights like www.gametrailers.com if you really don't want to wait for the good version.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=55942 (Interview)

What do you guys think of this new graphics engine and it's capabilities?

 

[Eywanadi]

Unreal3 is not the next evolution, doom 3 was because it changed the way games are built. Unreal 3 seems to be like a beefed up Doom 3 engine. I expect the Doom 3 engine in 2006 to be able to do everything the Unreal 3 engine can. As of right now the Doom 3 engine can do 90% of the stuff the Unreal 3 engine is able to do. Epic like allways is one step behind ID and just ends up building a similar engine but then uses higher resolution textures and more polys to make it look better and fool people into thinking it is more advanced tech.

 

[Mac]

I have seen it, and it is amazing, but 2 years off just seems a bit... too far off to be gettin overly excited about.

Although when the day comes for it to be realesed, I dunno if ill be going outside much :O

 

[Neo_Kuja]

And don't forget the cost of upgrading ........

 

[DarkStar]

Unreal Engine 3.0 has either not been talked about or not been talked about much.

Actually, it's been talked about to death.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Unreal Engine 3.0 has either not been talked about or not been talked about much. First off why do I consider it the next evolution?

Because at lease half of the most popular games are based on the Unreal Engine.

No they're not.

Unreal Engine 3.0 has been in development for about 18 months now and utilizes every special effect that the latest graphics cards have. Not only does it support Pixel Shader 3.0 and Hight Dynamic Range Lighting, but it uses a HDR64 Bit Color display now among many other new features.

Pity it doesn't run at anything like a playable rate on current cards.

The Unreal 3.0 Engine blows even the most anticipated games such as Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry and Stalker, out of the water.

The Unreal 3.0 engine isn't a game. By the time it's out, if, Valve etc will have comparable engine technology.

They are already working on a title which is due to ship in early 2006. Major rumors say that it's a sequel to "Cannon Fodder" due to the Cannon Fodder looking creatures in the tech demo displayed at E3 2004 and Nvidia's 6800 Launh Event.

Sorry, that makes no sense whatsoever. Cannon Fodder was a military strategy game. The creatures in the tech demo were demonic-looking.

Sadly at the time they have no plans to do an unreal 3,

Broad assumption. Epic are working on something, and they're not saying what it is.

 

[redundant]

dude, if it comes out in 2 years, and it DOESN'T look better than hl2 and doom 3 now, then epic really need to take a good long look at themselves. seriously, that's like saying, "don't get hl2, because hl3 is going to be better"

DUH.

 

[The Dark Elf]

Cannon Fodder was one of the games I originally worked on and yup Unreal 3 looks bugger all like it. It's like saying Alien was a sequel to the Brady Bunch.......... ok so maybe it could have been, oh shut up!

 

[DarkStar]

Cannon Fodder was one of the games I originally worked on and yup Unreal 3 looks bugger all like it. It's like saying Alien was a sequel to the Brady Bunch.......... ok so maybe it could have been, oh shut up!

You worked on Cannon Fodder? Sweet Fenric! I loved that game when I was a kid.

 

[Alsi]

I used to play cannonfodder on my AMIGA 500+ ........ that was like 8 years or something ? Veeeery long ago

Nice Fenric! that game was really great.


ooop - at least some topic. First game will be released 2006 ? Way too long to compare with current games/engines.

 

[The Dark Elf]

You worked on Cannon Fodder? Sweet Fenric! I loved that game when I was a kid.

It was too much fun. I just worked on the conversion to the PC version not the original Amiga one.. I found it a few months ago on one of those abandonware sites. Brought back a lot of memories.. surprised nobody has said they'd do a Source version to be honest

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Now there's an idea...

 

[PvtRyan]

Unreal Engine 3.0 has either not been talked about or not been talked about much. First off why do I consider it the next evolution?

Every little change is evolution... so yes, Unreal 3 is certainly evolution.

The Unreal 3.0 Engine blows even the most anticipated games such as Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry and Stalker, out of the water.

I think it's a bit unfair to compare an engine that considers a P4 3.2 and a 6800 Ultra low end spec to engines that are supposed to perform well on a GF3.

 

[The Dark Elf]

Now there's an idea...

You'd be one of the few people I'd trust to do it justice

 

[Chris D]

I think Pi Mu Rho touched on it but games won't start using the Unreal 3.0 engine for another 2-3 years yet. Valve have said that Half-Life 3 won't take as long as HL2 did, simply because they won't have to build an engine from scratch. They will just update the Source engine and naturally it will be comparable to any other engines in development at the time.

I can remember having Cannon Fodder - was it on the Mega Drive too?

 

[The Dark Elf]

I think Pi Mu Rho touched on it but games won't start using the Unreal 3.0 engine for another 2-3 years yet. Valve have said that Half-Life 3 won't take as long as HL2 did, simply because they won't have to build an engine from scratch. They will just update the Source engine and naturally it will be comparable to any other engines in development at the time.

I can remember having Cannon Fodder - was it on the Mega Drive too?

I think Sensible Software converted it to a lot of platforms yeah.

 

[IchI]

The Unreal 3.0 engine isn't a game. By the time it's out, if, Valve etc will have comparable engine technology.

It won't be with the Source Engine though. Also if Valve did make an engine of this capabilitie you will have to wait for that game/engine to be released as well, which from the looks of it would proberly be about 1 year after Unreal Engine 3. I don't really see anyone beating Unreal Engine 3 to the punsh at all. Also I dought very much the Unreal Engine 3 showed the full capabilities of the engine.

 

[Cybernoid]

Half-Life 2 is SO outdated because the new Stalker 3 engine is coming in 2010! I'm already saving money to upgrade (the 2048 megabyte NVIDIA 90 000) for the FUTURE GAMES.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

It won't be with the Source Engine though. Also if Valve did make an engine of this capabilitie you will have to wait for that game/engine to be released as well, which from the looks of it would proberly be about 1 year after Unreal Engine 3. I don't really see anyone beating Unreal Engine 3 to the punsh at all. Also I dought very much the Unreal Engine 3 showed the full capabilities of the engine.

So you don't think Valve are going to add those features (which are purely evolutionary - it's not some uber-technology that only Epic are privy to) by 2006? Of course they are.

Epic have just pulled off an advertising coup by showing their next-gen technology now, instead of waiting until there's a game released that uses it.

Valve and id have released a game now that is aimed at current technology. By the time 2006 comes around, PCs will have the grunt to run games with all of the Unreal 3.0 tech features. You can guarantee that id and Valve will have those features.

 

[Devilphish]

Source probably won't be heavily updated to the point of the Unreal3 engine until they go in to update it for HL3. But wether they will update it that heavily and how it will look when it's all said and done is speculation. The Doom3 engine on the other hand is already as powerfull as the Unreal3 engine. So yes, Doom3 engine "beat it to the punch".

 

[Gunner]

Unreal3 is not the next evolution.

QFE.

Just because it has purdy graphics does not necessarily mean it's an evolution.

 

[The Dark Elf]

Could all backfire for epic too.. They've played their cards very early on. They will now have to do something simply spectacular in two years time to compete with others who now, thanks to epic doing what they did at E3, have a better idea what they should be aiming to beat. Epic can't sit back and relax atall now because they'll all be trying to beat them.

Wow, I was on topic in this thread for once. Go me.

 

[Brian Damage]

Cannon Fodder was one of the games I originally worked on and yup Unreal 3 looks bugger all like it. It's like saying Alien was a sequel to the Brady Bunch.......... ok so maybe it could have been, oh shut up!

Blimey.

I never could figure that game out, though... Always got splattered by a helicopter...

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

Cannon Fodder was one of the games I originally worked on and yup Unreal 3 looks bugger all like it. It's like saying Alien was a sequel to the Brady Bunch.......... ok so maybe it could have been, oh shut up!

Holy crap!


I absolutely loved that game. A true clasic. :cheers:

 

[Hudson]

I went forward in time and saw the ending of Unreal Tournament 2033.

According to the screen, I win.

 

[EVIL]

It won't be with the Source Engine though. Also if Valve did make an engine of this capabilitie you will have to wait for that game/engine to be released as well, which from the looks of it would proberly be about 1 year after Unreal Engine 3. I don't really see anyone beating Unreal Engine 3 to the punsh at all. Also I dought very much the Unreal Engine 3 showed the full capabilities of the engine.

Source is a Hybrid Engine, you can add and replace engine modules like the renderer, psychics, sound etc.. Source will be updated with better capabillity's as time allows it. It will be on the bleeding edge of game tech for a very long time.

They haven't spend 40 million in technology to let it outdate in two years, and thats also what they said themselves in some interview a while back.

 

[Devilphish]

Source is a Hybrid Engine, you can add and replace engine modules like the renderer, psychics, sound etc.. Source will be updated with better capabillity's as time allows it.

FFS, Source didn't invent the idea of an updatable engine. Source is not special in this reguard. It's amazing the way Valve pimps things that have been done for many years by many people and makes it so their fans think it is something amazing and revolutionary Valve has invented. ALL major engines are updated as time goes by, either by the developers or liscensees. This doesn't give Source any kind of edge over other engines.

It will be on the bleeding edge of game tech for a very long time.

It isn't on the bleeding edge of technology now =\ The gaming industry recognizes this. Peep out Source's TWO liscensees, DEVELOPING RPGS! Source will never be a major competitor in FPS. The engine is ugly by todays standards. Look at Bloodlines. Ugly. Look at CS:S. Ugly. HL2 barely competes with modern games graphically, and the only reason it gets away with being behind is because it is the sequel to HL. Speculating about wether it will be updated to reach the "bleeding edge" at some point in the years to come is useless. Source is behind, and while Valve is updating it other engines which are already into the next generation of technology will be updating aswell. If Valve wants Source to compete with major players like Doom3 engine in the next few years, they have some major catching up to do.

 

[what!?]

I don't think that Epic played their cards too early. I mean the D3 engine was shown at E3 2000/2001? Epic plans to have UE3 games out by 2006/2007. Doom III is just coming out now and it is the bleeding edge.

 

[Gunner]

The engine is ugly by todays standards. Look at Bloodlines. Ugly. Look at CS:S. Ugly. HL2 barely competes with modern games graphically, and the only reason it gets away with being behind is because it is the sequel to HL.

Ugly? you need to see an optician my friend.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

The gaming industry recognizes this. Peep out Source's TWO liscensees, DEVELOPING RPGS!

Er, those are the two announced licensees. There's more, I assure you.

Source will never be a major competitor in FPS.

Well, it must be true if you say so. Regardless, engine licensing is secondary to Valve's business plan. Contrary to popular belief, it's not an enormous money-spinner. Even Epic make more money off game sales than they do from licensing.

The engine is ugly by todays standards. Look at Bloodlines. Ugly. Look at CS:S. Ugly.

That's your opinion, and I think you'll find a great deal of people disagree - myself included.

HL2 barely competes with modern games graphically, and the only reason it gets away with being behind is because it is the sequel to HL.

Which modern games are those then? Far Cry? I'd say HL2 competes easily with that. Doom 3? Ok, HL2 doesn't use the same unified lighting technology (as a matter of choice, not inability) but aside from that, it matches everything Doom 3 does.

 

[what!?]

I don't think that Source can compete with D3 and UE3, but HL2 and HL3 will still own.

 

[thehunter1320]

Unreal Engine 3.0 has either not been talked about or not been talked about much.

you obviously weren't here the day the footage was released

 

[Gunner]

I don't think that Source can compete with D3 and UE3, but HL2 and HL3 will still own.

It can and it will both financially and technically.

 

[Devilphish]

Find me a single shot of either bloodlines or CS:S that looks good enough to seriously compete with an engine like Doom3, and I will take back what I said.

Well, it must be true if you say so. Regardless, engine licensing is secondary to Valve's business plan. Contrary to popular belief, it's not an enormous money-spinner. Even Epic make more money off game sales than they do from licensing.

I never said it wasn't secondary. Pay attention to the topic. People on this forum are so accustumed to changing the topic of discussion in order to evade the point. We are talking about the evolution of engines over the next few years. Liscensees are a valid aspect of this discussion, reguardless of how important they are to Valve's business plan. My argument is that Source will not evolve quick enough to compete, because it is already behind and has nothing over the other major players that would warrent a developer liscensing it for a FPS. It is no coincidence that the only two liscensees are for RPGs. For first person shooters, Source isn't really a competitor.

Doom 3? Ok, HL2 doesn't use the same unified lighting technology (as a matter of choice, not inability) but aside from that, it matches everything Doom 3 does.

Wether it's a matter of inability or a matter of choice is irreleveant. And a unified lighting system is a MAJOR thing in gaming technology today. Developers will not be liscensing lightmap based engines for future games. That is the past. A unified lighting system is the future. Source is the near perfection of technology that is living it's last days as we speak. It may have done the old tricks very very well, but that doesn't change the fact that those tricks are now obsolete despite their exquisite execution. Source is the last engine of the last generation, it will not compete in the next generation, which we are entering right this moment, without major fundamental changes that are very unlikely to take place within the next year or two.

 

[^Ben]

http://bencodegood.co.uk/images/Image1.jpg

HL2 with doom3 lolzzzz

 

[Gunner]

For first person shooters, Source isn't really a competitor.

You must be either ignorant or just braindead, unless you haven't noticed they're porting CS to the source engine and do I have to remind you that CS is the biggest online FPS game ever?

And if it's not "pretty" enough for you then too bad, at least it will run on most computers unlike Doom 3. You don't need to be a major in economics to see who's going to make the most profits in the next few years.

 

[guchi]

http://bencodegood.co.uk/images/Image1.jpg

HL2 with doom3 lolzzzz

haha! nice!

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Find me a single shot of either bloodlines or CS:S that looks good enough to seriously compete with an engine like Doom3, and I will take back what I said.

No. As I said, it's your opinion. I disagree with it. There's no burden of proof.

I never said it wasn't secondary. Pay attention to the topic. People on this forum are so accustumed to changing the topic of discussion in order to evade the point.

Are they? Can't say I've noticed. I, however, am not. I suggest you stop trying to patronise me.

We are talking about the evolution of engines over the next few years. Liscensees are a valid aspect of this discussion, reguardless of how important they are to Valve's business plan.

I disagree. Licensees are irrelevant to the evolution of an engine. Games drive development of engines.

My argument is that Source will not evolve quick enough to compete,
because it is already behind and has nothing over the other major players that would warrent a developer liscensing it for a FPS.

Already behind in what aspect? Aside from you opining that it's "ugly", in what aspects is it "behind" and to what other current games?

It is no coincidence that the only two liscensees are for RPGs. For first person shooters, Source isn't really a competitor.

You're basing that assumption on the two currently announced licensees. As Valve themselves have said, they have other licensees. You have no way of knowing if they're RPGs, FPSs, RTSs or Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing. You also can't assert that it's not a competitor, when you have no idea of the competition. How many licensees does Doom 3 have? Far Cry?

Anyway, who cares if it's licensed for FPS or not? That's an argument that you're having with yourself. You said yourself that we're discussing the evolution of engines.

Wether it's a matter of inability or a matter of choice is irreleveant.

No it isn't.

And a unified lighting system is a MAJOR thing in gaming technology today.

Not if they still want to target the lower end of the hardware market (which is where the majority of the sales are).

Developers will not be liscensing lightmap based engines for future games. That is the past.

And yet, people are. Funny, that.

A unified lighting system is the future. Source is the near perfection of technology that is living it's last days as we speak.

Living it's last days? Right....
Unified lighting is, indeed, the future. When the majority of the hardware can run it.

It may have done the old tricks very very well, but that doesn't change the fact that those tricks are now obsolete despite their exquisite execution.

Yes, I can really see people not buying HL2 because it uses lightmaps. "old tricks"? Are you basing your entire argument on the lack of unified lighting? That's a very weak house of cards.

Source is the last engine of the last generation, it will not compete in the next generation, which we are entering right this moment, without major fundamental changes that are very unlikely to take place within the next year or two.

Wow! Can I borrow your crystal ball? How on earth would you know what engine changes Valve have planned/already in development? Simple answer - you don't.

 

[Devilphish]

You must be either ignorant or just braindead, unless you haven't noticed they're porting CS to the source engine and do I have to remind you that CS is the biggest online FPS game ever?

Valve porting CS to Source has absolutely nothing to do with the point. The point is heavy hitters in the industry aren't using Source for major FPS titles like they are with Doom3 for a reason, because Source doesn't compete. Wether Valve decides to take a popular mod and port it to Source has no bearing on the topic, nor does it change the fact that CS looks only slightly better on Source.

And if it's not "pretty" enough for you then too bad, at least it will run on most computers unlike Doom 3.

2 things here. First, this is not a discussion about wether I think HL2 is pretty. I am simply talking about how engines will evolve over time. HL2 looks decent to me, that doesn't change the fact that Source is beaten to a pulpe by other engines. Second, it amazes me that so few of you realize that the system requirements for Doom3 are only slightly higher than Source. There is only a very small percentage of people who can run Source with acceptable framerates but not Doom3. Doom3 was made to run very well on todays hardware. There is no getting around that fact.

 

[^Ben]

Pim just give it up mate.

I gave all the points that would ever be needed about this topic.

There is no point trying to argue with someone so set in his ways. It dosen't matter to him that you have worked in the gaming industry HE IS RIGHT CUS COOMACK IS GODlol\