Author Topic: Future is here (Read 3793 times)

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #15 on:** January 27, 2005, 08:50:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Blade
It is old as a presentation, but still impressive as the technology won\'t be used in an actual game until 2006.

more like 3rd - 4th quarter this year. The whole point to that engine is its using tricks rather then rendering shit loads of polygons. I personally see this type of graphics being used within the next year.

Evi · « **Reply #16 on:** January 27, 2005, 10:46:08 AM »

Yeah, that\'s the thing, and with this kind of technology, they\'ll be able to have boatloads of insanely high-quality characters running around on screen [I\'ve heard around 100+]. They take a low-poly character, and a few million poly mesh, and then the engine takes the difference of the 2 that creates a low-poly character with INSANELY high detail. It\'s good stuff

Here\'s a few sample characters [that you\'ve probably seen already]:

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/p_beast.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/p_bezerker.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/p_soldier.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/SoftShadows.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/DynamicLight.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/HDRGlow.jpg
http://www.unrealtechnology.com/screens/Spec_Wall.jpg

And again, these are relatively low poly-count creatures [8-10 thousand]. Obviously there\'s a few edges here and there, but if they used a higher poly character to mesh over, then we\'ll be seeing much less of that. It all depends on how awesome the developers want the characters to look

The surroundings use the same exact methods as the design for the characters.

If you haven\'t seen the video, and you have a crappy connection, then you suck!!

« **Reply #17 on:** January 27, 2005, 01:16:56 PM »

..........Yet they step into the same age old pifalls when showing of new tech ;

- monster\'s which\' design depend on zbrush dino skin and mechanic exoskeleton armour

- highly Gothic themed environments and buildings.

This is more or less all the things which Doom3 did wrong as well.

I\'d rather see them showing off how convincing (or not) that engine can be when it has to do current day realistic environments and open air day light (without the gothic clouds) like HL2\'s.

I would also wanna see more advanced effects like smoke, fog and translucencies.

Evi · « **Reply #18 on:** January 27, 2005, 01:30:36 PM »

The reason it has the same theme is because they\'re demoing the Unreal game. Some companies have already signed on to use the UE3.0 for their next-gen games [for consoles]. It\'s not about what they\'re showing in the video, it\'s the technology behind it. Not every game that\'s going to be made with this engine is going to be "gothic" themed, or have creatures in metallic armor, and whatnot. That\'s only for their next game in development.

You\'ll see this technology being implemented in all different types of games.

« **Reply #19 on:** January 27, 2005, 01:42:23 PM »

Sorry, but I disagree.

Like on a date ; first impression = key.

Right now, Half Life 2\'s matte radiosity realistic looking world is HOT.
This is also the case in the CG world ; HDRI and radiosity softshadows

This Unreal 3 content is imho step 2 of Doom 3 and Riddick\'s plastic fantastic worlds.

Realistic themed environments and characters are the best way to \'measure\' the potential of the tech. Why ?
Becuz ppl know reality they can identify with it and anything which looks less or other than realistic falls outside of \'measurement perimeter\' ; in this case the sci fi monsters and extreme gothic architecture.

Evi · « **Reply #20 on:** January 27, 2005, 01:46:19 PM »

We just simply haven\'t seen enough of this engine used in a variety of games. It\'s potential is what I\'m really concerned with.

But I agree with you on the Half-Life thing. I\'d like to see an upgrade to that engine. The facial expressions they display are simply amazing, as well as the physics.

Evi · « **Reply #21 on:** January 31, 2005, 12:21:18 PM »

@ Knotter...here\'s some incredible game shots of "Gears of War"...a next-gen game using the Unreal Engine 3.0:

Some of the environments give the game a much better feel. Not so enclosed in the gothic building environments.

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #22 on:** January 31, 2005, 01:37:41 PM »

It looks good enough for me, as long as its REAL time, i doubt there would be much difference between a gothic world and a nice grassy plain etc. In the end the textures probably take up the same amount of space, the polys are probably very close to each other in amount used and the lighting/shadow effects would probably be pretty much the same too........

in simple words. Same shit, different smell.

As long as its realtime, it looks great to me.

Evi · « **Reply #23 on:** January 31, 2005, 07:20:53 PM »

I\'m hearing from a friend who works at Microsoft that he\'s actually seen an Xbox 2 game in development that looks significantly better than this. And since the PS3 is supposedly going to be more powerful than the Xbox 2, that\'s very good news. And yes...it will look like those pics in real-time.

« **Reply #24 on:** January 31, 2005, 07:38:08 PM »

Are PS3\'s going to end up costing like 400 dollars??

Evi · « **Reply #25 on:** January 31, 2005, 09:03:18 PM »

200-400 dollars is a good estimate. No game console is cheap upon its first release. It won\'t be out until mid to late 2006 in the US, and if you can\'t save enough money by then, well...that\'s just sad.

It\'s really a bargain, considering how much power you\'ll be getting out of the thing.

« **Reply #26 on:** January 31, 2005, 10:27:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by EviscerationX
I\'m hearing from a friend who works at Microsoft that he\'s actually seen an Xbox 2 game in development that looks significantly better than this. And since the PS3 is supposedly going to be more powerful than the Xbox 2, that\'s very good news. And yes...it will look like those pics in real-time.

tell your friend they better make sure it\'s running at 60 fps by default this time... It\'s already bad enough 30 fps is widely accepted on Xbox - which is laughable considering it should be the easiest and most powerful to develop for. :rolleyes:

[/rant]

« **Reply #27 on:** January 31, 2005, 10:32:08 PM »

Ijust cant wait to see the next gen Tech Demos

Evi · « **Reply #28 on:** January 31, 2005, 10:55:02 PM »

Quote

tell your friend they better make sure it\'s running at 60 fps by default this time... It\'s already bad enough 30 fps is widely accepted on Xbox - which is laughable considering it should be the easiest and most powerful to develop for.

I highly doubt we\'ll be seeing 30FPS ever again. This hardware is WAY more powerful than people are fathoming. The Unreal Demo was being showcased on an NVIDIA 6800, and the Xbox 2 will have much greater power than that [and even moreso for the PS3]. We\'re gonna see some great games next-gen.

Quote

Ijust cant wait to see the next gen Tech Demos

Word. Actually, they\'ll probably have some playable games at E3. Sony may only have tech demos [but we\'ll see]. Still, I love tech demos.

« **Reply #29 on:** February 01, 2005, 10:27:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by EviscerationX
I highly doubt we\'ll be seeing 30FPS ever again. This hardware is WAY more powerful than people are fathoming. The Unreal Demo was being showcased on an NVIDIA 6800, and the Xbox 2 will have much greater power than that [and even moreso for the PS3]. We\'re gonna see some great games next-gen.

...and yet, framerate isn\'t dependant on hardware. Framerate is by design-choice. Hardware ranging back to early 90ties was capable of doing 60 fps - even a vast majority of cutting-edge PS2 games feature 60 fps - something the Xbox, an arguably more powerful piece of hardware, is seriously lacking in.

Hello

Author Topic: Future is here (Read 3793 times)