Beer glass scene creation
This course contains a little bit of everything with modeling, UVing, texturing and dynamics in Maya, as well as compositing multilayered EXR's in Photoshop.
# 1 03-06-2005 , 08:41 AM
dragonfx's Avatar
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,257

Unreal 3 engine...

It looks like everybody and then some is rushing to license it...

is it that good?

Anybody has had contact with it and isnt tied to an NDA on the matter?

# 2 03-06-2005 , 09:17 PM
R-Tillery's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ventura California
Posts: 966
Here's some things you should see to decide for your self about what you think, I my self dig it and can’t wait..:attn:

pic1

pic2

Site

# 3 04-06-2005 , 06:38 PM
dragonfx's Avatar
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,257
yeah saw them too... and the E32005 UT2007, GoW and Killzone2 videos...
i do dig it...


what i find stange is the paradigm shift of most of the developers are licensing it and writting just the game logic instead of writing their own engine as most of them came doing until now...

i meant "is it that good on the development side"

Im wondering exactly what that means...

Does it means that leveraging the complexity of the new tech is so hard it is better safer and chaeper licensing it for lets say something slightly under the million $ plus a low two digit % of the benefits?
Did they also bought and assimilated all the would be competitors like with the Reality Engine?


Last edited by dragonfx; 04-06-2005 at 06:54 PM.
# 4 04-06-2005 , 08:05 PM
dannyngan's Avatar
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,154
Which game engine a developer uses is largely determined by the kinds of the products they develop and how they want to develop those titles. Obviously, for first person shooters, Unreal is a good engine. That's what Unreal is, and that is what its focus has been in terms of new technology. However, Unreal isn't necessarily a good choice for an adventure game or a sports game. Contrary to what you may see out there, shooters are not the only games around. user added image

In terms of actually developing games, the benefit of using existing engines is reduced R&D time. Since the core engine elements are done, all you need to do is customize it for the product and create the content (easier said than done, of course). Less time spent making the tools, more time spent making the game. For many developers the cost of licensing and royalties is worth it. It could simply be a time and money issue. It could also be an experience issue. Writing your own game engine is no small feat, and not everyone can (or should) do it.


Danny Ngan
Animator | Amaze Entertainment
my website | my blog | my job
# 5 04-06-2005 , 08:16 PM
R-Tillery's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ventura California
Posts: 966
Well not just the UNED3 but a few more as well like.

1) Cytec
2) Steam
3) ID

It’s cheaper to buy another engine then to build one from scratch and why try to reinvent the wheel,, just make it better. user added image

# 6 04-06-2005 , 09:25 PM
alienscience's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: In the middle of nowhere in VA
Posts: 749
Ahh so true. But isnt it inovative to construct your own? I may be wrong on this, but, look at farcry. Sure it definently had its bugs and glitches, but the crytec engine blew some of the current games out of the water. The reason I am saying I may be wrong, is that I not 100% sure that the crytec engine was developed specifically for far cry. But if it was, then I think it was a good choice.

# 7 06-06-2005 , 08:35 AM
dragonfx's Avatar
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,257

Originally posted by dannyngan
Which game engine a developer uses is largely determined by the kinds of the products they develop and how they want to develop those titles. Obviously, for first person shooters, Unreal is a good engine. [...]

In terms of actually developing games, the benefit of using existing engines is reduced R&D time. Since the core engine elements are done, all you need to do is customize it for the product and create the content (easier said than done, of course). Less time spent making the tools, more time spent making the game. For many developers the cost of licensing and royalties is worth it. It could simply be a time and money issue. It could also be an experience issue. Writing your own game engine is no small feat, and not everyone can (or should) do it.

Yeah, yeah, i knew (well better said i supected it)...
But cmon microsoft?!?
if anyone shouldnt have the need to license a game engine it should be precisely them?
what does that tells us? (beyond what we suspected since QDdos and every sucessive windows... that is: that they dont know how to code well)

# 8 06-06-2005 , 01:36 PM
R-Tillery's Avatar
Subscriber
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ventura California
Posts: 966
I totally disagree with that statement, most of the in the game industry come from Microsoft, like Gabe Newell, founder from Valve, he worked at Microsoft for 13 years, with out him there would be no half life, 1 or 2 and the newer games that are using that engine. Im not a big fan of windows and that’s Bill Gates fault, but I can't blame the coders,, if you pass out a big pile of crap and slap on the Microsoft logo, people will look down on it, but it all comes down to the main people in charge not the workers. That why most of the split after a while.

# 9 06-06-2005 , 06:37 PM
dannyngan's Avatar
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,154
Why build an engine from scratch when you can just license it, learn it, and make the games? It's proven technology. There's wide support of it. No need to reinvent the wheel (again). Much simpler that way. Plus, with access to the source code, the dev teams can make whatever changes they need to make the engine work for them.

Also, by using an existing engine, there's less training that needs to be done for new employees. Chances are pretty good that new team members will have already worked with an engine like Unreal or Renderware or what-have-you, so they already know the basics.

The bottom line is developers need an engine that allows them to get their games done. "Innovation" doesn't necessarily mean a shippable product. Crytec and Far Cry aren't the norm. One game out of hundreds only means it can be done, but it is far from a sure bet.

Developing an engine *and* developing a game concurrently takes a very long time. You have to split your time between tool development and content development, and you have to somehow pay for that time. Most games take at least 1 to 2 years to produce. Add an engine onto that and development time can inflate to 2-4 years. The cost of something like that can run into the several millions of dollars (gotta pay the bills, pay your employees, pay for hardwares and software). Not exactly a cheap or easy thing to do.

Licensing engine might seem to cost a lot of money up front, but it can be worthwhile invest of time and money. Spend $100k on an engine that works right now and start making a game. Or spend a few hundred thousand dollars a year for the next 2-3 years to develop an engine that may or may not work all the while trying to make a game with an engine that isn't done. Do the math.

Man, after 7 years in this industry, I'm really starting to sound like the grumpy old guy. It's Monday. :p


Danny Ngan
Animator | Amaze Entertainment
my website | my blog | my job
# 10 07-06-2005 , 09:15 AM

watch this


Posting Rules Forum Rules
You may not post new threads | You may not post replies | You may not post attachments | You may not edit your posts | BB code is On | Smilies are On | [IMG] code is On | HTML code is Off

Similar Threads