Jump to content

Home

JK4 Game Engine? (No arguments about Q3 engine)


babywax
 Share

What engine would you like JK4 to use?  

71 members have voted

  1. 1. What engine would you like JK4 to use?

    • Far Cry Engine
      1
    • Source Engine - Half Life 2
      35
    • Doom 3/Quake 4 (they will use the same engine)
      24
    • Stalker Engine
      1
    • Unreal engine (some build, like Republic Commando will use)
      10


Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Rumor

d3 engine uses bsp's kiddo.

 

hl was built off of quake 2 not quake 1.

 

every engine after quake in the series has been built off of the quake engine. why do you think many of the commands etc are very very similar? d3 is just the next rendition.

 

HL2 uses the Source engine. not the havok engine. DX2 uses unreal warfare afiak (don't really care what it uses)

 

engines will continue to use .bsp's until a better system is devised.

 

please bring actual knowledge and facts to the table if you are going to debate.

 

1. No, it doesn't, BSP is obsolete. At least the way it's done in Quake. Doom III is all new in that department. There's very little precompiling, if any (I can only think of a stage to break up brushes, which may not be needed). Doom III has mapper placed portals instead of the old cluster, leaf node and portal stuff generated at the compile time.

 

2. A common myth, Half-Life was actually built off the original Quake engine, but had some of the aspects Quake II had.

 

3. Right, each Quake is built off the previous (but don't let that make you think Quake II is just a "modded" Quake and Quake III is just a "modded" Quake II, because that's quite off). I read somewhere that Doom III started as the Quake III engine, only so it would be easier to code in individual aspects, e.g. replace the renderer, and still have the other code in place to make it easier to test. I have no idea how true this is. And, don't think it's built off Quake III just because of the console commands, that's stupid. The console is so similar because, well, the Quake console just kicks ass, and so do the naming schemes for cvars and commands.

 

4. Uh, yeah, HL2 runs off Valve's Source engine, which uses the Havok physics engine, developed by Havok. Deus Ex: Invisible War and Thief III use the Unreal engine (there's only one Unreal engine, by the way, just various incarnations), and also use the Havok physics engine, along with a plethora of other games out there.

 

5. No, buddy, not many engines use BSP as you think. Nothing Unreal doesn't, nothing pre-Quake does, and a lot of engines use proprietary stuff, which I don't know much about, and also some octree stuff.

 

6. Yeah, you should bring facts to the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by Master William

Halo engine? don't get me started there. Not to mention Halo in general sucks ass, now we have to use its engine? Flying and driving is also very sloppy.

 

halo's vehicle system is one of the best and most accessible systems ever.

 

you implying that JA's system is better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, I can't stand all this fanboy drooling over the Doom3 engine. The fact is, Doom 3 looks FAKE. Sure, the lighting's great, but everything looks like plastic or clay. It's WAY overhyped. The Source engine is extremely close to photorealistic. The water alone looks 100% REAL, and the physics are fantastic. Source all the way.

 

http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/09.jpg

 

http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/17.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rumor, for a good vehicle system see Tribes 2 or, for the best out now IMO, Battlefield 1942. Battlefield has very, very well done aircraft and land vehicles.

 

4. Uh, yeah, HL2 runs off Valve's Source engine, which uses the Havok physics engine, developed by Havok. Deus Ex: Invisible War and Thief III use the Unreal engine (there's only one Unreal engine, by the way, just various incarnations), and also use the Havok physics engine, along with a plethora of other games out there.

You probably know this already, but just for the sake of it for people who don't, Half-Life 2 will use the Havok 2 physics engine, incorporated into the Source engine.

 

Real-time lighting CAN be programmed in, although it is no easy task. See my posts above, focusing on the Tenebrae 2 quake 2 modification. The enviroments easily rival Doom 3, atleast in the screenshots. I'm sure it has worse performance, but still it shows what can be done by even a non-professional team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Programmed into HL2? Haha, no way, not unless they open source the engine, which is never going to happen. And Havok 2 is Havok with a few constraints and a little added here or there, it's basically the same (although I am curious to see if Ion Storm has made any shocking significant improvements in Havok for DX2/T3, they did a lot more with Unreal than a lot of people thought they would).

 

And, yeah, Tenebrae 2 rivals Doom III in most areas except speed, and it doesn't have Carmack's miracle fix to stencil shadow self shading (the "bug" people like to talk about in the JO/JA shadows, it's not actually a bug, it's functioning perfectly, which makes it hard to "fix"). Although, I think Tenebrae 2 uses static bumpmapping (I know it CAN at the very least).

 

MMP, I could go on about how I can't stand HL2 fanboy drooling over the Source engine, too. Some of the newer Doom III screenshots don't look nearly as fake as the older ones, it's really been cut back. The E3 2003 trailer also shows some better stuff. You should also open your eyes and look around you. Almost everything is shiney and reflective to some degree. I'll admit some of the designers for Doom III overuse it, but I think a lof of people's calling it too shiney is the fact that almost every game until now has been totally NOT shiney.

 

It's also the game itself. It's sci-fi, but not the grundgy kind of sci-fi you often see in Star Wars, it's all clean and polished stuff on a Mars base or whatever. System Shock 2 looks just the same way, except without the bumpmapping. Metal based environments are going to be shiney. They're METAL.

 

I mean, gee, notice how the natural areas in JA, or the more rocky type areas like Tatooine or Ord Mantell generally look a lot more realistic than an Imperial base? Generally, fake things look fake, because they ARE fake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by babywax

Battlefield has very, very well done aircraft

 

I don't know of it's condition now, after patches and expansions, but I hated the plane controls when I first played it. There wasn't any throttle, it was either full power, or nothing. To fly somewhere in the middle, I had to tap the button at different rates, which was really lame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by babywax

Rumor, for a good vehicle system see Tribes 2 or, for the best out now IMO, Battlefield 1942. Battlefield has very, very well done aircraft and land vehicles.

 

 

You probably know this already, but just for the sake of it for people who don't, Half-Life 2 will use the Havok 2 physics engine, incorporated into the Source engine.

 

Real-time lighting CAN be programmed in, although it is no easy task. See my posts above, focusing on the Tenebrae 2 quake 2 modification. The enviroments easily rival Doom 3, atleast in the screenshots. I'm sure it has worse performance, but still it shows what can be done by even a non-professional team.

 

for aircraft bf is much better if you are going for a more realistic experience.

 

halo as i said is the most approchable. its vehicle system (esp for land vehicles) is far better than t2. also imho than bf, although i would change some things about the way it handles certain vehicles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Emon

I don't know of it's condition now, after patches and expansions, but I hated the plane controls when I first played it. There wasn't any throttle, it was either full power, or nothing. To fly somewhere in the middle, I had to tap the button at different rates, which was really lame.

 

good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by babywax

Emon, it COULD be programmed in, I didn't say mod developers would be able to do it, because almost anyone knows that would require the full source. Not just an SDK.

 

Uh, the whole renderer would have to be scraped and written just about from scratch...isn't this some of what took Valve the last 4 years, or so, to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, believe Emon and me...we know what we're talking about. We've worked with this kind of technology...it can't be simply added into the engine, as if it were like changing a variable. The lighting is most of what the renderer does in a game like Doom 3. More than 50% of the computer's power is used for the shadows.

 

Look, think about this...Tenebrae was originally done in Quake...why was this? Because that was the only engine whose source code had been released at the time they started! They've been working on it for a hell of a lot of friggin years!

 

The only reason John Carmack was able to program the Doom 3 engine so quickly is because he is, quite literally, a genius. Even Doom 3 wasn't much of a challenge for him, since he knows computer graphics inside out so well. In fact, he started a company to make a spaceship to compete for the X-Prize...he's literally a rocket scientist. Computer graphics pose so little a challenge to him, he's getting bored with it, and wants a better challenge. Other companies that develop a game engine, have a large teams to make it...Tenebrae had a large team of programmers working on it. But John Carmack still manages to single handedly make better engines in a shorter amount of time.

 

Now, please try to understand...we're not talking about changing a couple variables here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it could be programmed in with the existing system, I can think of a few ways. You could do dynamic lightmaps, which would be, uh, really ****ing stupid, because it would be too slow for any machine in probably the next ten years. It could also be possible to use the Z-buffer shadow technique they used on the models and objects, and apply it to the world. Only it would look bad and would run really slow, and from the looks of it, that code doesn't do multiple shadows, so yeah, it would be ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had a choice, I'd use the Glacier engine, it has great physics and can render beautiful graphics and lots of NPCs on a slow machine, my computer is ancient yet I can play Hitman 1 and 2 with high settings and not have any slow-downs.

 

Though I think alot of tweaking would be needed if the Glacier engine were to be used for Star Wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Samuel Dravis

I didn't think Star wars games were supposed to be terrifying. :D

 

What he's trying to say is the Doom III engine makes it feel like you're REALLY there and in the game, and provides a realistic experience. And I'll agree, it's one phenominal engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lighting and Shadows: A combination of precalculated, real time shadows, stencil shadows and lightmaps to produce a dynamic environment. Includes high-resolution, correct perspective, and volumetric smooth-shadow implementations for dramatic and realistic indoor shadowing. Supports advanced particles technology and any kind of volumetric lighting effects on particles.

Taken directly off of the crytek website. Take special note of:

for dramatic and realistic indoor shadowing.

Real time shadows are only indoors it looks like. I guess this has something to do with the fact that they use heightmaps for outdoor enviroments, and model the indoor enviroments in 3dsmax, kind of like battlefield. I bet they could still do shadows outdoor though.

This does however explain why there aren't shadows in the outdoors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...