Unreal Technology site updated new screens and tech...

[JD]

Still, you would think they would fix such obvious bugs in any version before releasing it. Glad to hear they fixed it.

 

[Ostsol]

Still, you would think they would fix such obvious bugs in any version before releasing it. Glad to hear they fixed it.

I agree, but like I said: if no one complains, nothing gets done. I'm not sure that they were really serious about marketting their toolset until Unreal Engine 2.0, anyway. I recall that the release of the editor for the first Unreal was entirely unsupported. Heck, when Ion Storm released the editor for Deus Ex it wasn't supported, either.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Still, you would think they would fix such obvious bugs in any version before releasing it. Glad to hear they fixed it.

I agree, but like I said: if no one complains, nothing gets done. I'm not sure that they were really serious about marketting their toolset until Unreal Engine 2.0, anyway. I recall that the release of the editor for the first Unreal was entirely unsupported. Heck, when Ion Storm released the editor for Deus Ex it wasn't supported, either.

UE2/2.5 editor is unsupported to the public. I would guess if you were an official engine licensee, you could get tools fixed either for a fee or as part of the support fee.

 

[SlmDnk]

Unreal Engine 3 demo @ E3 2005 (ShakyCamâ„¢).

http://www.nvnews.net/articles/e3_2005/unrealengine3demos.wmv (15m 26s, 320x240, 56.2MB)

- Demoed with 2x GeForce6800 Ultra SLI
- Lots physics stuff shown (NovodeX)
- Gears Of War played at the end

The quality of the video could be better but it's good enough to see the awesomeness.

EDIT: Mirror

http://rapidshare.de/files/1884275/unrealengine3demos.part1.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/1884473/unrealengine3demos.part2.rar.html

 

[suryad]

Linky doesnt work!!

 

[Intel17]

The renderer is good, but from what I've seen recently, proper shadowing is obviously not one of UE3's design goals, and they are still relying on mixed methods, pre-computation etc..., which is fine, and I'm sure it'll look great and be peformance attractive, but there are renderers out there now in games which can compete quite nicely and some on the horizon which will make UE3 not so impressive.

How is proper shadowing not one of UE3's design goals? Mixed methods are great for both performance and image quality: no current shadowing algorithm is best for all situations. Pre-computation is also necessary for the best combination of image quality and performance. It's just impossible to do realtime global illumination right now, and will be for some time, so pre-computation is just going to happen.

Wait, so mixing methods and utilizing each in the way that they're best suited for is better than one global solution (e.g. all shadowmaps or stencils)? Would UE3 like shadowing be much harder to get working and implimented correctly than just a single algorithm universal?

 

[Richard]

Wait, so mixing methods and utilizing each in the way that they're best suited for is better than one global solution (e.g. all shadowmaps or stencils)? Would UE3 like shadowing be much harder to get working and implimented correctly than just a single algorithm universal?

It's always better in terms of performance to mix impelementations; but it might be more work for the devs. On the other hand they can always leverage that by using several detail levels (like turning off shadow buffers on low-end machines and just use lightmaps) whereas if you use only one shadow implementation you can only turn it all on/off (well, you could have gradients in some implementations like number of samples for SB).

On the other hand again, mixing implementations is always more work for the level designers and it might even introduce limitations. For instance, even though HL2 is physics-happy, you didn't get hanging lamps swinging about when you shot them while D3 did despite its less impressive physics capabilities.

 

[Intel17]

Wait, so mixing methods and utilizing each in the way that they're best suited for is better than one global solution (e.g. all shadowmaps or stencils)? Would UE3 like shadowing be much harder to get working and implimented correctly than just a single algorithm universal?

It's always better in terms of performance to mix impelementations; but it might be more work for the devs. On the other hand they can always leverage that by using several detail levels (like turning off shadow buffers on low-end machines and just use lightmaps) whereas if you use only one shadow implementation you can only turn it all on/off (well, you could have gradients in some implementations like number of samples for SB).

On the other hand again, mixing implementations is always more work for the level designers and it might even introduce limitations. For instance, even though HL2 is physics-happy, you didn't get hanging lamps swinging about when you shot them while D3 did despite its less impressive physics capabilities.

Guess I was wrong then. Perhaps UE3 will be the most technologically superior and flexible of the next generation engines!

 

[bloodbob]

On the other hand again, mixing implementations is always more work for the level designers and it might even introduce limitations. For instance, even though HL2 is physics-happy, you didn't get hanging lamps swinging about when you shot them while D3 did despite its less impressive physics capabilities.

Why can't they do it? just they have to set it up as a dynamic light is all.

 

[Richard]

Why can't they do it? just they have to set it up as a dynamic light is all.

They can but even with a dynamic light the level geometry's shadows wouldn't change accordingly, making it look bad.

 

[Subtlesnake]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

 

[SlmDnk]

Just stopping by to post the goods here

http://www.nvnews.net/articles/e3_2005/sweeneyinterview.wmv

 

[Ostsol]

Why can't they do it? just they have to set it up as a dynamic light is all.

They can but even with a dynamic light the level geometry's shadows wouldn't change accordingly, making it look bad.

So, as far as HL2 goes, there are three basic situations where shadowing works: static light, static geometry; static light, dynamic geometry; and dynamic light, dynamic geometry. Correct?

Just stopping by to post the goods here

http://www.nvnews.net/articles/e3_2005/sweeneyinterview.wmv

Err. . . is there a transcript?

 

[SlmDnk]

Transcript? Come on... even I could understand 95% of what was said and English is not my native language But yeah, it's a little difficult to hear what is said, though. You have to concentrate...

 

[Fodder]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

They're cheap hacks using a transparent sprite, and certainly don't look okay when you get directly under them.

 

[HVZ]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

They're cheap hacks using a transparent sprite, and certainly don't look okay when you get directly under them.

pretty much sums up the source engine :?

 

[karlotta]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

They're cheap hacks using a transparent sprite, and certainly don't look okay when you get directly under them.

pretty much sums up the source engine :?

Hovs is back and trolling again?

 

[HVZ]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

They're cheap hacks using a transparent sprite, and certainly don't look okay when you get directly under them.

pretty much sums up the source engine :?

Hovs is back and trolling again?

maybe its just the truth?

 

[Intel17]

Well, swinging lamps are present in some of the HL2DM levels, and they look OK (although obviously without dynamic shadowing).

They're cheap hacks using a transparent sprite, and certainly don't look okay when you get directly under them.

pretty much sums up the source engine :?

Hovs is back and trolling again?

maybe its just the truth?

I share your opinion regarding the Source Engine, but constant restating of your opinion (which many do not share, I might add) can get extremely annoying and people will eventually label you as a troll.

Please keep your thoughts about this matter to yourself. It's not crucially important for everyone in the world to share your view.

 

[HVZ]

everyone here constantly restates their opinions(this is a forum), people just label those with counter opinions trolls. quick question tho, jvd does NOTHING but troll and restate unpopular opinions, why is he a mod? he does everything he tells others not to do with the threat of a ban.