That's not quite accurate at all. Do you think Epic has only been working on UE4 for the last year or 3 years or so?
Crytek: "It's physically & financially impossible to go higher than the PS4 & Xbox ∞"
- Thread starter Cyan
- Start date
That's not quite accurate at all. Do you think Epic has only been working on UE4 for the last year or 3 years or so?
Crysis 2 (CE3) launched March 2011.
First UE4 games may launch around late 2013 / Q1 2014. That's roughly 3 years.
Not the point and thanks for not answering the question.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think he's basically saying what a lot of us have been saying for years: These systems had to be sub 200 watt and sub $500. PS4 takes us right where we'd expect to be, the only change from the last generation is the way power and cost requirements have kept rising making it "mid-range" rather than leading edge.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Noone? Just recently a AAA game was released using CryEngine 3. Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 just launched. MechWarrior Online uses it. Nexiuz used it. Not impressed? Unreal Engine and Unreal Engine 2 had similarly bad industry uptake. Consider that America's Army was perhaps the most famous UE2 licensed game.
Yerli is correct however. Next gen consoles won't even be able to run CryEngine 3 with all features enabled. CryEngine is basically the pinnacle of 3D rendering game engines.
Looking back at it, it also took Epic with Unreal Engine multiple years and multiple engines to come close to matching iD Software's engine licensing volume despite having the superior 3D rendering engine (IMO).
There's a lot of inertia with development studios sticking with what they know as well as continuing to use the development tools they are familiar with.
Which has nothing to do with Cevat Yerli's statements.
3 years ago, they were certainly still focused on UE3. Tim Sweeny was likely working on things he'd like to have in UE4 at that time, however. And probably even implementing some of it into UE3 to see how things worked out.
But you could make the same argument for Crytek. Back in 2008 (3 years before Crysis 2 launched) they had just wrapped up the last game they developed using CryEngine 2 (Crysis: Warhead). Whoever is in charge of Engine development for Crytek had probably already started to mess around with things that would dictate where CryEngine 3 would be.
So yes, Crytek can arguably be said to be ~3 years (or more) ahead of Epic. And that's not taking anything away from Epic. Anything more than UE3 wasn't needed for the current console generation, it wasn't going to be able to properly push anything higher (CryEngine 3 is far more advanced than UE3, but basically had to be castrated significantly to be able to run on current gen consoles).
Tim Sweeny is a brilliant man. If Epic had been focused on the PC space as much as Crytek has been, then they likely would have been able to match CryEngine 3. Being focused on consoles, however, means that Unreal Engine didn't really need to see that sort of advancement.
Regards,
SB
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Consider that America's Army was perhaps the most famous UE2 licensed game.
RLY?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unreal_Engine_games
Noone? Just recently a AAA game was released using CryEngine 3. Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 just launched. MechWarrior Online uses it. Nexiuz used it. Not impressed? Unreal Engine and Unreal Engine 2 had similarly bad industry uptake. Consider that America's Army was perhaps the most famous UE2 licensed game.
lol! The list wars: they are on their 3rd iteration of the engine and all you got is Ghost Warrior and Mechwarrior? No, Unreal's uptake was never this slow. At their current pace, they'll almost be a decade away before they even get the amount of support that UE2 had. Unless Epic is a total ****-up (possible) figuratively speaking, nobody is going to be using CE.
UE4 has been in development since 2003 or was it 04? But around that time. The only real difference on the time scale is the amount of time Epic had to support UE3 with updates due to the prolonged ps3 and 360 generation. They beat Epic to the marketplace and they got such fine examples of ghost warrior. Need I say more?
Furthermore calling Ghost Warrior "AAA" is a bit of a stretch but I'll bite and I'll bet by 2014 Epic will have triple the amount using UE4 and at least on of those games are going to out sell all the CE games combined. So riddle me this: who is actually behind in that scenario?
Last edited by a moderator:
They are doing something very similar since more than two years already, it's called "CryENGINE 3 Free SDK", see:
http://www.crytek.com/news/crytek-releases-cryengine-3-sdk-free-of-charge
and:
http://www.crydev.net/dm_eds/download_detail.php?id=4
Cool! Wil definitely give that a shot, UDK didn't really click with me yet.
dragonelite
Veteran
Performance will find its way.
I did answer your question. You're just ignoring the point raised by both myself and SB.
CE3 with full DX11//next gen support hit the market in the form of a game you can buy roughly 3 years ahead of UE4 sporting the same feature set.
You asked do I think Epic has only been working on UE4 for the last year or 3 years or so? I respond to say that's completely irrelevant. However long Epic were working on UE4, Crytek would have been working on CE3 for a similar period given similar skill sets and similar capabilities of the final engines.
So unless you're suggesting Epic has been sitting on a fully completed UE4 for the last 3 years then Crytek is still 3 years ahead. And even if Epic had been sitting on a fully completed UE4 for the last 3 years it's still irrelevant. Crytek were 3 years ahead where it mattered - releasing a game on a "next gen" engine" and releasing a "next gen" engine for licensing to third parties roughly 3 years before Epic.
I do think he has been essentially sitting on it. No one simply paid Sweeney enough to get better than DX9 support up till now ... only when the DX11 feature set became relevant to next gen console development did he publish UE4.
Sweeney's lowest common denominator approach to engine development (in absence of payola) is probably one of the biggest forces opposing useful support of hardware innovation on the PC ever ... it's unfortunate his engines are as good as they are for that lowest common denominator.
Sweeney's lowest common denominator approach to engine development (in absence of payola) is probably one of the biggest forces opposing useful support of hardware innovation on the PC ever ... it's unfortunate his engines are as good as they are for that lowest common denominator.
^^Thank you, MfA, logic. Yes, Sweeney has said as much already, he's been working on UE4 far longer than Crytek has been working on CE3 by almost 3 years.
You're making hundreds of millions of dollars licensing technology to who needs it ( the lowest common denominator ). That's where the money is, that's what relevant, not how hard you can push the highest end hardware, that what's irrelevant. pjbliverpool and silent budda are so off base, about as clueless as crytek.
You're making hundreds of millions of dollars licensing technology to who needs it ( the lowest common denominator ). That's where the money is, that's what relevant, not how hard you can push the highest end hardware, that what's irrelevant. pjbliverpool and silent budda are so off base, about as clueless as crytek.
Last edited by a moderator:
L. Scofield
Veteran
Ghostz, can you tell me (backed by sources) when did the development of both CE3 and UE4 started?
Probably the most important shift is that compared to UE2, UE3 and UE4 were clearly geared for consoles first, whereas because Crytek was still making games with PC-focused improvements, CryEngine 3 had to have "next-gen effects" effectively 3 years earlier. Perhaps if there was a greater demand for an Unreal Tournament 4 which would have skewed more towards a PC fanbase, UE4 would have been released sooner, but as everyone already knows, there's still far more money in consoles.
A successful PC game makes more money than a console bust ... if there was more engine competition more engines would have tried to differentiate by for instance better supporting the PC. The UE monoculture brought on by his earlier innovation and first mover advantage allowed him to retard software innovation as much as he did ... I think without Sweeney everyone would have had decent MSAA implementations by now.
Consoles could go beyond that. Other consumer electronics sell for far more than 500 dollars, and all you need for over 200 watts is a bigger case and cooling solution.
L. Scofield
Veteran
Mhh, interesting.
How many of those high-selling, expensive devices are big?
In all fairness, if they are not portable they are not portable. So long as they are not the size of an Air Conditioner (ie - fit on the shelf) it doesn't really matter. Your point still stands though, most living room CE purchased have to be under 200$ and probably under 100$.
