Game engine comparisons (UDF2, AC, KZ2 etc.)

[Phil]

Mod : This is clearly a topic some people want, so here it is - a chance to discuss your favourite game engine and how it compares with others.

The origin of this thread is from the Uncharted 2 game thread, the latest victim of this common derailment, where Uncharted2 was being compared to other games in terms of technical and artistic accomplishment. Games like AC and UDF are trying to combine a bit of everything a graphic engine needs to create a natural environment. This is a tough job, and obviously compromises are going to be made. There's scope for an interesting debate and developer choices in large-scale worlds. There's also some comparison with other dissimilar but 'Technical Excellence' poster-child games like KZ2. Of course what constitutes 'technical excellence' will probably be subjective

Now ordinarily these discussions are not allowed because contributors find themselves unable to remain civil, but I'm giving you all a chance. Here you can wax lyrical about all your favourite looking games and compare them to other games, in the most respectful and thoughtful fashion, without having to mess up other game threads. Of course this thread will be watched closely with an exceedlingly low tolerance for the wrong sort of contribution, and infractions freely handed out. Think of it as an extra freedom of discussion for those who understand and respect the rules, a privilege with an associated responsibility that will have an associated cost. If you don't think you can talk sans sarcasm, biting remark, ad hominem, etc. you really don't want to be posting here. Check your posts very carefully before submitting, as to catch stealth-trollage and under-the-radar attacks, I'll smite anything that looks the least bit controversial.

---

Well, maybe in an effort to get back on topic - having seen the footage in full resolution on the big screen (though the footage I downloaded from Gamersyde is clearly highly compressed), it's not as impressive as the small down-sized screen would let you believe. As has been mentioned, there's some great use of texturing and mapping that gives the illusion of a very high polygon usage. Looking at walls as well from an angle shows the illusion quite well, sadly.

Even so, the game looks great and I'm impressed by the smooth motion and steady framerate so far. I still think KZ2 has an advantage on the technical side, but these two different games and both do a very good job of playing to the strengths of what they are trying to achieve. I also like that in Uncharted 2, the great shadows are back, lots of moving plants and an environment that seems to be quite dynamic. Together with the no loading screens, it's impressive for sure. Then I'm sure, there's going to be great water again - an area where the first Uncharted still impresses.

 

[_phil_]

I still think KZ2 has an advantage on the technical side

Animation system is 'technical side' ,and doing all this with continous streaming is also 'technical side'.

Lighting too, because colored and saturated worlds are a hell much more difficult to make.
I'm really more impressed by ND.

 

[tha_con]

Well, maybe in an effort to get back on topic - having seen the footage in full resolution on the big screen (though the footage I downloaded from Gamersyde is clearly highly compressed), it's not as impressive as the small down-sized screen would let you believe. As has been mentioned, there's some great use of texturing and mapping that gives the illusion of a very high polygon usage. Looking at walls as well from an angle shows the illusion quite well, sadly.

Even so, the game looks great and I'm impressed by the smooth motion and steady framerate so far. I still think KZ2 has an advantage on the technical side, but these two different games and both do a very good job of playing to the strengths of what they are trying to achieve. I also like that in Uncharted 2, the great shadows are back, lots of moving plants and an environment that seems to be quite dynamic. Together with the no loading screens, it's impressive for sure. Then I'm sure, there's going to be great water again - an area where the first Uncharted still impresses.

I have to disagree about KZ2 having a technical advantage. I think Uncharted 2 does a lot more things that KZ2 does not, specifically when it comes to animation and textures. Lighting is questionable, but I don't know lighting well enough to make that call.

 

[obonicus]

Why are UC2/KZ2 an open world/mentioned in the same breath as AC2?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Because they were being incorporated into the discussion on Uncharted 2 Oh, and it's AC1 that's being compared, not AC2. If there's any reference stuff for that (gameplay footage), I'm sure someone will be happy to bring it to the party.

 

[joker454]

You may want to tweak the game list for this discussion. Games like Assasins Creed and GTA4 are open world with very different demands compared to UC2 and KZ2, they aren't really comparable.

 

[tha_con]

I don't think we're talking strictly open world stuff. I think this should move more into animation, lighting, rendering techniques, etc.

In fact, I'd almost go as far as to say this could just be general engine comparison discussion. Afterall, 6 months from now people will be comparing different games to eachother, and 6 months after that the same will happen again.

 

[Arwin]

Yes, game engine comparison is probably more suitable.

Anyway, I think the KZ2 and Uncharted engines almost couldn't be more different, even if they share technology. KZ2 is filled with all sorts of smoke, pixel, light-bleeding, DOF etc. effects, whereas Uncharted has almost nothing (at least so far) - there's some motion blur on distant objects and in 2 there's more DOF it seems. Other than that I don't see a lot. The lighting is very different - KZ has no real HDR, Uncharted has very high quality HDR. KZ has limited color palette, Uncharted and especially part 2 is very, very colorful. Texture quality of Uncharted remains very high, where KZ2 has good, but not comparable. Uncharted is a very slowly paced game compared to KZ2, which isn't fast, but much faster than Uncharted. The environments, draw distance and such in KZ2 is also a lot bigger, and you can shoot and see (for instance the red eyes of Helghast) over incredible distances.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You may want to tweak the game list for this discussion. Games like Assasins Creed and GTA4 are open world with very different demands compared to UC2 and KZ2, they aren't really comparable.

Doesn't stop people comparing them though That's what makes these discussions kinda funky...

I've made a title change, which was originally based on the talk from UC2, to be more encompassing.

 

[tha_con]

I think KZ2 and Uncharted 2 both excel at what their good at.

KZ2 isn't a game that is about the "best" in any one area, rather, having great effects all aroung that come together to create a very immersive experience. The motion blur, DOF, lighting, smoke, grit, and animation all come together to make a very detailed experience.

In Uncharted, "realism" isn't a large focus, and the area's it excels at are top notch (lighting, textures, animation). But the game has never had a large focus on motion blur, realistic modeling, DOF, and other special effects.

Honestly, I would have really loved to see Killzone 2 have some sort of 3rd person view. Even if only for a "test" of sorts, I think the game would be absolutely stunning in 3rd person, even if it is a departure from the series norm.

One game I think people can look forward to (at least for some great collision and animation) is Fight Night Round 4. It seems no one is talking about it, but even in my limited time with the demo, I was blown away by it's sophiticated physics based animation and collision detection. It is fantastic.

 

[betan]

Uncharted is a very slowly paced game compared to KZ2, which isn't fast, but much faster than Uncharted.

How is that? I think Uncharted is significantly faster paced than KZ2.
It's probably one of the fastest paced 3rd person shooter I have played this gen, and unlike you I'm annoyed by the slow climbing sequences as they are really mood killer for me.

Anyway, Uncharted 2 seems mighty impressive graphically, but I wish they had a signature art style as opposed to generic (realistic) look.

 

[tha_con]

How is that? I think Uncharted is significantly faster paced than KZ2.
It's probably one of the fastest paced 3rd person shooter I have played this gen, and unlike you I'm annoyed by the slow climbing sequences as they are really mood killer for me.

Anyway, Uncharted 2 seems mighty impressive graphically, but I wish they had a signature art style as opposed to generic (realistic) look.

I think Uncharted is still extremely stylized, it shows in the facial animations of the characters. They're pretty exaggerated, almost "cartoonish" for a human face.

I think Uncharted does good to make it's signature it's story and setting, rather than it's visuals (which are still mighty impressive).

 

[betan]

I think Uncharted is still extremely stylized, it shows in the facial animations of the characters. They're pretty exaggerated, almost "cartoonish" for a human face.

Only for character models, even then it's very inconsistent. The first had hand drawn comic book style character models, some of which were quite awesome, but it had also plastic doll looking characters.

It's a tough spot though, even if they nail all character models perfectly, it's really hard to make it consistent with the lighting and texture detail of the environment which, at least for me, are well above the comic book style. That said, U2 seems to be doing fine in that regard.

 

[NRP]

The thread title should perhaps be called "rendering engines" rather than "game engines", since everyone so far seems to be talking about graphics. When I think of "game engine", I think of more general game features like co-op (online and offline), multiplayer (split screen, LAN, and online), etc.

 

[ultragpu]

KZ2 has more stuffs happening on the screen than UC2 and more impressive particle effects. UC2 however has excellent textures and SSAO to boot. Their lighting engines excel in different ways, it's like 350 light sources Vs. very high quality HDR with possible GI? The cartoony but extremely high polycount of character modeling in UC Vs. the realistic but less dense in poly models of KZ2? Either game have excellent animations, though the death animation in KZ2 is the best I've seen this gen. I have to see more of UC2 to make any meaningful conclusion, cant wait for the bigger open wildness level as promised. But so far KZ2 still has the edge.

 

[Squilliam]

I figuered I might as well jump in and get involved here.

When making a comparison tbetween some of the more linear vs open world engines what considerations must be made for the open world games for there to be a fair comparison? If you're comparing an engine/game where the developer has the freedom to tailor everything you see to an optimal illusion essentially, how much of that visual gloss can be attributed to the developer and how much to the engine the game is running on?

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Vs. very high quality HDR with possible GI?

Surely not realtime (dynamic) GI, but prebaked?

 

[AlNom]

Surely not realtime (dynamic) GI, but prebaked?

For a rather static environment, pre-baked GI would make the most sense.

 

[Mobius1aic]

I really like the original CryEngine and of course CryEngine 2.0. As much crap as people give CE2 in the case of Crysis and Crysis Warhead I think it's the best engine out their right now in terms of graphics, though it would be nice to see some more procedural destruction and for later on I hope it has some better liquid physics, though the water looks great. Nice graphics need a good graphics card so quit complaining about lack of optimization, when it's pretty impressive for the hardware it's being ran on >:/

As for the original CryEngine, it's still a great looking engine when properly developed for. Ever played the Delta Sector mod for Far Cry, absolutely incredible. Though I always wondered why the PC version of Far Cry didn't have full on shadow mapping for all objects in the game unless you made it possible in the editor. Though I will mention, the shadows were terribly blocky when I enabled them, anyone got any information on this predicament? FC:Instincts Predator on the 360 seemed to fix the low shadow map resolution while employing it across everything without a problem. I did hear that at the time, there was an issue with full shadowing and the engine, and I guess it would've just bogged down current PC hardware considering everything else looked pretty good plus the high resolution the game would be ran at unlike the the Xbox versions where the shader and texture quality was comparatively lacking by a huge degree but of course was running at 640 x 480 and still full shadowing was pulled off except with VERY blocky shadows haha, oh and lower draw distance too, but the game was still a very impressive piece of work for hardware that was about half as powerful as the hardware I was running Far Cry on. But of course, I got better textures, draw distance, shaders, and higher resolution, all on my laptop!

 

[Neb]

The soft edge shadows/shadow blur setting didn't work. So even with 2048x2048 shadowmap it still had jaggies. Would the soft edge/blur work the default 512x512 would have looked much better. XD

But yeah even today it is quite impressive even without mods/packs. And that was without the HDR update in the later patches. 1 2


Also Far Cry 2 although different devs and game it is amazingly beauthiful. I am surprised people dont talk more about the Dunia engine when talking about graphics. Sure it has liight gameplay but the graphcis is really good. Even if the console version is less detailed it still is amongst the best showcases. The HDR lighting (32bit or more on PC? "HdrFP32="1"), procedural sky/wind, quite consistent high-res textures, really highres shadows, limited destructibility, water rendering, HDR particles etc. Also edges are exceptionally sharp and clean despite 4xAA (DX10.1?) giving it the bullshot/promo look.