Game Engines: Too specialized for one game?

[Jedi2016]

I had this thought the other day. What kicked it off was playing some UT3, which is obviously powered by Unreal Engine 3, and got to thinking about some of the other games that use UE3.

It seems that, despite the fact that UE3 is "public", and can be licensed by other developers for their own games, it seems as though it was made a little too specifically for UE3 and other Epic games that use the same overall visual style. I went back and watched the original tech demos of the engine, which were made with some specific tech-demo material, as well as assets we later learned belonged to Gears of War.

The idea I got was that the engine had been made specifically for Epic Games' internal use, and their particular art style, and then simply thrown out there for other developers to see what they can make with it. The shading and lighting all seems to revolve around Epic's art style (which is why it works so amazingly well in UT3 and GoW), and not something "generic" that anyone can use. The only developer I've seen take UE3 and really run with it was Irrational, when they made Bioshock. They didn't try to force the engine to their art style, so much as they blended their style with Epic's style, and created something new and interesting. But everyone else just seems to half-ass it, and while they make a game that functions, there really isn't anything that stands out as being unique.

I got to thinking a bit more, and thought about CryENGINE2. Also licensed out to whoever wants it, but it seems like it was made specifically for Crysis. I've seen a small smattering of screenshots of other CryENGINE2 projects, and it just doesn't look near as good as what Crytek themselves did with it.

Now, obviously, an engine's own developer will usually be able to get more out of it than a stranger to the technology, but it seems like it's more than that. None of these developers seem to be out to create an end-all, be-all game engine for everyone.. they just make their engine for their game, then license it out, and no one else really makes much impressive use of it.

Do you think that sort of defeats the purpose of licensing the engine out? Maybe it's better for AAA developers to just make their own engine, fine-tuned to their own game and art style, rather than trying to use someone else's? I know that's not always possible, and there are times when a developer makes excellent use of another company's engine, but these seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

Thoughts? I know this doesn't mean much of anything in the long run, it's just something I was thinking about.

 

[Dominik D]

Haven't seen UE code myself I can only guess, but I firmly believe there is very little way for an engine to force certain art style on the developer. I'm pretty sure UE is generic enough to support any and every art style human being can come up with. We have examples of games on UE that don't look like UT/GoW: Mirror's Edge, Undertow, American McGee's Grimm, Stranglehold, Lost Odyssey,...

What I believe you confuse for an art style is a set of effects games utilize. It is safe to assume Epic develops little to no effects that won't be used in their games (they said something between those lines during one of the presentations). If developer licensing UE utilizes little to no gfx code outside of what Epic provides, game will obviously look similar. But that's still not an art style.

 

[Tchock]

Mass Effect wasn't special? GASP!
Fatal Intertia didn't look like UT3/GOW either, although it wasn't the best example to put forward as a prime title.
Frontlines: Fuel of War was quite good, and R6 Vegas was decent enough in graphic styles to differentiate from the current "UE3" look.


Capcom's in-house MT Framework does quite nicely too, from Dead Rising to Lost Planet (not too big of a change) to DMC4. Which is quite different in "style" as they say.

Another example I'm seeing is Codemaster's Neon/EGO. First they have their 2 racing games on it, and now it's going to be tooled for OFP2.


Crysis and CE2 is a little different though. I suspect dev tools aren't too robust or friendly to switch form the former UE3 framework.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I think you're only interpreting UE3 results from UE3 titles you recall. Check out this list and you'll see titles across a lot of genres and art styles. Monster Madness, The Agency, Hail To The Chimp and The Last Remnant all have very different styles. I think the 'signature UE3 style' is more a lack of imagination from the devs who use it, or perhaps the fact it's just a standard for the current gen, kinda like how a whole load of games last gen looked similar even on different engines, because that was the look attainable on that hardware.

 

[Acert93]

I think you're only interpreting UE3 results from UE3 titles you recall. Check out this list and you'll see titles across a lot of genres and art styles. Monster Madness, The Agency, Hail To The Chimp and The Last Remnant all have very different styles. I think the 'signature UE3 style' is more a lack of imagination from the devs who use it, or perhaps the fact it's just a standard for the current gen, kinda like how a whole load of games last gen looked similar even on different engines, because that was the look attainable on that hardware.

I think that has a lot to do with it Geezer. Look at Siggraph or the like. Programmers work hard to develop techniques that produce good results within the threshholds of current hardware (or upcoming hardware) and it gets disseminated through the industry. Likewise a lot of developers arrive at similar conclusions about budgets and best practices. An example could be grass or extreme transparencies; the hardware can do these techniques but maybe developers have found moving resources elsewhere gives better IQ results. I also think tends to go in "trends" and people have certain expectations about what is, and isn't, good to the eye. Sometimes recreating the wheel can be a gamble, so following the trend can be the safe route.

 

[Jedi2016]

Mass Effect wasn't special? GASP!

Give me some time, I only picked it up a couple of days ago.

I think the 'signature UE3 style' is more a lack of imagination from the devs who use it, or perhaps the fact it's just a standard for the current gen, kinda like how a whole load of games last gen looked similar even on different engines, because that was the look attainable on that hardware.

I think you might have hit it right there. Taking the quick-and-easy route, and creating a look that's exceptionally easy to do with the engine. Granted, UE3 is impressive, but I'd hate to think the entire generation will be defined by it.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

The UE3 engine does not prefer one artform over another, Epic's games look the same in artform, but thats because they chose to, not because the engine forces you to. There are plenty of games running on the UE3 that looks completely different.

 

[Jedi2016]

The UE3 engine does not prefer one artform over another, Epic's games look the same in artform, but thats because they chose to, not because the engine forces you to.

Yeah, I know, I was pointing out that it seems the engine itself was designed to allow them to hit that style more easily, to the potential exclusion of other styles. Ironic for a game engine that's licensed to everyone and their brother.

 

[zarbaj]

my problem with UE3 is the human models.

it really ruins excellent artstyles like lost odyssey.

ID5/Rage on the other hand is really good at this, just look at this:

http://i33.tinypic.com/34ybji0.jpg
http://i36.tinypic.com/292wxug.jpg

beautiful, though i have yet to see hair haha.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Yeah, I know, I was pointing out that it seems the engine itself was designed to allow them to hit that style more easily, to the potential exclusion of other styles. Ironic for a game engine that's licensed to everyone and their brother.

I dont think the engine itself allow them to hit that style more easily at all, dont see why it would.

 

[ShootMyMonkey]

Yeah, I know, I was pointing out that it seems the engine itself was designed to allow them to hit that style more easily, to the potential exclusion of other styles. Ironic for a game engine that's licensed to everyone and their brother.

It tends to be the case, though, that engines and their updates are basically going to be written with the providers' own projects in mind and not anybody else's. Unreal is no exception, and probably never will be.

It's not so much that the engine is specialized to their game or that it's easier to do Gears art style, but that their concern when developing on it and plowing through bugs and adding features is "what do we need for our project?" As far as the licensees who can use or not use it, it's just a caveat emptor sort of philosophy. If Epic starts adding features that they don't need or interfere with their own work, the standard advice is "you can remove that if you like."

 

[ShaidarHaran]

IMO, the OP's "complaint" can be ascribed to any engine which is used for more than one game, and by multiple developers. If you've ever played a D3-engine game, you'd no doubt be able to pick out any other D3-engine game on sight. At least I know I sure can.

 

[obonicus]

IMO, the OP's "complaint" can be ascribed to any engine which is used for more than one game, and by multiple developers. If you've ever played a D3-engine game, you'd no doubt be able to pick out any other D3-engine game on sight. At least I know I sure can.

I know I can usually tell if something is an UE3 game because of extremely rich textures, to the point of looking polluted. But I don't know if that's not just artstyle as opposed to a technical issue.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

I know I can usually tell if something is an UE3 game because of extremely rich textures, to the point of looking polluted. But I don't know if that's not just artstyle as opposed to a technical issue.

Every engine is designed to give a certain look and feel. Game devs (artists and character/level/object designers) add their own unique touches, but the game will still look like an "X engine" game unless the engine is heavily modified.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But the lists above prove otherwise! Or do Monster Madness, The Agency, Hail To The Chimp and The Last Remnant all look like Gears and UT3 etc. in your eyes?

 

[zarbaj]

The Last Remnant looks like GOW.

I can tell by some of the textures and having seen quite a few game engines in my time.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

This is ridiculous... The only thing common in UE3 games is the depth based haze effect - but only when it is used...

 

[Nesh]

But the lists above prove otherwise! Or do Monster Madness, The Agency, Hail To The Chimp and The Last Remnant all look like Gears and UT3 etc. in your eyes?

I think what the original post wanted to say is that, the UE3 gets the best results by following a similar path in art direction, not that every UE3 game looks similar.

Although it has been used in different art styles and genres, few times do games look outstanding or as outstanding as the ones that used the path of Unreal or Gears.

I am not sure how true this statement is, but the best usage of UE3 I think so far has been done by GoW, Bioshock and UT3 based on what I can remember right now

 

[Arwin]

Well, I can say that there are a bunch of developers that agree with you Nesh, but it just really depends on the kind of game you want to make. It's not a be-all-end-all solution to every problem a developer has, but for certain projects it's great, others sufficient, and others just inappropriate. It depends also on the talent and experience you have in-house as a studio, whether or not you want to do multi-platform releases and so on.

 

[Acert93]

Mirror's Edge is pretty much contrary to everything GeoW/UT3 I regards to art, and it is UE3 based.