Hows the framerate in Unreal Championship?

Tagrineth said:
randycat99 said:
So are there any benefits at all to the Unreal engine's CPU appetite (assuming you have the resources), or is the Quake engine just the better designed engine for the current state of computer architecture?

Karma physics.

Play the Am. Football like mode, and fall down one of the pits under the goal rings. Watch as your corpse bounces realistically off the bars! (that in and of itself is far too addictive)

Isnt the karma physics system comparable to the physics system used in halo?
Suppose that suffers when things heat up, but not in open areas
 
sergio_r said:
Tagrineth said:
randycat99 said:
So are there any benefits at all to the Unreal engine's CPU appetite (assuming you have the resources), or is the Quake engine just the better designed engine for the current state of computer architecture?

Karma physics.

Play the Am. Football like mode, and fall down one of the pits under the goal rings. Watch as your corpse bounces realistically off the bars! (that in and of itself is far too addictive)

You mean Rag Doll physics? This isnt really anything new, is it?
 
The quake 3 engine pushes a lot of polygons considering it doesn't off load the lighting to the GPU. It's probably about as good as it gets for the non-DX7 T&L generation -- well more like L.

The thing with the Unreal engine is as follows, the engine used in Unreal Tournament was basically a hacked up software rasterizer. It spent a lot of time culling. This meant it was very CPU bound. I believe this is the Unreal engine v 2.x

Unreal Tournament 2003 is version 4.x. This engine doesn't spend so much time culling, so it's faster in that regard. However, I believe Tim Sweeny's goes by the belief that the compiler will handle the implementation optimizations and concentrates on algoritimic (more design) optimzations. The thing is that algorithmic optimizations earn you a lot of performance, but there is a lot left behind. When you have lots of AI, Physics and all that going on you bog the CPU down.

The other thing to note is the butt load of geometry that is being pushed, this is probably causing the XBox to choke, since it doesn't have enough RAM. I believe, in outdoor areas the amount of geometry just makes the Xbox start calling on the information stored on disk since there isn't enough space in RAM. This sucks really bad thanks to the fact that IDE sucks up lots of CPU power. This is probably just another big reason for geometry compression through HoS and what not.

I think it comes down to the fact that the Unreal 4.x engine is a little bloated for the Xbox. But that's okay so long as you don't release a game with the Unreal 4.x engine for the Xbox.
 
Hitman 2's physics are almost as good (okay, not quite) but it has 10x the performance of UT2k3 on low-end PCs.

Still, the fact that games like Hitman2 and NOLF2 with good physics engines run so much better than UT2k3 casts the "ut2k3 is only sllow because of physics" argument into quite some doubt.
 
BoddoZerg,

Could you please prove your claim about Hitman 2's performance vs Unreal 2003 performance?
 
Back
Top