Reality Engine Interview

http://www.cgonline.com/images/stories/uc/uc3.jpg

That HUD belongs in Doom 2 or something.

 

Actually, the whole game belong to Doom or something.

There also a MUST-SEE (no joke) Video (~40MB) of the game, Universal Combat - Hostile Intent, BTW.

This game was not using the Reality Engine, before someone asks.

 

Wow...Epic just bought Reality Engine...

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/8229/Epic-Games-Purchases-Reality-Engine-Hires-Tim-Johnson/

 

Yeah...apparently Tim Johnson isn't feeling all that "altrusitic" anymore wrt game engines.

 

I though one of the advantages to 'RealityEngine' was that it offered some newer rendering techniques (HDR, PRT etc ) but with a much lower licensing cost the EPIC's 'Unreal Engine 3'.

Not any more!

 

That's why EPIC bought them, dude!

 

I have a feeling it was bought more for Tim Johnson than for the engine itself.

 

RealityEngine .has better approach on global lighting.
-Realtime Radiosity (PRT) Pipeline
-Dynamic Day/Night Lighting & Shadowing
-Network Level Editing
-Free From BSP/CSG Limitations
-Soft Full-Scene Realtime Shadowing
-GUI Editor.

i'am more seeing an association than a simple buy.


As an artist ,i hightly apreciate what the Reality engine will bring to UE3.

edit:
linky:
http://www.artificialstudios.com/compare.php

 

Sweeney felt a disturbance in the Force, ha?

 

Seriously, I'm not even sure how much Sweeney (sp?) is himself directly involved in the rendering aspect of the engine these days. (He always seemed more interested in developing the development evironment / tools). I wouldn't be surprised if he really wants to pass as much of the coding / engine work off almost completey.

An interview seems to be in order here...*cough*.

 

PRT isn't anything hard to implement. I doubt that Epic will ever go that route, though, due to level build time issues. If anything, I'd be willing to bet that Epic will make use of the networked level editing (Soft full-scene realtime shadowing is automatic with PRT + soft shadowing on dynamic objects, and thus shouldn't be listed in the above, and I'm dubious as to whether the performance can really be there by completely freeing itself from BSP/CSG limitations).

 

It kinda reads that way, doesn't it? Unsure if they'll actually integrate any of it, and giving deep discounts for upgrades to UE3 to existing licensees. Wouldn't be too hard to imagine the conversation going like: Sweeney: "Dude, you rock. Come play with the big boys." Johnson: "Hey, I got an investment here, and licensees that I've made commitments to." Sweeney: "No prob".

Gotta be a pretty good egoboo there for Johnson, and if Sweeney really sees him as nitty gritty tech heir apparent, he probably took him to the mountain top and showed up all the cool toys the big boys get to play with in god mode.

 

Well, the only thing is, if it was just a hostile takeover, they wouldn't have hired Tim on. Epic must obviously feel that Tim Johnson has something to add to the team (other than another Tim).

 

I don't think that's fair. Running Artificial Studios and creating Reality Engine was a blast. Hell I'd do it again if the market conditions were right. However, Epic's a fantastic team, they have an amazing product, and I think I can accomplish a lot more working with them rather than against them at this point.

The problem is in the licensing field there's this insane gap developing as production budgets rise. If you have funding a million dollar engine is nothing, and if you don't have funding a $10K engine is too much. We did pretty well out of Reality, but this growing gap was a real concern to the long-term viability of our business model.

On the flipside that's exactly why I think Epic are going to conquer this market. UE3 is the only real viable complete software suite (apart from Reality <g>) for next-gen games, and it's at a stage where you couldn't hope to replicate its level of functionality internally without blowing 3+ years off your schedule and taking a huge risk. The real challenge remaining now (IMHO) is crossing the traditional genre boundaries licensing typically finds itself in.

BTW, Reality Engine is still actually available for licensing for a bit longer, despite what the press release may say.

 

Well, this is awful news... I hope I don't get the email addresses of the two Tims all mixed up. Can one of you two change your first name please?

 

Hi Tim,

That was tongue in cheek...why did you cut out the smiley

Seriously, best of luck to you!

 

Tim, I think it was a mistake to put up that engine feature comparison chart and comparing on features that might not really matter much. Though, on the bright side, I think whoever did that airplane in the clearing scene deserves a pat on their back. Really nice scene. When I was reading the engine features I had hard time placing the engine at what it's best at. At times it felt like I was reading DX9 api specs without any mention about the efficiency being mentioned. I worry because most hobbyists don't really understand the engine dev. and can't really judge the tradeoffs. I think when you don't have a game to give people and idea of what the engine is capable of that it makes sense to list the costs of each feature as well at the least. But your site read to me like a page out of marketing book and that's not good for endusers imo.

 

Not that it matters now but I don't think Artifical Studios ever had "hobbyists" in mind when they set out on creating a game engine that they want to make money out of.