I agree if we compare graphics. It's not true in a purely technical comparison.
Technical Game Engine Comparisons: non-subjective *OffTopic Cleanup Spawn*
- Thread starter Jupiter
- Start date
- Status
I agree if we compare graphics. It's not true in a purely technical comparison.
Obviously you could but your opinion has far less value than that of Kojima or the GDC awards...
So, Tetris running at 60fps is a more complex game than HZD ? HZD is more complex on about everything when compared to any Dice game. What makes Dice games truly impressive is the framerate.
This comparison is pure fallacy. Uncharted 4 multiplayer is only a small extra next to the single player mode which is the real technical showcase.
Last edited:
That is PR. An Unreal Engine 4 is much more flexible and many developers are using it because the engine is well structured. If he really thinks that the Decima engine is "a league ahead of everywhere else" including something like Unral Engine 4 then I can't take him seriously at all.
Naughty Dogs Engine was just not good enough for a decent looking game at 60fps. Even for a few players and small environments. Uncharted 4 has neither an astonishing number of details per object nor a particularly large number of objects on the screen at 60fps.
Naughty Dogs Engine was just not good enough for a decent looking game at 60fps. Even for a few players and small environments. Uncharted 4 has neither an astonishing number of details per object nor a particularly large number of objects on the screen at 60fps.
Last edited:
AC: Origins is already much better optimized than previous titles of this series but there is still much more possible. The engine from The Division makes a better use of the hardware. id's engine is also very well optimized. Maybe even one of the best besides Dice. On the Xbox One X Wolfenstein often is near to UHD at 60fps.
It's not PR... it's a well known fact that the Unreal Engine 4 isn't the best optimized engine on console : https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/devs-comparing-high-profile-engines.60164/#post-1984523
For instance, the Frostbite engine is already much better on console. But i thought you were impressed by Dice, why do you you change your point with the Unreal Engine 4 ?
Also : "The biggest advantage of an in-house engine is that the engine that you have is very specifically tailored towards the game that you’re making,” van der Leeuw explained. “This means you can be more creative and it can be easier to make use of all of the hardware features. Of course, it also means you need to have a big engine team, which is a downside."
https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/dont-blame-game-engines-for-bad-games-developers-say/
Why do you think that a generic engine would beat a unique engine especially made for a specific hardware ?
Not only Sony studios build their engines for their specific needs but their engines are built with only one hardware in mind...
Once again, you're comparing a small extra vs a full game... it doesn't make any sense. If you want to judge ND, look at their single player mode.
Also, i wonder why they were the previous winner of the GDC awards before Guerilla this year...
http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/03...-of-the-year-at-game-developers-choice-awards
Last edited:
If the engine is better in a small specific point. Then how is it supposed to be a generation ahead of everyone else? I have spoken to some engine programmers who would shake their heads after Kojima's statements.
Adapting an engine for one specific game with some visual fireworks (which many people can do today) is also not as impressive that one could say that they are the best developers. It is impressive when the engine is done so well that even others can also achieve great things with it.
As for Death Stranding, I'm skeptical it's gonna come out fast. The employees don't know the engine as much, there are outside of GG just a few who worked with it (with the Unreal Engine 4 there are many with experience) and who knows if the engine has been designed for strangers to get along with it.
Adapting an engine for one specific game with some visual fireworks (which many people can do today) is also not as impressive that one could say that they are the best developers. It is impressive when the engine is done so well that even others can also achieve great things with it.
As for Death Stranding, I'm skeptical it's gonna come out fast. The employees don't know the engine as much, there are outside of GG just a few who worked with it (with the Unreal Engine 4 there are many with experience) and who knows if the engine has been designed for strangers to get along with it.
Last edited:
It is better than everything else for the needs of his game. As simple as that.
https://archive.is/M2J66
Based on this quote how can you say this : "From all developers Dice gets the most out of the hardware."
It's obviously false... yeah, Sony engines might be less flexible, but they're better than every other engine for what they do. Then, people are surprise when Sony games are praised for their technical achievements...
The most custom engines are those made by first party studios...
Last edited:
Because there are multiple Dice games with 60fps/40 players. Which is quite difficult when considering the hardware of the base consoles. I don't know anything else comparable. id software is the closest after Dice. As far as performance is concerned ids engine is so well designed for the hardware that even GTX 1080 frametimes can be achieved with the Xbox One X.
He said: "I visited many studios all around the world, meeting many great people. Guerrilla Games in Amsterdam: their technology was just a league ahead of everywhere else"
This is generalizing and does not only refer to a special game.
He said: "I visited many studios all around the world, meeting many great people. Guerrilla Games in Amsterdam: their technology was just a league ahead of everywhere else"
This is generalizing and does not only refer to a special game.
Their games still are multiplatforms and they still have to consider the lowest common denominator which is the Xbox One.
Sony studios are not concerned by these problems : they build their engine for their specific needs and for a specific hardware. Other studios can't match that unless they benefice an unsual high budget + amount of time.
Multiplayer games tend to have a far simpler game logic than classic games. Everything is more basic : AI, interactions, animations, scenes complexity, etc.
Obviously, it's still extremely impressive to achieve that at 60fps. I'm not saying it's easy. But Dice games would not impress anyone if they were running at 30fps with that quality.
Moreover, there's a reason why only 60fps games can be ported on Switch...
Last edited:
All that doesn't say anything. For example: How do developers decide on the quality of the objects? Depending on how many are to be displayed at the same time. Not whether it's a multiplayer title or not. If a game displays just a few of the same objects in a scene at the same time it can have e.g. 1 million polygons. If there are several of them in the picture at the same time its better to reduce the polygon degree. So if it has to display 40 characters, it is clear that the level of detail per character is lower than in a game where only 3 characters can be seen at the same time. But then there are still such cases as from Naughty Dog's multiplayer where less characters are displayed than in Battlefront and the quality is also worse at the same time.
The Xbox One has a faster CPU and therefore both consoles have different bottlenecks. Engines are scalable. Why wouldn't they have these problems? When I look at the Pro it has much more flaws than the Xbox One X. Therefore, it also loses significantly more in topics such as resolution than was initially assumed when the raw output was compared.
The Xbox One has a faster CPU and therefore both consoles have different bottlenecks. Engines are scalable. Why wouldn't they have these problems? When I look at the Pro it has much more flaws than the Xbox One X. Therefore, it also loses significantly more in topics such as resolution than was initially assumed when the raw output was compared.
Last edited:
You can continue as much as you want with this pointless comparison, yet ND still won the GDC 2017, not Dice... in more classic games such as Mirror's Edge, which means a situation where the engine has to deal with more comparable problems, the result is already less impressive. In a multiplayer game, everything in the environnement is basically controlled by other players.
If ND only put its ressources in a multiplayer game, the result would be different and you know it. You comparison is flawed from the start. One engine is optimized to run at 30fps and runs at 60fps for a small extra. One engine is optimized since the begining to run at 60fps for the main game.
Not to mention that their multiplayer mode has some expensive special effetcs that you don't see in Dice games.
Sorry, but that's not what we see in multiplatform games. The CPU advantage, very small to begin, is basically cancelled by other hardware disadvantages.
Yeah, that's why you praise SC as the most impressive game in the market... it's because engines are scalable...
Indeed and it's a good example to support my point. X version of exclusive titles usually are far superior to what you can find in multiplatform games.
Last edited:
GDC Awards - winner for best technology
- 2004: Half-Life 2
- 2005: Nintendogs
- 2006: Gears of War
- 2007: Crysis
- 2008: LittleBigPlanet
- 2009: Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
- 2010: Red Dead Redemption
- 2011: Battlefield 3
- 2012: Far Cry 3
- 2013: Grand Theft Auto V
- 2014: Destiny
- 2015: The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
- 2016: Uncharted 4: A Thief's End[21]
- 2017: Horizon Zero Dawn[22]
Sure. Destiny and Witcher III won but their have both a bad engine and performance. GTA V was also not as good 2013. There were many games with a more advanced technology. Who was nominated in 2018 next to Horizon:
- Destiny 2 (Bungie / Activision)
- Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice (Ninja Theory)
- Assassin’s Creed: Origins (Ubisoft Montreal / Ubisoft)
- Horizon Zero Dawn (Guerrilla Games / Sony Interactive Entertainment)
- The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Nintendo EPD / Nintendo)
Destiny 2 with ist bad engine was there again. Wolfenstein and Battlefront 2 look better and have double the frame rate and yet they're not even nominated. CoD and Gran Turismo: Sport are better as well. I wouldn't give too much attention to such GDC awards.
Optimization is optimization. If ND's engine were very well optimized in many areas, the games would also run well at 60fps. Conversely, DOOM also works on the Switch. On the PlayStation 4 Pro the result of Uncharted 4 is also not impressive.
Really? I would rank the the optimization of Wolfenstein and Battlefront 2 above Xbox One esclusive games on Xbox One X.
Last edited:
phoenix_chipset
Regular
Yeah most of those choices are kind of baffling. I can agree with witcher 3 (PC version!), crysis and gears of war and that's about it. UC4 was a 2015 game.. on console i'd give that the win for that year, even now it still isn't out and out beat by any other console game. Only problem I have with that game are some of the post processing choices.
GTA 5 is very impressive... i don't know what's your problem with this game. They really deserved to win.
Wolfenstein 2 has a very low resolution on Xbox One + very unstable framerate. They may use more criterias than you think. Battlefront 1 ran at 720p on Xbox One...
So ND engine isn't optimized now... fine, feel free to find something that matches this then :
The older Battlefront of 2015 matches this easily. Uncharted 4 has a flat 2d ground, low AF, missing shadows in this scene. It does look good, but I don't see how it can keep up with Battlefront Endor. There's a lot more action on the screen in Battlefront.
In 2013 there were even many technically advanced games, where the PlayStation 3 version of GTA V can by no means keep up. Killzone Shadow Fall, Crysis 3, Ryse, Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag etc.
One can like the art style of Witcher III but technically I does not hold up with many other games. For example, the GI is completely missing. Which is why interiors do not look good. In 2014/2015 there were games like AC. Unity, Battlefront, The Order 1866 etc.
In 2011 I would also see Crysis 2 above Battlefield 3. If both games can be compared on the PC today, Crysis 2 can keep up much better with today's titles.
In 2013 there were even many technically advanced games, where the PlayStation 3 version of GTA V can by no means keep up. Killzone Shadow Fall, Crysis 3, Ryse, Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag etc.
One can like the art style of Witcher III but technically I does not hold up with many other games. For example, the GI is completely missing. Which is why interiors do not look good. In 2014/2015 there were games like AC. Unity, Battlefront, The Order 1866 etc.
In 2011 I would also see Crysis 2 above Battlefield 3. If both games can be compared on the PC today, Crysis 2 can keep up much better with today's titles.
Last edited:
phoenix_chipset
Regular
^ Witcher 3 was open world mate. The level of detail and its optimization on PC was crazy impressive if you ask me.
- Status