Technical Game Engine Comparisons: non-subjective *OffTopic Cleanup Spawn*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nesh said:
With that kind of detail and execution?

All's relevant
Click to expand...
1) Not until you elaborated on it.
2) Not really. You list a bunch of things the game is doing but none of them is impressive neither in isolation nor combined. For example, regarding LOD transition of characters/lighting between cutscenes and gameplay: what's impressive about using the same models / lighting for both? Nothing, it just means they don't go the extra mile for cutscenes. Streaming data while traversing very controlled environments at a low speed is again, not impressive. And so on...
 
OCASM said:
1) Not until you elaborated on it.
2) Not really. You list a bunch of things the game is doing but none of them is impressive neither in isolation nor combined. For example, regarding LOD transition of characters/lighting between cutscenes and gameplay: what's impressive about using the same models / lighting for both? Nothing, it just means they don't go the extra mile for cutscenes. Streaming data while traversing very controlled environments at a low speed is again, not impressive. And so on...
Click to expand...
You are oversimplifying and not getting what I said but whatever :)
 
Btw Witcher is supposed to be a technical showcase. But nobody is discussing that game.
How does it compare with Horizon Zero Dawn? I never played Witcher 3
 
Nesh said:
Btw Witcher is supposed to be a technical showcase. But nobody is discussing that game.
How does it compare with Horizon Zero Dawn? I never played Witcher 3
Click to expand...
I haven't played Horizon but I've watched lots of videos and I've seen lots of screenshots.

I have seen The Witcher 3 in person, though, and I was quite underwhelmed. I didn't understand why some people think it's a technical showcase. True, it can look pretty, but when I looked at the hair of some characters (plain, ugly low poly meshes) or the quality of the joints/cloth, I thought "Ugh".
 
eloyc said:
I haven't played Horizon but I've watched lots of videos and I've seen lots of screenshots.

I have seen The Witcher 3 in person, though, and I was quite underwhelmed. I didn't understand why some people think it's a technical showcase. True, it can look pretty, but when I looked at the hair of some characters (plain, ugly low poly meshes) or the quality of the joints/cloth, I thought "Ugh".
Click to expand...
What about its PBR implementation? Something looks a bit off there as well, at least based on screenshots
 
Nesh said:
What about its PBR implementation? Something looks a bit off there as well, at least based on screenshots
Click to expand...
I only had a quick look, honestly, but materials didn't seem specially realistic to me, even though I don't know the tech behind this game.
 
Nesh said:
But nobody is discussing that game.
Click to expand...

Hzd is more impressive, came a few years later aswell and its an exclusive with a bigger budget.
That and its a console/ps4 game, on a forum where the platform is the most liked.
I discovered b3d quit late, did it start pc oriented, them shifted to consoles?

Wouldnt a game like hzd sell more if ported at a later state to other platforms? Like gta3/vc and sa to og xbox. While keeping it exclusive to Sony a year or two.
 
Recop said:
Of course, that's why you need to make balanced choices to meet your goals : gameplay ambitions + visual standards.

And in my opinion, God of War brilliantly succeed at both.

Also, if you're not impressed by what you see on screen, then you already failed, not matter what your engine is doing under the hood. You don't need to explain why your game is impressive, people should see it naturally.

Otherwise, it means that your choices weren't balanced. If you need to explain, then it's because it's not obvious. Something carefully crafted is obvious for everyone.
Click to expand...

I guess we just see things from different perspectives.

OCASM said:
The best volumetric clouds I've seen in a game:

Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to the gas giants in Star Citizen. They say it would be a big challenge to make such a tech which works from a distance for the whole planet as well as when one is directly in or next to the clouds. One of the employees working on it is Carsten Wenzel who was responsible for atmospheric effects and particles in Crysis and also did the tech for atmospheric scattering in Star Citizen.

EDIT:

Nesh said:
Btw Witcher is supposed to be a technical showcase. But nobody is discussing that game.
How does it compare with Horizon Zero Dawn? I never played Witcher 3
Click to expand...

WItcher III may have many strengths but the technology is not. Horizon is better at almost all points. All the more on the consoles.
 
Last edited:
Jupiter said:
WItcher III may have many strengths but the technology is not. Horizon is better at almost all points. All the more on the consoles.
Click to expand...

Indeed, we see things from different perspectives because, fundamentaly, i don't care about the technology used in The Witcher 3. The visuals speak for themselves : the game looks outdated compared to HZD.

If you use a more advanced technology for less impressive results on screen, then i don't see the point of using it...

In my book, better technology means :

- Better results. For instance, the cloud tech used in Driveclub :


or

- Less ressources consumed for at least comparable results. For example, cheaper AA solution vs MSAA.

So i don't care if a game uses GI, PBR or whatever. I'm only interested by what i'm seeing on screen. If someone gets better results than you, then he made smarter choices, no matter the tech used.
 
Last edited:
Recop said:
Indeed, we see things from different perspectives because, fundamentaly, i don't care about the technology used in The Witcher 3. The visuals speak for themselves : the game looks outdated compared to HZD.

If you use a more advanced technology for less impressive results on screen, then i don't see the point of using it...

In my book, better technology means :

- Better results. For instance, the cloud tech used in Driveclub :


or

- Less ressources consumed for at least comparable results. For example, cheaper AA solution vs MSAA.

So i don't care if a game uses GI, PBR or whatever. I'm only interested by what i'm seeing on screen. If someone gets better results than you, then he made smarter choices, no matter the tech used.
Click to expand...

Drive Club use truSky like Ace Combat 7
 
Battllefront 2017
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmk77ok5

Star Wars Battlefront 2017 (2) by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr

Star Wars Battlefront 2017 (5) by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr

Star Wars Battlefront 2017 (7) by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr

The properties of the materials are good. In many games PBR materials only look good on metals. The quality of the vegetation is convincing and it is a 40 player /60fps game with a lot of destruction and physics. The reflections could be from a movie as long as there are no artifacts to be seen. More screenshots in the album.

In comparison: Battlefront 2015: https://flic.kr/s/aHskBAans7
 
Last edited:
From all developers Dice gets the most out of the hardware. This can also be seen from the fact that most titles run at just 30fps on consoles while Dice achieves 60fps in complex and dense areas.

The singleplayer campaign in Battlefront 2 was very bad. Bot modes etc. on multiplayer maps are much better than this. In Battlefront 1 people complained about the missing single player campaign but in the end I played Battlefront 1 much more offline than Battlefront 2. Honestly, I don't want to even think about the horrible campaign of Battlefront 2. Dice should take CoD as an example and cancel single player campaigns in Battlefields and Battlefronts.

Kamino
Star Wars Battlefront 2017 (8) by X-RAY-89, auf Flickr

Take a bit of the blue filter away and it looks closer to the movie.
 
Last edited:
Jupiter said:
From all developers Dice gets the most out of the hardware.
Click to expand...

Not according to many people in the industry :

https://wccftech.com/kojima-guerrilla-games-decima-engine/ : "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"

https://twitter.com/x/status/976756809175326720

https://wccftech.com/cerny-naughty-dog-guerrilla-ps4-button/ : "I mean, I was sitting there this morning at the keynote at PSX 2016 and it’s clear that Guerrilla and Naughty Dog have somehow found the button you push that makes more polygons come out."


But i guess it's just a coincidence...

Dice games don't do many things that 30fps games do. This is presicely the reason why they run at 60fps. The whole package is still extremely impressive, but i really doubt that it matches Sony exclusives. One obvious reason is that Sony studios only have to work on one platform.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure we can know who has the biggest dev balls if we're comparing what they can get out of 60fps compared to 30fps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top