#6463 posted by JneeraZ on 2013/03/31 12:59:01
SleepwalkR
Right now, yes, because we're not promoting a game. :) We're an engine provider as well as a game studio so this demo is to get people interested in licensing the engine. Which everyone should! It only seems right...
In My Usual Polemic Way
#6464 posted by megaman on 2013/03/31 14:01:53
all I see in those videos is a trillion dollar artist budget. I'm not at all familiar with the unreal technology (is it still called that?), but..
Where are the new rendering techniques? Where are the "simple art" test cases that show the pros and cons, where are the performance breakdowns? Where are the awesome features your engine has that nobody else has? Voxel cone tracing maybe? But where are the details of what is actually implemented there? When does it break down? How does it handle near-field? I heard there are problems with that... in the original paper. What about your implementation?
If I would have to make a decision about spending a lot of money on engines, those would be what I want to base my decision on. All I see in most engine videos is more particles, more deferred lights, more post processing, etc., and of course, lots of artists. Those don't come with the engine, I heard =)
Maybe that's my academic view, and that's because I see the papers a long time before an actual product uses that stuff. Maybe managers just buy stuff, because they don't even know what engine vs artist means. Or it isn't even about them, it's about the public that in turn buys everything with unreal engine "because it just has to look as good as the tech video".
oh, and i didn't even watch it, just the graph ui advertisment. :-)
okay, i just did. the glossy reflections look indeed nice, but there does seem to be only one type of glossy material (puddles/wet) that actually uses it. Why's that?
What else is there? Nice volumetric lighting, but not enough time and bad video compression to actually see what the problems with it are. Or how fake it is. Then... there's lots of particles, lights, artist budget :-) How many "VPLs" are actually hand-placed? Model/Animation of the main character with dread locks looks really bad (the joints?!), but I'm not sure if that's just artist fuck-up (but how did it pass QA then, if it was easily fixable? See the problem?) What shadowing there is looks really nice, but some stuff doesn't seem to cast any.
And it's all really pretty.
Oh, And I Forgot All About The Programming Side Of Things.
#6465 posted by megaman on 2013/03/31 14:04:34
what's your code quality, how easy is it to modify stuff, plug my own stuff into it, what abstractions are there... I'd like a video about that =)
#6466 posted by Spirit on 2013/03/31 14:23:37
I expected some nice honest advertisement but that natural and spontaneous infomercial made me cringe. So much bullshit bingo phrases. I swear I was able to do what I want and let the creative energy flow into the code and leverage the intuitive interface and feel unleashed with that FPS creator thing that was advertised in magazines in 1996. You can be a game designer too! But only with this new product. Not any of the competitors. It is so new and innovative!
#6467 posted by JneeraZ on 2013/03/31 15:11:22
It's a marketing video, yes, but look at what's being shown. That's no bullshit. Shane created all of that stuff entirely on his own and he knows nothing about coding. He's an artist, through and through, and he's making games entirely on his own in UE4.
Megaman
#6468 posted by Spiney on 2013/03/31 15:14:52
They did release some paper last year:
http://eat3d.com/blog/metalliandy/siggraph-2012-technology-behind-unreal-engine-4-elemental-demo
Also some walkthrough of the editor and some tech info:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvfn1p92_8
And yes, million dollar art budgets and such. I totally agree. I also tend to get more excited about NPR and innovative art direction nowadays. Nevertheless, impressive stuff.
One thing I wish would get solved once and for all in this generation is transparency.
Willem
#6469 posted by Spiney on 2013/03/31 15:18:27
I hope something is coming out of that Samaritan demo ;) I loved the noir cyberpunk setting.
#6470 posted by slapmap on 2013/03/31 15:45:36
Come on, those "engine ads" are actually aimed at general public to support the brand and make the "build with WHATERVER tech #" a selling point for the gamers. And execs too of course.
Cryengine Flow Graph > Kismet all day btw.
#6471 posted by JneeraZ on 2013/03/31 15:56:18
"Cryengine Flow Graph > Kismet all day btw. "
Have you played with UE4 Kismet/Blueprints yet? It's a LARGE step up from UE3.
Btw
#6472 posted by slapmap on 2013/03/31 16:09:49
what Unreal3 tech games officially have map editor and custom maps support?
#6473 posted by sikkpin on 2013/03/31 16:46:54
GoW and UT3 are the only two I can think of off the top of my head.
U-Engine
I've always loved the Unreal Editor, the kismet system shown is really impressive. It's great to see that Shane still works at Epic, he seemed to drop off the radar somehow. Remember the days when the guys making the games were really at a kind of celeb status? Not really like that so much these days (except for guys like Carmack or Miyamoto).
#6475 posted by Kinn on 2013/03/31 20:52:51
Remember the days when the guys making the games were really at a kind of celeb status?
Haha, I remember the nineties too. It's great until they try to make you their bitch though, then it all ends in tears.
#6476 posted by Spirit on 2013/03/31 21:50:47
ok that video was nice. the debugger looks amazing.
I Really Dont Get It
#6477 posted by nitin on 2013/04/01 00:50:46
the ad markets exactly what it says (engine) but you guys want it to market something else (game).
That would be when Epic pimps the next GoW or Unreal?? All your where is the gameplay comments would be valid then.
#6478 posted by starbuck on 2013/04/01 02:59:37
I just read the Epic Siggraph 2012 paper. I understood some of those words. Actually really awesome reading though, thanks Spiney.
The voxel cone nonsense seems mad cool. I thought this video by Cyril Crassin (the author of the original paper) does a great job of demonstrating it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fAsg_xNzhcQ
Why Does Everyone Call That A Paper? :D
#6479 posted by megaman on 2013/04/01 15:32:14
http://maverick.inria.fr/Publications/2011/CNSGE11b/GIVoxels-pg2011-authors.pdf this is a paper :-)
Nice slides nonetheless, i didn't know they had a siggraph talk.
#6480 posted by Spiney on 2013/04/01 15:46:12
I thought it was a paper, I might just have remembered wrong :P
It Is Not A Paper...
#6481 posted by JPL on 2013/04/01 16:53:10
.. pdf is electronic format, till you print it, then it becomes paper...
/you ignorant !!
Re: Megaman
#6482 posted by starbuck on 2013/04/01 18:09:39
Why? because I'm not a clever man. Why must everyone insist on pointing this out?
The Original Link To The Blog Post That Had The Link
#6483 posted by megaman on 2013/04/01 18:47:29
said paper.
#6484 posted by slap map on 2013/04/01 20:19:51
Wait, what? Out of all the hundreds games that use UE3 only 2 Epics own titles have editor/custom map suport?
Quick google couldn't find much relevant info.
Does it have much to do with everyone selling DLCs instead of letting users make their own mods or what.
#6485 posted by Spiney on 2013/04/01 20:52:49
Yeah, it's kind of depressing...
I know there's workarounds for UDK that work with some titles, but nothing official.
#6486 posted by JneeraZ on 2013/04/02 18:37:29
Game Engine Looks Amazing.
#6487 posted by Shambler on 2013/04/02 23:28:36
Now make a cyberpunk Skyrim in the video setting, with Crytek-esque gameplay.
Thanks!!!
|