Agreed. There's a reason I still play CS 1.5 now and again, and not 1.6. Why do you say UT2004 has bad netcode? How can you know how good or bad the HL2 netcode is?
Future Engine: Half Life 2? Yay? Nay?
- Thread starter cracwhore
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Beppo
Infiltration Lead-Programmer
UT2k4s netcode is highly improved due to the patches that were already released (one almost halved the average pings btw). And even the original netcode from 2k4 was improved against the 2k3 version of it of course.
Just think about what UT2k4 has to 'handle' now if you want to compare it to something like HL or CS.
So, without knowing how the 'new' games will play online and what pings will be seen you cannot even try to compare them. You will have to wait for the games to be released to be able to really compare them... so, no need to discuss something like this now ... pretty much useless imo.
Just think about what UT2k4 has to 'handle' now if you want to compare it to something like HL or CS.
So, without knowing how the 'new' games will play online and what pings will be seen you cannot even try to compare them. You will have to wait for the games to be released to be able to really compare them... so, no need to discuss something like this now ... pretty much useless imo.
Obviously, all netcode speculation is just that. I'll admit I have a small modicum of faith that HL2's netcode will be quite good and that this is based solely off the fact that HL's current netcode is also pretty good, but that obviously doesn't carry a hell of a lot of weight.
Personally, I'd say it's obvious that if the videos are all true and the demos all accurate, Source is pretty much the best engine for the next few years. Whether they are or not is, of course, highly questionable, and while I'd personally advocate waiting for HL2, a more prudent course of action would be to work heavily on the stuff that can go in any engine (weapon/player models, textures, broad map designs, etc) and wait until you can see for yourselves. I really would like to see HL2 get some consideration.
And as a side note, what's this about them having a bad track record with SDKs? They got HL's out on time after the game's release, and back then, that was standard practice. They're not a perfect company, by any means, but there's no need to beat the crap out of them where it's not deserved.
Personally, I'd say it's obvious that if the videos are all true and the demos all accurate, Source is pretty much the best engine for the next few years. Whether they are or not is, of course, highly questionable, and while I'd personally advocate waiting for HL2, a more prudent course of action would be to work heavily on the stuff that can go in any engine (weapon/player models, textures, broad map designs, etc) and wait until you can see for yourselves. I really would like to see HL2 get some consideration.
And as a side note, what's this about them having a bad track record with SDKs? They got HL's out on time after the game's release, and back then, that was standard practice. They're not a perfect company, by any means, but there's no need to beat the crap out of them where it's not deserved.
@Beppo:
Does that mean the SS Team will wait untill all the engines you think about will be realeased and then start to work? That sounds... umm... not so good.
But if it is your decision I´m with it.
Does that mean the SS Team will wait untill all the engines you think about will be realeased and then start to work? That sounds... umm... not so good.
But if it is your decision I´m with it.
I did not say that Valve had problems with SDK. That was meant for UBI. Valve has some other serious problems at the moment though. It appears it is getting sorted out but until then... They both have problems. UBI with SDKs and Valve with pretty well everything else.
I am not saying not to use these games as a base. What I am saying is be damn sure what you need is there including mod support. At the moment though I don't want to have another trip into speculation land again so I'll leave it there.
I am not saying not to use these games as a base. What I am saying is be damn sure what you need is there including mod support. At the moment though I don't want to have another trip into speculation land again so I'll leave it there.
Last edited:
You can't wait for "every" engine to get released. There will, as I've said before, always be something "new and improved" on the horizon. You evaluate your options, make a desicion and stick with it, just as the team did with 2.9. They could easily have dropped the old UT engine and said "screw it, we're going for UT2003". Then came UT2004, then came Far Cry, soon comes HL2, after that something even better. Which brings us back to the beginning of my post 
Some things about the Farcry engine have not been mentioned. I saw a demo at a recent show of this game under a 64bit OS (the 64bit version is ready to go and will release when the final code for Windows XP64 is cemented and launched). All I can say is Awsome. The maps for the 64bit version are huge. up to 5 times the size of the 32 bit versions. The details on the 64bit blew me away. The other thing I was totally awed by was interactable and destrucable objects. The first thing I saw them do was push over a book shelf full of stuff. It all fell and skattered around the most I've seen in UT are a few traffic cones.
Plus as was alread mentioned Farcry would take far less work to get it to look "as real as it gets" as it is mostly there now. Oh yeah did I mention real scopes.
Plus as was alread mentioned Farcry would take far less work to get it to look "as real as it gets" as it is mostly there now. Oh yeah did I mention real scopes.
1: What are we going to do with maps that large? Run around for 40 minutes, and shoot for 5?
2: What about an SDK. Far Cry does not yet have a full SDK available to the public. UT2k4 does.
3: UT2k4 will run on lower end systems better than Far Cry will. Some people can't spend a ton on upgrades.
UT2k4 is the best option to get INF to the community in the shortest span of time.
2: What about an SDK. Far Cry does not yet have a full SDK available to the public. UT2k4 does.
3: UT2k4 will run on lower end systems better than Far Cry will. Some people can't spend a ton on upgrades.
UT2k4 is the best option to get INF to the community in the shortest span of time.
1. Kind of the way it works in real life isn't it.
2 true but I hope one come out soon.
3. The latest engine is always a strain on the hardware. The UT 2004 is essentialy the same engine as in 2003 with some upgrades. It might have been cutting edge 2 years ago but not now. The farcry engine was created with INF type games in mind, not futuristic blast the guy with the ball type games.
Mind you, if had asked me 2 months ago which engine, I would have said the UT 2004 hands down. Now, I'm not so sure. I think the team should at the very least evaluate the FC engine as a possible candidate. There is a pretty good bit of savings of time just in not having to implement features like leaning, zoom, movment, etc. that are already present in FC.
2 true but I hope one come out soon.
3. The latest engine is always a strain on the hardware. The UT 2004 is essentialy the same engine as in 2003 with some upgrades. It might have been cutting edge 2 years ago but not now. The farcry engine was created with INF type games in mind, not futuristic blast the guy with the ball type games.
Mind you, if had asked me 2 months ago which engine, I would have said the UT 2004 hands down. Now, I'm not so sure. I think the team should at the very least evaluate the FC engine as a possible candidate. There is a pretty good bit of savings of time just in not having to implement features like leaning, zoom, movment, etc. that are already present in FC.
Well rumour has it that the Far Cry SDK is due for release June 15th so hopefully it won't be too long after that. Also they are building a website to support modders which is nice.
Been playing through the levels. Very nice. Now if they only fix the interior lighting bug I will be happy.
Also does anyone know if you can play a multiplayer map with just bots? I have a **** connection and can't play this online but would like to mess around. Poked around the settings but haven't seen anything.
Been playing through the levels. Very nice. Now if they only fix the interior lighting bug I will be happy.
Also does anyone know if you can play a multiplayer map with just bots? I have a **** connection and can't play this online but would like to mess around. Poked around the settings but haven't seen anything.
Well... some of the best multiplayer experiences I ever had were 1on1 matches on Delta Force that lasted for 20+ minutes per round with 1-5 minutes firefight. The longest round I recall lasted 2 hours.Demosthanese said:
Shrap said:
If you are lucky to have a directX9 card you are able to change the render mode which results in pretty different optics and some don't look cartonish to me at all.
Also remember how cartonish UT99 looked and UT2004 still does IMO.
Have you seen the screenshots from Strike Force, or Raven Shield? They don't look cartoonish to me. The cartoonish look is entirely down to the level and game design, not the engine itself.
Well my new concern with Far Cry at the moment is the lack of bot play for us people with poor connections. At the moment there is none other than the campaign itself.
Now there is some effort in the community to work on this and it does seem possible. Also I have read that once the SDK is out it should be more clear to what it possible AI wise.
Now there is some effort in the community to work on this and it does seem possible. Also I have read that once the SDK is out it should be more clear to what it possible AI wise.
One of the things I liked (I just have the demo right now) was the way bots reacted. They went for cover. They scattered. Some would ran an get help. thet would attempt to flank. I was quite impressed with this. It is quite clear to me the UBI and crytech plans to get behind the modding of FC. They have a page on there site that is dedicated to just modders.
GenoOfTheCrayon
l33t 14 year old with an iron sight RC50
Silly people. Making a realistic mod for a game that's pretty much already considered by the general public to be realistic. If you mod FarCry, like fist said, it'll be just like a mutator, and not at all like a total conversion. What you're looking for is an improved FarCry, not a good engine for INF.
jayhova said:
CryTech, probably. Ubi? Well, let's just say that with Raven Shield, they weren't exactly helpful with providing an SDK, or giving advice to people trying to mod the game without the tools. I wouldn't consider them to be very community/mod friendly.
GenoOfTheCrayon said:
I disagree on this.
Inf was always pretty innovative in its features. SS were among the first (if not the first) to implement leaning, proning, iron sights, ballistics, breath control etc.
Some of these features are fairly standart by now. Why redo it? To proof you can? Fairly weak argument IMHO... and a waste of limited manpower as well.
Why not aim for new features not seen in realistic shooter by now like:
- per polygon hit detection with sophisticated damage system
- in game voice communication (i.e. distance based + radio comm)
- destructabile environment (trees, buildings etc.)
- dynamical mission (something like DEAS)
just to mention a few.
If you just want to proof your abilities in 'hacking' the engine you can start with a racing sim or a soccer game... and have INF 3.0 someday 2009
So rather start with something that meets the requirements and put all the effort into innovative features instead of re-inventing the wheel.
Just my 2 cents
Last edited:
OICW said:
Raven Shield's "community support" is joke. I haven't been there in quite some time, but i remember the moment i spotted trouble was when the raven shield home page had a forum link called "mods" which lead to threads about how to map. lol I wouldn't be surprised if they still hadn't released their SDK.
As far as things i'd like to see in a "realstic FPS" to step the genere up a notch?
-Full war simulation. Do away with the whole (or at least minimize) the idea of "pre defined missions". Step away from the whole linear mario bros. "levels" concept, and instead adopt something similar to a "grand theft auto" non-linear aproach to representing the "game world". Obviously military operation is very "mission" oriented but for the most part the "missions" in reality are made in a reactionary or manner or is just "part of the book". By that i mean that some poor guy in Iraq doesn't get a letter from President Bush saying "your mission is to secure the building because saddam is inside! Hoo Yah!" lol
What i'd like is a game that setup a large game world (say a large city and surrounding areas) and have a very vauge goal like "capture the city" and then just let the crap hit the fan. No prescripted missions, just let the whole war play itself out. You could for example put the player in the shoes of a grunt, and have the AI handle all the mission objective decisions. It'd sorta like being a grunt in Star craft, but having the opposing sides controled by AI. You'd have to do the fighting but the orders would just come down the pipe as needed. It would truely put into persective just how little or how much one person's actions could effect the out come. Some could argue that a game where you could play perfectly and still not achive victory in the end wouldn't be satisfying to a player.... and while that may be true, i'd also go and say that i didnt' go and buy "call of duty" or "medal of honor" so that i could single handedly win WW2, i bought it because i liked the experience and the gameplay.
-