What do you think the new engine should be? [Poll]

[cracwhore]

[put your sarcasm helmets on]

I just hope that UnrealEngine 3 retains the UT2k fog.

[ok, take them off]

 

[N'kEnNy]

No. Source is entirely new and shares only superficial similarities with the old Half-Life engine.

Its just that I read this little bit from John Carmack's Blog. (on the topic of releasing the Quake3 engine Open Source)

Previous source code releases were held up until the last commercial license of the technology shipped, but with the evolving nature of game engines today, it is a lot less clear. There are still bits of early Quake code in Half Life 2, and the remaining licensees of Q3 technology intend to continue their internal developments along similar lines, so there probably won’t be nearly as sharp a cutoff as before. I am still committed to making as much source public as I can, and I won’t wait until the titles from the latest deal have actually shipped, but it is still going to be a little while before I feel comfortable doing the release.

Emphasis is my own.
----
Now obviously the official god of all that is "pwnage" could in this one instance be wrong. Whom is right or wrong in regards to the HL2 code doesn't really matter. Its only a point of personal interest that I point this out.

 

[Turin_Turambar]

HL2-source is a new Directx 7-to-9 engine developed by Valve, but surely they used a bit of Quake3, because they bought a license in 2000.

 

[-Snakebite-]

I read the same, but I couldnt remember where I saw it so I couldnt be bothered to go searching

Q3 was a real nice engine, very solid.

 

[Arethusa]

That's something I hadn't heard until now. Might be worth shooting Carmack an email and asking for a clarification.

 

[Logan6]

Gah!, HL2, there goes any hope of good graphics, much less lighting.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

Before getting all concern find out what code is involved. Net code? sound? Physics? How much?

BTW on my system the graphics are top notch. Too bad they didn;t send a game to go along with the cool engine.

 

[cracwhore]

Gah!, HL2, there goes any hope of good graphics, much less lighting.

What is wrong with you?

Why must we explain things to you, two, sometimes - thirty times?

Your computer is not fit for anything beyond Quake 3. 256mb of RAM is a joke. What you're doing is akin to me complaining that INF looks like **** on my Commodore 64.

Get yourself a nice computer, turn HL2 up onto 'Ultra High' detail with 2x AA. Then come back and tell me it looks worse than UT. I can't believe you'd even suggest something so amazingly ignorant to begin with - then again, a little part of me tells me 'you should've known better - look at your sig'.

Here, I made a little animated .gif so you can see for yourself how terrible HL2 looks on ultra-high settings - the pixelation, obviously because of the allowed file size...

edit: Ah, bugger...nevermind the cropping...I'm not going to upload a fixed version - forums are too slow. Anyway, at least it works...

 

[Arethusa]

Crac, usually I'd find that unnecessarily harsh, but really, you weren't mean enough.

Logan, you are an idiot. Half-Life 2, all misgivings about Steam aside, is the most beautiful game out right now. There is no room for debate. Stop being stupid. Everything you say makes my brain hurt.

 

[geogob]

Well N'kEnNy the fact that Q1 code is still in HL2 does not surprise me... just like there will still be code from Unreal 1 first alpha version in the last version that will be made of Unreal 3. Similarly, I'm pretty sure INF 3 will use bits and pieces of INF 1.

In general, once you coded a working function to do something, you tend to stick with it... not redo it every time you need it...

Snakebite... I agree... Q3 engine was very nice, except of the net code. ugh.

 

[N'kEnNy]

Actually the basic Q3 netcode offered with the game is excellent. The problem lies with the fact that its excellent for Q3 DM.. not realism games. The only major fault of the Q3 engine is its lack of skeletal animations. But then again the core game Q3 didn't need it.

There where various mods released that made an attempt to "fix" the netcode. Many of these where very successfull.

Geogob: I've noticed your signature, and for some reason I've placed your origins from within the True Combat community. (atleast a while back) I'm not sure of the capabilities of the TC netcode. But Ns:Co (also on q3) had an excellent one, infact one of the best ones.

Playing UT DM or even Infiltration, in consideration to the network code, just makes me want to cry.

 

[Arethusa]

Actually, I'd say it's pretty damn unlikely anything will remain from INF 1 when things get going.

 

[-Snakebite-]

As far as netcode goes CS will probably give you the smoothest experience available. I would love to play inf with that kind of latency, close combat would become more than just luck.

 

[-Snakebite-]

Snakebite... I agree... Q3 engine was very nice, except of the net code. ugh.

Thats an interesting one. The netcode for q3 is actually very good, but it relies on people having a top notch internet connection. Q3 was very accurate, if you had a ping over 50 you would have a difficult time playing. It was designed for low-lag situations. Q3 was a very serious DM game, and they didnt want people with 56k modems and pings of 300 using client prediction to their advantage. If you didnt have the connecton, you couldnt play.

Its very harsh, but the netcode itself did its job very well

 

[geogob]

Well that what I call not so a good net code... A good net code should be flexible enough to support low-end internet connection... cmon the game was released what... in 99 or even late 98? How many of you had broadband internet connection at that time? I didn't... so I played Q3 at the university! Even nowadays, I played a lot of Q3 in the past year... so much I got sick of all the circle strafe jumping and doing defrag run... even with my 5 Mbps connection, I get net issues. If you ping varies a little or is a little high, you are toast. The ping stability and "lowness" was my key success for a 99% accuracy with the railgun and over 75% with the RL or GL. But you are right... the net code is not so bad... the problem is that the game experiences varies too much on both the frame rate (yes!) and the ping... especially on the ping... hence my "bad net code comment".

And I'm a very serious DM player ^_^

 

[Psychomorph]

BTW on my system the graphics are top notch. Too bad they didn;t send a game to go along with the cool engine.

Thats exactly the single problem. HL2 would be my 100% choice if not the force to steam.

@geogob:
As I know Q3 was release 2000 (or very late 1999), same as UT.
I played UT in the university .

@Logan6:
HL2 is really a cute engine, the problem is the texture quality, which is a matter of the file size.

They is a cool thing I noticed some time watching TV.
They showed a docu about a norwegian person and I was just passing the channel and they showed some old and rusty rafineries at the norwegian beach and I couldn´t belive, it was like HL2 in real life, it looked the same, but more photorealistic.

Also I was watching 'The Rock' some days ago and this old and rusty prison was like a photorealistic clone of HL2.
They were some action outside at the roof where one guy tried to shoot Nicolas Cage with the M60 and tried to snipe him with a sniperrifle (guess the SPR) and the whole 'map' looked like real became HL2, I loved it and always imagined INF3.0, especially cuz they were marines running with M4's.

 

[PadreScout]

The community shouldn't be too much of an issue. Inf's community is small, and whichever engine it goes to it will remain reasonably small (as if the average CS player would even think about playing it...). That's part of what makes Inf what it is.

I'm hurt. I'm an avid CS player and I love Inf. Granted I dont really play anymore due to a long story involving lots of lost copies of UT but I assure you I'll be there when it finally pop on Source engine.

In unrelated news, People who say that Source doesnt support large maps make me laugh. maximum map size is 1 mile X 1 mile. Not huge mind you but it aint no effeciency apartment

 

[Crowze]

I meant no offense, even I play CS on occasion. Would you consider yourself an 'average' CS player though?

Just think how fast certain vehicles can travel. One mile is no way near enough.

 

[PadreScout]

I meant no offense, even I play CS on occasion. Would you consider yourself an 'average' CS player though?

Just think how fast certain vehicles can travel. One mile is no way near enough.

well. I'm not sure about average. is top 3% average? hehe, i play it about 3 hours a day when I can. I'm alright. Yeah, I suppose your right about the vehicle thing. 1 mile isnt really that big once you take into acount a jeep or hummer or truck or whatever doing 35 MPH, it'd cross the dang map in no time. I conceed that point.

 

[(SDS)benmcl]

Then it begs the question, why are we so concerned about vehicles? If vehicles are that big of a deal why not consider one of the battlefield engines? (Never played the silly games my self so I have no idea how they look.)

Frankly if I want to drive a vehicle I'll pop in Nascar 2003 or something. When I want to shoot people I play Infiltration.

It is about the boots on the ground and not peddle to the metal.