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

  • 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.

What do you think would be the next best engine?

  • Far Cry - Crytech engine

    Votes: 14 14.3%
  • Half-Life 2

    Votes: 21 21.4%
  • Doom 3

    Votes: 5 5.1%
  • Unreal 2004

    Votes: 59 60.2%

  • Total voters
    98

OICW

Reason & Logic > Religion
Gamer developers have access to the source code of the Unreal engine they lciense, just like any other license. Mod developers do not; the Inf team might be able to do higher texture and polycounts and a few workarounds, but in terms of collision detection and the hitboxes with UT2K4, I don't think they can do too much to overcome that.

Having said that, I still think that UT2K4 is the best bet for the time being.
 

ravens_hawk

New Member
Apr 20, 2002
468
0
0
Visit site
@ Logan6: Stop counting on the next INF taking forever to come out, its pessimistic and irritating.

OICW (and in general) what game out there has good collision dection and hitboxes?
Afaik they all still use the good ol' coke can hitbox. That being said, if we can workaround it in UT99 (like yurch's BS4) you'd think we'd be able to do it in UT2K4.
 

fist_mlrs

that other guy
Jan 4, 2001
1,496
0
0
40
Zittau, Germany
www.fistmlrs.com
just like halflife ut2004 supports collision boxes attached to bones, which works pretty good imo. per poly hit detection should also be possible, at least it is for everything else (performance tradeoff though)
 

Philophobos

New Member
May 11, 2001
495
0
0
43
Visit site
ravens_hawk said:
@ Logan6: Stop counting on the next INF taking forever to come out, its pessimistic and irritating.

OICW (and in general) what game out there has good collision dection and hitboxes?
Afaik they all still use the good ol' coke can hitbox. That being said, if we can workaround it in UT99 (like yurch's BS4) you'd think we'd be able to do it in UT2K4.


I might be completely wrong, but didn't Soldier of Fortune 2 have excellent hit detection? I remember shooting people at close range and seeing the blood decals and what not show up seemingly on the exact pixel I shot. Is there a way to extrapolate such accurate decal placement from coke-can hitboxes? I know, I have a math degree, but I am too tired to think about it this morning.
 

(SDS)benmcl

Why not visit us here in the real world.
May 13, 2002
1,897
0
0
Visit site
Looks need to be balanced though not only with game play but ease of development. At the moment UT2K4 is still easier. Yes the Sandbox editor is nice but it is only one part of the puzzle. I still can't find anyone with anything good to say about the rest of the tools.
 

Arethusa

We will not walk in fear.
Jan 15, 2004
1,081
0
0
Hadmar said:
Feel free to correct me.
Half-Life 2 will definitely be available for Linux. I've heard mentions of consoles as well, but nothing I'd bet on. No idea on Macs. Other than that, seems right to me.

Logan6 said:
Face it, UT2004 is the last of the old engines. Its little more than a souped up UT99.
I strongly oppose any consideration of UT2k4 for the next engine, but you are out of your goddamn mind.

cracwhore said:
You know "Splinter Cell"? Yeah, that's on the UT engine. So is "Theif: Deadly Shadows". Both games have fantastic lighting effects and look pretty damn nice on high detail. Granted, those companies had enough money to license the engine and such, but it's a flexible engine that will run decently on older hardware while still not looking all that terrible on lower detail settings.
The problem here is that licensing an engine allows you to do things with it that UT2k4, simply put, is not flexible enough for while still remaining UT2k4. As purchasing the engine is out of the question for Sentry, any analyis of what's been done with licensed development is simply not worth much.

ravens_hawk said:
Afaik they all still use the good ol' coke can hitbox. That being said, if we can workaround it in UT99 (like yurch's BS4) you'd think we'd be able to do it in UT2K4.
Honestly, you shouldn't consider a workaround acceptible in the next engine. It's clever and interesting for the time being, but there's no way it should be considered an acceptible solution in anything remotely resembling the long term.

Approx said:
I might be completely wrong, but didn't Soldier of Fortune 2 have excellent hit detection?
Yes, SoF and SoF2 both had per poly hit detection. Not that either's worth considering in terms of engine (or much else, really), but it is certainly doable without much of a performance issue. More important is whether or not it's doable within the confines of the engine.


Anyway, I do really need to state this bluntly: you all need to stop considering the big cylinder hit box acceptible. It's not really all that great in UT2k4 and it's beyond unacceptible for a realism mod. That's not to say you can't work around it in UT2k4, nor that there aren't other issues worth considering, but a lot of you do seem stuck in a very complacent mindset where you'll accept rather little change. Not true of everyone, certainly, but I do feel it's worth stating. Take it for what it's worth.
 
Last edited:

(SDS)benmcl

Why not visit us here in the real world.
May 13, 2002
1,897
0
0
Visit site
The hit box issue is the one area I do agree with Arethusa. Also vehicle physics in UT2K4 is an issue but since I don't really want vehicles I am a bit bias. For the record it is very doubtfull I will be playing the new INF online due to bad connctions where I live. ATM I can barly play 2.9 online and I know the next engine would prevent me from doing so. Thats just the way it is.
 

Arethusa

We will not walk in fear.
Jan 15, 2004
1,081
0
0
Realistically, you've got a year and a half to two years before something materializes. Your situation could definitely change between now and then.
 

fist_mlrs

that other guy
Jan 4, 2001
1,496
0
0
40
Zittau, Germany
www.fistmlrs.com
Anyway, I do really need to state this bluntly: you all need to stop considering the big cylinder hit box acceptible. It's not really all that great in UT2k4 and it's beyond unacceptible for a realism mod. That's not to say you can't work around it in UT2k4, nor that there aren't other issues worth considering, but a lot of you do seem stuck in a very complacent mindset where you'll accept rather little change. Not true of everyone, certainly, but I do feel it's worth stating. Take it for what it's worth.

as i allready said you can apply multiple hitboxes or spheres per bone, so its rather easy to do a hitdetection which is pretty much perfect for what we need. halflifes hitboxes were pretty good as well, even though they can only use one hitbox per bone afaik. also per poly hit detection is possible, but not truely needed imo. ut2004 uses hitboxes to keep the models balanced, thats about it. it can do collissions just as good as the other engines.

the most important points to consider are the engines modability and netcode. doom3 fails badly in both points, and farcry doesn't look as shiny as it did before either. atm its pretty much up to what kind of sdk halflife 2 offers, good old unreal offered a much better modability then halflife, even if halflifes mods were much more successfull.
 
Last edited:

Arethusa

We will not walk in fear.
Jan 15, 2004
1,081
0
0
Actually, Half-Life's hitboxes were awful. They were fine with the original game, but CS and DoD proved that any real attempt to push them much further than that and truly add any real degree of precision would either be disastrous or at least messy.

As for modability, Doom 3 really remains an unknown, seeing as the SDK hasn't hit. FC fails miserably here, from what I've seen of the community. Netcode can be fixed on either of the two, though I hear neither's particularly stunning. If I had to hold out hope, though, I'd bet Doom 3 would pull it together a fair bit sooner. Also, keep in mind that Quake 4 will absolutely have great netcode and would be a fairly easy port if development were to start on Doom 3.

Also, I really don't see how Unreal Tournament was more flexible than Half-Life. If anything, my experience points in the exact opposite direction.
 

Hadmar

Queen Bitch of the Universe
Jan 29, 2001
5,567
47
48
Nerdpole
Arethusa said:
Half-Life 2 will definitely be available for Linux. I've heard mentions of consoles as well, but nothing I'd bet on. No idea on Macs. Other than that, seems right to me.
The only thing I heard was a HL2 server for Linux but no client. Where did you get this info?
 

fist_mlrs

that other guy
Jan 4, 2001
1,496
0
0
40
Zittau, Germany
www.fistmlrs.com
Actually, Half-Life's hitboxes were awful. They were fine with the original game, but CS and DoD proved that any real attempt to push them much further than that and truly add any real degree of precision would either be disastrous or at least messy.
i got to disagree. having been a regular cs and cod player in the early betas i find the hitbox system good enough in most cases. later betas of cs used larger hitboxes to increase gameplay speed, using a hitbox for each bone (for example upper and lower arms and legs left and right, lower torso, upper torso, neck and head) are very close to the actuall model dimensions. and since you can use more then just one box per bone or uttilize hitspheres instead of boxes where possible, you achive an allmost perfect hit detection, just as it is used in pretty much all games but doom3 out there, ofp and aa use hitboxes just as well, and i never heard anybody complain. per-poly hit detection is possible and natively supported by ut since '2003, but its a waste of recources imo, i don't need to differenciate between beeing hit in either nose or eye, saying its the head should be all the game needs to know imo.
As for modability, Doom 3 really remains an unknown
it got no map editor, it got radiant. enough cons for me ;)
Also, I really don't see how Unreal Tournament was more flexible than Half-Life. If anything, my experience points in the exact opposite direction.
nope. in halflife you have no true modular system you could use to extend existing code, you have to completeley rewrite everything you want to change. thats the reason for all halflife mods playing rather simmular, because they mainly replace the models, tweak a few settings and add some new gameplay goals. mods like alienswarm or the sidescolling shooter for ut2003 and a topscrolling one for ut99 whose names i forgot would be completely impossible. have a look at quake 3 for example, the few total conversion feel very q3ish imo. the modular system the unreal series utilizes is a lot mor flexible and can be adjusted according to your needs easily, in addition to mutators it offers a lot more possibilitys for a mod as well. up to now the only con of the unreal series in this department was the folder structure, where everything was placed into the root folders by default, but 2004 offers a usefull folderstructure simmular out of the box, where every mod can have its own folder.

all in all modding a quake based engine such as halflife is a lot more problematic then a unreal based one, whats a mod in ut is your standart fullsize mod for the former ones.

not to mention the horrible radiant series mapeditor slowing down the mapping to a level where everybody uses the same textures and very limited mapping concepts. words can't discribe how much i dislike this editor. i worked with it back when halflife was released, and i also did a few maps for quake3, but i stand by my point that its an extremely clumsy and unflexible toolset that limits the variety of mapthemes quite a lot.

halflife2 uses a new engine, so we can hope for a decent sdk including a real mapeditor, but chances are there they'll go for a solution simmular to hl1 to not scare away the existing modcommunity. halflife does not need new mod teams as much as other games do, they got a established community allready.
 
Last edited:

Logan6

TC Vet
Dec 23, 2003
601
0
16
fist_mlrs said:
it got no map editor, it got radiant. enough cons for me ;)


...not to mention the horrible radiant series mapeditor slowing down the mapping to a level where everybody uses the same textures and very limited mapping concepts. words can't discribe how much i dislike this editor. i worked with it back when halflife was released, and i also did a few maps for quake3, but i stand by my point that its an extremely clumsy and unflexible toolset that limits the variety of mapthemes quite a lot.

Radiant = ****.
Map compile time = days.
 

Crowze

Bird Brain
Feb 6, 2002
3,556
1
38
41
Cambridgeshire, UK
www.dan-roberts.co.uk
The map compile time is not Radiant's fault, it's part of the way Q3 maps were made. I used to make Quake 2 maps using Qoole (awesome editor, if a bit buggy), and once you add lighting the compile time goes up dramatically. I'm not sure if it's the same in Doom 3, since the lighting system is completely reworked.
 

jayhova

Don't hate me because I'm pretty
Feb 19, 2002
335
0
16
59
Houston Texas
www.flex.net
fist_mlrs said:
per-poly hit detection is possible and natively supported by ut since '2003, but its a waste of recources imo, i don't need to differenciate between beeing hit in either nose or eye, saying its the head should be all the game needs to know imo.

I can think of a number of good uses for per-poly hit detection. First, it could be used to determain whether or not the bullet hit the head or the helmet. Second, it could be used for a sophisticated damage system that could differentiate between a scratch, a bleeder and an outright kill. Third, it is possible to determain based on angle whether or not the projectile penetrates or ricochetes. Forth, it would be really cool to be able to place hit decals (entry and exit wounds) on players and bodies.

I'm sure there are more uses but these are the ones that I can come up with right off the top of my head.
 

Logan6

TC Vet
Dec 23, 2003
601
0
16
jayhova said:
I can think of a number of good uses for per-poly hit detection. First, it could be used to determain whether or not the bullet hit the head or the helmet. Second, it could be used for a sophisticated damage system that could differentiate between a scratch, a bleeder and an outright kill. Third, it is possible to determain based on angle whether or not the projectile penetrates or ricochetes. Forth, it would be really cool to be able to place hit decals (entry and exit wounds) on players and bodies.

I'm sure there are more uses but these are the ones that I can come up with right off the top of my head.

Good points.
 

NavySupra

New Member
Oct 21, 2004
41
0
0
I have one of the FC SDKs sitting here on my machine.

I think that FC is an excellent choice for INF. The crytek engine is very flexible and allows for some very unique game play ideas. For example, which some modding it shouldn't be that hard to take a very interesting senerio out of a tom clancy novel.

If the netcode is brought up to speed, and FC supported enough online players, to say... the same level as BF1942 or BFVietnam, one could take the attack on the 3 or 4 nuke silo's in china that are in the end of "the bear and the dragon"

For inside buildings it shouldn't be that difficult for a good mapper to bring the building to life, but from what I've seen FC does a pretty good job on the inside of buildings.

The possibilities with the Farcry engine are near limitless, in ways of increasing the actual gameplay of INF.

I ran farcry rather nicely on my old notebook (Toshiba Satellite 5205 2Ghz with 64meg GeForce 4GO 460 and a gig of ram)

I honestly don't feel that UK2k4 is really a good choice. uk2k4 has a very sloppy feel to it.

Half-life 2 looks gorgeous thus far, but the fact of the matter is HL2 isn't even out yet.

I'm not sure if everyone here is really seeing the level of possibilites with FarCry.
 

NavySupra

New Member
Oct 21, 2004
41
0
0
To me its like compairing the fit and finish of a ford crown vic to that of a lexus GS430.

The Crown Vic is a nice car, but its no lexus. My point is, that the ut2k4 engine is very... big and "little kiddish" ... very... unrealistic.

Where as farcry has a very nice fit and finish and a very nice feel to it.