1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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 engine to use? Poll

Discussion in 'New Version Suggestions' started by -Penfold-, May 13, 2004.

?

Which engine to use for the next Infiltration?

Poll closed May 13, 2005.
  1. System Shock 1 Engine

    10 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. Wolfenstein 3D Engine

    14 vote(s)
    46.7%
  3. Doom I Engine

    12 vote(s)
    40.0%
  4. Delta Force 1 Engine

    9 vote(s)
    30.0%
  5. Tomb Raider 1 Engine

    9 vote(s)
    30.0%
  6. Carmageddon Engine (vehicle support!)

    7 vote(s)
    23.3%
  7. Deer Hunter Engine (kill deer and eat 'em for health!)

    12 vote(s)
    40.0%
  8. Tiger Woods 99 Engine (War on the links! WOOH! Where's the beer cart?!?)

    11 vote(s)
    36.7%
  9. Terminator 3: War of the Machines Engine (known for its SWEET death animations)

    8 vote(s)
    26.7%
  10. Britney's Dance Beat Engine (heavily modifed, Britney and her friends are the hostages! You win and

    15 vote(s)
    50.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Logan6

    Logan6 TC Vet

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quake 3. Its old but better than UT. You can buy it in jewel case for about 10 bucks. /me imagines what the inf team could do with all that eye candy. :D It would take a 3.0 ghz machine and about a gig of memory to play maps like bordertown and mapping is a bitch but it would be sweet!
     
  2. Shrap

    Shrap Beaver

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    We're trying to improve, not go back.
     
  3. Captain'04

    Captain'04 I'm the Alpha and the Omega

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    dont u wanna bring this mod out for ut2k4??
     
  4. -Penfold-

    -Penfold- New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    338
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shrap and Cap, it's called sarcasm.
     
  5. Demosthanese

    Demosthanese .

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    hu·mor ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hymr)
    n.

    1. The quality that makes something laughable or amusing; funniness: could not see the humor of the situation.
    2. That which is intended to induce laughter or amusement: a writer skilled at crafting humor.
    3. The ability to perceive, enjoy, or express what is amusing, comical, incongruous, or absurd. See Synonyms at wit1.

    joke ( P ) Pronunciation Key (jk)
    n.

    1. Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.
    3. An amusing or ludicrous incident or situation.
    4. Informal.
    1. Something not to be taken seriously; a triviality: The accident was no joke.
    2. An object of amusement or laughter; a laughingstock: His loud tie was the joke of the office.

    fa·ce·tious ( P ) Pronunciation Key (f-sshs)
    adj.

    Playfully jocular; humorous: facetious remarks.



    I hope that clears things up a bit. Personally, I say we go with Wolfenstein 3D, as it already has Iron sights.
     
  6. The_Freaker

    The_Freaker Supahfly !

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol..this thread is funny...makes me laugh when ppl say why isnt there no FarCry, Quake IV etc..
     
  7. (SDS)benmcl

    (SDS)benmcl Why not visit us here in the real world.

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok what part of this thread are people taking seriously? Just curious because some of the posts have me a tad worried.
     
  8. Logan6

    Logan6 TC Vet

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, its obvious the dev team is probably porting to UT2004 because its hardly a port at all. Porting to a different engine would probably be a nightmare and take forever. I put in Quake 3 because it has better graphics and better physics. I can hardly wait to see what Quake IV has to offer. UT2004 doesn't look to bad from the screen shots but I hope it has better climbing physics like Quake has, i.e. the ability to reach up and grab the top of a wall, ledge, etc. and pull yourself up. Very realistic. I think quake has better jumping physics too. Inf and Quake 3 would be awesome. Unfortunately, mapping in Q3 is a bitch.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2004
  9. (SDS)benmcl

    (SDS)benmcl Why not visit us here in the real world.

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,897
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually it is not obvious. They have stated clearly that they are looking at a few options. I would like UT2K4 but I just want them to make the best decision they can.

    Good to see the titty engine still ahead.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2004
  10. geogob

    geogob Koohii o nomimasu ka?

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    4,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    *cough* *cough* ra286
     
  11. AlmostAlive

    AlmostAlive Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Logan, the team is NOT going to just throw everything that was made for 2.9 into a potential new version for UT2004. You make it sound like it's something that can be done in a few hours. That is not the case. As the team has stated, everything will be built from scratch.
     
  12. Crowze

    Crowze Bird Brain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,556
    Likes Received:
    1
    Also, try Rune. Proper grab/climb in the UT engine. And Quake 3 definitely does not have better graphics and physics than UT2004.
     
  13. Hadmar

    Hadmar Queen Bitch of the Universe

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    5,476
    Likes Received:
    30
  14. Anonymous_[FOOL]

    Anonymous_[FOOL] Forever FOOL.

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2003
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, Britney rules! I want to have Britney! ;)
     
  15. Logan6

    Logan6 TC Vet

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, Im glad to hear that other engines are being considered. But I must say that the one thing I really like about UT is the ability to have large maps. Supposedly you can do this in Quake, but I've tried to do this and it failed miserably. Either the machine can do it, but it will take days to compile the VIS and Light portions of the map, or the machine just eventually spits out a bunch of errors and crashes. I was trying to compile a 16000 x 16000 unit map of just plain terrain. A few rolling hills with some tree models. This was on a 2.0 ghz machine with a Radeon card. BSP took about 5 minutes. Then came the vis. It took it about an hour to reach the 1 out of 10 mark. From what I've seen this timeline is exponential, so it might take it 2 or 3 hours ( or more ) to reach the 2 mark. Then far more to reach the 3 mark. You get the picture. It might end up taking days to make a 1000 foot by 1000 foot map of terrain. Thats ridiculous. I've tried it on about 3 different machines now, and its always the same. Quake just can't make large maps.
    And of course the light stage seems to take about 10 times as long as vis.
    UT can compile a large map in a few minutes. I was astounded when I saw how fast it was. Makes mapping a whole lot better.
    One thing I'd like to suggest in order to make even bigger maps, is bring down the scale to 8 units per foot instead of 16. We could quadruple the map sizes this way. Thats the scale in Quakes True Combat mod and it seems to work. Now how translates in UT I'm not sure, but I think it would be something to look at.
     
  16. yurch

    yurch Swinging the clue-by-four

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    We don't have big maps because the amount of detail rendered inside of them is far too much if you want them to look as proportunately good as all the others. We have no reason to rescale everything and cause a bunch of size conversion problems.
    We do have a few extremely large maps that look like undetailed cubes if that's your thing.

    We aren't using quake. Give it a rest already.
     

Share This Page