Cry Engine ala DX10. One minute of footage.

[Regs]

Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
i dont understand what this Video shows? Is this a demo of a patched Farcry Version running under DX10?

My guess it's Far Cry 2.

 

[kleinwl]

to thread-crap some more about cars... I've worked as an engineer (tier I supplier) to GM/Ford/Toyota/Chrystler. The only difference between those companies is what the spend their bucks on. They all have the same technology... purchased from suppliers.

It is a myth that any of these companies spend R&D $. The only R&D is crash testing, road testing, emission testing (for those few that actually build their own engines), etc. All the real research and development comes from suppliers.

I'll be one of the first to bash on GM/Ford/Chrystler... because they spend their dollars on chrome, interiors, etc. They are not luxury cars (at least Chevys are not) so they don't have the big budgets to spend on interiors and parts. But the main reason they spend money on interiors and not parts is because they know that's what their average customer wants. The average life of the car (first customer) is under 50,000 miles. So, WHY would you pay for "lube-for-life" bearings? Same reason, why would you pay for fuel injection, overhead valves, electric waterpumps, etc to get 30 mpg? Fuel is dirt cheap. A normal engine costs less that $2000. An advanced engine could cost more than $4500. That's $2500... or more than 830 gallons (I'm in CA) of fuel... or 25000 miles of driving (assuming 30mpg). The first owner may have already traded his car before saving the 830 gallons of fuel. So the average buyer... just doesn't care about fuel economy... his eye is on the sticker price... the fancy leather wrapped stearing wheels... etc. I mean... if you are asking why he doesn't think ahead... and pay for the cost savings down the line... you have to ask yourself. Do you know what the crash rating of your car was? Side impact? Maybe even rear impact? It's your life we are talking about after all! Do you have air bags? Gen I or II? Do you know the difference?

If you want better fuel economy we could always petition the EPA (and CARB) to allow european diesels to operate in the united states... then we could all enjoy 300hp-600 ft-lb torque with 45 mpg. But really.... does anyone care?

I think the answer is obvious.

 

[johnnqq]

hah $2000? i hope you meant bought used from a retailer (block freshened etc.)


where are there unreal engine videos?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: kleinwl
to thread-crap some more about cars... I've worked as an engineer (tier I supplier) to GM/Ford/Toyota/Chrystler. The only difference between those companies is what the spend their bucks on. They all have the same technology... purchased from suppliers.

It is a myth that any of these companies spend R&D $. The only R&D is crash testing, road testing, emission testing (for those few that actually build their own engines), etc. All the real research and development comes from suppliers.

I'll be one of the first to bash on GM/Ford/Chrystler... because they spend their dollars on chrome, interiors, etc. They are not luxury cars (at least Chevys are not) so they don't have the big budgets to spend on interiors and parts. But the main reason they spend money on interiors and not parts is because they know that's what their average customer wants. The average life of the car (first customer) is under 50,000 miles. So, WHY would you pay for "lube-for-life" bearings? Same reason, why would you pay for fuel injection, overhead valves, electric waterpumps, etc to get 30 mpg? Fuel is dirt cheap. A normal engine costs less that $2000. An advanced engine could cost more than $4500. That's $2500... or more than 830 gallons (I'm in CA) of fuel... or 25000 miles of driving (assuming 30mpg). The first owner may have already traded his car before saving the 830 gallons of fuel. So the average buyer... just doesn't care about fuel economy... his eye is on the sticker price... the fancy leather wrapped stearing wheels... etc. I mean... if you are asking why he doesn't think ahead... and pay for the cost savings down the line... you have to ask yourself. Do you know what the crash rating of your car was? Side impact? Maybe even rear impact? It's your life we are talking about after all! Do you have air bags? Gen I or II? Do you know the difference?

If you want better fuel economy we could always petition the EPA (and CARB) to allow european diesels to operate in the united states... then we could all enjoy 300hp-600 ft-lb torque with 45 mpg. But really.... does anyone care?

I think the answer is obvious.

I cared about my car... I would have had broken legs if I didn't have my Volvo... I had a 2005 S40 T5 and the thing was built like a tank. My Dad, who has done auto repair work for the last 35 years was amazed at how well the car survived and protected me from the side impact. No broken legs, no cuts, not injuries. I was hit the from the side at about 45 MPH and walked out of the accident... This was 3 months ago. I would almost say Volvo for life, because their cross membered high strength steel safed me from being in a wheel chair for a while.

 

[johnnqq]

ok i found divx codec and installed the whole thing.

"this application has failed to start because qt-dx331.dll was not found. Re-installing the application may fix this problem."
what the hell...i found other zip files and i get the same error...I WANT TO SEE THE VIDEO!!

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: southpawuni



And you are the PERFECT person to show the world why the people who think those cars are superior are wrong.

You are comparing a 7000 pound truck to a what, 3100 pound car?
And you have the nerve to say that you prefer the ride better on the car.. lol

well for one its a CAR, not a TRUCK. It cant pull anything, your suburban can.. thats the difference.. and why it might not ride so cushy like what pleases you.

I dont think you guys think AT ALL when comparing domestic to foreign. This is a prime example and what is usually the case.
I do know how a motor works, and I understand the differences between a Ford, Chevy and Toyota.. its clear you arent even thinking of blatantly obvious reasons and talking COMPLETELY out of your a$$.

Its a myth, a popular notion that those companys want you to believe so you buy their car instead.. nothing more.

Not to mention you probably cant get a truck over 100K because you drive it like a car?

As far as cars go, I've seen Oldsmobile Delta 88s go 300K, probably driving as easy as you drive your "sophisticated" ES300. And with the same care.
People buy domestics and beat on them, then call them junk. Foreign car elitists typically dont beat the piss out of the car.. they trade it off anyway because when they near 100K they get scared.


What you say might be what you have observed, but you really need to think it through better. Car, truck.. not the same thing. Go buy a 2006 Monte Carlo and see if it lasts as long as your ES300. I bet it will, and I bet it will be cheaper to fix when something does go wrong.. which happens on all brands and even your :wine:sophisticated:wine: engineering.

Hey dumb ass, a Mercedes S500, Lexus ES300, Honda Accord, BMW 325 and Toyota MR2 are all cars, not trucks. So next time before you start your spiel about why you're so smart, first take the time to read before making yourself look so stupid. I only mentioned they owned a Suburban but never made any comparisons. Duh don't you feel stupid eh? Not to mention all the drivel you typed had nothing to do with my post LOL. Lay off the crack pal.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Crytek > id

(Who would have thought the Germans would have developed this?)

lol

germans are smart as fvck.....they are stupidly efficient, the russians/ukraine places like that, maybe poor but they have some of the brightest people ever, the russians are certainly not stupid. some of the stuff they made/invented is truely scary

i love the russians. they have the biggest helicopter in the world heh....it can lift over 20ton and has 2 engines.....12,000 horse power EACH.

Um Russia is not Germany.

German engineering is overrated. VW BMW and Mercedes are horrible when it comes to reliablity. So what if BMW used to be able to make awesome helicopters.. I am not buying their POS cars.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
For some reason, I thought I ended up in OT.

Agreed... I have seen a lot of misinformation in this thread.


5. Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volvo (Swede) all some of the best production cars in the world. You cannot compare these brands to Mazda or Ford, or GM. You just simply cannot do that. Else you are comparing a P4 to a Celeron.

Look at their problems per 100 vehicles sold. BMW Mercedes and VW are the worst excluding Land Rover.

"Cordes did not specify which J.D. Power survey he was referring to. In the J.D. Power 2004 Initial Quality Survey of auto nameplates, Mercedes-Benz ranked No. 10 with 106 problems per 100 vehicles. Toyota's premium Lexus brand ranked No. 1 with 87 problems."
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0505/06/1auto-173641.htm

"The worst makes continued to be luxury nameplates such as Lincoln (with an average of 26 problems per 100 vehicles), Mercedes-Benz (25 problems per 100), and BMW (21 problems per 100). Also in this bottom group were Volkswagen (23 problems per 100), and Saturn and Nissan-both with 19 problems per 100 vehicles."
http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/6662/

"Consumer Reports has come out with its annual list of cars to avoid. Consumers may have warranty or lemon law claims if they experienced problems with these vehicle. Mercedes-Benz C-Class (V6), Mercedes-Benz CLK, Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Mercedes-Benz S-Class"
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:QYOwALqx7UEJ:www.lemonlawclaims.com/Consumer_Rep...s+automobiles+mercedes&hl=en&client=firefox-a

No yotas or hondas on that list but quite a few American cars as well as an Audi and BMW 7s and Volvo s80


"By contrast, the problem rate for European automakers rose slightly to 21 per 100 from 20 last year.

"Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, and Volvo had more than their fair share of problems. Only Audi came out better than average," the magazine said.

"The most reliable brand overall is now Subaru, which averages eight problems per 100," Consumer Reports said. It noted that Honda Motor Co. Ltd. , long a reliability leader, now averaged nine problems per 100."
http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=34639

So you were saying about misinformation and fanboism Archangel? I think you are pwned.

 

[UzairH]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Crytek > id

(Who would have thought the Germans would have developed this?)

Hey, your memory short or something? id demo'd the Doom 3 engine in 2001, way before Far Cry 1 was released. At the time Doom 3 was un-frigin-believably ahead of the times, even now the lighting and shadowing are leagues ahead of most new games. After playing D3 I fired up Far Cry and Half-Life 2, and they looked flat and unimpressive - it was strange to see no REAL lighting.

In comparing D3 and Far Cry 2, or Unreal 3 for that matter, you are comparing a game engine demo'd in 2001 and released in 2004 with engines demo'd in 2005 and released God know when. For that matter I think we should wait to see what Carmack's next engine looks like. Face it, he IS the leader of the field.

 

[StrangerGuy]

*Reads thread title"

Mercedes, BMW, German engineering and Honda Accords? WTF got that to with game engines?

 

[imported_g33k]

Who cares its fun going OT every now and again. Lighten up.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: UzairH

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Crytek > id

(Who would have thought the Germans would have developed this?)

Hey, your memory short or something? id demo'd the Doom 3 engine in 2001, way before Far Cry 1 was released. At the time Doom 3 was un-frigin-believably ahead of the times, even now the lighting and shadowing are leagues ahead of most new games. After playing D3 I fired up Far Cry and Half-Life 2, and they looked flat and unimpressive - it was strange to see no REAL lighting.

In comparing D3 and Far Cry 2, or Unreal 3 for that matter, you are comparing a game engine demo'd in 2001 and released in 2004 with engines demo'd in 2005 and released God know when. For that matter I think we should wait to see what Carmack's next engine looks like. Face it, he IS the leader of the field.

Completely false... CryTek had a demo of their engine out before Doom3 in a form called X-isle. It was an nVidia tech demo and the foundation of their CryEngine. Go look it up if you are interested.

Additionally, CryTek beat ID to the game with polybump technology. They had demonstrated it first, months before id paved way for their version.

Asside from that, what does it matter if someones releases a tech demo first? That is meaningless for the most part. If that is the case, then we can deduce that CryTek is way better than id, because according to you, they had a huge head start and CryTek still released the product sooner! Take it which way you will, but CryTek surprised everyone with a release that beat both the "big" guys. So if you believe that D3 had a demo out first, then I guess we really do have to rip on id, because, clearly, they were unable to keep up with the programmign prowess of a brand new, unestablished German developer!

Ha!

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
For some reason, I thought I ended up in OT.

Agreed... I have seen a lot of misinformation in this thread.


5. Audi, BMW, Mercedes and Volvo (Swede) all some of the best production cars in the world. You cannot compare these brands to Mazda or Ford, or GM. You just simply cannot do that. Else you are comparing a P4 to a Celeron.

Look at their problems per 100 vehicles sold. BMW Mercedes and VW are the worst excluding Land Rover.

"Cordes did not specify which J.D. Power survey he was referring to. In the J.D. Power 2004 Initial Quality Survey of auto nameplates, Mercedes-Benz ranked No. 10 with 106 problems per 100 vehicles. Toyota's premium Lexus brand ranked No. 1 with 87 problems."
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0505/06/1auto-173641.htm

"The worst makes continued to be luxury nameplates such as Lincoln (with an average of 26 problems per 100 vehicles), Mercedes-Benz (25 problems per 100), and BMW (21 problems per 100). Also in this bottom group were Volkswagen (23 problems per 100), and Saturn and Nissan-both with 19 problems per 100 vehicles."
http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/6662/

"Consumer Reports has come out with its annual list of cars to avoid. Consumers may have warranty or lemon law claims if they experienced problems with these vehicle. Mercedes-Benz C-Class (V6), Mercedes-Benz CLK, Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Mercedes-Benz S-Class"
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:QYOwALqx7UEJ:www.lemonlawclaims.com/Consumer_Rep...s+automobiles+mercedes&hl=en&client=firefox-a

No yotas or hondas on that list but quite a few American cars as well as an Audi and BMW 7s and Volvo s80


"By contrast, the problem rate for European automakers rose slightly to 21 per 100 from 20 last year.

"Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, and Volvo had more than their fair share of problems. Only Audi came out better than average," the magazine said.

"The most reliable brand overall is now Subaru, which averages eight problems per 100," Consumer Reports said. It noted that Honda Motor Co. Ltd. , long a reliability leader, now averaged nine problems per 100."
http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=34639

So you were saying about misinformation and fanboism Archangel? I think you are pwned.

No, I do not think I was owned at all. Some people put a lot of belief in comsumer reports and that is there choice, I do not consider them reliable. A person who drives a nice car is way more picky than someone who drives something like a Honda or Pontiac. Therefore, it seems likely that a picky person will complain. Therefore, I believe all the more expensive cars have more marks on their record, because pepole buy these things are expect perfection, when no car is perfect. Again, I do not believe consumer reflects anything remotely accurate for a car company who specializes in only luxery versus an economy car. You can choose to believe those reports, but I do not accept that as acceptable evidence.

It takes a lot of pride to come in and say something like /pwned on your own, before anyone had a chance at a rebuttal. But you can *think* anything you want, it just does not always match reality.

 

[UzairH]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: UzairH

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Crytek > id

(Who would have thought the Germans would have developed this?)

Hey, your memory short or something? id demo'd the Doom 3 engine in 2001, way before Far Cry 1 was released. At the time Doom 3 was un-frigin-believably ahead of the times, even now the lighting and shadowing are leagues ahead of most new games. After playing D3 I fired up Far Cry and Half-Life 2, and they looked flat and unimpressive - it was strange to see no REAL lighting.

In comparing D3 and Far Cry 2, or Unreal 3 for that matter, you are comparing a game engine demo'd in 2001 and released in 2004 with engines demo'd in 2005 and released God know when. For that matter I think we should wait to see what Carmack's next engine looks like. Face it, he IS the leader of the field.

Completely false... CryTek had a demo of their engine out before Doom3 in a form called X-isle. It was an nVidia tech demo and the foundation of their CryEngine. Go look it up if you are interested.

Additionally, CryTek beat ID to the game with polybump technology. They had demonstrated it first, months before id paved way for their version.

Asside from that, what does it matter if someones releases a tech demo first? That is meaningless for the most part. If that is the case, then we can deduce that CryTek is way better than id, because according to you, they had a huge head start and CryTek still released the product sooner! Take it which way you will, but CryTek surprised everyone with a release that beat both the "big" guys. So if you believe that D3 had a demo out first, then I guess we really do have to rip on id, because, clearly, they were unable to keep up with the programmign prowess of a brand new, unestablished German developer!

Ha!

Ha! to you, pal. I looked up the crytek website and they announced the Crytek engine first in May 2002: http://www.crytek.com/news/index.php?p=1&n=pr&t=1.
And the first screenshots of X-Isle were made available on 28 May 2002: http://www.crytek.com/news/index.php?n=dev

OTOH I myself downloaded a video Doom 3's first public demo way back in Feb 2001. It was at the launch of the GeForce 3 in Tokyo if you remember and John Carmack came on the stage and showed off the new engine tech and wowed everyone with what still are cutting-edge graphics. Looking at that demo you can see that D3's core graphics were done by 2001.

So unless you can show me a link to X-Isle where it was demo'd in early 2001, I'd say the D3 tech came out a fair bit earlier. Not counting the actual release dates of the games and how good or bad they were of course.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: UzairH

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: UzairH

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Crytek > id

(Who would have thought the Germans would have developed this?)

Hey, your memory short or something? id demo'd the Doom 3 engine in 2001, way before Far Cry 1 was released. At the time Doom 3 was un-frigin-believably ahead of the times, even now the lighting and shadowing are leagues ahead of most new games. After playing D3 I fired up Far Cry and Half-Life 2, and they looked flat and unimpressive - it was strange to see no REAL lighting.

In comparing D3 and Far Cry 2, or Unreal 3 for that matter, you are comparing a game engine demo'd in 2001 and released in 2004 with engines demo'd in 2005 and released God know when. For that matter I think we should wait to see what Carmack's next engine looks like. Face it, he IS the leader of the field.

Completely false... CryTek had a demo of their engine out before Doom3 in a form called X-isle. It was an nVidia tech demo and the foundation of their CryEngine. Go look it up if you are interested.

Additionally, CryTek beat ID to the game with polybump technology. They had demonstrated it first, months before id paved way for their version.

Asside from that, what does it matter if someones releases a tech demo first? That is meaningless for the most part. If that is the case, then we can deduce that CryTek is way better than id, because according to you, they had a huge head start and CryTek still released the product sooner! Take it which way you will, but CryTek surprised everyone with a release that beat both the "big" guys. So if you believe that D3 had a demo out first, then I guess we really do have to rip on id, because, clearly, they were unable to keep up with the programmign prowess of a brand new, unestablished German developer!

Ha!

Ha! to you, pal. I looked up the crytek website and they announced the Crytek engine first in May 2002: http://www.crytek.com/news/index.php?p=1&n=pr&t=1.
And the first screenshots of X-Isle were made available on 28 May 2002: http://www.crytek.com/news/index.php?n=dev

OTOH I myself downloaded a video Doom 3's first public demo way back in Feb 2001. It was at the launch of the GeForce 3 in Tokyo if you remember and John Carmack came on the stage and showed off the new engine tech and wowed everyone with what still are cutting-edge graphics. Looking at that demo you can see that D3's core graphics were done by 2001.

So unless you can show me a link to X-Isle where it was demo'd in early 2001, I'd say the D3 tech came out a fair bit earlier. Not counting the actual release dates of the games and how good or bad they were of course.

Earliest date I could find from www.google.com was this link. Dated June 1st 2001. But, I am sure it was released before then, because I remember using the demo before that date. Anyway, you are comparing a publicly released demo to something Carmack would display in only the ideal setting. There is no disputing that.

You are comparing a released techdemo for everyone to download and use on their own machines with demo displayed at E3 where no one is able to download and run. To me, that states D3 was an ALPHA build, whle CryTeks were considered release, and at worst, Beta.

But you can argue it how you want... Fact is, CryTek beat them to the game.