The most advance 3d game engine?

[PseudoKnight]

FYI, the guys behind Offset have done this before. They started out with a few developers and ended up creating a full game by the name of Savage. The broke off from that developer house and created Offset. The videos we see are not primarily for endusers. They are more for publishers/investors.

I like Source's flexibility. I bought HL2 for the mods. I'll get more mileage out of Source because of it's flexibility, and that is what's most important to me.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Add one more point for the CryEngine...BUT

You have to admit that Half-Life 2's engine is simply ingenious. To be able to play that game on a P3 1.2ghz is pretty astounding. The scalabilty is quite awesome, and if your computer has the power, you will be amazed by the graphics. And if you don't have a top-of-the-line, you can still play it.

You're cheating if it was that sweet PIII-S with 512kb L2

 

[ArchAngel777]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Add one more point for the CryEngine...BUT

You have to admit that Half-Life 2's engine is simply ingenious. To be able to play that game on a P3 1.2ghz is pretty astounding. The scalabilty is quite awesome, and if your computer has the power, you will be amazed by the graphics. And if you don't have a top-of-the-line, you can still play it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You're cheating if it was that sweet PIII-S with 512kb L2

I have to be honest... The Source Engine really does not impress me. When people talk about scaling, well, I thikn CryEngine scales just as well. CryEngine has licenced out to an MMO company based on Koria from what I have read, and that alone should make the engine quite incredable.

I personally believe the CryEngine is the most effecient engine when it comes to graphics. I think it can display the most eye-candy for the least amount of performance required.

Just my opinion. I think CryEngine is pretty top notch... It has to be, it is being sold for million - millions just to licence it

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: igowerf

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
i like the duke nukem forever game engine.

Which one? It started on Quake 2, then moved to Unreal, then Unreal Tournament, then their own uberfied engine based on UT tech. Interesting factoid that I read:

The rovers Spirit and Opportunity were proposed, authorized, announced, designed, launched and successfully landed upon Mars within the timeframe of Duke Nukem Forever?s development.

I'm pretty sure if I had a hundred-billion dollar budget and thousands of the worlds smartest people, I could put a hunk of metal down on a rock too.

 

[Xyclone]

I loved the physics of the Source engine. The Cry engine was the best one visually. The D3 engine was way too impractical for older computers.

 

[sparkyclarky]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
The source engine gets my vote.

It can do anything CryEngine and Doom3 Engine can do, but source does it faster. Not to mention source has physics so astounding that no other engine is anywhere near it.

Source scales well but it isn't doing as much. Until HDR is added, the lighting is weak at best. Last I heard, the Doom III engine is capable of doing physics as well as Source, but then again physics is a component entirely separate from graphics (more like Havok tied to Source). The Source geometry/polygon counts as shown up to this point are not particularly strong. It accomplishes a lot of what appears to look good through bump mapping/pixel shaders, but the problem is that upon any sort of close examination the magic fades and you're still left with a flat surface.

My vote goes with Doom III for both it's ability to tackle high polygon counts and complex lighting (although the cry engine is starting to edge in on this).

 

[klah]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Do any games have separate physics engines? Or are they incorporated into the game engine? Because Tom Clancy games have hands-down the best physics engines I've ever seen.

Most use the Havok physics engine.

Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon 2, Rainbow Six 3, Painkiller, Half-Life 2, Max Payne 2, Tribes: Vengeance, Full Spectrum Warrior, F.E.A.R., Deus Ex: IW, etc.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Most use the Havok physics engine.

Thanks for the information. If this is the case, then why are people raving about source having the best physics engine? It isn't even theirs...

 

[stnicralisk]

Its because they show it off a lot and they did do some things with objects in order to allow havok to work so nicely. For instance making matresses so that they have vertexes with limits that are realistic compared to a real matress - havok does the rest.

IIRC iD wanted to do vacuum where if you shoot a window out the glass flies out realistically but it owned even the top of the line stuff so they ditched it. Now THAT would be awesome.

 

[PseudoKnight]

Someone from Valve said that they worked off the licensed Havok code, but almost none of the original code is left. They have to give credit to Havok since the physics are based on the engine, but it's ultimately not the same as every other game that uses Havok.

 

[mdchesne]

UNreal Engine 3

 

[Stuxnet]

The Battlefield 2 engine.

Wait... does the engine have to work or can it just be used in a game that's on the shelf?