"Unoriginality Engine 3 and the console curse"

[magomago]

Cheaper yes... but not graphically equivalent or better.

He never said that at all....so whats your point lol?

Its cheaper and good enough for most people to accept graphical jumps that align with buying new consoles as opposed to buying 150-500 dollar graphics cards every once in a while.


And again, so as long as it will sell, it will be made. If gamers stopped buying that shit, devs would try to take more risks in an effort to get gamers buy whatever shit they'll make.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I have a low end system, so I am not that concerned about graphics as much as most PC gamers. What I dislike most about the "consolized" games is the checkpoint only save system and some games with the lack of having more than one save game so that 2 people cannot take turns playing on the same computer and each have their own game going. I also dislike the lack of originality in games, but MW2 and Mass Effect were quite original to me. Unfortunately now all we are getting is sequels.

 

[Modelworks]

Comments like this one show he doesn't have a clue

Sure, Epic's made some tweaks and improvements, but I don't see Unreal Engine 4 anywhere.

I have been using Unreal SDK for quite a while, before it was open to the public. Epic doesn't add a feature and call it a new SDK like many developers. It really requires some major changes for them to change versions. Anything the hardware currently out can make use of the unreal engine already implements that includes the tessellation features in newer cards.

The unreal engine is often misunderstood. People assume it is an fps engine because that is what it has been used for. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is any viewpoint or game type you want to make it to be. I have seen everything from side scrollers to platform games done with the engine. The limitations are usually in the developer choosing it because they want to do an FPS.

There isn't any lack of innovation in graphics either. When people post that , especially about the unreal engine, I know they have no experience with it. The limitation with what the engine can do is not the engine, it is the hardware and the developer. People that expect to play games with photo real graphics need to realize that , yes the engines can do it today, but you will be playing at 5fps, and that is with the most powerful cards that exist. Game engines still require tricks to try to get the best graphics with what hardware is available. Also remember that you cannot make a game that uses $10K of pc hardware and expect it to sell it.



Do games use the same old concepts over and over ? Yes, but so does anything that is sold for entertainment. Look at the movie industry trends as a good example.

 

[Mr. Bluntman]

Hey guys, first post.

Anyways, I pretty much agree with what Cyril said in his blog post. Things have reeeeeally stagnated in terms of graphical advancement, not neccesarily because of UE3, but because of the dominance of console hardware/software sales in the market, and publishers' near catatonic fear of piracy on the PC. Let's boil down a couple of facts:


1. Microsoft isn't helping the issue with it's XBox division.

They have been buying out and paying off developers to switch from PC development to their console. Epic is a good example of this with basically saying sit-and-spin to PC gamers, now focused solely on XBox 360 development. I wonder how many digits were on the check from MS?

http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=22770

If facebook is going to be the future of PC gaming, I am having no part of it, although my fiance (and the other hundreds of millions of FB users) wouldn't mind at all. Me? Excuse me while I throw up.

Also, Remedy was originally going to develop Alan Wake for PC (anyone else remember IDF 2006?) to be a showcase for quad core CPUs and DirectX 10. Then it was going to be a PC and XBox 360 game, before MS finally said "it would be best played on a big screen tv from the couch."

Sure. They can't collect licensing fees or sell more consoles if its on the PC, now is it? Same thing with Halo. Wasn't it supposed to be for PC and Mac before Bungie got bought by MS?

Wikipedia seems to agree with me.

And their latest comments about PC gaming being very important come off as hollow and empty. Don't tell me PC gaming is important to you, f'ing prove it.


2. BitTorrent.

Piracy is also a huge factor among publishers. If you were to do a search, there really isn't a game you can't find that doesn't have a torrent file associated with it, PC or console (with the exception of the PS3 because BluRay burners are expensive, ISO sizes are massive, and nobody has worked out how to crack the system/firmware). Publishers have the rationale that if you're smart enough to build a gaming PC, you know how to use BitTorrent. Modded consoles aren't as common, and with the 360, hooking up to Live will likely get it banned. Publishers have a consensus that consoles are the safer bet for making sure more people buy your game. Especially when you're spending $20-40M on the development and marketing of just one title. Economies of scale are in full effect here.


3. The economic downturn.

With unemployment at an all time high, and people pinching pennies like it was the great depression, few people want to spend nearly $1000 for a high-end or at least competent gaming PC every two years, especlially when they can buy one console for $300-500 every five years (or is it going to me more like 10 with this generation? MS and Sony seem to think so...) The misconception that you need to spend a freaking fortune on a gaming PC is probably left from the mid-to-late 1990's, in which you would spend $2000-3000 for a bitchin' system.

Now, with graphics cars costing less than $200 you can have a fantastic gaming experience as long as you aren't using a 30" 2560x1600 LCD monitor, and cheap quad cores with stellar performance for the same, I call BS, but this is how the general public thinks. And until OEMs (and also Intel, I'm looking squarely at you, bubby) stop including god-awful integrated graphics with the majority of systems, PC gaming won't reach the masses, either. However, I have very high hopes for AMD's Fusion tech. An equivalent or better gaming experience to a console at 1366x768 on a cheap 15.4" laptop, sure, it's far better that what we have now.


4. For the average consumer, they want things to just "work."

You know, like Macs are supposed to? No messing with drivers, crashes, incompatibilities, just pop in the disk and go. Unless you get an RRoD. Wait, what? Most people are too stupid to figure out how to upgrade or fix problems, or simply just don't want to bother. That's why you've got places like Geek Squad (shudders).


5. For the average gamer, console graphics are more than enough.

Why? Because they probably don't know that there is hardware capable of much, much more. Or just don't care.


6. Not everyone wants to sit at a computer desk, they'd rather be on the couch in front of a big screen.

I can understand this to a point, but to me, comfort takes a back seat to visual fidelity. But that doesn't mean I don't have one comfortable-ass computer chair. :awe:


I could keep going, but I think I've made my point.

 

[shortylickens]

Welcome newb!

Those points have already been made about a thousand times before, but rarely so well and so completely. I think you will do alright here.
Little tip: We have this discussion on a regular basis so I recommend you never take it TOO seriously. Many folks get bent out of shape and start pissing contests.

 

[Mr. Bluntman]

Welcome newb!

Those points have already been made about a thousand times before, but rarely so well and so completely. I think you will do alright here.
Little tip: We have this discussion on a regular basis so I recommend you never take it TOO seriously. Many folks get bent out of shape and start pissing contests.

Thanks! I really put a lot of thought into that post.

And I know all to well about threads degenerating into nothing more than fanboy-ish flame fests. I've been over at [H]ardForums for a while now and wanted to get a breath of fresh air by joining up here. Sometimes the eilitist attitude can be draining.

 

[evident]

sigh. all i want was an arena shooter a-la UT focused on multiplayer balance, teamwork and longevity. UT3 shattered those dreams and every other FPS is miserable to play.

 

[shortylickens]

sigh. all i want was an arena shooter a-la UT focused on multiplayer balance, teamwork and longevity. UT3 shattered those dreams and every other FPS is miserable to play.

Steam has UT and UT2004 dirt cheap right now.

 

[pmv]

They're looking to make the next big $$$-making hit, which is why the gaming world is starting to feel a lot like Hollywood to me, which is a horrible, horrible thing.

I think this hits the nail on the head really. Its probably following the same path that the movie industry has.

 

[pmv]

I suppose, as hardware improves eventually it will be possible for a small indie developer using generic development tools to make an FPS that's > UT2004 graphically. Will still be behind what would have been possible with that hardware if industry had continued as it had in the past, but it would still be better than what we have now.

 

[nyker96]

I love more of the same personally. but I think more of the same should be sold as expansions ie cheaper not a sequal.

 

[evident]

Steam has UT and UT2004 dirt cheap right now.

the online community is so splintered right now though and its tough to find good servers.

 

[skace]

"He [John Carmack] once bragged that storylines to video games were like storylines to porn."

He's right. Video games are a series of puzzles with enough storyline to interconnect them and to give the player a sense of motivation. It's the novelty of the puzzles and the ability to create skills that make games interesting.

Doom is a good example of the FPS where the storyline is thin, but skill and puzzles helped make it a fun game. Gran Turismo is a game series that subsists entirely on skill creation. Tetris, Bejewled, etc. puzzle and skill. All the old 2D side-scrolling games were skill.

RPGs, strategy, dungeon crawlers, and RTS usually need stories to get the player into the world. When you're grinding through the game, it really helps when the player feels some motivation for completing the game.

I agree with this comment more than the original article. The problem isn't that graphics stagnated or that we don't have good enough plots. The problem is that developers have forgotten that puzzles are actually what people used to be playing. We've replaced puzzles with scripted movie-esque sequences that are boring garbage that is meant for every player to beat. It's lowest common denominator bullshit. We used to have games where people would have to go and figure out how to get past something, we don't anymore. When our brains stop being challenged, they grow dull and bored.

 

[Judgement]

When our brains stop being challenged, they grow dull and bored.

qft

 

[NoQuarter]

I agree with this comment more than the original article. The problem isn't that graphics stagnated or that we don't have good enough plots. The problem is that developers have forgotten that puzzles are actually what people used to be playing. We've replaced puzzles with scripted movie-esque sequences that are boring garbage that is meant for every player to beat. It's lowest common denominator bullshit. We used to have games where people would have to go and figure out how to get past something, we don't anymore. When our brains stop being challenged, they grow dull and bored.

I used to not even bother playing Nightmare or Insane difficulty cuz most games I wasn't good enough but these days I have to play them on max difficulty right away to make them challenging, it's actually annoying that some games make you unlock the higher difficulties since the normal difficulties are so easy anyway.

I just started playing ME2, made a Soldier on Insanity and it is quite easy. Rolled up a Vanguard instead and it's more challenging due to lack of range but I have a feeling once I get my Vanguard skills maxed out it'll be easy again.

 

[simonizor]

The Unreal Engine 3 was used in Borderlands. It can be used in original looking games. The gaming community as a whole wants CoD style games. The developers give it to them. If it bothers you make sure you support the original games that do come out.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Borderlands was far from original. Take your generic post apocalyptic world, add more guns than you even care to find, create a bunch of monsters that look like mutated animals from this world, shit out a story line that's almost completely random and not tied together in any way, and what do you have? Another generic game that's only fun to play with your friends. I believe that this game is a great example of how games have been dumbed down ever since consoles have become more powerful and became more of a replacement to a PC.

 

[Firsttime]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Borderlands was far from original. Take your generic post apocalyptic world, add more guns than you even care to find, create a bunch of monsters that look like mutated animals from this world, shit out a story line that's almost completely random and not tied together in any way, and what do you have? Another generic game that's only fun to play with your friends. I believe that this game is a great example of how games have been dumbed down ever since consoles have become more powerful and became more of a replacement to a PC.

My bad, I didn't qualify that. Oh wait, I did. I said original looking. The topic was about the engine used to create the games and how all Unreal games look the same, which is true to an extent. Borderlands however doesn't look like all other Unreal games, it looks quite original. I was just making the statement that the Unreal engine can be used to make games that look original, consumers just don't want them bad enough apparently. I hope that makes my post clearer for you.