What is the Next Generation Game after Crysis?

[Foxery]

Originally posted by: johnleeRIP
Are any such games in the works or being developed right NOW? What do you guys think we will see being delivered 3-5 years from today?

id Software's Rage, running on their "Tech 5" engine. (Or is it 6 now?) Same folks who brought you Doom/Quake have a new IP coming, though I have no idea how close it is.

One thing I have noticed, while graphics have jumped leaps and bounds, AI and natural language in gaming has remained at a standstill. We can have players look near lifelike at pass the visual turing test from afar, but they don't come remotely close to mimicking real humans as far as conversations or interactions go.

Er, what games have you been playing? They still have issues, but AI has made a definite leap from "run towards my machine gun, waiting to die" to paying attention to what I do, coordinating with other enemies, and generally standing an actual chance at killing me first. It's not stellar in many games, but in the time frame you're talking about, it has gone from 0 to something capable of presenting a challenge.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: SunnyD
Wow, you're missing so many steps in between everything - and Crysis was hardly revolutionary or evolutionary. All it is is a horribly inefficient engine that has no better graphical features than the Unreal Engine or the latest Carmack engine.

bullshit. ID Tech 5 maybe, but unreal 3 is not on the same level. You might not liek the "GAME" but the engine is more UNREAL then the unreal engine.

It's not inefficient either. It's just so powerful in its nature that most machines can't handle it all. Do some research. go check out crymod.com

On the contrary, it's not powerful at all, otherwise current hardware wouldn't have any problems with it. Rather it IS inefficient, especially when you compare it to engines that Carmack put out - cutting edge at their time, while pushing out premium performance on even mid-range systems of their time.

that doesn't make sense dude. Assuming you had an all powerful system that could fully exploit the engine, you'd get more out of the sandbox2 than any other engine out. The power is in its abilities, not how it runs relative to the system its on. They've openly admitted the engine is so over-developed systems today can't exploit it fully.

I'm an ID fan, so hopefully ID5 proves to be better, but I doubt it. The power/efficiency is relative.

Of course they're going to say it's the best thing since sliced bread. Do you think they'd make money off of something that has huge requirements because it's inefficient? Again, Crysis really isn't all that impressive compared to the other engines out there.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: SunnyD
Wow, you're missing so many steps in between everything - and Crysis was hardly revolutionary or evolutionary. All it is is a horribly inefficient engine that has no better graphical features than the Unreal Engine or the latest Carmack engine.

bullshit. ID Tech 5 maybe, but unreal 3 is not on the same level.

It's not inefficient either. It's just so powerful in its nature that most machines can't handle it all. Do some research.

Actually UT3 can be on the same level. Don't judge engines based on games. Instead spend some time actually taking them apart, looking at the source code and understanding how they work. All the engines mentioned are VERY powerful . There is only so much you can use in an engine before the hardware specs start to turn your frame rates into single digits. The UT3 engine has many capabilities that have not been used in games simply because they are too demanding for the hardware.

With engine development it is not what can you program into the engine, it is what can you program into the engine and still have the hardware be able to keep up. I have heard many a developer say "Man, the game would be great with this feature, I just wish the hardware could do it in real time". Sometimes it is not even about graphics, last time I recall it was about sound processing.

I think the next generation game will actually be Spore.
Developers that don't get "Graphics don't make a game" are the ones that quickly find themselves out of work.

For those wanting more info on engines :
http://www.devmaster.net/engines/

Currently I am working with OGRE. It's an amazing engine, though not specifically a game engine.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
On the contrary, it's not powerful at all, otherwise current hardware wouldn't have any problems with it. Rather it IS inefficient, especially when you compare it to engines that Carmack put out - cutting edge at their time, while pushing out premium performance on even mid-range systems of their time.

Maybe for Quake 3 and earlier engines but Doom 3 ran terribly on my computer at the time. A 1.4Ghz Thunderbird and ATi 9200 were low range at the time but I couldn't even get a consistent 10 frames per second on lowest settings. Even my friend's 9600 can get ~20 on Crysis. It couldn't support decently sized levels at the time either.

 

[TecHNooB]

I hope Half Life 3 is the next graphical benchmark

 

[Skunkwourk]

I would say Max Payne 1 for introducing bullet time, but I never tried 2.

 

[JPB]

Originally posted by: m0mentary
I would say Max Payne 1 for introducing bullet time, but I never tried 2.

Max Payne 2 is an AWESOME game. I have a new copy :thumbsup:

Its a two disc set in a fold out book.

 

[GundamSonicZeroX]

Deus Ex 3.

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK
It's not inefficient either. It's just so powerful in its nature that most machines can't handle it all. Do some research.

Do you believe everything you read on the Interwebs?

 

[skace]

Cryengine2 does several things that other FPS engines simply can't mimic. Even Cryengine 1 had ridiculous outdoor areas, but Cryengine 2 really upped the ante. I'd say Crytek is at the cutting edge of outdoor environments and always has been and that is a revolution in and of itself.

 

[BFG10K]

Stalker Clear Sky maybe?

 

[Sureshot324]

Every ID software engine has been revolutionary as far as graphics go and I don't see Tech 5 being every different.

 

[hooflung]

I don't see anything ID has done since Quake as being revolutionary. Since then their work has been average at best. Half Life 2 made Doom 3's engine look like lego's in motion with all the plastic. Quake 4 was just an update. Quake Wars perfected it but it still looks average compared to the competition. Not many games have even used the Doom 3 engine where UT2k3-4, which as a game to me blows compared to the original, has been used in far more games and has been upgraded. The best Quake 3 engine was Jedi Academy by Raven Soft, and as a game it sucked pretty hard and was unbalanced. No wonder Quake 4 was better than Doom 3, since Raven modified the Doom 3 engine like they did Quake 3 before it.

ID5 might be the next best engine, who knows. Every developer and their uncle can make them these days.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: johnleeRIP
MAX PAYNE 2 was released BEFORE HL2 and WAY BEFORE far cry.

You realize Far Cry came out before Half-Life 2, right?