Duke4.net Forums: DNF's engine viable in 2011-2012? - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

Hide message Show message
Welcome to the Duke4.net Forums!

Register an account now to get access to all board features. After you've registered and logged in, you'll be able to create topics, post replies, send and receive private messages, disable the viewing of ads and more!

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

DNF's engine viable in 2011-2012?

User is offline   ultra tree 85! 

  • Honored Donor

#1

Hi, I was inspired to ask a question to this forum by a post made by Sinisterambo in another thread in which he called into question the almost uniform assumption that in 2-3 years, the DNF technology will no longer be capable of being the base of a successful shooter. This got me thinking about how accurate this assumption actually is, and whether it's possible that DNF will still be visually adequate after the court case is resolved (likely in 2011 or late 2010).

The thing is, the engine is fundamentally already over 7 years old, and it still holds up against the competition, just like George always said it would. They began the current renderer in early 2002, finished it by the end of 2002, and all the more modern features such as HDR lighting have been added in over the years (apparently the technology base constructed by 3DR is quite flexible). If it has survived 7 years already, is it so hard to think that it could make it through just 1-2 more? It's seen the passing of multiple graphical generations, and it has been advanced enough along the way to remain competitive.

So, I'm basically just wondering whether people are premature in jumping to the conclusion that the engine can't survive just a little longer or be further enhanced with new features if necessary. What do you think?
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#2

Quote

after the court case is resolved (likely in 2011 or late 2010)


Nice assumption..?

Quote

The thing is, the engine is fundamentally already over 7 years old, and it still holds up against the competition


I wouldn't be too sure about that, the graphics seem a wee bit dated to me but that's not necessarily a bad thing, the game still looks good. Heck, I'm happy with anything that looks like a 2007 game (or newer).

But from things I've read I'm under the impression that while the underlying technology might be 7 years old there have been more restarts than the one at switching engines and the 2002/2003 reboot.
0

#3

DNF graphics will be dated, but that's all, I would buy the 2001 DNF today if it was released so I don't really care. IMO DNF has enough graphics wise. Though I'm not a fan of "Everything is shiny" graphics.
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#4

I guess what you could do is look up which games are gonna get released in 2010 and see how much better (or worse) they look than DNF in its current state. IF the case is even over by "late 2010".
0

User is offline   crunchysuperman 

  • Honored Donor

#5

It doesn't matter anyway. :P
0

User is offline   Sir Tobbii 

#6

Well most engines are just built upon all the time, idTech5 for example is still idTech1 somewhere beneath it's skin so you can't really judge it by the engine's origin year.
0

User is offline   ultra tree 85! 

  • Honored Donor

#7

View PostSir Tobbii, on Dec 28 2009, 01:53 PM, said:

Well most engines are just built upon all the time, idTech5 for example is still idTech1 somewhere beneath it's skin so you can't really judge it by the engine's origin year.


Exactly! So under no circumstances would 3DR be forced to throw everything out. They could just upgrade the engine and retain all current game assets. :P
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#8

View PostSir Tobbii, on Dec 28 2009, 10:53 PM, said:

Well most engines are just built upon all the time, idTech5 for example is still idTech1 somewhere beneath it's skin so you can't really judge it by the engine's origin year.


There is more to games than just the engines. Sure, you could upgrade your engine and have it support higher poly models, bigger levels, higher res textures.. but it's all for nothing when all you have are the old assets.
0

User is offline   ultra tree 85! 

  • Honored Donor

#9

View PostSangman, on Dec 28 2009, 02:09 PM, said:

There is more to games than just the engines. Sure, you could upgrade your engine and have it support higher poly models, bigger levels, higher res textures.. but it's all for nothing when all you have are the old assets.


Yes, but the assets used in DNF at this point are probably almost entirely from 2007-2009, so they are actually quite recent. :P
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#10

Have you read your own thread title? I'm talking about how well DNF's current assets will compare to game in 2011 or 2012.
0

User is offline   Stabs 

#11

graphics are at a point where they just look good regardless these days, DNFs strong point would of been its gameplay.
0

User is offline   Sir Tobbii 

#12

Look at Alan Wake. That game has been in constant development since (as far back as we know) May 2005. It hasn't been rebooted once, and as far as it looks right now it seems fantastic!
0

User is online   Micky C 

  • Honored Donor

#13

Well look at it this way; it should definitely work on most computers :P
0

User is offline   UglyNacho 

#14

In my opinion, the graphics look very good. It has that "solid" feel to it. All the weapons that we've seen from leaked footage look detailed and badass. So do the enemies and environments in the game.
0

#15

The game we saw snippets of has probably already had its graphics updated based on two assumptions (ass out of you and me aside). The first is on 3DR's facebook, Scott said that the leaked Brian Brewer portfolio vid was an old build and the second reason is the D-Day pic.

Don't quote me on this though as it is mostly unfounded.
0

User is offline   peoplessi 

  • Honored Donor

#16

It's not dated yet. Alan Wake looked spectacular in 2005, now it's more like just awesome. Same with Crysis.
0

#17

View PostCultureShock, on Dec 31 2009, 05:40 AM, said:

This is the same Brian Brewer who put his portfolio vid together during his last week? Do 3DR routinely dish out old versions to their artists, or was Brian selected for special punishment? I'm getting a bit confused here unless 3DR is even more badly run than we thought or Scott's talking smack... again. Personally, I'd be surprised if Broussard even remembers what a compiler flag is and, hey Scott, a recompile doesn't magically add features and content. Flippy neck. I wish it did.


Here is the quote (the vid has been removed from the page now but was a rehash of Brian Brewer's):-

Scott Miller
Really lame video. Put together from leaked versions of a very old build, I'm guessing.

The above quote has been removed from the page, I wonder why.

This post has been edited by Sinisterambo: 20 January 2010 - 01:53 PM

0

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#18

Well, hey...look at CS:Source and HL2. The Source engine was just the Quake 1 engine with a makeover, and then renamed "Source Engine" and the graphics and physics updates that Valve put into the engine and the games around it made it even better than some game engine technologies being released at the same time, namely the Doom 3 engine. Hard to believe that a re-hashed engine from almost 14 years ago can look better than a brand-new engine from only 5 or 6 years ago. Way to go, Valve! I'm quite sure that 3DR is probably thinking along those lines when it comes to tweaking the Unreal technology to DNF in much the same manner. You wait and see.
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#19

View PostSinisterambo, on Dec 31 2009, 05:33 PM, said:

Scott Miller
Really lame video. Put together from leaked versions of a very old build, I'm guessing.


Uploading that as a portfolio video would make very little sense, so I'd take Scott's words with a grain of salt. As much as it pains me I have to side with CultureShock on this one.
0

User is offline   crunchysuperman 

  • Honored Donor

#20

View PostCultureShock, on Dec 31 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

I invented the download while you play game (true), the composited desktop (true), in-browser games (true), emotiontronics (true). Where's the evidence? Uh, sitting in an archive in about a million pieces. This isn't unusual or unique. Heck, I solved the inverse shadow algorithm a week before Carmack in 30 seconds flat.


Al Gore - is that you? :P
0

User is offline   vtastek 

#21

View Postpeoplessi, on Dec 30 2009, 03:13 PM, said:

It's not dated yet. Alan Wake looked spectacular in 2005, now it's more like just awesome. Same with Crysis.

Also Crysis and Alan Wake have day-night cycles and full-dynamic lighting and shadows. Still they looked better than anything else. Only Mirror's Edge is taking advantage of pre-baked lighting. With fixed environments(which most games take place), game visuals should deliver more. Visuals like ATI's toyshop demo, which is 3 years old. And Crysis is 2 years old. There is like no competition in PC. And if it wasn't for PS3's promoting we could never get Killzone 2. And Killzone 2 is showing the limited power of PS3.
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#22

View Postvtastek, on Dec 31 2009, 10:46 PM, said:

Also Crysis has day-night cycles


It did? :P Can't seem to remember that.. maybe one level had a scripted weather change?
0

User is offline   Striker 

  • Auramancer

#23

View PostSangman, on Jan 1 2010, 10:33 AM, said:

It did? :P Can't seem to remember that.. maybe one level had a scripted weather change?


No, it actually does change between day and night if you wait long enough. I have Crysis and have played it quite a bit. Though, I think there is a level or two that is scripted to be locked into nighttime.

This post has been edited by StrikerMan780: 01 January 2010 - 11:51 AM

0

User is offline   Sangman 

#24

I wonder what the point is of day-and-night cycles if you need to wait around just to see it in action. I do remember a level where day turned into night rather rapidly though but I have a feeling that one was scripted (it was a level where you had to blow up a ship, I think)
0

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#25

Like I said in the 3DR forums, I believe that George is attempting to get the Unreal Tech to match the simplicity of that which Build had for Duke 3D, since the concepts of the Unreal Tech were somewhat similar to what Build was based upon. Being able to use sprites like static meshes, and sectors were based on BSP material, or those predated what UnrealEd was using. Whatever...anyway, point is, using these facts, UnrealEd is almost as close to Duke 3D's Build when it comes to building a map with that WYSIWYG feeling. I mean, you don't have to go through all that compiling all over the place, and how you build it in the editor is exactly what it'll look like in-game. Seems like CiffyB and George B. were on the same wavelength when it came to this. So I can see why George and Scott chose this technology.

This post has been edited by WedgeBob: 01 January 2010 - 01:05 PM

0

#26

A little off topic but here: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=WUzi8XUZjyw
0

User is offline   WedgeBob 

#27

View PostDuke Nukem Atomic, on Jan 1 2010, 04:18 PM, said:

A little off topic but here: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=WUzi8XUZjyw


...and you made this using?
0

#28

View PostWedgeBob, on Jan 1 2010, 02:43 PM, said:

...and you made this using?


Actually, I didn't make this. :P But you could ask the guy that put up the video on Youtube.
0

User is offline   The Commander 

  • I used to be a Brown Fuzzy Fruit, but I've changed bro...

#29

Comments on the video suggest it is the Bioshock engine.
0

User is offline   Sangman 

#30

View PostThe Commander, on Jan 1 2010, 11:21 PM, said:

Comments on the video suggest it is the Bioshock engine.


A.k.a the Unreal Engine? Perhaps.

edit: Yeah looking at the vending machine it's obviously a little shitty Bioshock custom map.

This post has been edited by Sangman: 01 January 2010 - 05:20 PM

0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks are property of their respective owners. Instead of reading this text, you could be playing Ion Fury! ;) © 2019 Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options