Slimebeast said:
zarx said:
Slimebeast said:
zarx said:
You have to create an architecture that not only allows you to take advantage of this kind of hardware, but you also have to do it in such a way that it’s resilient in the face of people writing leaf code (not core engine code) and people creating assets for that pipeline. So that’s just a hard problem. If there were 500 people who could write a good game engine in the last generation, you’re really talking 50 people who are going to be good enough to do it in the next generation. Which is good for those people.
PC Gamer: Do you have those people?
Gabe Newell: Well, we think we do, yeah. But a good programmer could create an engine to take one of these architectures, and a great programmer could come in and do the same kinds of things and do them ten times faster on the same kind of hardware. In other words, it’s a non-linear return. And you just don’t see that today. Nobody walks in onto an Xbox or a PS3 team and can make something that runs ten times the amount of content on the screen. But in these emerging generations, that will definitely be the case.
So you know, guys like Carmack or Sweeney or the guys at Crytek can do it, but it’ll be harder and harder for other people to be able to program at that level. So that’s a side effect of it. The games will be great; I mean the opportunity is just immense for what’s going to be possible going forward.
|
What on earth is he talking about? If anything this gen has taught us that games and especially game engines have pretty much the same quality of graphics no matter who makes them.
Epic/Bioware - Unreal Engine - Mass Effect
Guerilla - KZ-engine proprietary - KillZone 2
id - Tech 5 - Rage
CryTek - CryEngine - Crisis
Ubisoft - Anvil - Assassin's Creed
Naughty Dog - Naughty Dog Engine 2.0 - Uncharted 2
Rockstar - RAGE - Red Dead Redemption
GSC - XRAY 1.6 Engine - S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
CD Projekt - proprietary - The Witcher 2
Techland - Chrome - Call of Juarez
Valve - Source - L4D
Bethesda - Gamebryo - Oblivion
DICE - Frostbite 2.0 engine - Bad Company 2
Reality Pump - GRACE engine - Two Worlds II
Sony Santa Monica - custom engine - God of War 3
4A Games - 4A Engine - Metro 2033
Team ICO - custom engine - The Last Guardian
|
well if you actually read the article you would realise he is talking about next gen, he clearly says that on the current gen it is impossible for a dev to come onto the PS360 and produce an engine that can push far more than current tech. But next gen the systems will be so powerful and so complex that even tho a good dev could make something spectacular a truly great dev will be able to make an engine that will be able to do so much more it will look like a generation leap.
The key part you seem to have missed is "Nobody walks in onto an Xbox or a PS3 team and can make something that runs ten times the amount of content on the screen. But in these emerging generations, that will definitely be the case."
as for your list well there are huge leaps in capabilities between some of the engines you listed. idtech5's mega textures for example (60fps people) vs gamebryo? yes they aren't massively different but there are clear examples of some engines just being better than others and what Gabe is saying is that next gen those differences will be massive between a good engine and a great one.
|
He is claiming there is and will be so much diversity and difference in programming skill and between game engine capabilites. I don't see that. I am seeing how the differences from the past have been erased in this generation (which had more complex hardware than the past). So if we see so many independent game developers able to create their own engines that can hold it's own against the UnrealEngines and CryEngines today, why would there be less tomorrow?
Also having Gamebryo (and Source) on the list is to illustrate how small the quality differences actually are, because you still see games developed on these engines and remaining graphically competitive (Left4Dead 2, Fallout New Vegas, Elder Scrolls 5) despite them being over 6 years old. Meanwhile the first game on id Tech 5 isn't even out yet. The quality leap between Gamebryo/Source and id Tech 5/CryEngine 3 doesn't look like a whole console generation to me.
|
I think you need to look at Oblivion with it's low res textures and few enemies on screen at once again and then compare it to rage it's not a generational leap but the difference is clear and keep in mind the scale and diversity Rage has (50ft enemies, long draw distances etc) and then remember that Rage is running at 60 fps. the diferences next gen will be even greater between engines. And tho the engines may be getting on they have been constantly updated until the point of the game releases.
And Gabe said that this gen there isn't much difference between the big engines, but next gen there will be because of the complexity obviously he is exaggeration a bit. I mean look at last gen almost every game on consoles last gen used a proprietary engine, but this gen most developers aren't able to make new engines so a lot have turned to the unreal engine. Next gen from what Gabe is saying (he should know) the difficulty of making a good engine will likely lead to far fewer proprietary engines with just a few really good third party engines being used for most games. And likely those engines will be maintained by 100 people unlike the 20-30 this gen.
@TheVoxelman on twitter
