-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
It seems impossible to compete with Nanite and Lumen, it seems like in-house engines will become a rarity
DarkestHour
Banned
I see this as a positive that will hasten game development. I’m not sure the good it serves to build an in-house engine if it doesn’t do something better.
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
Same thing every gen, new tech appears which can't be beat, then everyone ends up being at a similar level at the end. Look at the Unity demo for what other engines look like.
Tim Soret works mostly in Unity already and he's the one making the comment. What he says is true it's difficult to maintain an in-house engine that competes with UE5. Nobody said anything like that during UE3 and UE4.
Last edited:
remember_spinal
Banned
Naughty Dog enters the room
Negotiator101
Member
We will see.
killatopak
Member
For multiplats I guess.
1st party can co-develop engines so it reduces that amount of time devs have to develop or upgrade their own engine unlike 3rd party.
1st party can co-develop engines so it reduces that amount of time devs have to develop or upgrade their own engine unlike 3rd party.
remember_spinal
Banned
Rockstar Games enters the room
LazyParrot
Member
I love the tacit assumption that every single dev wants to make the kind of games that would benefit from this shit.
The artful mincer
Member
Biomutant will still have the best fur tech.
mortal
Gold Member
Damn, we still have yet to see a current-gen Naughty Dog game built from the ground up to take full advantage of PS5 & Dual Sense.
That's going to turn some heads whenever that debuts, I'm sure.
All eyes are on GTA VI to see whether or not R* are still as ambitious.
Their recent efforts with the GTA IP have made me more cautiously optimistic, whereas before I was much more ecstatic post-RDR2
Last edited:
93xfan
Banned
Same. Maybe UE5 for 30FPS games, but not sold it will be the only engine.
cireza
Member
I knew very quickly that this wasn't reality : there wasn't a single car accident.
The way the cars move is actually quite amusing.
Otherwise it has been obvious for at least 10 years that in-house engines are disappearing, and this is really disappointing. Purpose-made engines will always offer something that generic engines can't. This has been verified every single time. So moving away from an in-house engine means throwing away part of what makes a series unique to make it a bit more generic.
The way the cars move is actually quite amusing.
Otherwise it has been obvious for at least 10 years that in-house engines are disappearing, and this is really disappointing. Purpose-made engines will always offer something that generic engines can't. This has been verified every single time. So moving away from an in-house engine means throwing away part of what makes a series unique to make it a bit more generic.
Last edited:
lukilladog
Member
Guy doesn't even give any reason as to why that could be the case.
ethomaz
Banned
Both Nanite and Lumen are generic techs… they are made to be used to all type of games but not to give you the best of each one.
Proprietary focused engines will do what Nanite and Lemen in another level.
Anything EU5 do you can do better with a focused game specific engine.
Proprietary focused engines will do what Nanite and Lemen in another level.
Anything EU5 do you can do better with a focused game specific engine.
Last edited:
500ms response time animations.
TheRedRiders
Member
You can achieve a micro-polygon rendering system like Nanite through Mesh and Primitive Shaders, they're more flexible too and not confined to geometry only workloads. People also need to stop acting like Epic are the only ones who thought of Nanite, the concept of REYES and micro-polygon rendering systems have been around for a long time now but there were hardware limitations holding this back. Epic cashed in on this technology before anyone, and s of now they are ahead of everyone but it won't last long.
It's also safe to assume several studios already have dynamic multi-bounce GI lighting systems which we'll see soon as well, we already got very bogged down versions of these and previous gens and the developers will likely update their tech thanks to the newer hardware capabilities.
There are draw backs to using Unreal Engine as well, in terms of technical limitations or drawbacks, and financial and business reasons.
It's also safe to assume several studios already have dynamic multi-bounce GI lighting systems which we'll see soon as well, we already got very bogged down versions of these and previous gens and the developers will likely update their tech thanks to the newer hardware capabilities.
There are draw backs to using Unreal Engine as well, in terms of technical limitations or drawbacks, and financial and business reasons.
We already are seeing a lot of in-house engines being replaced with UE5. Witcher, Tomb Raider, Arkane using UE5 for their next game Redfall instead of their modified Void engine.
That's not to say in-house engines won't exist but they will only be for the big publishers who can afford to develop and maintain them. A lot of in-house engines are going for UE5 already though.
Last edited:
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
I agree. UE5 is going to be the standard and devs will continue to drop in-house engines.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
So Unreal Engine will still have the best fur tech?
P.S In 2020 Unreal Engine:
Right. We have yet to see a Nanite equivalent from any other engine but of course there is a mythical engine that does it better because obviously?
*Checks where all the graphic engineers are migrating to....NOT proprietary engine developers.
Nvidia, Epic, Unity, Intel.....hmmm Epic might be on to something cuz they snatched up a whole bunch of talent.
If Nvidia ever release Omniverse as a sort of game engine we might has some respite cuz thats basically the only real competish Unreal Engine 5 has in the real time space.
Yes I know Unity is still the most popular engine but how many games can you mention that use HDRP?
ToTTenTranz
Banned
If the above was true we wouldn't be seeing such a massive move to Unreal Engine 5 from enormous publishers and dev houses.
Competition among game engines is good, but people do need to realize that all these publishers like CDProjekt and EA are moving to UE5 because they need their games to be competitive themselves in image quality and resulting immersiveness.
That would probably be useless on the RDNA2 game consoles that usually move the largest amount of sales.
Epic knew what they were doing when they implemented a temporal reconstruction technique that doesn't depend on dedicated tensor cores and a lighting system that plays well with RDNA2's slower raytracing acceleration.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
He hasn't even put out a game yet. His input is about as valuable as the shovelware devs on steam frankly
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Forgot Nvidia arbitrarily locked Omniverse to Nvidia GPUs even if its DXR and VkRay compatible.
For all their talk of collaborate with any hardware yada yada locking out AMD and Intel seems counter to their messaging.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
It becomes more a question of value at a certain point, like Epic can offer so much more value than having to develop something that competes in-house, it's just economies of scale. Unless you know you're going to make 20+ games with an engine, the hundreds of developers and years of time you need to make your own similar engine don't make much sense.
Where it will continue to make sense is for situations where less is more. Games targetting a single platform, for example, without much need to scale, can maybe more effectively target and optimize to specific features. This is why companies like Naughty Dog and Insomniac probably aren't going to hop on Unreal. These engines aren't really competing with Unreal feature-for-feature, but they don't have to.
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
4A Games already have something better than Lumen with its implementation of full raytraced lighting in Metro. Cryengine's Voxel GI(SVOGI) is also better and scalable enough to be used on the Switch version of Crysis Remastered.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Doubt it, game dev is a mess even to this day. A game that could be made in three years with proper tools and management turns into a five year stunt because more often than not they spend three years just figuring shit out which is hilarious.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
GI solutions shouldnt be too much of a problem.
There are already alternatives.
Dare I say HDRP is already on par with what Unreal Engine and Lumen can produce.
Do we really have any alternatives to Nanite?
Thats where IMO shit hits the fan....not needing to worry about LODs all that much is a frikken godsend.
Heck render budgets are so much easier to calculate with Nanite legit devs need some sort of competish for it....if you have a bunch of static meshes of which nanite will soon support world space modifiers and others, then how do you beat the density that Nanite can handle?
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Yeah but both crysis and metro look like shit next to the Matrix.
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Metro was designed to run on old hardware. I guarantee Crysis 4 and 4A next game will look as good if not better than Stalker 2 which will be using UE5.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Wish that certain breakthrough technologies and their generic implementation would be made open-source*. Certain companies made living off of open source Carmack work, but they gave zero shit back to community.
*by law
We've seen massive adoption of open source codebases recently and it's a beautiful thing.
Namely oodle kraken, that physics engine from Guerilla dev and many others. Not the mention open source tools like Blender.
*by law
We've seen massive adoption of open source codebases recently and it's a beautiful thing.
Namely oodle kraken, that physics engine from Guerilla dev and many others. Not the mention open source tools like Blender.
VFXVeteran
Banned
The reason is that budgets are going through the roof with time and most gaming studios hate doing R&D and spending money for years on it. I remember talking with iD software and they mentioned they don't have time to figure out anything new within a game cycle. It was very discouraging IMO. I suspect that smaller studios would take several years to come up with something similar to Nanite and run on all hardware efficiently. I guess we'll see what happens this generation..
Last edited:
kyliethicc
Member
This dev is self employed indie with like 1 game made, that doesn’t even have a wiki page.
For that scale of dev, sure UE5 will be very useful.
But the big boys (Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Rockstar, etc) will have no reason to stop using their own tech.
For that scale of dev, sure UE5 will be very useful.
But the big boys (Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Rockstar, etc) will have no reason to stop using their own tech.
Karak
Member
I can say that what I am hearing is that since EPIC is of course their own engine developer where game makers making 1st party have to eat that as well, that Unreal is very exciting to them.
The maybe 20 or so I have talked to for the videos as well as the podcast with Andy(who works at epic) yesterday. Overall many devs feel that using Unreal would allow for them to put work in other places, where those still pushing 1st party have more specific needs. But NO one is not testing it and comparing it. Many devs are doing all sorts of comparisons and resource based investigations on what to use.
Was also interested to hear that at least 2 of the devs worked at a company with a 1.5 year old engine(as in their updating it for next gen making a new one) and that unreal's implementation in a variety of places including GI was faster than theirs by about 3 fold. It makes sense, that is their business, but still was cool to hear their excitement.
The maybe 20 or so I have talked to for the videos as well as the podcast with Andy(who works at epic) yesterday. Overall many devs feel that using Unreal would allow for them to put work in other places, where those still pushing 1st party have more specific needs. But NO one is not testing it and comparing it. Many devs are doing all sorts of comparisons and resource based investigations on what to use.
Was also interested to hear that at least 2 of the devs worked at a company with a 1.5 year old engine(as in their updating it for next gen making a new one) and that unreal's implementation in a variety of places including GI was faster than theirs by about 3 fold. It makes sense, that is their business, but still was cool to hear their excitement.
Last edited:
nominedomine
Banned
If certain features end up being that good other talented engine makers will come up with their own similar solutions. We don't even have a single date for any ambitious Unreal 5 game release. I need to see at least one impressive game (not a demo) that uses Unreal 5 running on consoles before crowning their asses.
In all these years we never had any "magical" tech that made any engine the only option for devs, so I'm already skeptical. If it turns out that Unreal is so good that devs don't see a reason to use other engine so be it, congratulations on making a great product.
In all these years we never had any "magical" tech that made any engine the only option for devs, so I'm already skeptical. If it turns out that Unreal is so good that devs don't see a reason to use other engine so be it, congratulations on making a great product.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Is there any drawback to using it?
Maybe is good at a very specific thing, using a very specific pipeline but at a cost that can impact performance in a prohibitive way.
It's clear that UE5 has the potential to become the standard for AAA (and not AAA) game development. But I think proprietary engines are still going to be the secret sauce of some studios (especially from PlayStation).
Maybe is good at a very specific thing, using a very specific pipeline but at a cost that can impact performance in a prohibitive way.
It's clear that UE5 has the potential to become the standard for AAA (and not AAA) game development. But I think proprietary engines are still going to be the secret sauce of some studios (especially from PlayStation).