ZDoom

Hope it's okay for me to post this here. It's techniocally Doom related, but it Technically isn't, but it looks damn cool!

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/html/te ... ue30.shtml
It's the Unreal Engine 3. Prapare to be impressed by what you see!

And here is a video of it in action. The file is very big, so, only those of you with decnt connection sjhould attempt to download it. I've just wantched the video and it's very impressive. Looks promising .
http://download.beyondunreal.com/filewo ... ine_e3.zip

If anyone thinks this is unapropriate, please let me know and I shall delete the content.

Th-th-th-THAT'S computer generated? Creepy stuff!

Finally, 3d games seem realistic.

*yawn* ... Doom still r0x0rs ...

Yeah personnally, I'm waiting for a different engine.

http://download.beyondunreal.com/filewo ... ine_e3.zip

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's sites that claim to host a file, that then link to other sites claiming to host the file, that then link to still other sites that claim to host the file.... JUST GIVE ME THE FILE DAMMIT!

They really don't like updating that site do they?

I'd already seen the video... pretty fucking impressive.

I'm not really interested in a technology demo video. It'll just make it painfully aware that I'm still flat-out broke and stuck with a below-1GHz box running Windows 98. I'll never be able to run an Unreal 3 game for about 5 years.

wildweasel wrote:I'm not really interested in a technology demo video.

Me neither, but for different reasons.

In my job I have seen a lot of more or less impressive technical demos. The problem is: most of them are cheats to lure in potential unsuspecting customers who are supposed to buy the unfinished product (of course in many cases it's 'cash first - information later') which regularly is of inferior quality and not usable for practical purposes.

This is especially true in the marked of 3D engines. You can be 100% certain that if anyone brags that the engine was 'developed independently of a particular game' it will suck. Those people have no real world test case to work with and the product will show.

Demo videos are particularly bad. Who knows how fast it really runs and how much has been cheated. Do I need to say 'Half-Life 2'?

Yeah, I can see where Graf's coming from. It's the same thing with those console poly count numbers that like to be tossed around. Yeah sure, it can do it. But only in the exact conditions the test/demo was made in. Throw a single variable off (CPU speed, FSB speed, memory speed, gfx card speed, gfx card memory speed, monitor refresh, audio output, and even background threading) and boom. All of a sudden that aewsum 3d demo becomes a neat slideshow.

This is impressive, most impressive. However, unless it has something to back it up it's little more than pretty pictures. If I'm not able to interact with it yet, you may as well just render some very nice looking pictures with a 3D art package and show them to me. Nothing based on this engine will be available anytime soon, and even when it is, there are no guarantees it will be fun to play. (eg, IMO Unreal Tournament 2003 was a vastly superior looking game technically than UT, but the gameplay fell a long way short of the frantic action and well balanced weapons of UT - kind of important in a game like that.)

Don't get me wrong. I want, nice spiffy looking games but someone saying what they will release at some point in the future has limited impact on me. Especially when I have no idea how it will perform. Thief3 is almost out. It looks good (not as good as this) but I'm excited about it because it will be in my sweaty little hands soon. Doom3, apparently, shouldn't be too far behind.

Heh,

I'm sure every developer is going to love the 5 million dollar price tag slapped on this baby.

I also agree with the tech demo issue, but only in a different way. These images seem to be showcasing the Unreal 3 Engine, not Unreal 3 itself. So hypothetically, we could be looking at 10 days of work on preparing for one screenshot. As game technology advances we seem to forget the real cosmetic work is being forged by Animators, Modelers, and Artists, just because an engine possesses the power of introducing 5 million polygon enemies, doesn't mean we'll actually see them in a game. Behind those nifty looking models and maps, is a whole lot of human effort. It's like taking a dump truck full of clay for making a water pitcher, will you use it all? No. But the more you use, the more people will be satisfied.

Or you can shoot me in the back and call me dead wrong.

The Unreal 3 Engine has been shown in video form. And even there, the framerate was a little low (to compare, the video I saw was playing somewhere between 24 and 30fps.. and I could still see the video stuttering in contrast to the foreground real-life movement.

EDIT: But still, the modelling and animation was extremely tight (read: very good).

Graf Zahl wrote:Demo videos are particularly bad. Who knows how fast it really runs and how much has been cheated. Do I need to say 'Half-Life 2'?

... HL2 is, at least, believable. But I'm not gonna completely believe the Unreal 3 video until I see the game in action.

HL2 is, at least, believable

And vaporware.