UT3 and Gears of War actually have more of a cool palette, not a warm palette. some maps and some parts of the games lean towards warm (what you refer to as sepia, although Sepia's something entirely different and I don't know of any UE3 games that are at all sepia), but for the most part they're all cool (in favor of softer and darker blues, essentially)
[QUOTE=edja007;16209885]If you think that UE3 is only sepia, look at mirror's edge :D[/QUOTE]
I believe that developers can modify the engine as they please.
[QUOTE=FunnyGamer;16209918]I believe that developers can modify the engine as they please.[/QUOTE]
They sure can, but people shit on ue because it has all these filters... Hell, if they want, they can filter cryengine too.
no, people that bitch about it being UE3 bitch because it seems like the fad with games using UE3 is that the devs just use the presets.
and for the most part, they do, EXCEPT FOR Mirror's Edge, but Mirror's Edge isn't the only exception.
I really like UE3 for it's rain/water drops, espicially in Bioshock.
I like building in subtractive mode with UT3. It makes indoor levels cake.
[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16199200]Because both Unreal Engine and Source Engine are better optimized, and by that i mean if we start a Cry2 game and UE3 on exactly same PC's with exactly same graphic setting and same amount of polys on the screen UE3 will have more FPS.
Also what we are talking about is what ENGINE is better NOT what engine looks better.
CryEngine2 have the looks...that's it.
Enreal Engine 3 have the optimization, great mod support, crossplatforming, best games etc.
IMHO UE3 and Source win
Idiot
[editline]04:42PM[/editline]
P.S. i can bet that most of the people here doesn't even know what game engine is.
Engine is not just what you see, engine is the core of the game as a program. Proper gamedevs (like me ^^) know that.[/QUOTE]
With the way you type I doubt you have the mental and knowledge capacities to make a game or program for that matter
[QUOTE=Limerick;16210909]I like building in subtractive mode with UT3. It makes indoor levels cake.[/QUOTE]That's one thing I like about Unreal Engine 3. It's map based from the start, while CryEngine 2 is terrain-based.
It's not like it is that hard to add on a BSP loader to an engine, though.
[url]http://crymod.com/[/url] you can see how effective the actual engine can be.
[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16199200]Because both Unreal Engine and Source Engine are better optimized, and by that i mean if we start a Cry2 game and UE3 on exactly same PC's with exactly same graphic setting and same amount of polys on the screen UE3 will have more FPS.
Also what we are talking about is what ENGINE is better NOT what engine looks better.
CryEngine2 have the looks...that's it.
Enreal Engine 3 have the optimization, great mod support, crossplatforming, best games etc.
IMHO UE3 and Source win
Idiot
[editline]04:42PM[/editline]
P.S. i can bet that most of the people here doesn't even know what game engine is.
Engine is not just what you see, engine is the core of the game as a program. Proper gamedevs (like me ^^) know that.[/QUOTE]
By "Proper gamedevs (like me ^^)", do you by any chance mean 12 year old dumbasses who think they're "1337 shit" as a result of their ability to use GameMaker?
Cryengine has, by far, more potential. UE3's user-friendliness makes it a more popular choice mor games/mods, but I think we'll be seeing a lot more awesome shit like [url=http://www.moddb.com/mods/petrograd]Petrograd[/url] before long.
Oh yeah, i run Crysis max settings in my another computer. FPS is almost everytime 60-80 :)
[QUOTE=Crazy_Farmer;16211141]With the way you type I doubt you have the mental and knowledge capacities to make a game or program for that matter[/QUOTE]
ya, I think we've established that
[QUOTE=edja007;16195832]Crysis, why does it run worse than unreal tournament? Because it's graphics on max is much better. If you would scale their graphics to same levels, I bet they would perform the same. But crysis's maps are a lot bigger than ue3's.[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://img263.imageshack.us/i/ut3vcrysis.jpg/][IMG]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/3448/ut3vcrysis.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
True, there is a lot of foliage in the Crysis shot, but the point still stands.
[QUOTE=abcpea;16216449][URL=http://img263.imageshack.us/i/ut3vcrysis.jpg/][IMG]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/3448/ut3vcrysis.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
True, there is a lot of foliage in the Crysis shot, but the point still stands.[/QUOTE]
That's not max.
This thread have no fucking idea what it's talking about.
[QUOTE=edja007;16217287]That's not max.[/QUOTE]
My point was that Crysis has to look like shit to run as good UT3 runs looking good.
Note the FPS counter at the top-left.
snip
[QUOTE=abcpea;16217551]My point was that Crysis has to look like shit to run as good UT3 runs looking good.
Note the FPS counter at the top-left.[/QUOTE]
Remember, Crysis' maps are huge and filled with foliage etc. while UT3 has small, cramped maps.
[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16217485]This thread have no fucking idea what it's talking about.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry Mr.Legit Gamedev, would you like to explain everything to us under educated peons?
[QUOTE=Andriko123;16211346][url]http://crymod.com/[/url] you can see how effective the actual engine can be.[/QUOTE]
It's full of weapon mods and levels. There's only like 2 -4 Total conversions. UT3 has like at least 10.
[QUOTE=abcpea;16217551]My point was that Crysis has to look like shit to run as good UT3 runs looking good.
Note the FPS counter at the top-left.[/QUOTE]
Indeed
[editline]12:34PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sodisna;16217898]It's full of weapon mods and levels. There's only like 2 -4 Total conversions. UT3 has like at least 10.[/QUOTE]
Much much more than 10, every Unreal Engine had HUGE amount of total conversions and average mods.
Source > UT3engine > Cryengine2 > Dunia
Why dunia?
[QUOTE=abcpea;16217551]My point was that Crysis has to look like shit to run as good UT3 runs looking good.
Note the FPS counter at the top-left.[/QUOTE]
It really means absolutely nothing considering that what is being rendered in each scene are completely different. It's like claiming that Source is less efficient than Crysis because you have to run the game at all low settings to get 30 FPS in the middle of a 32 player fire fight while in Crysis you get 30 FPS with all settings up to max while looking at a wall.
[QUOTE=Dlaor;16218148]Source > UT3engine > Cryengine2 > Dunia[/QUOTE]
Iunno, I think the source engine is pretty awesome but... it's getting really old now.
[QUOTE=Dlaor;16218148]Source > UT3engine > Cryengine2 > Dunia[/QUOTE]
Source was great back in 2004, but now it's starting to feel outdated.
[QUOTE=abcpea;16216449][URL=http://img263.imageshack.us/i/ut3vcrysis.jpg/][IMG]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/3448/ut3vcrysis.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
True, there is a lot of foliage in the Crysis shot, but the point still stands.[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/#65c355a04b539e4db6603133b4e1a33f.png][IMG]http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/pics/65c355a04b539e4db6603133b4e1a33f.png[/IMG][/URL]
Old unoptimized pre-patch Demo version of Crysis, 1920x1200, all graphic settings set to high, more than 30 FPS.
UE3 can take it's shitty over-glossed normal map dependent graphics and shove it.
Agree, the Cryengine manages to create more photorealistic graphics.
While Unreal3 only looks super nice when it's desaturated and muddy . Depends too much on normal maps and shaders too.
And let's not forget the annoying texture pop which appears way too much.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
