Game engines that were a waste of time

[j00g0t0wnd]

[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16617912]Any proof of me being idiot?[/QUOTE]

Yes. AA wasn't "invented by nVidia."

[jjsullivan]

[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16617933]
Restart PC if it crashes? Are you serious?[/QUOTE]

Agreed, apperently some people can't tell the difference between a BSOD and a program crash, or about ctrl+alt+delete

[j00g0t0wnd]

[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16617933]Restart PC if it crashes? Are you serious?
[/QUOTE]

Ya, bcuz ctrl+alt+delete iznt envented yet

[Trogdon]

I think life is a waste of an engine /wrists

[j00g0t0wnd]

FUCKING...

sigh...

[Suicide Requiem]

[QUOTE=PLing;16617535]Ahahah

No.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aliasing#History[/url]

I'm guessing it was also presented in SIGGRAPH to be shared with all the people like most new visual technologies are. The graphics and video game industries are a funny thing because they share new technology with each other for absolutely nothing.
But without that, there wouldn't be any industry. Everyone would have their own rendering pipelines, their own shader support, their own hardware even.

Every time someone comes up with a new, amazing algorithm to improve the visual experience somehow, he's gonna share it with everyone in SIGGRAPH and that way the whole industry steps ahead until the next guy comes along with something even better. It's the way it works.[/QUOTE]

Ok, Sorry, my bad but i think i've read that it was Nvidia that implemented AA (or some sort of advanced AA) in their Early GeForce or Riva TNT cards...probably just my memory that's failing.
However i do believe that Nvidia are usually (not always) much better in handling the AA.
From my and my friends experience that is, (he uses Ati only and i love Nvidia) he always had troubles with AA in his games, it could be some technical sort of fault or just decreased performance compared with me even when he had much never Ati card. Also Ati 've got shit support for OpenGL but that's offtopic.

[editline]05:56AM[/editline]

[QUOTE=j00g0t0wnd;16617998]Yes. AA wasn't "invented by nVidia."[/QUOTE]

Well excuuuuuse meeeee princess.
Corrected myself.

[lolwutdude]

[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16618083]Ok, Sorry, my bad but i think i've read that it was Nvidia that implemented AA (or some sort of advanced AA) in their Early GeForce or Riva TNT cards...probably just my memory that's failing.
However i do believe that Nvidia are usually (not always) much better in handling the AA.
From my and my friends experience that is, (he uses Ati only and i love Nvidia) he always had troubles with AA in his games, it could be some technical sort of fault or just decreased performance compared with me even when he had much never Ati card. Also Ati 've got shit support for OpenGL but that's offtopic.

[editline]05:56AM[/editline]

Well excuuuuuse meeeee princess.
Corrected myself.[/QUOTE]

proof please

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Suicide Requiem;16618083]Ok, Sorry, my bad but i think i've read that it was Nvidia that implemented AA (or some sort of advanced AA) in their Early GeForce or Riva TNT cards...probably just my memory that's failing.
However i do believe that Nvidia are usually (not always) much better in handling the AA.
From my and my friends experience that is, (he uses Ati only and i love Nvidia) he always had troubles with AA in his games, it could be some technical sort of fault or just decreased performance compared with me even when he had much never Ati card. Also Ati 've got shit support for OpenGL but that's offtopic.[/QUOTE]

Ati uses a different method of sampling that results in very different results. Ati's sampling method is fuller and more lush due to a higher usage of bits, since it doesn't support CSAA and thus takes more samples.

This is slower than nVidia's method, which has CSAA which can render 16x AA while only sampling as much as 4x AA, though of course, on closer looks, you can see the difference between CSAA 16x and MSAA 16x.

[Suicide Requiem]

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;16618187]proof please[/QUOTE]

Proof of what? i just said my opinions and PERSONAL experience, which one do you need proof for?

[editline]06:24AM[/editline]

[QUOTE=thisispain;16618347]Ati uses a different method of sampling that results in very different results. Ati's sampling method is fuller and more lush due to a higher usage of bits, since it doesn't support CSAA and thus takes more samples.

This is slower than nVidia's method, which has CSAA which can render 16x AA while only sampling as much as 4x AA, though of course, on closer looks, you can see the difference between CSAA 16x and MSAA 16x.[/QUOTE]

Thx, fetch a wrench.

[Tzefa]

Doom 3 was a fail

[j00g0t0wnd]

No, it was pretty damn good for its time. In fact, it was quite legendary for its time.

Then Half Life 2 came along.

[Slasha00]

[QUOTE=Chunk3ym4n;16615436]It seems like you are infering that since the console version of Cryengine 3 doesn't look as good as Cryengine 2 that the PC version is automaticly shit. We already know that Cryengine 2 on PC looks better than Cryengine 3 on CONSOLES.[/QUOTE]

I know, I'm just stating that it looks better. Why would I say CryEngine 3 for PC would be worse than 2? Crytek basically lives to push the boundaries of graphics.

[Xenomoose]

[QUOTE=Ultragamer05;16617932]How does running in windowed mode improve framerate? It seems like it would worsen it to me, considering now it's juggling the game's resources between everything else now. Don't rate me dumb if I am wrong, though. Just tell me why I am wrong.[/QUOTE]

eh, it's either that or keep it in fullscreen, which, at that much of a difference in resolution, would make the game look like a giant blur instead of a game.

[Banned?]

Doom 3 was not bad except for the fact that the character models all has a very blatant seam down the middle of them and their hands were like The Penguin (from Batman).

[Ultragamer05]

-snip-

[qurl]

[QUOTE=RayvenQ;16614340]Used in one game on pretty insignificant details to be honest, yeah, if it gets more widely used it'd not be a waste of time, but until it spreada, then it is pretty much a waste of time.[/QUOTE]

How ignorant can you get? There's so many crazy technologies that programmers are developing as we speak. They wont even be in retail games until many years to come. How is that a waste of time?

"So we are making this thing called Screen Space Ambient Occlusion but its not in any games yet"
"Fuck it then, it's a waste of time"

Jesus Christ, some people these days.

[edja007]

Most of people in this thread mix up engine and game.

[qurl]

[QUOTE=trent_roolz;16613013]The first half of your post is 100% bullshit, what the hell do you really need windowed mode for? Can't you just print out your pussy cheat codes? The second half though, that part is 100% pure truth. Imagine a super-modded forge mode. With terrain deformation or something awesome like that.
[/QUOTE]

There are MANY reasons to have windowed mode options. We're talking about ENGINES here not the actual gameplay.

If I bought a license to an engine and it had no windowed mode, then that's going to make development of my game take considerably longer. Albeit if I did buy a license to an engine then I could just add the option myself but for mod tools and the like, windowed mode is a must.

'cheat codes'? What are you, 13 years old?

[editline]11:27AM[/editline]

[QUOTE=edja007;16620977]Most of people in this thread mix up engine and game.[/QUOTE]

I know, I'm actually starting to agree with Suicide Requiem after reading that trent guys post.

[editline]11:30AM[/editline]

Maybe the thread should be moved to the programming section so it doesn't get flooded with plebs

[Shogoll]

[QUOTE=qurl;16620978]There are MANY reasons to have windowed mode options. We're talking about ENGINES here not the actual gameplay.

If I bought a license to an engine and it had no windowed mode, then that's going to make development of my game take considerably longer. Albeit if I did buy a license to an engine then I could just add the option myself but for mod tools and the like, windowed mode is a must.

'cheat codes'? What are you, 13 years old?

[editline]11:27AM[/editline]

I know, I'm actually starting to agree with Suicide Requiem after reading that trent guys post.

[editline]11:30AM[/editline]

Maybe the thread should be moved to the programming section so it doesn't get flooded with plebs[/QUOTE]

I agree with everything you said except the part where you agree'd with Suicide Requiem.

Lets not do anything [b]too[/b] extreme here, alright?

Also seriously, windowed mode is the shit. If you've ever had a dual screen set up, you would know how useful it is to be in windowed mode. Saying that you don't need windowed mode is fucking dumb.

[qurl]

[QUOTE=Shogoll;16621695]I agree with everything you said except the part where you agree'd with Suicide Requiem.

Lets not do anything [b]too[/b] extreme here, alright?

Also seriously, windowed mode is the shit. If you've ever had a dual screen set up, you would know how useful it is to be in windowed mode. Saying that you don't need windowed mode is fucking dumb.[/QUOTE]

I agree with what he's trying to say but he's just going about it the wrong way and coming across as a gigantic tool.

[ashxu]

[QUOTE=DeadorK;16578443]The fucking Source engine.[/QUOTE]

It's a fucking legendary engine.

[lazyguy]

[QUOTE=jjsullivan;16612672]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVk1GArKqfo&eurl=http://www.projectoffset.com/media/video6.html&feature=player_embedded[/media]
[/QUOTE]

That smacks of pre-rendered.

[Suicide Requiem]

[QUOTE=qurl;16621711]I agree with what he's trying to say but he's just going about it the wrong way and coming across as a gigantic tool.[/QUOTE]

Can't help myself.
But I'm glad to hear that at least someone understood my point.

[editline]01:06PM[/editline]

[QUOTE=qurl;16620909]How ignorant can you get? There's so many crazy technologies that programmers are developing as we speak. They wont even be in retail games until many years to come. How is that a waste of time?

"So we are making this thing called Screen Space Ambient Occlusion but its not in any games yet"
"Fuck it then, it's a waste of time"

Jesus Christ, some people these days.[/QUOTE]

Ambient Occlusion is the shit (in a good way), too bad it lowers too much fps in it's current state.

[editline]01:14PM[/editline]

[QUOTE=edja007;16620977]Most of people in this thread mix up engine and game.[/QUOTE]

Here have a Agree.
Proble sis that people most people have no ide what Engine is.
I can only guess how they think, probably like this.
GameDev1: "Here, we made Crysis 2 and it uses CryEngine 3 *shows neat graphics*"
People: "Wow, graphics are really nice!!!oneone"
GameDev1: "We're making a game called "Piggy's adventures in a space farm" it uses CryEngine 3"
People: "Gosh, This game will look awesome!!11oneone"

Game engine is a tool, it provides technology for graphics, sound, networking etc etc etc.
You can probably say that a Engine is a Game without content. No levels, no models, no menus just a bunch of "useless" files.
How the game is going to look is up to Developer.

[Cloak_Raider]

[QUOTE=jjsullivan;16618002]Agreed, apperently some people can't tell the difference between a BSOD and a program crash, or about ctrl+alt+delete[/QUOTE]

or if it crashes preventing you from seeing the error message or the screen, or seeing the task manager menu open up because it is obstructed by the crash.

[j00g0t0wnd]

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;16626006]or if it crashes preventing you from seeing the error message or the screen, or seeing the task manager menu open up because it is obstructed by the crash.[/QUOTE]

No Source crash prevents you from seeing a taskbar if you do CTRL-ALT-DELETE. Even pressing on Alt Tab or the Windows button always works for me.

[lazyguy]

Because every game is a Source game.

[j00g0t0wnd]

He was talking about Garry's Mod as an example. Learn to read.

[edja007]

I sometimes had crashes in smod that forced me to put my pc to sleep mode and back up so I can end hl2.exe

[PLing]

[QUOTE=Zero Vector;16616916]Source is one of the most flexible and stable engines I've ever seen[/QUOTE]

It's not, if I'm honest. Yes, flexible in the way that the visuals have been improved over the years but not at all versatile in what can be done with it and what games it has brought us. Comparing it to a "hard-working" engine such as UE-series and you can see it's very held back.

Don't get me wrong, it does what it's supposed to (albeit usually with some duct tape and bubble gum). But it only does what it's supposed to.

[toad]

[QUOTE=Dlaor;16580985]Game Maker.[/QUOTE]

What's that? I can't hear you over the sound of these awesome Game Maker games.

[img]http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/kotaku/2009/02/gang_garrison_2.jpg[/img]

[img]http://blog.politiken.dk/klik/files/2009/02/spelunky_screen.png[/img]

[img]http://fun-blog.at/admin/uploads/file/karoshi_1.png[/img]

[img]http://www.remar.se/daniel/games/iji_screen4.gif[/img]