Gabe Newell Officially Confirms That A Next-Gen Valve Engine Is In Development
262 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;38424624]Note that the game in the video actually runs at ~0.125 frames per second :P
The recorder just captures each frame and creates a video running at normal speed. I've seen people do something similar in GMod.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;38424671]That's really far from realtime though.[/QUOTE]
Well [B][I]no shit[/I][/B], it's a mass physics video.
Point is that it does this with far better stability than Source does, and solves the physics way better.
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Anders118;38424649]They both use Havok for their physics engine. Same thing, maybe the CE version is just a bit more optimized.[/QUOTE]
I can't find anything saying that CryEngine uses Havok.
I'm pretty sure they use their own proprietary multi-threaded physics engine.
[QUOTE=paul simon;38424724]Well [B][I]no shit[/I][/B], it's a mass physics video.
Point is that it does this with far better stability than Source does, and solves the physics way better.
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
I can't find anything saying that CryEngine uses Havok.
I'm pretty sure they use their own proprietary multi-threaded physics engine.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough.
Cryengine 2 uses a 3rd party physics engine, though it doesn't say which. ([url=http://www.gamephys.com/game-physics/cryengine-3-to-use-in-house-physics-engine-no-havok-physics-or-physx-middleware]source[/url])
Cryengine 3 uses an inhouse though, source is in the same link.
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;38424914]Fair enough.
Cryengine 2 uses a 3rd party physics engine, though it doesn't say which. ([url=http://www.gamephys.com/game-physics/cryengine-3-to-use-in-house-physics-engine-no-havok-physics-or-physx-middleware]source[/url])
Cryengine 3 uses an inhouse though, source is in the same link.[/QUOTE]
I read that, but some users insisted that it was the same deal with CryEngine 1 and 2, and that they were not surprised that CryEngine 3 would do the same.
I can't find any definite source on it though, but I'm still looking.
Notice how your source doesn't say that CryEngine 1 or 2 used a third party engine. The article is just worded in a way that kind of implies it, but i believe the reason for that was that Crytek wanted to have that as a part of their marketing. Presenting it in a way that [I]implied[/I] it was new.
To further support that, Crysis 1 does not appear on lists of games with Havok or PhysX.
[QUOTE=paul simon;38424950]I read that, but some users insisted that it was the same deal with CryEngine 1 and 2, and that they were not surprised that CryEngine 3 would do the same.
I can't find any definite source on it though, but I'm still looking.
Notice how your source doesn't say that CryEngine 1 or 2 used a third party engine. The article is just worded in a way that kind of implies it, but i believe the reason for that was that Crytek wanted to have that as a part of their marketing. Presenting it in a way that [I]implied[/I] it was new.
To further support that, Crysis 1 does not appear on lists of games with Havok or PhysX.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, while the crysis series has really good physics, Half-Life's physics system has always felt more solid than most games that I have played. Objects feel like they have weight and feel to them, they utilized the Havok engine for their physics yes but they tweaked it to near perfection.
Just my opinion though.
half-life 2 only needed a decent physics engine for the game itself
same thing with crysis but they decided to go all out which is why most people couldnt play it until like 2008 or so
[QUOTE=BenJammin';38426200]I don't know, while the crysis series has really good physics, Half-Life's physics system has always felt more solid than most games that I have played. Objects feel like they have weight and feel to them, they utilized the Havok engine for their physics yes but they tweaked it to near perfection.
Just my opinion though.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you on that. HL2's physics feel more defined, and behave as you'd expect in smaller scales.
It just starts to act up when you're doing massive amounts of physics.
Wow Im jealous of gabes facial hair
My favorite thing about source engine games is how grounded you feel, if that makes sense. I play all these other games and it's almost like you're floating. The movement is source just feels really solid and reliable. I hope to god that it stays that way on Source 2.
I love Gabe's great sense of humor. "Ok, what do you guys want to know other than about HL3." This made me smile that Gabe at least acknowledged the name. Source 2 is going to be great. If only some pictures were to be shown.
-snip-
What a swell guy, stands for an hour and talks to a bunch of anons from the internet.
64bit utilization pls
[QUOTE=Untouch;38421739]I just hope they improve hammer so it doesn't look and feel like it belongs in 2004.[/QUOTE]
If someone was to compile a list of features and fixes they want then someone will be more likely to make a standalone one.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;38429043]My favorite thing about source engine games is how grounded you feel, if that makes sense. I play all these other games and it's almost like you're floating. The movement is source just feels really solid and reliable. I hope to god that it stays that way on Source 2.[/QUOTE]
IMHO, if anything, Source does the most "[URL="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FirstPersonGhost"]floating camera[/URL]" games I know of
[QUOTE=CarmineGear;38430234]I love Gabe's great sense of humor. "Ok, what do you guys want to know other than about HL3." This made me smile that Gabe at least acknowledged the name. Source 2 is going to be great. If only some pictures were to be shown.[/QUOTE]
He's been saying that for a good year or two.
In source the movement feels really responsive, a remnant from iD tech. Usually in other engines like Frostbite for example you feel like you are sliding everywhere which can be pretty annoying.
[QUOTE=zombojoe;38432665]In source the movement feels really responsive, a remnant from iD tech. Usually in other engines like Frostbite for example you feel like you are sliding everywhere which can be pretty annoying.[/QUOTE]
The movement code of source and id tech games are pretty much the same and are incredibly simple, I'm not sure how other games get it so wrong.
I'm expecting 64-bit capability so I can make use of the 32GB of RAM which I bought. :dance:
I'm hoping for Oculus rift support.
Voxel based models, real time ray tracing and more destructibility would be nice, but I'm certainly not expecting it, just dreaming.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;38433029]I'm expecting 64-bit capability so I can make use of [b]the 32GB of RAM which I bought.[/b] :dance:
I'm hoping for Oculus rift support.
Voxel based models, real time ray tracing and more destructibility would be nice, but I'm certainly not expecting it, just dreaming.[/QUOTE]
Why
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;38429043]My favorite thing about source engine games is how grounded you feel, if that makes sense. I play all these other games and it's almost like you're floating. The movement is source just feels really solid and reliable. I hope to god that it stays that way on Source 2.[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about? Movement? You glide around like an ice skater. You want a game that really accurately gives the feeling of controlling an actual person, Killzone 2 or 3 is a great example.
Not saying that the half life games don't control good, but to say they create a realistic or convincing sense of controlling a human is a bit of an exaggeration. Not that arcadey movement is bad or that realistic is better, depends on the game. I don't think realistic would suit half life anyway.
[QUOTE=TonyP;38434830]What are you talking about? Movement? You glide around like an ice skater. You want a game that really accurately gives the feeling of controlling an actual person, Killzone 2 or 3 is a great example.[/QUOTE]
It's not that it feels realistic, it's that it feels like you have full control and pinpoint accuracy. There's no delay in the movement, no camera bob or latency to confuse you, no mouse smoothing and the amount of "friction" in the horizontal movement is perfect. The movement system is very solid and reliable, enabling very precise control without thinking.
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;38434892]It's not that it feels realistic, it's that it feels like you have full control and pinpoint accuracy. There's no delay in the movement, no camera bob or latency to confuse you, no mouse smoothing and the amount of "friction" in the horizontal movement is perfect. The movement system is very solid and reliable, enabling very precise control without thinking.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this.
[QUOTE=Im Crimson;38434892]It's not that it feels realistic, it's that it feels like you have full control and pinpoint accuracy. There's no delay in the movement, no camera bob or latency to confuse you, no mouse smoothing and the amount of "friction" in the horizontal movement is perfect. The movement system is very solid and reliable, enabling very precise control without thinking.[/QUOTE]
Which, in my opinion, is half the reason why not many other games out there that have huge potential sandbox capability have their own 'version' of Gmod.
[QUOTE=alien_guy;38434567]Why[/QUOTE]
Why not?
Windows will find a way to use it (if you're on 7 or 8) — and even if it couldn't, you'd still be able to use some of it as a virtual disk to speed stuff up, like intensive I/O tasks :)
[QUOTE=TonyP;38434830]What are you talking about? Movement? You glide around like an ice skater. You want a game that really accurately gives the feeling of controlling an actual person, Killzone 2 or 3 is a great example.
Not saying that the half life games don't control good, but to say they create a realistic or convincing sense of controlling a human is a bit of an exaggeration. Not that arcadey movement is bad or that realistic is better, depends on the game. I don't think realistic would suit half life anyway.[/QUOTE]
"Realism" is cancer of game industry.
[QUOTE=nick_9_8;38417662]They should just release HL3 on Christmas day without any warning.
Imagine the steam chats.[/QUOTE]
I kind of hope that [b]doesn't[/b] happen. I'd rather Valve just silently release some trailers and get one HUGE hype train rolling, get all the internet to talk only about HL3 and once the game is released have the biggest "ghost town" internet day in the history of the internet! :v:
[QUOTE=.EDI;38435412]"Realism" is cancer of game industry.[/QUOTE]
Rail shooters are, not realism.
realism is fine so long as it doesn't pretend.
FC2 is the most realistic I can think of and it's not harming anyone because no one plays it.
[QUOTE=.EDI;38435412]"Realism" is cancer of game industry.[/QUOTE]
There is nothing wrong with realism. It's honestly not that people don't really want a "realistic" game, but rather an "authentic" game, when they ask for realism: They want realism because they want to feel immersed and feel the atmosphere, and most realistic games do this so badly; one example being ArmA 2.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;38433029]I'm expecting 64-bit capability so I can make use of the 32GB of RAM which I bought. :dance:
I'm hoping for Oculus rift support.
Voxel based models, real time ray tracing and more destructibility would be nice, but I'm certainly not expecting it, just dreaming.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't a voxel based model be really blocky and ugly?
[QUOTE=.EDI;38435412]"Realism" is cancer of game industry.[/QUOTE]
No. Unless its like get hit by one bullet and die instantly.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.