Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can The Unigine Engine Get Any Better? Yes, And It Has.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    arma2 video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KK6Fo3Y0AU from this video i can say clearly that, lighting sucks, fire and smoke effect aren't better than in crisis or UE 3 (Direct3D based engines). Grass, so ugly can't comment on that. Qaridarium, your opinion on graphics quality aren't good to compare it with any other game engine.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLzVE...eature=related the video speaks for itself...

    Now OpenGL based engines that comes to my mind are Id Tech 4 (look out for Wolfenstein by Raven software and Brink by Splash Damage) & 5 (the last on is top quality yet uncomplete), Unigine IS great enough to be compared to against Id Tech 4 & 5, Now think about the differences between OpenGL 2.1 (Idtech 4 (Brink/Wolfenstein) / Unigine Tropics demo) and 3.x and 4.x (Idtech 5 (Rage) / Unigine Heaven demo)...

    Qaridarium stop whining about things we don't have on linux (arma2 isn't native). Most of the time that you comment on something is all about whining. You are definitely pessimist and cynical. We don't need people like you whining about this and that. Last time that you behaved just like this (like a jerk) was on the steam port to linux i think and i thought that you left the forums because you said that this forum was BS and what not. your argument are weaks and most of the time useless. it's like you were comparing apples with planets.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Qaridarium
      i don'T talk about the gameplay.

      arma2 beat crysis in graphic quality watch the vehicles for exampel.

      the triangel count in arma2 per vehicle is higher and the textures are just higher resolution.

      arma2 also beats crysis in view distance 10 000m if you hardware is not grandmas old shoes.

      I paid money for Arma2. I actually want my money back on that game. It was crap. It always will be. Sorry but it's true. Just my opinion, like many others here would agree. Do you know what kills the game, it's BUGGY. The game is unfinished and even when patched up, still buggy as hell. To the point that you can't even finish some of the missions. When a game gets so bad that it feels like a chore to finish, you kind of give up really fast. In fact I only got 1/5th the way through before getting frustrated enough to just want to use the CD as a frisbee ~chuck~.

      Unreal 2004 used OpenGL and the game-play feels lovely and smooth. Sure the graphics are older because of texture count and model detail. John Carmack mentioned that simply counting model detail in terms of polygons per character does NOT equate to better graphics. What counts is how well the polygons are put to use. Arma2 wastes polygons by shoving them everywhere. Putting them where they're not needed. All those fanciful trees in that little example you gave us...Sure... Looks good. But uh, screw game play. Screw optimisation too.

      UT2004 has better graphics, because the developers make excellent use of the graphics ability of the OS/Drivers/Hardware at the time. I would argue that it's overall a better game engine even with the dodgy scripting and shonky map editing software. OpenGL is just the API to the hardware anyway, so it wouldn't matter if it was D3D or OGL. The fact that Arma2 is unpolished makes it a very pointless release. Mentioning the API is like comparing the same car painted in different colours. You want something to whine about, whine about PC ports over Console ports rather than Arma2 vs Unigine 3.0...

      Yet ironically, this is another problem with a lot of PC games lately... Too many dodgy console ports that come to PC still feeling like a console game. Even the menu's still include the controller (xbox or ps3) as if the game was just recompiled and shipped away. Yeah very professional.. =( It's getting to the point that even some of the prized PC games have xbox360 or ps3 written all over them. It puts you off wanting to buy such ported games for that reason alone. I don't think marketing understand the psychological impacts of stupid decisions like that. Oh yeah save money but in the end, people don't play games that play like crap on PC. Games specialised for PC are just better full stop. Hell I would argue that even Arma2 is probably another dodgy console port... I wouldn't be surprised.

      The fact that games like UT2004 or Quake games even made it to Linux is a privilege because there is little money to be made by doing so. Otherwise every game developer and their dog would be doing so right now. The consoles seem to be making the money right now so even the PC gamers are suffering. What is this, 6 billion dollar industry in the console market yet only 1 billion in the PC market? What percentage of these are games made on other OS platforms such as Mac and Linux. I'm starting to think that maybe (as much as I hate to say it) Steam will rescue the PC gaming market because it seems to be one of the few things doing well on PC these days. Blizzard would have to be one of the other few niche companies that are otherwise reaping it in. Unfortunately they don't want to know about Linux. Unless of course it's one of their servers that probably run battle.net ... That's another story.

      I don't even know why Arma2 was brought up. It's like apples and oranges to me. If anything it should be two DX11 / OpenGL 4 engines being compared... Not two engines from different generations. Especially not a game that as far as I'm concerned was probably a rushed console port that sold poorly and really didn't make the cut. Hey why not compare the Fallout 3 engine? (http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Gamebryo) Since even that game is a console port. The game doesn't make good use of PC hardware even with a good rig. Fallout 3 doesn't use x64 architecture. If you have 8Gig of ram, you'll find the game won't use more than a few gig. If you hack the binary to make it use more ram, that doesn't help either as it probably introduces memory leaks that the game suffers with already. Not to mention that my cpu usage is at 20% while my nVidia 460 1GB is is being hammered constantly. Even Fallout New Vegas does the same thing. That's just stupid.

      Arma2 is old technology that has little importance on the gaming industry. No one cares about it. Arma2 is a distraction to any other real game engine that should be mentioned instead. </Flame off>.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Qaridarium
        the point is arma2 is a real game and more than 2 year old
        Just for information, ArmA II is just one and a half years old, the stand-alone expansion Operation Arrowhead just five month.

        As for the Unigine Engine, the screenshots and tech demos look nice. But then again, they usually do. So, nothing special here.

        Concerning games on GNU/Linux, I'll only start discussing about that when there are any.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Qaridarium
          arma2 uses 64gb of ram without x64 because of PAE sure you need windows7 or a server edition windows to use this feature for 64gb ram.
          PAE has been supported in Win 2k, XP Pro and Vista as well so it is not limited to Win 7 or a server edition

          Comment


          • #25
            To be correct, PAE is always used when there is NX active. But a software limit for the desktop systems does not allow the practical use of it. A 32 bit app can usually not get more than 4 GB ram with PAE active. A 64 bit app can use full memory. If your system has more than 3 GB RAM there is a hack that enables full PAE support on Win desktop systems too like v or 7.

            http://www.pallab.net/2009/12/30/ena...ndows-vista-7/

            Comment


            • #26
              Can you people SHUT UP about arma and take it to another thread?
              This particular thread is about Unigine, and developer tools is a very relevant topic.

              Comment


              • #27
                If the quesiton is when will someone make a full game in Unigine, I wonder if the quickest path might be to take an existing OSS game like Tremulous, Nexuix, World of Padman, etc. and port it to Unigine rather than create all new models, maps, etc. for a new game.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by enderandrew View Post
                  If the quesiton is when will someone make a full game in Unigine, I wonder if the quickest path might be to take an existing OSS game like Tremulous, Nexuix, World of Padman, etc. and port it to Unigine rather than create all new models, maps, etc. for a new game.
                  Unigine should have their OilRush game out well before any such port could be done.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Well a simple first or third person shooter would be nice too, i do not like strategy games.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Kano View Post
                      Well a simple first or third person shooter would be nice too, i do not like strategy games.
                      Actually, I'm not a fan of shooters myself. I prefer RPGs and strategy titles, but the FPS genre is the most popular genre out there. There really should be a FPS title to show off the engine.

                      And quite frankly, if you're trying to make the best FOSS shooter out there, why wouldn't you consider porting your game to this engine?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X