Unreal Engine 5 Revealed! Running real time on Playstation 5

From featured comment in Ars Technica

The biggest impediment to large open-world games is the cost of asset development. What you ultimately want to be able to do is take a model of NYC and use that as your starting point for either Spiderman or The Division and not have to recreate those assets over and over.
Click to expand...

....

That's really what Epic is focused on here, and surely it derives from the work they're doing with movie studios. These are all problems that they are encountering using Unreal for filming. But now Marvel could build a Mandalorian game around the digital assets they created for the show. Everything is already in-engine. There's still a lot of work to do around gameplay, actors, scripting, dialogue, etc. but having so much of the world assets already done seriously eases the cost and length of development
Click to expand...


https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020...of-that-incredible-unreal-engine-5-tech-demo/
 
Flogger23m said:
As much as it would be cool, you just can't load UE and press a "make me a game button" and have a perfect game come out. You still need an army of developers who know what they're doing. PUBG was clearly made by armatures who were not experienced in game design and it shows. UE is supposed to be fairly easy as far as games go, and has good support from Epic. Game engines are about making things easier and simpler to do. The tech wasn't just showing off eye candy, but how it in theory will be easier to obtain said level of eye candy with less time and more ease.
Click to expand...


Armature_image_from_Modern_Radio_Practice_by_Charles_Hayward_page_47 (1).png
 
^ Haha yeah. But for my friend who doesn't understand. What?

EDIT: Jesus. lol.
 
Last edited:
Arcygenical said:
This might be the first console generation I pick up, since the PS2.... It won't ever surpass a 35" ultra wide experience, but for casual couch gaming at 1080p/~4k, I'm rather interested. Just need a 55" 4K screen that surpasses the blacks of a basically new panasonic ST plasma, before I consider that upgrade, though.

Sweeney's assertion that "Nothing on the PC approaches the PS5's level of storage access, at any price point" is absolute BS, though... From a technical standpoint, perhaps he's right. The SSD controller in the PS5, and the metal access between data assets and working memory might very well be unparalleled compared to most common gaming systems... But, by the PS5's launch, with better data access programming, and even current (expensive) solutions - that's clearly PS5 fanboyism. "Any price" includes a $4kUSD 700gb RAM drive that blows the access time/transfers of the PS5 out of the water... But I'm excited for engines to resolve assets from mass storage with better intelligence, compared to current systems.

The slowest online storage I currently have is a 3.47gbps NVME ssd, though, so... Like.. Cmon Tim. We're talking percentage points here.
Click to expand...

I’d argue that Sweeney knows what he is talking about. Even with super expensive RAM drives you are still dealing with Windows and it’s overhead. Not to mention how poorly it manages things like I/O. Your 3.47GB/s drive will NEVER reach it’s max theoretical speed under Windows, so its more than just a few percentage points.
 
So somehow it utilizes the SSD to be able to get all this incredible detail and it needs the SSD because there isn't enough space in memory.

How is space on the SSD is it using for this and is it actively writing or just reading from the installed game data?
The PS5 has 16 GB of memory and the SSD is 825GB. The SSD is the ONLY storage on the PS5.
Even if this special technique only uses the existing data without having to write the games are going to be bigger to contain all the data. Games now are already using 100 GB each. So even if it's the same as games now that means you can only have 8 games installed at once. If they're packing in all this extra detail doesn't that mean games are going to be much much bigger?

And if this technique needs to actively write large amounts of data to the SSD it means you need a large amount of the space free.

How many games will you even be able to have installed and will UE5 games using this need a specific amount of free space or they won't run?
 
sharknice said:
So somehow it utilizes the SSD to be able to get all this incredible detail and it needs the SSD because there isn't enough space in memory.

How is space on the SSD is it using for this and is it actively writing or just reading from the installed game data?
The PS5 has 16 GB of memory and the SSD is 825GB. The SSD is the ONLY storage on the PS5.
Even if this special technique only uses the existing data without having to write the games are going to be bigger to contain all the data. Games now are already using 100 GB each. So even if it's the same as games now that means you can only have 8 games installed at once. If they're packing in all this extra detail doesn't that mean games are going to be much much bigger?

And if this technique needs to actively write large amounts of data to the SSD it means you need a large amount of the space free.

How many games will you even be able to have installed and will UE5 games using this need a specific amount of free space or they won't run?
Click to expand...

They're not using the SSD as memory or anything like that. It's streaming data from the SSD incredibly quickly, nothing is being written to it. What they're doing here would theoretically have been possible prior to now, if not for severe bottlenecks caused by I/O bandwidth (this is true for PCs as well, by the way). The RAM can easily handle what's being shown on screen, RAM is significantly faster than the SSD.

Games will probably get bigger, even with newer compression techniques and potential optimizations to how things are done. That said, what Epic showed off here is likely a big part of the reason Sony is only going to recommend people add drives that they've validated are capable of handling the required speed to do all of this. There are likely similar reasons behind MS not allowing people to use USB external drives to play SX games.
 
sharknice said:
So somehow it utilizes the SSD to be able to get all this incredible detail and it needs the SSD because there isn't enough space in memory.

How is space on the SSD is it using for this and is it actively writing or just reading from the installed game data?
The PS5 has 16 GB of memory and the SSD is 825GB. The SSD is the ONLY storage on the PS5.
Even if this special technique only uses the existing data without having to write the games are going to be bigger to contain all the data. Games now are already using 100 GB each. So even if it's the same as games now that means you can only have 8 games installed at once. If they're packing in all this extra detail doesn't that mean games are going to be much much bigger?

And if this technique needs to actively write large amounts of data to the SSD it means you need a large amount of the space free.

How many games will you even be able to have installed and will UE5 games using this need a specific amount of free space or they won't run?
Click to expand...
The simple solution would be to partition off a section that you can't see that is used for that transfer using some high speed format. they say it is 825GB but the drive itself could very well be 1TB, but if Apple taught us anything you can't say it has X amount of HDD space when only X/2 is usable, because that is how you get sued. So Sony would be making a large mistake if they didn't learn from Apple's error on that. If they were to create a partition in some modified version of XFS they could probably tweak that easily for extreme read speeds and use that section as a buffer for game data. at 175 GB it would be large enough to fit any one game in there at a time and because of the internal transfer speeds of the drive itself loading all the required parts of a game there wouldn't take much more than a second or 3 at launch.
 
sharknice said:
So somehow it utilizes the SSD to be able to get all this incredible detail and it needs the SSD because there isn't enough space in memory.
Click to expand...
This is probably true, but the 'how much space' available vs. needed isn't really defined. This will be important when considering requirements for similar or higher levels of fidelity when running on other systems like desktop PCs.
sharknice said:
How is space on the SSD is it using for this and is it actively writing or just reading from the installed game data?
The PS5 has 16 GB of memory and the SSD is 825GB. The SSD is the ONLY storage on the PS5.
Even if this special technique only uses the existing data without having to write the games are going to be bigger to contain all the data. Games now are already using 100 GB each. So even if it's the same as games now that means you can only have 8 games installed at once. If they're packing in all this extra detail doesn't that mean games are going to be much much bigger?

And if this technique needs to actively write large amounts of data to the SSD it means you need a large amount of the space free.

How many games will you even be able to have installed and will UE5 games using this need a specific amount of free space or they won't run?
Click to expand...
It is very unlikely that all of the 'original' assets that are imported during game development will actually get shipped with games. Instead, there's likely an 'export' stage for optimization where developers employ UE or other tools to cull resources that simply will not be used.

Realistically, UE5 is doing two things here: first, it's handling real-time culling during development to ease developer workload, and then, it's allowing the results of that automatic culling to be exported into a deliverable dataset.

Also, expect writes of game assets to SSDs inside the consoles to happen approximately once. There's really no use case for dynamic asset generation and storage on the consoles themselves, as this would cause all kinds of additional problems throughout the system.
 
Out of all this I wonder what king Gabe is doing, Epic doesn't disclose the clearest of financial data but their numbers are up and Valve's are down, the Source engine was also pretty far behind UE4, let alone UE5. As much as I love to give the Epic store shit, and I will seriously still no cart nor gift options get into the right decade Epic.... they have been firing on all cylinders to get themselves into an advantageous position and I am waiting for the other shoe to drop.
 
Last edited:
Lakados said:
Out of all this I wonder what king Gabe is doing, Epic doesn't disclose the clearest of financial data but their numbers are up and Valve's are down, the Source engine was also pretty far behind UE4, let alone UE5. As much as I love to give the Epic store shit, and I will seriously still no cart nor gift options get into the right decade Epic.... they have been firing on all cylinders to get themselves into an advantageous position and I am waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Click to expand...

Valve just seems to be largely content to sit on their few games and letting Steam continue to print money.

I honestly wonder what the fuck goes on there and what all those devs are actually working on. Unless iterating near silently for 7 years is the new norm for them to pump out their latest masterstrokes.
 
Lakados said:
Out of all this I wonder what king Gabe is doing, Epic doesn't disclose the clearest of financial data but their numbers are up and Valve's are down, the Source engine was also pretty far behind UE4, let alone UE5. As much as I love to give the Epic store shit, and I will seriously still no cart nor gift options get into the right decade Epic.... they have been firing on all cylinders to get themselves into an advantageous position and I am waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not sure how good Source 2 is to work with or how it can diversify, but it looks pretty good graphically and it seems like it works well for VR. And Valve does seem to be making games again as seen with HL Alyx. They claim they're working on other games and I assume they're actually focusing on getting a few of these out in reasonable time frames. HL Alyx took 3-4 years to make, not that long. When Valve is focused they get stuff done. Seems like they took too casual of an approach post 2013 and just coasted along nipping projects in the bud as they came along. I assume they've noticed that they were lethargic and are pushing along to get some real games out there again. Maybe they'll get onto Source 2 and make it a viable competitor to Unreal.
 
Valve seems to be in 'don't fix what ain't broke' mode. Like Blizzard, they don't really have a need for engines with cutting edge graphics; that's simply not the customer base for their in-house games. Instead, responsiveness and stability across a wide-range of platforms on top of availability for multiplayer gaming seem to top their list of game development priorities outside of borderline experimental stuff like VR.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Valve seems to be in 'don't fix what ain't broke' mode. Like Blizzard, they don't really have a need for engines with cutting edge graphics; that's simply not the customer base for their in-house games. Instead, responsiveness and stability across a wide-range of platforms on top of availability for multiplayer gaming seem to top their list of game development priorities outside of borderline experimental stuff like VR.
Click to expand...

Well said. I remember discussing this with a guildie back when I played WoW. The person was griping about the graphics - but playing it successfully on a horrible laptop with integrated graphics! Similar with overwatch - runs fast as blazes on potatoes. That's the goal. (Valorant is going the same route, I believe, but have no knowledge there).

There's a real (literal) art to it. Many games look great with either a deliberately stylized look or deliberately retro (pixel-art, for example). Those can look really nice, and be kind to hardware. It's all about the experience the game is trying to support.
 
According to Epic Games China, the Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo can already run faster on the PC. Not only that, but it appears that the demo does not take full advantage of PS5’s SSD. After all, an NVMe 970 SSD is more than enough to run the game with 40fps at 1440p.

Thus, a modern system with an NVMe 970 SSD and an NVIDIA RTX2080 notebook can already outperform the unreleased PS5 in this particular tech demo.

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/epic...-run-with-40fps-on-rtx2080-notebook-at-1440p/

via fps review
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...ech-demo-just-fine-with-a-modern-gpu-and-ssd/

During a recent livestream, employees from Epic Games’s China division (via DSOGaming) revealed that the demo runs pretty well on modern hardware. More specifically, a notebook with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 mobile GPU and Samsung 970 EVO SSD was able to run the demo at 40 FPS.
Click to expand...
 
Marees said:
According to Epic Games China, the Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo can already run faster on the PC. Not only that, but it appears that the demo does not take full advantage of PS5’s SSD. After all, an NVMe 970 SSD is more than enough to run the game with 40fps at 1440p.

Thus, a modern system with an NVMe 970 SSD and an NVIDIA RTX2080 notebook can already outperform the unreleased PS5 in this particular tech demo.

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/epic...-run-with-40fps-on-rtx2080-notebook-at-1440p/

via fps review
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...ech-demo-just-fine-with-a-modern-gpu-and-ssd/
Click to expand...

Interesting. I'd love if they would release the demo publicly for the PC and I would really love to see them release it for the PS5's launch. I'd really love a chance to see it in person, not limited by Youtube's crappy compression.
 
Wow! Very nice, definitely next generation class look.
Some notes:
  • RNDA2 GPU in the consoles should be able to load assets directly from the SSD and not have to go through the CPU - HBCC
  • Game size may not be as big as some think for this level of detail:
    • You don't have to have multiple level of detail of objects (multiple versions from high density to low polygon models)
    • Do not need baked lightmaps
    • Do not need normal maps and at different resolutions (mipmaps). There are thousands of these if not tens of thousands in a typical complex graphically game.
    • You don't need baked textures (which you could have several for the same object or scene depending upon lighting as in day or night)
    • You don't need height maps
Shadows in the demo were overly sharp, maybe just some adjustments are needed.
A number of dynamic type shadows totally missing, as in the bugs crawling around on the floor had no shadows, also falling rocks.

I do not think you can effectively use Ray traced GI in a scene/environment with that many polygons, micro polygons, you would need multiple rays per triangle - will be interesting if ever attempted - then again would the IQ improve enough to make that costly approach even worth while? I can see for better reflections to supplement screen space reflections except then you will be streaming even more micro polygons in for objects not in screen space to get reflections. Makes me wonder if Ray Tracing for games will be rarely used in the end?

Anyways UE5 looks like a game engine that actually "Just Works", at least from the geometry, lighting aspects. Like to see other types of environments and objects such as trees, leaves, hair, fur, flexible geometry as in animals and people more.

UE 5 coming out next year, Games using it? 2-3 years+, effectively? We will be on RNDA3 and whatever comes after Ampere unless the world falls apart.
 
From what I'm reading, you can effectively consider Nanite to be software rendered... in compute shaders. Which seems incredible, it's like they beat the GPU at its own game.
 
Arcygenical said:
This might be the first console generation I pick up, since the PS2.... It won't ever surpass a 35" ultra wide experience, but for casual couch gaming at 1080p/~4k, I'm rather interested. Just need a 55" 4K screen that surpasses the blacks of a basically new panasonic ST plasma, before I consider that upgrade, though.
Click to expand...

Pardon the belated reply, but: wouldn't virtually any OLED set do the job? I mean, you don't get better than perfect blacks and virtually infinite contrast ratios. Now, you do have to be careful about burn-in, but that mainly means "don't leave your TV on with static elements for a long time."

I have an LG C7 and the picture is superb two years after buying it.
 
Marees said:
According to Epic Games China, the Unreal Engine 5 Tech Demo can already run faster on the PC. Not only that, but it appears that the demo does not take full advantage of PS5’s SSD. After all, an NVMe 970 SSD is more than enough to run the game with 40fps at 1440p.

Thus, a modern system with an NVMe 970 SSD and an NVIDIA RTX2080 notebook can already outperform the unreleased PS5 in this particular tech demo.

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/epic...-run-with-40fps-on-rtx2080-notebook-at-1440p/

via fps review
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...ech-demo-just-fine-with-a-modern-gpu-and-ssd/
Click to expand...



That translation is inaccurate at best, LUMEN runs at 40fps the rest of the demo doesn't.

"
The Epic guy is saying the first scene(Lumen) can run at 40fps on his notebook, not the whole demo.

-If its a 1080P screen, 2 triangle per pixel, make some compression on vertex, than you still can run this demo, no need very high bandwidth and IO like PS5.

-UE4.25 implemented asynchronous/overlapped loading (Because bottleneck was the CPU). They overhauled their shaders to work well with the event-driven loader. This gave them >50% loading speed improvement.

-In the final UE5 scene, compression and careful disk layout avoided the need for high speed SSD. The workload wasn't that high.

-Guy mentioned they can run the demo in the editor at 40fps, not 40+ but did not specify resolution.

-Currently Nanite has some limitations such as only works on static meshes, doesn't support deformation for animation, doesn't support skinned character model, supports opaque material but no mask.

-Lumen costs quite a bit more than Nanite.UE5 could eventually be a hybrid renderer using both Lumen and Raytracing in the future."


Also Tim reminded people on Twitter that to run at 30fps locked it means that it has to run higher than 30fps all the time including much higher on certain scenes. This was in regards to the 40fps lumen fact.

Also from comments of other developers and the UE5 engineers, do notice that they are in the process of fine tuning the engine settings for performance and that even with the high bandwidth and low latency ps5 i/o they had a couple of small artifacts from streaming. If you find a certain ex ND Developer on Twitter that's been talking highly of the ssd's you can see the small artifacts.
 
Last edited:
It’s a massive quantum leap in artist-friendliness and the visual resources you get. — Kim Libreri CTO Epic games

https://venturebeat.com/2020/05/13/...eal-engine-5-to-make-next-gen-graphics-shine/

it means that now all industries that use our engine don’t have to worry about the traditional authoring process. You can load in a movie-quality asset and it just works in the engine. The engine does all the work behind the scenes. Even if ultimately your target’s going to also cover mobile, the engine will make clever LODs (level of detail) for that platform without the usual drudgery associated with making game assets.
Click to expand...

For the demo, the environment team was half-classic Epic environment artists, and then a couple of the other people who came in came straight from a movie VFX company.
They said,
“Wow, this is crazy. It’s like authoring in the metaverse. I just grab a rock. It looks like a rock. I can move it and scale it and light it and adjust the bounds around it and still get results.”
Click to expand...
 
not to be a debbie downer, but just remember the Unreal 3 demo and how impressive it looked... and how crap the final game ended up looking...

still, it's great to see the advancement and potential here. I also wish "triangles" would soon go away and be replaced by voxels, for truly "3D" objects that can be cut and respond to physics in more ways. Maybe Playstation 10 will be ready for that.
 
Youn said:
not to be a debbie downer, but just remember the Unreal 3 demo and how impressive it looked... and how crap the final game ended up looking...

still, it's great to see the advancement and potential here. I also wish "triangles" would soon go away and be replaced by voxels, for truly "3D" objects that can be cut and respond to physics in more ways. Maybe Playstation 10 will be ready for that.
Click to expand...

I hate stupid statements like this, this statement doesn't even make sense.
Unreal Engine 3 was used to make numerous games there was no "game", the end quality of those games are ultimately determined by the developer not solely the game engine and there are quite a few games that use Unreal Engine 3 that looked amazing and still hold up to this day, over a decade later.
 
That's fine if you didn't think Unreal Tournament 3 looked like washed out shit compared to all the tech demos leading up to it... it's just a warning these things don't always pan out the way they are presented.
 
Youn said:
That's fine if you didn't think Unreal Tournament 3 looked like washed out shit compared to all the tech demos leading up to it... it's just a warning these things don't always pan out the way they are presented.
Click to expand...

It didn't though...
 
Since a preview version of UE 5 isn't releasing until early 2021, and the full version of the engine isn't releasing until late 2021, getting a game that actually uses its technology could still be a few years away.
 
That doesn't make sense, Youn . Unreal Engine 3 powered some of the best looking games of that console generation, including Gears of War, Mass Effect, and Bioshock, among others.
 
Youn said:
That's fine if you didn't think Unreal Tournament 3 looked like washed out shit compared to all the tech demos leading up to it... it's just a warning these things don't always pan out the way they are presented.
Click to expand...

First, you didn't say Unreal Tournament 3 you said "Unreal 3" so my point still stands.
Irrelevant of what you thought Unreal TOURNAMENT 3 looked like, that wasn't the only game created with the the engine and game engines aren't magic, they still require work. If a developer chooses not to put that work in that's on them, not the engine.
So you're either being dense or you don't understand the difference between a game and the engine used to create said game.
 
compare the original engine demo:
http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image...gine-3-project-untitled-20050418001052671.jpg

to what some of the early games came out looked like (in this case UT3):
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_01.jpg
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_02.jpg

I agree other games using that engine, especially later, looked much better, and that that's mostly in the hands of the artists. But I was not alone in seeing the downgrade compared to the tech demo, many on this forum were pissed off about it. I wasn't, it was not a surprise to me, but I was sad to see others hype it all up so much...
 
About the debate around storage. And I'm sorry I didn't scroll back through every page here. I highly suspect they are segmenting the storage out to have multipath I/O access to the storage. Meaning many 'controllers' (I put in quotes because they could be software devices.) providing simultaneous access to the available storage device/devices.

In reality it will probably look a hell of a lot like multiple small raid 0 'disks' as one logical 'disk'. With each of the smaller 'disks' having a dedicated controller. With data replication and other what I could call common raiding techniques you will have unprecedented data access performance and streaming of data to multiple calls at once. Net effect is your access times to fetch the data in question are much faster.

They didn't create the technology in this case. What they did do is adopt it to a small form factor platform.

IF (and that's a big if) that is the case don't expect to be able to take your drive from your PS5 and use it in a PC, even if you can change out connectors, because the controllers are all going to be either software driven or live on the main system board.
 
Youn said:
compare the original engine demo:
http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image...gine-3-project-untitled-20050418001052671.jpg

to what some of the early games came out looked like (in this case UT3):
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_01.jpg
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_02.jpg

I agree other games using that engine, especially later, looked much better, and that that's mostly in the hands of the artists. But I was not alone in seeing the downgrade compared to the tech demo, many on this forum were pissed off about it. I wasn't, it was not a surprise to me, but I was sad to see others hype it all up so much...
Click to expand...

This is what they showed when they announced UE3 in 2004
Gears of War and Unreal Tournament 3 had all those cool features and basically looked that good.
 
Youn said:
compare the original engine demo:
http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image...gine-3-project-untitled-20050418001052671.jpg

to what some of the early games came out looked like (in this case UT3):
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_01.jpg
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_02.jpg

I agree other games using that engine, especially later, looked much better, and that that's mostly in the hands of the artists. But I was not alone in seeing the downgrade compared to the tech demo, many on this forum were pissed off about it. I wasn't, it was not a surprise to me, but I was sad to see others hype it all up so much...
Click to expand...

Again, that's one game and a multiplayer one at that.
I don't see why you're so stuck on UT3 and why you think that single game which isn't even a good metric of UE3 games is somehow the the ultimate metric of future games using UE5. Maybe it's time you let UT3 go, It's been nearly 15 years, you've got to get over it.

There is nothing wrong with being hyped about something as long as you understand what you're hyping and why. Most of us here understand what makes UE5 worthy of that hype and it's not just the graphics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T4rd
like this
grifter_66 said:
There is nothing wrong with being hyped about something as long as you understand what you're hyping and why. Most of us here understand what makes UE5 worthy of that hype and it's not just the graphics.
Click to expand...
well said and I agree
 
Grimlakin said:
About the debate around storage. And I'm sorry I didn't scroll back through every page here. I highly suspect they are segmenting the storage out to have multipath I/O access to the storage. Meaning many 'controllers' (I put in quotes because they could be software devices.) providing simultaneous access to the available storage device/devices.

In reality it will probably look a hell of a lot like multiple small raid 0 'disks' as one logical 'disk'. With each of the smaller 'disks' having a dedicated controller. With data replication and other what I could call common raiding techniques you will have unprecedented data access performance and streaming of data to multiple calls at once. Net effect is your access times to fetch the data in question are much faster.

They didn't create the technology in this case. What they did do is adopt it to a small form factor platform.

IF (and that's a big if) that is the case don't expect to be able to take your drive from your PS5 and use it in a PC, even if you can change out connectors, because the controllers are all going to be either software driven or live on the main system board.
Click to expand...

If you have the time I recommend checking out Digital Foundry’s video on the reveal of PS5s specs. Starting at around 13:30 mark they begin talking about the SSD and it’s controller.

It’s all above my head so I’m not going to attempt to surmise what they or Cerny say on the matter.
 
Youn said:
compare the original engine demo:
http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image...gine-3-project-untitled-20050418001052671.jpg

to what some of the early games came out looked like (in this case UT3):
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_01.jpg
https://martincrownover.com/blog/files/images/gallery/ut3_02.jpg

I agree other games using that engine, especially later, looked much better, and that that's mostly in the hands of the artists. But I was not alone in seeing the downgrade compared to the tech demo, many on this forum were pissed off about it. I wasn't, it was not a surprise to me, but I was sad to see others hype it all up so much...
Click to expand...

Unreal Engine isn't Unreal Tournament. A tech demo for a game engine shows what it is capable of but not every game will use all those features or have the skilled developers to make it happen. Game engines essentially make things easier for developers. This new tech will make it easier for developers to make games with better graphics but it will take a while for them to learn how to use it to their advantage, as always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top