Unreal 3 engine Thread

Excuse me if theses image has been discussed before but

Sorry ps3 but it seem's like the pc will win out again in the long run

Img136.echo.cx

http:http://www.aoqz76.dsl.pipex.com/Web%20Page%20Components/Wallpaper/Games/Unreal%203%20Monster.jpg

Aoqz76.dsl.pipex.com

3 cheers for pc gaming

------------------------------
Discuss

Edited by (in order): frosty-theaussie, frosty-theaussie

please correct the url-tags, they do not work. should be really not that difficult to view your posts after you send them in to see that tags are cranked up

Edited by: Dragonlord

Fixed

awsome. im wondering if xbox 2 (i will never call it 360) will really have graphics that good....

Its simple, PC will ALWAYS WIN!, because the damn games have to be developed on PC's, so i get angry and confused when chavs say "Xbox is betta than PC yo!" The VERY best any console can hope to do is match the PC, but that would be hard considering how long it takes to develop a game, and how quickly technology advances

Those screens look AWESOME!! btw

i dont know, the phantom looks like a pretty good contender for better-than-pc-console!!!!

What did i just say?

Its not possible to have a console that is BETTER than the PC, you might get one that is equal, but i doubt it due to how long things take to make

me those images make afraid but not that the game could be that good, no, that it will be that bad... reason?

i have from this u3 stuff now seen a lot of pictures but always the same two or three models. if they only have like 3 or 4 enemie types i gonna puke. if you look a bit close you can notice that newer games spend more and more time on heavy modelling of one character. but having only one super modelled monster makes me doze off in front of my monitor after 10 minutes of playing it. what makes games interesting is variation and this gets lost here.

i really fear this crap-vlopment... where has the creativity left off?

Chunky.The.Tree wrote: awsome. im wondering if xbox 2 (i will never call it 360) will really have graphics that good....

Unreal Engine 3.0 is up and running on X-Box 360 already.

Diablobasher wrote: What did i just say?

Its not possible to have a console that is BETTER than the PC, you might get one that is equal, but i doubt it due to how long things take to make

The PS3 cell processor has 256GFLOPS of power, compared to the roughly 20GFLOPS in current x86 CPU's.

PCs will indeed always be more powerful. But the strength of consoles is that they're all the same: they will always work! The game will always work. Performance is equal everywere. From that insight, consoles are very nice for developers.

But meh, I will always prefer PCs..

Yeah, dont get me wrong, consoles are solid, they tend to be more stable, more flexible due to controll systems, and overall, they can give a better gaming experience, depending on the game. I mean, if i had to play resident evil (any) with a keyboard, it wouldve ruined it completely for me.

But yeah, its physically impossible for any console to be better graphicly than a top spec PC. Because the technology has to exist, and be developed on PC before it can be implemented on a console.

just that consoles aren't really that 'equal' like you all think. i know a couple of cases there certain games play slopy on one concolse of the same brand but on another it worked passable. and yeah... consoles better than pc? not as long as consoles like crap-box have the GSOD (green screen of death ^________^)

Dragonlord wrote: me those images make afraid but not that the game could be that good, no, that it will be that bad... reason?

i have from this u3 stuff now seen a lot of pictures but always the same two or three models. if they only have like 3 or 4 enemie types i gonna puke. if you look a bit close you can notice that newer games spend more and more time on heavy modelling of one character. but having only one super modelled monster makes me doze off in front of my monitor after 10 minutes of playing it. what makes games interesting is variation and this gets lost here.

i really fear this crap-vlopment... where has the creativity left off?

What are you talking about?

Of course character development takes longer in next gen games because they have to normal map from high poly source art for each character. Does this mean that they will have one character in the game? Fuck no.

All it does is increase development time slightly and costs...but, granted, there are increasingly better tools to help curb the tasks surrounding high detail characters.

nope... as they have deadlines... they still need to stay within the deadline set by the superiors and they usually do not want to give them more time as this cost helluva money. thus they have to hurry and what we get is crap games where they had enough time to do the graphics but for the important things like gameplay they lacked the time.

this is what i fear will happen with this title too...

they tend to show pics of 1 or 2 models to show off the engine etc, i guarantee they have lots more (or at least on paper)

As for the ps3 processor having a million gigoflopwapipodofied monkey spanners, i refer you to my earlier statement.

If a PC cannot do it, then neither can a console. And i never said that consoles were equal, i said the VERY best they could hope for, would be for a game to look the same as its PC counterpart (if it has one)

And what is all this "Next gen" crap, jeese, this is the 3rd age of gaming, therefore 4th gen character creation takes longer thats my view anyway, goddamn, and god...damn! slow down, some people are still calling CrapBox next gen.

btw... a tv screen is limited to a certain number of pixels. any good graphic card on a high res monitor beats the snout out of any console out there.

Diablobasher, you are full of ignorance. A PC isn't the be all, end all system ever created. It can be surpassed, even for a year, by the consoles. If you have even noticed, the consoles are blowing the PC out of the water with its game lineup.

And the reason we say "Nextgen" means "the next generation." We called Xbox the next-gen console because we weren't in that generation yet of the PS2's, Gamecube's, and Xbox's run. Now that we are in that generation, we look to the future.

The new Xbox will have a graphics card that is currently in a spot above what's on the market for PC's today, so what does that mean? Hey, I just spent $300 on an entire machine that's cheaper than buying the same video graphics card seperately for the PC (upwards to $500). My wallet still feels pretty hefty, don't it? I think I'll be happier owning a system that can accomplish a lot of things that I do on the PC with half the cost, tyvm.

I also feel a lot safer running my game on a console than a PC. As soon as I pop in the disk, it instantly runs the game. That throws the whole installation process out the window, and I don't have to worry about hard drive space as well. I can also rent console games, which saves me from going out and throwing $50 down on a game that I might be disappointed with. And the last time I checked, a PC will go in for repairs a lot more often than a console, and with the money I'd spend fixing that PC, I could buy another console.

Sure, a console isn't the best damn supercomputer in the world, but for the affordable price, I say it's one hell of a deal. Not to mention, console games have been blowing PC games out of the water for years.

Ippo wrote: Diablobasher, you are full of ignorance. A PC isn't the be all, end all system ever created. It can be surpassed, even for a year, by the consoles. If you have even noticed, the consoles are blowing the PC out of the water with its game lineup.

Not to mention, console games have been blowing PC games out of the water for years.

Then what are you doing in the PC discussion forum then, preseniting ironically ignorant statements of absolute console fanboyism?

Edited by: leilei

Ippo wrote: Diablobasher, you are full of ignorance. A PC isn't the be all, end all system ever created. It can be surpassed, even for a year, by the consoles. If you have even noticed, the consoles are blowing the PC out of the water with its game lineup.

bullshit! pc has the better game setup as consoles are only able to handle a small set of game genres well, the rest is crap.

And the reason we say "Nextgen" means "the next generation." We called Xbox the next-gen console because we weren't in that generation yet of the PS2's, Gamecube's, and Xbox's run. Now that we are in that generation, we look to the future.

NO console out there today is taped to it's power, especially not pc with crap-dows on it. and next-gen is one of the most stupid words ever thought off as calling a console next-gen in comparing to a computer is bullshit. a console has one better graFX chip perhaps but the rest is inferiour to a pc. that's far fro surpassing it.

The new Xbox will have a graphics card that is currently in a spot above what's on the market for PC's today, so what does that mean? Hey, I just spent $300 on an entire machine that's cheaper than buying the same video graphics card seperately for the PC (upwards to $500). My wallet still feels pretty hefty, don't it? I think I'll be happier owning a system that can accomplish a lot of things that I do on the PC with half the cost, tyvm.

and why? because this graFX chip is the only real usefull thing on the machine and the rest is crap. with a pc you get splendid power for all the components and especially you get THE good components and are not forced to use some crap a manufacturer has thought of for you. you pay more for having a machine that is better if you put the right stuff in it. consoles are cheap crap-intosh thingies, not more.

I also feel a lot safer running my game on a console than a PC. As soon as I pop in the disk, it instantly runs the game. That throws the whole installation process out the window, and I don't have to worry about hard drive space as well. I can also rent console games, which saves me from going out and throwing $50 down on a game that I might be disappointed with. And the last time I checked, a PC will go in for repairs a lot more often than a console, and with the money I'd spend fixing that PC, I could buy another console.

crap-dows... tsk tsk... if you think a pc is only crap-dows then i'm sorry for you as those problems exist only with this OS. and if you enter a game into a console and start it... wow... it does auto-play too!!! or do you have to press a button load on your console?

Sure, a console isn't the best damn supercomputer in the world, but for the affordable price, I say it's one hell of a deal. Not to mention, console games have been blowing PC games out of the water for years.

bullshit as mentioned in the first quote. the best games i know are pc games, not console games, and they even play worse on a console than on a pc.

Im full of ignorance? are you peopla listening to what im saying?

Fact: This stuff has to be developed on a PC, therefore if a PC cannot handle it, then a console cant even have it. So what if it has a better graphics chip, it will look exactly the same as it did when being developed on a computer! (note, PC!!!)

Fiction: Consoles are good value for money, prrfttt, yeah, after a year maybe, even then the game lieups are ussually crap, i mean come on, what is there on the Xbox that i want to play right now? out of god knows how many games, the only ones worht playing are jade empire, and Half life 2 (and in some people opinion Halo) all of which are available/scheduled for PC anyway.

More Fact: Coke tastes like ash.

And another thing, as much as ive been slagging consoles, in no way do i not like them (except Xbox) i think there brilliant little machines, and great for fighting/platform games, i dont know what idve done without Abe's Oddesey, or mario, or Street Fighter, the point im trying to make, is that a console can never do anything a PC cant, its that simple, im not trying to say, x is better than x because of blah, im just trying to get it into some people thick skulls hat if a PC cannot do it, how can it be done on a console? huh?

Please dont reply to this post, its not worth it, when people start developing games on consoles (without the use of any kind of PC/PC software) then you can start the argument again because it might just be possible.

consoles are shite, the shitty res consoles run at (given most TVs can't handle anything over 640x480.. ), the fact all graphics are over-cubed and the controls are nasty. They're good for social/sport games but that's IT, they'll never better PCs for gaming again, not since the PC overtook the console back in '94 ish with stuff like DOOM and command and conquer coming to PC, spelt the end of the platformer and the end of arcades.

Consoles were originally good because the driving force in gaming were the arcades, where games would stay there undeveloped for 5 or more YEARS before being updated, suddenly here was a system where games could stay a lot fresher than that, therefore could have better graphics than that, you could play at HOME and for "free" (at time of use). As soon as the SVGA cards for PCs/macs (macs back in 94 were arguably better for gaming than PCs, they had DOOM in higher res and more colors, they had c&c, they had sim city, they had all those old school star wars games) were commonplace it spelt the beginning of the end for consoles.

Oh, sure, so the playstation is the most successful gaming thing ever, but that's not because it's BETTER than PCs, it's grainy as fuck, slow as fuck, but it's COOL, it's all about marketing and image.

FOR GODS SAKE!! YOUR NOT LISTENING TO THE POINT IM MAKING!!

PC NEVER OVERTOOK CONSOLE!!! PC WAS ALWAYS AHEAD!! IM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GAMES DAMMIT!!

Im talking about what they can do, no console can do anything that a PC cannot do, its that simple. Im talking graphics, not slection of games, speed, resolution anything.

No console game can look better than a PC games, its physicly impossible!! (unless its a rerelease, but that doesnt count)

Actually, i apologize for that outburst, and make an effort to return to topic.

So, the unreal 3 engine looks prety sweet.

diablo - back before the early nineties the console WAS ahead, when stuff like sonic or mario hit consoles there was NOTHING on PCs that was equivalent, when platformers were ruling PCs had little.

again, you still dont understand the point im making. Back then PC's were not used to play games, noone understood their potential, but they were still capable. The early games werent just designed on paper then assimalated into the game carts you moron, they still had to be developed on PC.

Therefore, the PC's were still capable of AT LEAST the same as the consoles (which is the fricking point ive been trying to make!!)

You have to forget about the games, and start thinking about what the machines were actually capable of, then someone might actually understand what im saying.