Last message on previous page:
Why not? Your saying the same damn things i said, cept your in favor of quake and doom over Unreal. Wake up and smell the napalm. If your not biased i'm a Duck.

You cant judge a comparison until they're both out. Doom3 may well have more eye candy etc than Unreal, Doom3 wont be out for at least a year probably based off how much (little) of it we've seen (almost nothing at all yet you scream its praises with no proof). We get the UT2003 demo this month. Think where Unreal might be in a year... Your judgements are based off how many developers liscence their engine. Seems pretty dumb to me in the end...dev's will use whatevers cheapest and works cause there's just not that much money floating around with the firms that liscence engines usually. There's good games based off both quake and unreal engines so cream that way of comparing okay...

On Textures, i see alot more, and alot better textures in unreal, so whether you care or not, i prefer unreal. >I< >DO< have all these games (MoH:AA, RTCW, Q3, UT, Unreal, HL, R6 series, and others. The physics of unreal are far better in my opinion than Q3. I think the engines always run my better on my pc. I think the games have always looked better. I think the gameplay's always been more fun. There are no other ways to judge an engine, who cares whats behind the scenes if its never put to good use.

This is my opinion and i'm sticking it.

Not Biased my arse. Everyone's Biased, hell, yer biased against my opinions...Don't even go there. Ever...anyone claiming to be not biased needs help cause they're just denying the truth.

I am biased.

The biggest difference between unreal and Doom 3 at this very moment is Doom 3 is mostly hype and Unreal is zero hype. Yes, thats a fact, cause Unreal never claims more than it can show at that time. Its an engine in constant development and as they accomplish more and improve it more and more they show us more and more. With ID...you see the hype machine rolling big time, we get a huge list of stuff claiming it'll be the best game EVER with ZERO proof. 2 or 4 years later we finally get to see the game and by the time it comes out wow...not so amazing anymore is it, look, everyone else is doing the same stuff now. Thus, whenever a new ID game is realsed it generates massive hype and wow factor. But, its not even demoable for graphics nevermind playability. Meanwhile, you have unreal which has always stayed ahead at release points of ID's quality but generates zero hype cause they only show and talk about stuff after its accomplished.

Thanks but i'll take Unreal any day over a hype machine.

Note to reader: I am biased and I am not a Duck.

Eden: There's nothing special about a fresh engine unless you admit your last one doesnt have the versatility to go anywhere... The Unreal engine is currently fully up to date in DirectX terms. The beautiful thing about what Epic's done is they've created a lifetime project that just always gets better and better and never gets stale.

nVidiot: Message board Troll employed by nVidia to terrorize aTidiots.

Then a duck you are.

hmm... Now you base this deduction on? Did you know that ID supply minimal documentation with their engines and even less support? Did you know that all companies that licensed the Unreal engine also got UT engine update code for free all with heavy documentation and lots of support? You tell me which gives more bang for the buck. Yet most developers still opt for the ID engine.

You still don't seem to understand what a game engine is.

Oops... I already convinced my self of the opposite. :-)

True... Sweeney probably is the better Software Engineer, but carmack imo is the better engine writer. And Quake 3 supported a lot of the latest features out of the box. All games based on the Q3 engine will support the Matrox Multimonitor gaming thingy without any changes or patches whatsoever. Also, I'm not sure about this, but didn't UT need a patch or something to support Hardware T&L?


Now I will tell you that, No I am not biased. Yes, if you dig up my past posts you'll find I preferred Q3 over UT against human opponents, but I liked UT better in Single player. So that should balance out some stuff.

Again you keep comparing game features rather than engine features. Isn't Jedi Knight 2 based on the Quake 3 engine? That engine scales brilliantly. The first game on the engine played fine on a 300MHz K6 with 32mb ram and a 16MB TNT. Now here it is featured in one of the latest titles by a company that um... according to you has "not that much money floating around". That game, according to some, looks better than Halo.

And finally, you may note, my arguments have been based on past engines and my opinion on the future engines were and still are as already mentioned - speculation, but not unreasonable.



<font color=red><b>A man is only as old as the woman he feels</b></font color=red>

Either i wasnt clear or you misread, there was a reply to something eden said in that last post of mine. Eden stated as fact that the Doom3 engine would rule everything else.

Its not a deduction, I read what you wrote:

Don't flame me for coming up with your dumb reason.

No matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise, you are biased, so am i, so is everyone else in the world.

Now matter how much you think otherwise, i do know what a gme engine is, i simply chose to judge by different standards.

No matter how badly you wish it were so, I refuse to think like you do cause i actually like my opinion on this issue.

No matter how happy you feel when your flaming, i'm still laughing that you dont seem to understand that "I don't care what you think about my opinion".

Keep your own opinion and stop attempting to smear others intelligence level because you disagree. I do understand exactly what i'm talking about and saying and it says precisely what i wanted it to say. Not what you think it should say.

I don't give a flamin bleep what who had to patch. Whole point of the unreal engine is its ongoing development. There IS NO BOX for it. Its a continual work in progress and >I< >THINK< thats cool.

Feel free to diagree with me, god knows, a few million other people prolly do too. Prolly about that many that would agree with me though too. Do you guys never understand? This whole industry is based on opinions and personal tastes, not absolutes. Some people cant stand the way games like Morrowind look yet its the most technically advanced game and engine in the area. Some people prefer the quake 3 engine and the games based off it and some prefer Unreal and the games based off it. So, for you the ID engines are superior, for me the Unreal engines are superior. Get it? No, i didnt think so. So i'm ready for your next flame ever misunderstanding flamethrower.

edited:
If i sound pissed its because i am. I am sick of people trying to force their opinions over other people's. I was careful to make sure that everything i said was clarified as "MY OPINION". No matter how much some would like to paint me so, i am not a fool. I KNOW what a game engine is.

JK2 is a perfect example of why i hate the quake 3 engine. Its quake3 with different textures and models. The physics are insane. The gameplay is a complete dud. There are shadows on the sky instead of the ground where they belong. The AI is a joke, it even FEELS like i'm playing Quake 3 instead of star wars. I highly prefer JK1 over JK2. Most people dont agree with that though, they think the egine rocks and that Raven did a great job building JK2 with it. I dont, i think its the worst game of the year, its a complete rip, a total time sink. There's a tremendous lack of content in it, it uses near impossible puzzles in place of content. There's less content in there than in Max Payne and people thought THAT was short. Man, attention spans must be getting horrid. And dont tell me i'm confusing the game with the engine. Its what they do with the engine that counts, loosegrenade.

This is definitely my last post in this thread. Reason: Its impossible to have a decent discussion when the other side simply insists my opinion is stupid all day. Thats an argument, this is a discussion forum, i'm off to discuss.

nVidiot: Message board Troll employed by nVidia to terrorize aTidiots.

Well if you hate Jedi Knight II for personal reason, it's your op and I respect that. But if you beleive it has a bad engine, you are wrong. It is awesome.

BTW you said it yourself, Unreal is a year away as well as Doom III, this means as Sweeney can improve it, Carmack will also do so. Nobody said the Doom III engine has finished, and is waiting to be released. Also, the current Unreal 2002 benchmark tests, show GF4s at 1284*1024 doing around 40FPS, and that is on max detail and higher res, as well as stressed situations. Anandtech has said it many times, the current test does not reflect the final product. In the end it will run with higher FPS performance. This to me would sound that if Tim Sweeney is still good, he has optimized his new game very well, and it will run at a decent 60FPS average for GF4s at 1284*1024. And that would also mean the graphics are not gonna challenge Doom III, and that is IF it has been fully optimized.
OTOH IF Doom III is also fully optimized and gives around 60FPS average on 1024*768 and drops to 40 on 1284*768, without the benchmarks, it is obvious it will be more pretty and much better. That is if you use my circumstances I laid out here.

Also you are saying Unreal has zero hype. I am sorry but you are doing this to defend yourself. UT has an established fan base worldwide, all my friends know it, and most of my friends still prefer the Q3 engine to it. I regret but the only reason Doom+ID is more known, is that it has been having a known franchise and more goodies than Epic's. If UT and Quake 3 were famous equally, and they still opted for Q3 developpment, it's cuz it's better.

--
Luke, I am your father...but due to a bacon-slicing accident, your mother...

I suppose the gamers world is all subjective and of fandom. It is quite different from my side of the fence, though I'm not totally over the fence yet. Developers a la me cannot afford be fans of something like that. Neither can the bigger game developers.

But, I'm preaching to the converted, and you do seem to be the queen of everything. Just one thing your royal somethingness. At the risk of a beheading, AI is part of the game, not the engine...

<font color=red><b>A man is only as old as the woman he feels</b></font color=red>

Personally I never liked Quake (any). The game seems overhyped if you ask me. Other than graphics what new aspects does Doom/Quake bring to gaming?

Eden: It would appear to read from your post that you are equating frames per second with how well an engine looks?...
"OTOH IF Doom III is also fully optimized and gives around 60FPS average on 1024*768 and drops to 40 on 1284*768, without the benchmarks, it is obvious it will be more pretty and much better."

I just don't understand how that kind of logic works. I can name plenty of games that have @ss low frame rates, but still look like hell I actually really like JK2, once I got past the first few levels without the force powers. I thought it definitely added a different feel to a FPS and was a welcome change in gameplay I've been working my way thru MOHAA too, and I have to agree that games based on the Q3 engine have looked better thus far. I've played Deus Ex and NOLF, and they don't look as good. But gameplay has always been the most important thing , that's the reason I still play CS, hopefully the gameplay of Doom III will be equal to it's graphics (which are definitely impressive). I think these new crops of games are finally going to entice me to upgrade from my GF2GTS

ps: no insults or anything are intended in this post I'm just wondering about what you meant exactly.

Dunno really. Gameplay is highly subjective, so I don't think I can comment on much there. I think the next Doom engine will include a full physics engine, not sure if its home built or licensed from a third party. There should hopefully be some stuff on 3d sound with the availability of realtime dolby digital encoding and all. May be more, may be not.

<font color=red><b>A man is only as old as the woman he feels</b></font color=red>

Dungeon Siege is very demanding, especially if you have a number of spell casters in a big battle, but even at low framerates it still handles it quite well. I have no complaints...yet.

<font color=red>I have a computer and it does weird stuff. please help.</font color=red>

What I had meant was that if a graphics engine is awesome but yeilds low FPS, it isn't well optimized, but still beautiful. My hope is that more games like Aquanox come out, where they have very awesome graphics, and the frame rate is also very very nice too, being very optimized for GF3s. Take note the word "optimized" into account on every thing I said before!

Problem is, sometimes gameplay depends on graphics. Some games reek graphical wise and personally it can be a pain to play them if the models are annoying you. OR, if the graphics are not optimized, you get yourself very low FPS, which in the end it's graphics ruining the gameplay. Yes both have to be equal. That's why recently games are using very beautiful GFX with awesome gameplay!

--
Luke, I am your father...but due to a bacon-slicing accident, your mother...

Ok the newest news is, tommorow DOOM III is to be announced by GameSpy on their website, including a video clip of 7 minutes doing a time machine-like moment until the newest addition.
<A HREF="http://www.actiontrip.com" target="_new">http://www.actiontrip.com</A> has more.

--
I can't beleive Dungeon Siege has a pitchfork weapon called "Hoe"!