Unreal Engine 4 will exclusively target consoles!?

Discussion in 'Gaming News' started by Fireblade, Mar 14, 2008.

Share This Page

  1. Fireblade

    Fireblade Mental Modder[ator]!!

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Messages:
    9,279
    Likes Received:
    0
    :eek: :(


    Read the full story here.
     
  2. jacobzcoool

    jacobzcoool Chav Hunter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, guess that means slow paced, low detail ports of the games at best :(

    Consoles are killing gaming TBH
     
  3. nicky munchkin

    nicky munchkin Nick is not responding...

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    PC gaming is a very niche market, what 90% of games are played on consoles? Not too surprised tbh.
     
  4. theuncharmed

    theuncharmed I was hatched

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    90% of games are consoles? Where did you get your stats from?

    I agree, PC gaming is a far smaller market and it's an obvious choice for Epic to concentrate on consoles.

    I still maintain that a good game is not about graphics. Hell I played HL1 through to the ending on 640 x 480 because I was so engrossed I wasn't interested in pausing the game to change the settings!
     
  5. eXistenZ

    eXistenZ Super Kustomer

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    0
    Didn't GoW come out on the 360 using UT3 engine months before anything came out on the PC using it?
     
  6. kopite

    kopite Super Kustomer

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    0
    yup.

    Unreal engine 3 was used for many console games before hitting the pc.

    Its sad that the pc gaming market is shrinking so much
     
  7. nicky munchkin

    nicky munchkin Nick is not responding...

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obviously PC gaming would be more of a hit if people didn't need to shell out a lot of money for a system to run the game at a good setting. An Xbox is about £200, a PS3 is about £260 now, and how much for a decent gaming PC?

    Whats even more stupid is when people spend a thousand pounds on graphics cards to run a game which sucks. IE Crysis. They spent ages on graphics, and we ended up with a boring game that nobody could play (well). And COD4, how long does that take to complete? A week?

    And people wonder why the wii, a console with very low spec parts sells so well.

    Name: Nick
    Subject: The bleeding obvious

    :D
     
  8. Fat Jez

    Fat Jez Master of the High Five!

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    0

    In your opinion, but there is no way in hell a console will ever play this game at the same resolution as a PC. To use COD4 as an example, despite the fact that my Xbox 360 would display it at 1080p, in reality it is rendering at about half that resolution (600p) and scaling it up.

    The Cry engine has been written with the future in mind. The Quake 3 engine, which has been powering games for years now, was equally demanding when it came out. Crysis are simply producing an engine that they hope will be licensed by game makers for years to come, by which point the hardware will have long since caught up.

    And in my opinion, Crysis was a good game, one which has entertained me for hours and I've still to complete it!

    Cheers,
    Stephen
     
  9. Archaon

    Archaon Eats, Drinks, Sleeps Kustom

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,421
    Likes Received:
    0
    Crysis, just like Far Cry, is effectively a game-sized tech demo. I disagree that it's boring, however if you were expecting the best game ever then you weren't paying attention. The hype was never about the gameplay, it was about the graphics, physics and the size of the environment compared to convential FPS games.

    And while I understand your £200 console vs gaming PC, someone with a brain can build a gaming PC for £600. That may be 3 times what the console costs, however in reality it's a £400 home PC with a £200 graphics card - which is the actual bit that costs the money in regards to gaming. A £200 add-on for a PC that lets it play games in addition to everything else, or a £200 console that only plays games? Ok, a £200 graphics card isn't enough to run Crysis on maximum settings - a mix of medium and high is more realistic. But it still looks better than anything the 360 has to offer. Is the PC really as bad value as you're suggesting?

    PS - You do know that the Wii is now more expensive than the 360, right? And if you want to use it for 4 players you're looking at nearly double what it costs to kit out a 360 or PS3 with 4 controllers?
     
  10. nicky munchkin

    nicky munchkin Nick is not responding...

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which is the exact opposite of what a game should be about (imo).

    Yes I know the 360 is now cheaper than the wii, but I would still choose the wii. I've used all 3 of the major consoles and I would pick the wii because of the great fun I've had playing on it. (And the fact that 20% or so- can't remember exact statistic of 360's fail :rolleyes:)
     
  11. Archaon

    Archaon Eats, Drinks, Sleeps Kustom

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    5,421
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...within their warranty period. :rolleyes:

    (not saying it's a good thing, but at least MS extended it)
     
  12. Sub

    Sub The cake is a lie!!

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    UE3 was powering stuff before gears of war...
    rainbow 6 vegas for one. and many many others..?
    personally considering just how long its taken for the bigger titles to arrive, UT3 GoW etc.
    the engine hasn't impressed me anywhere near as much as they were hyping it. its been one big let down for me :(
    the fact the audio engine is a complete pile of crap also annoys me, on vista its a damn joke. GoW pc can't do surround sound without hacking it, and even then its glitchy and cuts out and pops alot.
    UT3 is the same absolutely abismal surround sound support.
    the engine had SO much going for it and its turned out to me to be pretty rubbish. the textures are terrible, gears of war was 'pretty' but just.. so rough and ugly in other places. :( cut scenes are ugly, and on the whole i'm disapointed. from the tech videos and other stuff they've let me down :(
     
  13. eXistenZ

    eXistenZ Super Kustomer

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    0
    GoW was released a month before R6:V :p
    And I have no problems at all with surround sound in UT3... plays perfectly all the time, and I have the same sound card as you :/
     
  14. Sub

    Sub The cake is a lie!!

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    vista 64 also?

    if so.. HRM...
    i have a physx card in there and am thinking it might have something to do with it... but i'm unsure
     
  15. eXistenZ

    eXistenZ Super Kustomer

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yup.
    What are you connecting the speakers on? I'm using the digital (not optical) out.
    Creative Audigys used to be a bit funny about which PCI slot you put them in - could be the same with the X-fi - maybe try moving it to a different slot?
     
  16. Hue

    Hue Kustomer

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    it's stupid PC fans have always been one of Epic's main's supporters, i have been playing UT for years after getting bored of quake.. this is ridiculous...