GoldenEye: Source Forums
Debriefing => General Goldeneye => Topic started by: Koba on February 13, 2012, 03:17:56 pm
-
I was wondering if there is any chance of abandoning the old and busted Source Engine and switch over to the new hotness that is CryEngine 3?
Besides CryEngine 3 being light years ahead of Source it would help us get rid of the most annoying obstacle for playing this mod: The requirement of purchasing a game from Valve to get Source SDK 2007.
-
That most likely won't happen due to the amount of work they have already put into the Mod using the source engine. I could be wrong, if i am, could a developer please correct me.
-
The requirement of purchasing a game from Valve to get Source SDK 2007.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the mod is free now thanks to TF2. It comes with the SDK. I think that was mentioned somewhere but I don't recall where.
-
These are the games that come with Source SDK: http://store.steampowered.com/search/?category2=16 (http://store.steampowered.com/search/?category2=16)
As you can see the free to play version of TF2 is not among them.
-
CryEngine is a piece of shit though.
-
I totally agree that the Source Engine is old and busted. We developers have to deal with Valve's proprietary file formats, countless bugs and outdated/lacking features. Even if Valve came out with a totally new engine tomorrow it's not fair to leave us in the dark for so long. For those reasons and others I've pretty much switched to working with the UDK and Unity.
Turning GE:S into a standalone game for a modern engine would be wonderful, but I just don't see enough interest right now to warrant all the work it would take. All the maps would have to be redone as would the programming. All the developers would need to take time out of their busy lives to learn new software and standards.
-
SDK is free now, you don't need to buy a game to get it (or will be, as per Valve (http://www.moddb.com/engines/source/news/source-sdk-is-free)). Switching to CryEngine also limits the audience for the mod, since it's system requirements aren't as scalable as Source.
-
No the Source SDK is not free now, it requires a paid game. See my previous post.
But about the CryEngine itself. I'm not saying you guys drop everything and switch now. I'm only asking to hear your opinions on it, and whether or not it is possible to use it to make a better GoldenEye game. I understand it takes a lot of work but if the CryEngine 3 picks up any steam (not Steam) it's possible that you also would attract new talents.
I think the engine is really good, it's definitely not a piece of shit as someone commented earlier.
-
It does not require any purchase to receive sdk base 2007. It is now free. Feel free to read the Goldeneye Source homepage.
-
It seems you are right about that. They sure like to hide that information.
But my main point stands. I would like to see GoldenEye become standalone and use a more modern game engine.
-
nahhh, no cryengine
-
I've been meaning to study UDK and have been toying with the idea of porting elements of GE:S over to Unreal 3 as a learning exercise. The unreal engine is free for noncommercial projects, such as our own :P
-
I'm pretty sure if we ever switched engines it would be to UE3. CryEngine, while it's got some nice shaders, does not come close to the openness, support, and modding opportunity on UE3.
-
And you can wait for the Unreal Engine 4 to be released in the upcoming years. I'm sure that it wouldn't be readily available right away though for general use. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
-
CryEngine sucks, why would we use that?
-
CryEngine sucks, why would we use that?
Because I know, somewhere deep down in your heart, you still love me.
-
Forget about CryEngine 3 - go Frostbite 2!
-
I'm pretty sure if we ever switched engines it would be to UE3. CryEngine, while it's got some nice shaders, does not come close to the openness, support, and modding opportunity on UE3.
It sure is pretty though :3
-
anyone remember the crysis goldeneye mod they shut down after trying to finish Dam... sorry i'll take the source engine over that crap any day
-
Is this it?
http://www.youtube.com/v/laRApcNRfLU
-
Please don't switch to CryEngine. It's ugly as sin!
-
Please don't switch to CryEngine. It's ugly as sin!
You're out of your mind Roger.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuLh2eb1hZs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuLh2eb1hZs)
remember the goldeneye4dead map for L4D2... this can show you how the source engine can still work for
Goldeneye..
besides the goldeneye source development team have worked hard with the source engine and have pushed the boundries of how mods are made...so its all good :)
-
Switching over to UDK or Cryengine would mean starting from scratch again.
Level creation is so much different from source and it's not enough to be a mapper anymore, you'll also need to be able to produce your own models.
Roughly 90% of a UE3 map consist of models with only a tiny bit of brushwork involved, while in source it's vice verse.
Also UDK is much more complex and complicated. Allmost every feature you can think of and even some you'd never think of are in there and every single one has dozends of parameters and values to toy arround with.
The issue with this is to find the ones you need within all these expandable menues.
In terms of mapping i really prefer Source's Hammer, nice, clean, well structured and easy to use.
While it takes a little effort to learn mapping with Hammer, it would take a seriouse ammount of knowledge in several fields to produce a map for UDK if you're not only planning to stick together some default assets.
As for CE3 i cannot say much beside having played crysis, read the feature list of the CE3 SDK and toyed arround with the FarCry1 editor a little.
But so far the toolset should be more or less equal to the UDK, feature wise.
As for source, it's far behind with the toolsets and features now but still a good engine.
I'm sure with a huge toolset and engine update they could be up-to-par with the other engines again.
On the other hand, if you create a beautifull map with UDK it's just a good looking map powered by a potent engine, but if you create a map on source that is far better then everything you'd ever imagined comming out of source....
....just look at Dear Esther ...or maps created by the GES team :P
-
Switching over to UDK or Cryengine would mean starting from scratch again.
Oh goodness, no. I don't want to go back to the alpha stage.
I'm no developer here, but it just seems like a lot of hard work for the little audience around now.
-
Unless SP is on UDK.... ohhhhhhhhhhh snap.
-
lets switch the mod to these graphics
(http://images.wikia.com/egamia/images/2/24/ET_3.png) (http://images.wikia.com/egamia/images/2/24/ET_3.png)
-
ET phone home.
-
Sorry to bump an old topic, but thought this trailer deserves a view:
http://www.youtube.com/v/r5nB9u4jjy4
-
That is fucking amazing.
-
omg the graficks are so good and the oshean looks real
-
What's the point in showing off how detailed something is and then not uploading it in 1080p resolution?
-
All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.
-
All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.
QFT
Developers these days are putting way too much time on the visual quality of a game rather than putting this time on the game itself.
-
remember the goldeneye4dead map for L4D2... this can show you how the source engine can still work for
Goldeneye..
This.
....just look at Dear Esther ...or maps created by the GES team :P
This.
All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.
And this.
-
hey guys,
New member! so first of all Hi all! :)
Secondly, I just want to say 'great work you guys are doing!' It's great to see Goldeneye getting the attention it deserves but also treated so well!!. It really succeeds in bringing back those fond N64 memories! So, keep up the very good work guys! :)
That said, on topic..
A game with amazing graphics does NOT necesarily make for a good game!
Having played both Crysis 1 and 2, while I enjoyed both games (2 more so), neither beats my experience of Half-Life 2 in my opinion. They wipe the floor with it in terms of graphics of course they do but graphics are only noticed and cared about while you're playing, they don't leave you with lingering fond memories of what you've just experienced.
Let's not forget the reason THIS mod exists in the first place is because we've all presumably spent countless hours of our childhood playing Goldeneye on the N64. I'd hardly call Goldeneye64 a graphical beast! But that didnt stop it being fun.
I'd argue Source already is making Goldeneye look amazing compared to where it originated from graphically!
The major issue with switching to a powerhouse engine such as CE3 is you need your users to have equally powerhouse machines just to run the thing!
Source may be old but it runs like butter! One thing i can rely on is ANY Source game will run on my machine!
lol not that I couldnt run Crysis 2 but, you notice the speed difference when you switch...source flies!
I played CS:S and it ran so fast and the action was so frenetic, after coming back from these 'modern games', it took me kinda by surprise.
Goldeneye multiplayer should be equaly fast and ferenetic because thats what it was like back in the day. If that experience starst to slow down in anyway performance wise, I feel that would do more harm than good for this mod.
The thing I really like about Source is how its been able to adapt over its long run. You only need to compare the graphics of CS:S to L4D2 or Portal 2 and those latter games almost look like they're running on new engines! But it's still source, just upgraded.
It seems nicely versatile too.
Games like TF2, The Ship and Bloody Good Time show a nice cartoony side to the same engine.
Also, when it comes to map making, speaking as a fellow mapper with experience in both the UDK and Hammer, if you asked me which id rather map in for a project, hands down....Hammer.
Don't get me wrong, UDK is an amazing piece of kit!! Capability wise, it's miles ahead of hammer, but theres a comfortable simplicity to Hammer. You know where you are with it! When you use hammer, it's like a 'trusty friend'...I tell it what i want it to do, and it does it for me.
UDK, you almost need a PhD just to navigate the 3D window!! Let alone make a cube!
Thats not to say however its not within the capabilities of some talented UDK mapper but its a lot of work for, in my opinion, a practically worthless gain.
Goldeneye to me is not the best candidate for 'super fancy photo' graphics considering the whole POINT of this mod is to create some semblance of a true-to-the-original remake, which had highly polygonal models and blocky faces.
Goldeneye where the world is hyper real just woudlnt feel the same to me and its that 'feeling' that is all important here! Nostalgia and all that!
Summed up, basically, game play/ fun > hyper realistic graphics.
if you want realistic graphics, look at a photo, or better yet, GO OUTSIDE! lol :p
Life in all its photo-realistic glory lie just beyond your front door.
Why do we feel this strange need to stare and drool over a 'amazing waterfall' in a game like its something weve never seen in our lives before?
Can we get back to playing games for FUN again now? :-)
-
Lastly, let me just clarify...
I'm not competely averse to games developing graphicaly. lol! Despite sounding the contrary!
I will put my hands up and say while playing games like Crysis 2 and Skyrim, I DID walk round going 'ooh pretty' , I mean i get WHY its good to have improving graphics, so that we can really 'lose ourselves' in the experience, but NOT at the expense of gameplay!!
While I marvelled at the graphical spectacle that was Crysis 2, I cannot remember much of what I did while playing it besides shoot a lot of aliens in a pretty city....Half-Life 2 on the other hand has sooo many unforgettable moments that I will never forget! ravenholm, water hazard, road to city 17, nova prospekt, striders, i could go on. :p
But i won't! :-)
Lastly, Goldeneye (no offence to the game, just true really) is hardly going to 'rock the world' being made in CE3 is it? Most of Goldeneye's maps are small interior complex's, facilities and bunkers. Ok, so theres the odd jungle, sateliite dish and siberia but again, they are small focused DM maps. CE3 is an engien designed for vast open landscapes. To use it to make small confined DM maps look 'prettier' just seems to be a REALLY silly use for such a powerful engine.
-
Freddy you made my day, thanks
-
All that stuff (besides the AI Navigation) is just silly eye candy. It does not improve the fun or experience of the game.
Deep down you know its beautiful, but we know it wont come to GES anytime soon :-(
and to comment on that quote, YES, game devs are putting excessive time on the visual quality of games, rather than focusing on the actual gameplay! (DNF)
and lastly, I think these nice visual looking games is the selling point that drives people to buy them? idk, that was just my opinion. Times have changed, and I'm guessing we won't see games like Quake, doom, quality anymore :-(
-
game devs are putting excessive time on the visual quality of games, rather than focusing on the actual gameplay! (DNF)
lol, I must be one of the only people that actually quite enjoyed DNF! :P
I'll admit, it definately felt like a game that was trying to do too much. 'jack-of-all, master-of-none' type game but for me, that diversity of gameplay was actually what kept me enjoying it from start to finish.
Do people who speak badly of DNF ever REALLY play DN3D? Because, in my opinion, they're not THAT different!
One minute you're shrinking aliens and stepping on them, the next you're controlling a remote car to solve a puzzle, the next you're driving a jeep through a desert, the next you're shrunk down and having a shoot out behind a can of frozen peas.... lol what's not to enjoy?
The only problem with all those things ive listed is they werent properly fleshed out enough to be FULLY engaging for any length of time but i'd wager a huge part of that was simply down to its hugely broken up and drawn out development process.
But even with that said, I still found the variety it presented to be enjoyable while it lasted. Something a fair few of these 'cookie cutter' shooters would do well to think about.
The ending was rubbish ill grant you that though. recycling the same boss from the beginning of the game..but..that is what you'd expect from a game thats had the development problems it had. TBH, we were lucky to even PLAY the thing! :P
Anyway, way off current topic so, sorry about that (but you did bring it up lol) ...
and lastly, I think these nice visual looking games is the selling point that drives people to buy them? idk, that was just my opinion. Times have changed, and I'm guessing we won't see games like Quake, doom, quality anymore :-(
While that may be true from mainstream devs like Rockstar, Crytek etc. there will always be indie devlopers and Mod teams like GE that will keep the quality of 'gameplay' alive. Sounds crazy when you say it out loud but ive had more fun recently with a lot more indie & mod-based games than I have the current AAA titles.
Minecraft, Project Zomboid, PayDay, The Ship, GE:S ( ;-) ), Bloody Good Time are just a few games ive clocked more hours in than Skyrim, CoD, Crysis etc.
Graphics alone REALLY don't make a game. They may SELL a game, but it certainly won't KEEP you playing it for any length of time unless there's some SERIOUS gameplay underneath that 'make-up'. One common factor among the games I listed above are that they are all simple, easy-to-get into games that have an addictive quality to them. A huge part of that addictiveness comes from the fact they run so well.
For example, if a game like Minecraft lagged in any way, the chances of me WANTING to load it up to 'have another go' get dropped quite significantly.
I heard somewhere that Max Payne 3 probaly won't run on FULL on most peoples machines yet. I find that rediculous! I simply don't get that logic!! if you're a games developer and you know full well youve made a game too graphically advanced for your customer base to enjoy the full experience, why waste all that effort when the first thing most gamers will do when they install your game will be to down-res?
The answer is undoubtedly 'consoles' though! Because the PS3 can handle it, there we go! PC users will just have to put up with it.
That would be like the GE:S team putting long hours and a lot of sweat and tears into an amazing looking level that only works for users of Windows 9!
Well, none of us are going to be enjoying that level for the next 3 years or so lol so why did the GE:S even bother?
I find it all a rather flawed design logic!
Much better to design for tech thats existed for a short while (like source) than design for the very latest, or worse yet, 'soon-to-be' tech because the numbers of gamers who will be able to enjoy your game will be rediculously small.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpuQEmLoU-8&feature=related
This is a few months older.. but in 1080p