unreal engine 4 VS SE's luminous engine?
polycounter lvl 10
After seeing both demos for Unreal engine 4 which is awesome and Luminous engine which was breathtaking.Gat to admit luminous engine looks better than Unreal 4 but might be harder to use to make games.
What is ur opinion about the engines u saw?BTW,is unreal engine 4 free like unreal engine 3?
What is ur opinion about the engines u saw?BTW,is unreal engine 4 free like unreal engine 3?
Replies
On the other hand, UE4 is gonna get the UDK treatment sooner or later.
Also, one more thing, the LE demo's that peeps saw was non-interactive, meaning we don't have an actual idea on what it would feel like to be 'in it', vs just watching a cinematic being rendered real-time, and based upon history alone, Epic has a much better track record on that then SE.
Still plenty to see in 2014...
I'm not surprised, to me asia is the birthplace of the greatest video games so why not the greatest game engine. I think with Nintendo leading the helm at first, they took a position that technology takes a back seat, but now with the west making so much money they are finally switching positions. And now square might only sell to their licenses to japanese developers in order to stimulate japan's video game economy or something I wouldn't be surprised
Btw, the guy who is chanting is the guy from Ranma 1/2 who is always hitting on Akane and "girl-time Ranma". I got a kick out of that lol
You can say that Luminous looks soo much better..but its a non interactive sequence that is only designed to show off graphics. It was a cinematic, every shot was well composed and prepared specifically to be seen at one angle, whereas the ue4 demo targeted specific tools that the engine gives to the user.
I don't think we have to do this "who is better" game. Cause frankly it's probably who threw more money at the demo making. If you compare the first games on xbox360/ps3 vs the stuff that comes out now, it's also "worlds inbetween", as people use stuff they get better in using it. I guess the only thing that matters is who can use it, and I guess Unreal will win on that front
The only thing that really matters to us is which has the best balance of power/features to ease of use. We'll probably get to find that out for UE4 (as they've even shown some of it), but not for the Luminous engine.
The UE4 demo was also running on a consumer level system with an i7 and a single GTX 680. I highly doubt the same can be said for the Agni demo, as much as I'd love to see visuals like that being feasible in the near future.
They haven't explicitly stated the specs of what they're running on, but they did say in one of the videos [paraphrasing]"Agnis is running on comparable specs to similar competing demos". I'm taking that as either Samaritan or the new UE4 demo (which has been revealed to be running on a 680 for a while). UE4 is doing all of its lighting in real-time, but I don't believe that's the case for LE (in fact if I remember correctly I've read papers by people working on the engine describing baking ray bundles or something).
IMO I'd rather have proper radiosity that is baked than to have subpar radiosity for everything in real-time; the reason being the differences seen in these two demos. That being said Agnis definitely does some things dynamically, like the specular reflections and dynamic light instances (like in the cage with the stark direct lighting or the casting with the flashes of light from effects). More information would be nice; this is all just speculation.
UE4 looks a bit more western , Lumin is ofc asia-ish. all based on the artwork.
The thing is we never got to know how many polys´and so on they were running att realtime. Kinda easy to say "hey this interactive movie is better than this".
there's no word about same production quality landing for the final game. there's not a single word on any actual games using it right now.
everyone praised artistic direction they used this time (even though I don't like square catching up on mud-bronws in 2012), but how much of this awesomeness is gonna get in the final product?
it's way to early to praise or judge it already.
ue4 gets more credibility, since developers are more open about actual hardware specs and their suggestions to hardware manufacturers in case of consoles. ff VI-2 please thanks
[ame="
UE3
[ame="
UE4
[ame="
FB2
[ame="
[ame="
UE3 - Star Wars 1313, people flipped out and swore this was UE4, from what I've heard it's using the Samaritan tech so UE3 or... UE3.5?
[ame="
UE4 - 3D Mark, kind of gaudy "tech demo" art, fanboys are starting to show this video as an example of the "inferiority" of UE4
[ame="
The thing is, while UE4 didn't blow you away in term of eye-candy, the Dev Doc is where it's at, seeing RT Emissive lights interact with the Environment is the type of stuff that separates wannabe's from actual people who know their stuff.
Mark has neither to be honest.
Anyhow, don't waste your time reading what people say, I'm more interested what people in the industry have to say instead of some snot 14 year old kid who thinks just because they took a black and white image of a chair, they're qualified connoisseur of art.
Star wars is for the ps3,right?and from what I read,its the UNREAL 3 engine,not unreal 4.I must say the graphics is superb for a ps3 game and that plastic look that always plagues unreal game graphics is completely absent here.
Justin,do u mean:''UE4 - 3D Mark, kind of gaudy "tech demo" art, fanboys are starting to show this video as an example of the "inferiority" of ''UE4'' or 3dmark 2012"?I am thinking 3dmark is not a game engine so why is it an example of the inferiority of UE4?I don't get it.
my mistake about the 3Dmark one, a site reported that it was using UE4 (or I made the mistake some of you guys made with my post, I skimmed over the article without actually reading it :P)
The UE4's art was fairly bad. Environments were good, but the character was fairly rushed / ugly.
Agni on the other hand had obviously more attention put into the art.
It doesn't matter which is more powerful. I bet a sexy team of artists/techs can make the UE3 almost on par with Agni using art tricks alone.
1. Yeah the art was quite cool, then again if SE did not crash and burn in one department then it's their art direction. BUT the will probably not be used outside of SE japan. So people who will actually use this engine will be very limited (as with the crystal engine). Not even SE subcompanies like Eidos and so on probably wont put hands on this piece of techology.
2. UE4 was closer to what can be expected as performance from the coming years. Lumnious looked great but according to some comments of SE personal ran on Tri SLI 680...not really what you can expect out of the next generation. Sure they will find a way to bring something reasonable to the systems but i question it will be THIS level of quality.