Gotta admit the Shield demo was really smooth, the thing that kinda gave it away for me was the flares, which i'm not saying looked bad at all, just familiar lol, anything else really hard to spot... we definitely need more demo's showing off the new capabilities and also the toolset, common Epic, show us more stuff, need Willard, the tech demo Wizard...
There is one comment where they praise Jordan for SF2 scene, and it also says
"His latest piece, seen here for the first time, is rendered in UE4 to show off subtle shader effects and distinct material reflections made possible by, among other things, global illumination".
The lighting in the new version is completely fucked. They've also culled the relevant post processing (and replaced it with cheap horrible flares/bloom?) and there are hardly any particle effects.
Yeah, that doesn't look good at all. Just compare the archways on that door as an example - the material seems to have changed, but worse, where's the specularity gone?
Edit: is that *actually* a shot of last nights demo?
The bottom picture is a shot from last nights PS4 demo yes, the top one is from the PC demo from last year. Motion blur and stream artifacts might have made it look better than it did, maybe.
Camera moved too fast in that demo, add motion blur and video compression to that it was really hard to see anything well in that destruction flyby because of the blurriness. Only shot I did like however was with SSS. Better pics here:
I don't get it, the Fire lord seems to be missing Normal Maps, and there is a distinct lack of self-shadowing on the model.
Not to mention, looks like someone forgot about using proper metal looking spec values, and forgot how frozen Archways aren't going to have too much Oren Nayar (Roughness) going on.
This isn't a technical limitation, you can see from the Ice lord part on the SSS, Normals Map, Spec, etc that the engine is still capable of all of those effects, yet the first part of the video is missing all of those.
Any reasons? Did Epic forget to Cook the packages for the Fire lord, and left all the assets back at their studios, because UDK hilariously decided to break 'link' with packages that might have moved?
i think. i may be wrong, but i have a feeling it was more about showing of the vfx capabilities.
i kind of feel like they feel the ue4 demo is a bit of a lost cause
yeah I was very suprised when I saw the UE4 demo. The fire lord part looked TERRIBLE, not even UDK quality. The ice lord looked better with the SSS and such. But very underwhelming demo.
Had to go look up clips on youtube after seeing this last night to make sure I wasn't missing anything. Yup, it looks like ass. They clearly only seemed to care about showing particle effects and SSS... BUT! I'm hoping over the next year they should be able to get some better lighting and quality for ps4 builds.
Biggest thing on my mind however - will UE4 UDK allow us to publish for PS4?
Publish in what sense? Because publishing have very little to do with UDK and Epic if you don't have a large sum of money in your bank account to afford the licenses and kits from Sony/MS for the console.
Devkits will still be a thing, Sony kind of hinted at dev kits possibly being cheaper
"We usually don't talk about the pricing of the dev kit. But yeah, I'd say it can be cheaper. But I don't know if it's cheap enough for those indie guys. Because it's not just the cost of hardware, it's also the SDKs and tool chains and dev support and all those costs."
In the PS4 announce they did discuss how they want indies to be able to publish for it easily (the easiest console to publish on, or something like that.) If they count iOS publishing when they're saying they'll be indie-accessible then they may have a way to deploy to home machines.
I still think the best change for unreal engine 4 is going to be the editing changes. Being able to code while the engine's open will bring a lot of people from Unity back to Unreal.
I know I keep asking this, but has there been any word on whether Unreal4 will be able to publish for Linux? Maybe now that they're talking about PS4 publishing they'll mention Linux as well.
Hmm, I don't know, I read a couple of posts on Reddit from indie Dev's, and they all said the same thing, which is that Sony and MS assert total control over you at the end of the day.
Take it with a truckload of the salt, but even if only half of what is being is said is true, that is out of many people's league.
UDK will do very little to change this, so yeah, I think the more interesting question is will the latest iteration of UDK will have at least a way of getting an environment package working under Linux, especially with Valve trying to push, and the PS4 sporting a PC like architecture this time around.
I know I keep asking this, but has there been any word on whether Unreal4 will be able to publish for Linux? Maybe now that they're talking about PS4 publishing they'll mention Linux as well.
I would massively doubt it. Linux isn't a platform game developers will consider for a huge pile of reasons.
Hmm, I don't know, I read a couple of posts on Reddit from indie Dev's, and they all said the same thing, which is that Sony and MS assert total control over you at the end of the day.
Take it with a truckload of the salt, but even if only half of what is being is said is true, that is out of many people's league.
UDK will do very little to change this, so yeah, I think the more interesting question is will the latest iteration of UDK will have at least a way of getting an environment package working under Linux, especially with Valve trying to push, and the PS4 sporting a PC like architecture this time around.
That reddit post sounds 100% accurate to my experience with them. I've personally witnessed all that stuff he's talking about, albeit not all at once like he says. But still.
So yeah, that's the main reason the new Valve push for Linux sounds so exciting to me. The only thing missing is a proper engine (though I hear Unity will let you publish for Linux), and that's why I hope to god UDK4 will let you publish for Linux, even if the tools themselves don't run on Linux.
I know it's been done with SDL, which I believe is the guy working with Valve now on their Linux stuff. So it is possible. Just sounds like a pain in the ass, and I'm really hoping Epic will make it a bit more streamlined.
Edit:
Actually, I wonder if the new Unreal4 stuff, like global illumination, are Direct3D-dependent, or if they'd work with OpenGL as well.
Oh I had completely forgotten about this thread, cool, so now i can voice my disappointment over that little 'demo', so yesterday i finally watched the Killzone: Shadow Fall demo and I was both blown away(by the quality) as well as disappointed that an "In-House" engine could produce that and Unreal Engine 4, the engine that was supposed to redefine the next-gen, would produce that abominable piece of work(except for the last few seconds, and i'm talking specifically PS4 here)... the only excuse that i could come up for them was that they had very very little time to do it, otherwise, well, i'm just sad...
And wuts up with these In-House engines, they're popping up left and right...
And wuts up with these In-House engines, they're popping up left and right...
Use your head - people are developing tech in-house because third party solutions that already do what a company needs to do now are not available yet. Middleware takes time to develop.
And wuts up with these In-House engines, they're popping up left and right...
Most studios I have worked at use their own engine. I have only used UE 2x over the course of my career and both times it has been heavily modified. most of the time in house engines are awesome at doing one type of specific game, but are hard to change to do different genres, part of the reason you see studios continually making the same type of games ex: criterion and racing, guerilla and fps etc.
@ambershee... I was mostly implying that apparently it's become much more easier and/or feasible to develop your tools, even if it's the whole engine, and even if it's next generation in-house instead of working with the current available tools and/or license the soon to be released tools compared to the past, where only a handful of engines had dominated the market, i.e. Unreal Engine...
@PixelMasher... Makes sense and i agree, it's just that it seems to me that the number of serious, big budget end-to-end engines is starting to grow more rapidly compared to a few years ago, and that's both interesting and kinda worrying, to me... but then again I admit I'm mostly watching the industry from the outside, so it very well may have been always like this...
@ambershee... I was mostly implying that apparently it's become much more easier and/or feasible to develop your tools, even if it's the whole engine, and even if it's next generation in-house instead of working with the current available tools and/or license the soon to be released tools compared to the past, where only a handful of engines had dominated the market, i.e. Unreal Engine...
This isn't the case. Developing tools is expensive, and developing engines even more so, which is why licensed engines like UE3 often win out when the intended product can be catered for by them. It's common for the developer to modify said engine to their needs.
The lack of UE4 games isn't an indicator of anything other than that developers don't feel it's worth adopting yet. The first boxed retail UE3 game to hit a console didn't arrive until a full year after said console (Gears of War), and consider that Epic developed the tools and the game simultaneously much like other developers would. With the notable exception of Rainbow 6: Vegas, the first non-Epic UE3 games didn't arrive until two years after the 360. Most studios at this point would have been using their own tools and pipelines.
The next console and games are likely to be exactly the same.
I see, makes sense, to be honest I watch UE4's tech walk-trough every once in a while and visuals aside I can not imagine a more intuitive environment to work in (having used UDK extensively, in comparison), and that very well may be the reason why Square Enix licensed it despite having developed their own engine(which many people bashed Unreal for looking not 'as good' when it was demoed)...
So visual capability isn't the only factor the studios take into account, but still it is the most important to most end users and I don't know if Fortnight would do justice to the real visual capabilities of the engine, neither will that title from Zombie Studio... let's face it, Unreal has a reputation for not being very good at rendering realistic looking things, skins in particular, and so far they haven't tried to address that in any of the demos I've seen so far(although that Shield demo looked really good for a mechanical object), and that kinda worries me, nonetheless I probably won't look for a second elsewhere when it's finally released to the public no matter how hyper-realistic another engine's renderings might look, at that time, you know what i'm talking about...
Those things aside, I'm dying to know if they'll keep Material Editor the same way it is now considering it's a fully deffered system now... they should do more demos of the engine itself...
aargh I never go on gametrailers anymore cause of the long unskippable ads it was a nice 4 second video, lots of dof and motion blur so I cant see much but I guess thats the future
i actually liked the teaser. got me excited for whatever it could be. my insticts to go shadow complex or something samaritan-like. or even a new unreal.
Replies
Hopefully it'll look better in motion.
Found one demo if anyone wants to try out voxel cone tracing.
http://simonstechblog.blogspot.com/2013/01/implementing-voxel-cone-tracing.html
Oh and nice find Money, as always...^^
Yeah this seems really, really awesome and definitely sounds like the future. No more countless hours wasted doing lightmap uvs and baking, weeeee!
http://www.mutantspoon.com/
"His latest piece, seen here for the first time, is rendered in UE4 to show off subtle shader effects and distinct material reflections made possible by, among other things, global illumination".
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8saq9O4pWPQ
JordanW cleaned and polished his helmet before showing it off.
Pretty close
Yeah, that doesn't look good at all. Just compare the archways on that door as an example - the material seems to have changed, but worse, where's the specularity gone?
Edit: is that *actually* a shot of last nights demo?
Just look at his shins, it's like they forgot the normal maps...
http://www.allgamesbeta.com/2013/02/this-is-unreal-engine-4-running-on.html
Also what happened here, those brick textures look all blurry
Not to mention, looks like someone forgot about using proper metal looking spec values, and forgot how frozen Archways aren't going to have too much Oren Nayar (Roughness) going on.
This isn't a technical limitation, you can see from the Ice lord part on the SSS, Normals Map, Spec, etc that the engine is still capable of all of those effects, yet the first part of the video is missing all of those.
Any reasons? Did Epic forget to Cook the packages for the Fire lord, and left all the assets back at their studios, because UDK hilariously decided to break 'link' with packages that might have moved?
i kind of feel like they feel the ue4 demo is a bit of a lost cause
Biggest thing on my mind however - will UE4 UDK allow us to publish for PS4?
"We usually don't talk about the pricing of the dev kit. But yeah, I'd say it can be cheaper. But I don't know if it's cheap enough for those indie guys. Because it's not just the cost of hardware, it's also the SDKs and tool chains and dev support and all those costs."
I still think the best change for unreal engine 4 is going to be the editing changes. Being able to code while the engine's open will bring a lot of people from Unity back to Unreal.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/18irx0/the_minecraft_test_how_to_tell_if_your_console_is/c8fcm4v
Take it with a truckload of the salt, but even if only half of what is being is said is true, that is out of many people's league.
UDK will do very little to change this, so yeah, I think the more interesting question is will the latest iteration of UDK will have at least a way of getting an environment package working under Linux, especially with Valve trying to push, and the PS4 sporting a PC like architecture this time around.
I would massively doubt it. Linux isn't a platform game developers will consider for a huge pile of reasons.
That reddit post sounds 100% accurate to my experience with them. I've personally witnessed all that stuff he's talking about, albeit not all at once like he says. But still.
So yeah, that's the main reason the new Valve push for Linux sounds so exciting to me. The only thing missing is a proper engine (though I hear Unity will let you publish for Linux), and that's why I hope to god UDK4 will let you publish for Linux, even if the tools themselves don't run on Linux.
I know it's been done with SDL, which I believe is the guy working with Valve now on their Linux stuff. So it is possible. Just sounds like a pain in the ass, and I'm really hoping Epic will make it a bit more streamlined.
Edit:
Actually, I wonder if the new Unreal4 stuff, like global illumination, are Direct3D-dependent, or if they'd work with OpenGL as well.
And wuts up with these In-House engines, they're popping up left and right...
Killzone: Shadow Fall (PS4) First Gameplay [1080p] TRUE-HD QUALITY - YouTube
Use your head - people are developing tech in-house because third party solutions that already do what a company needs to do now are not available yet. Middleware takes time to develop.
Most studios I have worked at use their own engine. I have only used UE 2x over the course of my career and both times it has been heavily modified. most of the time in house engines are awesome at doing one type of specific game, but are hard to change to do different genres, part of the reason you see studios continually making the same type of games ex: criterion and racing, guerilla and fps etc.
This isn't the case. Developing tools is expensive, and developing engines even more so, which is why licensed engines like UE3 often win out when the intended product can be catered for by them. It's common for the developer to modify said engine to their needs.
The lack of UE4 games isn't an indicator of anything other than that developers don't feel it's worth adopting yet. The first boxed retail UE3 game to hit a console didn't arrive until a full year after said console (Gears of War), and consider that Epic developed the tools and the game simultaneously much like other developers would. With the notable exception of Rainbow 6: Vegas, the first non-Epic UE3 games didn't arrive until two years after the 360. Most studios at this point would have been using their own tools and pipelines.
The next console and games are likely to be exactly the same.
So visual capability isn't the only factor the studios take into account, but still it is the most important to most end users and I don't know if Fortnight would do justice to the real visual capabilities of the engine, neither will that title from Zombie Studio... let's face it, Unreal has a reputation for not being very good at rendering realistic looking things, skins in particular, and so far they haven't tried to address that in any of the demos I've seen so far(although that Shield demo looked really good for a mechanical object), and that kinda worries me, nonetheless I probably won't look for a second elsewhere when it's finally released to the public no matter how hyper-realistic another engine's renderings might look, at that time, you know what i'm talking about...
Those things aside, I'm dying to know if they'll keep Material Editor the same way it is now considering it's a fully deffered system now... they should do more demos of the engine itself...
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/6bnhuh/unreal-engine-4-teaser
Also, the character appears much like one from Mortal Kombat.
i actually liked the teaser. got me excited for whatever it could be. my insticts to go shadow complex or something samaritan-like. or even a new unreal.
Please disable adblock for polycount, their ads are not invasive and small, and they barely cover hosting costs.
I agree with you, The game looks promising but it bugs me that the character has both her hands up all the time.
[ame="