Rubbish, you're recognizing the game, not the renderer. Render a generic sci-fi interior with generic alien/soldier guys and and the same shaders turned on and the differences will be minor.
The xbox 360 has a fixed architecture. As devs get used to it they will be able to bleed out small enhancements, but it's going to be nothing like the technology generational jump of Unreal 2 to Unreal 3, because those engines were designed to take advantage of different generations of hardware.
It's easy to notice UE3 games because they're all basically the same type of game. I doubt you would have recognized the Gamebryo engine when seeing games like Civilization IV or Lego Universe.
That had nothing to do with what I said, but …ok.
As far as Skyrim is concerned, I think there's still a lot we don't know about the engine, and a lot of people seem to be jumping to conclusions. I'm still not convinced that it's a completely new engine as they claim, but I'm not judging it until I've actually played it.
Well, if " the same engine/tech" for you means a new renderer, new animation system, elimination of several pieces of middleware, and a probably largely rewritten (but of indeed probably evolved from previous versions) content creation system , than I guess we (sort of) agree…
I would still argue though that the main thing we notice here is that it has the same artists working on it.
A game that has that much mods is not a game with good modding support, but a game with many flaws.
But I've more problems with dungeons/caves, they all feel like designed on squared paper, not natural, just synthetic, not comparable to i.e. Gothic, Risen, …
I just think it will end up another Morrowind —> Oblivion sort of evolution, rather than being an all new experience.
. You can recognize UE3 games 95% of the time by sight, it's a common thing people talk about.
..yeah, because that ruleset is so special that no one else could've came up with it (or stolen it and called it something else if they'd wanted to do that)?
Nah, i'm gonna continue to be a little bit hyped. In each of their games they've improved the combat, it sucked in Morrowind, was pretty bad to decent in Oblivion, was good or even very good in FO3 imo.. I'm expecting good or even great combat (at least it sounds great from what we know) + nice adventuring / free roam RPG'ing with awesome atmosphere in a "living, breathing world" (at least more so than other RPG's except for the older Gothic's or Ultima7) = win.
It's easy to notice UE3 games because they're all basically the same type of game.
If that's true, then why is it so easy to distinguish the id engines from the Unreal engines?
Don't leave us wondering…I'm sure you can explain.
I would say because some game engines are more distinct than others.
So, it's about how your brain works and what it notices. Just like some people are expert at recognising faces, and others at finding their way around - or remembering names.
Sure, that makes sense, but there's still a limit to what most people can recognize. My point was that it's easier to recognize any given engine if you've played similar games using that engine (i.e. first person shooters vs RTS). The Doom 3 engine is pretty hard to miss because it's never been used for anything other than first-person shooters.
Some engines are simply a lot more flexible than others. Anyone who claims they instantly recognized Gamebryo when seeing Lego Universe for the first time is full of shit.
To all you Eagle Eye Engine Enthusiasts - I wonder how`d you do in a blind/randomized test. It`s very "easy" to spot an engine when you have a prior knowledge that a game was written in it
To all you Eagle Eye Engine Enthusiasts - I wonder how`d you do in a blind/randomized test. It`s very "easy" to spot an engine when you have a prior knowledge that a game was written in it