Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Disscusion Hardest next gen engine to run ALL WELCOME

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 11, 2013 3:30:41 AM

I wanted to start a discussion on what you guys think the hardest next gen game engine to run will be (also if I need to add another gtx 680 to max these out :) ) Between unreal 4 vs cryengine (not sure if it cry4 or if their still using cry 3 for crysis 3) vs new announced fox engine. Try not to yell at my opinions and feel free to correct me but: unreal engine I think is the most used (unreal 3) out of all them thus unreal 4 probably will be the most used but unreal 3 never wowed me unless it was used in a game I played and not remembering but I don't think it is the most powerful graphics wise. Crytec is amazing obv and crisis 3 high spec recommendation is a gtx680 a $500 gpu which is pretty damn high recommendation but crytec engine is only used in crysis and far cry 3 (as far as I know) but far cry uses a very highly modified version. Then Fox which for some reason everywhere I look is getting knocked on and I have no idea why. It has been in the making for I think 10 years and I know mgs only been on console (not using Fox engine) but it looks very good on console so no doubt the new MGS for PC using fox will be absolutely amazing. I think Fox is the under dog but will be the top in graphics if not tied with cry engine but as far as I know only game running Fox will be new MGS and I don't think it will be used for any, if any other game. Whats your thoughts? what do you think you need to run top end games using these engine? and what games will use them?...
a c 76 U Graphics card
January 11, 2013 4:29:26 AM

Nice wall of text
m
0
l
January 11, 2013 5:02:11 AM

sarcastic?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 87 U Graphics card
January 11, 2013 5:25:30 AM

AFAIK, none of the newest engines require a GTX 680 except to play at some of the higher settings. I don't know of any game currently in the works that can't run on even a Radeon 7750 or 7770 at a lower resolution with low or medium settings. IDK which of the newest engines will be the best in any given situation.
m
0
l
January 11, 2013 5:37:07 AM

I only play on single 1080p led Samsung monitor so I plan to max them out with my single gtx 680 or at least hope to
m
0
l
a c 87 U Graphics card
January 11, 2013 3:33:51 PM

If I had to guess, I'd say that you'd be able to max them out in texture quality and such at 1080p with a GTX 680, but take that with a grain of salt since I really have nothing more than a guess to give.

Unreal 4 was originally supposed to be some incredibly intensive engine, but then they weakened it in the second demo of it and then they made some seemingly ludicrous claim that only consoles have the power to run it and it seems to have gone downhill from there. How it turns out is anyone's guess AFAIK right now.

Crytech, if they're making a new engine for Crysis 3, may have taken the cake here, but I don't know much about the game right now other than its recommended hardware and that's not much of an indication to go by based on how things went with the previous Crysis games.

I don't even know where to begin on this new Fox engine that you mentioned. Theoretically, it sure has potential AFAIK, but only because I don't know anything about it.

I don't know what games will use what other than the obvious few, but I can say that it's unlikely that you wouldn't be unable to play any games made in the next few years (and several after that) with a GTX 680. You'll probably be able to more or less max out texture quality and such in anything in the next year or two at 1080p (at least that seems to be the trend IMO).

Sorry that I can't give more, it seems like not many other people cared to join in :( 
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:18:02 PM

I was just kidding about my gtx but hopefully for info will be released soon or at least demos. I think fox will be the best Konami never disappoints and mgs in japan is as big as hello kitty out there I know that doesn't say much about the engine but 10 years in development shouldn't disappoint. I wish more games used frostbite 2 tho the destruction in bf3 would be great in everygame. I think unreal has destruction too if I remember right because its used in red fraction I think or just cause 2.
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:18:22 PM

Was typing on my phone sorry for errors
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:22:34 PM

Unless someone releases a PC-centric or PC-only engine, all the next gen engines are going to be about the same because they're all going to be designed with consoles in mind.

I expect UE4/Cryengine 3/Frostbite 2 to all be roughly comparable to one another but we'll see. UE4 will almost certainly be the big name engine next time around just like UE3 was this time.

I'm betting Crysis 3 will be a pretty good benchmark of what the "next generation" is going to bring to the table.
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:38:05 PM

The ideal engine is one that can bring high end hardware to its knees, but is optimized well enough to run on low end. I'm looking forward to the next Source.
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:49:47 PM

Big mac I didnt think of that but thats not true look at bf3 ultra on computers and consoles run it at 30fps at med settings. They can make amazing engines then just lower them for consoles. And I agree helz and I think games are going to look better and get easier to run over time.
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:51:44 PM

I dunno about medium settings - probably more like low.

And you gotta remember that consoles are only rendering at 720p, so there's not only a big jump in settings but a big jump in resolution as well when going from console to PC. I know they can lower settings to be scalable back to console level hardware, but eventually the fact that they're being scaled down so much will limit the upper ceiling (see:every current console engine).
m
0
l
January 17, 2013 11:55:31 PM

But new generation should be able capable of about a single gtx 680 at most which would make the limit between pc and console less for now.
m
0
l
a c 144 U Graphics card
January 18, 2013 12:45:13 AM

maucerit said:
I wanted to start a discussion...


crysis 3 still based on cryengine 3 just like crysis warhead that based on cryengine 2. IMO crytek will not going to make new engine soon. maybe not until the console can take full advantage of the engine though this is just my opinion. so which engine are the hardest to run idk. but i do think when the dev make an engine and intend to licence it to other companyxthey most likely want the engine able to scale to wide range of hardware. so in the end it depends on the game developer how they want to utilize the engine they're working with. for example both mass effect and borderland use UE3 but did they look the same?

about fox engine i'm not really sure. did konami intend to license the engine to others?
m
0
l
January 25, 2013 1:13:32 AM

I dont think konomi lets anyone else use it and I do not know of any other games beside mgs they make. Unlike crytec which is owned by ea technical (I believe) they have great amount of games they can allow it to be used on but sadly its not only crysis and far cry use it as far as I know. Im just waiting for these engines to announce maybe new tech newer version of ssao and hbao for example that smooth texture better but have less demand
m
0
l
January 25, 2013 1:27:12 AM

Maybe I am expecting to much. The way I see it with a new gen of consoles there is a leap in tech for now developers have a reason to improve graphics because the mass gamers ( consoles) can now run them. But with this jump in teach in console there is huge leap in PCs because they can make games consoles can barely run but PC can max out and fully utilize. For example Bf3 is barely playable on current gen consoles its at 30fps settings are on maybe medium but on PC the game looks fantastic. If that makes sense I am trying to type what I am thinking lol sorry if it confuses some. Example crisis 3 devs can make engine unreal make it barely playable for even next gen consoles but on pc with control of graphics look even more amazing. And rumors so far I think for an xbox 720 or new xbox w.e. its called suppose to have 1.8 ghz 8 core processor 8 gb of ram and gpu equivalent to gtx 670 if that. Console gamers are in uproar of how amazing that is but its not and obv its not a pc but I was expecting more. processor does have one purpose unlike pc...to play games but 8 core 1.8 ghz come on my galaxy not 2 have 1.8 ghz quad core and s4 and note 2 are getting 8 core processors I think they should have done a quality quad core but could have been cheaper to do it there way. 8gb of ram is the only new good thing. 360's have 512 mb of ram and honestly we all know it take forever for in game hud to pop up with that ram so 8gb is going to really help with that. And gpu I was expecting at least 680 or 7970 equivalent but again those card run hot and in little console box not good or we would have another red ring problem which is why gpu only clock at 800mhz. but anyways this should make a leap in pc agming
m
0
l
January 25, 2013 1:29:56 AM

maucerit said:
I dont think konomi lets anyone else use it and I do not know of any other games beside mgs they make. Unlike crytec which is owned by ea technical (I believe) they have great amount of games they can allow it to be used on but sadly its not only crysis and far cry use it as far as I know. Im just waiting for these engines to announce maybe new tech newer version of ssao and hbao for example that smooth texture better but have less demand

I don't think "Screen space ambient occlusion" smooths textures and I don't think that is a good idea as you want to keep the textures and lines crisp. This is the same problem with FXAA and TXAA as they are cheat methods to reduce the "jaggies".
m
0
l
!