Can the Nintendo Wii run Unreal 3 Engine?

[mac000]

does anyone know this for sure?

[GFLPraxis]

No, no one knows. It's possible it might be able to run it at low settings, no HDR, in SD....we'll see.

[Dagless]

Probably not, but the Unreal engine is so yesteryear. Now Crysis...

[combatcolin]

Its a Games Console.

The OS takes up the same size as a mobile phone ringtone.

The answer is very much yes.

(Hard Hat on!;) )

[mac000]

Probably not, but the Unreal engine is so yesteryear. Now Crysis...


are u kidding me??? Crysis 2 is still < Unreal 3 engine. :eek:

[GFLPraxis]

are u kidding me??? Crysis 2 is still < Unreal 3 engine. :eek:

Are you insane? Crysis uses freakin' raytracing, apparently. It's for next gen PC's with physics cards and >$600 graphics cards in SLI and multicore processors.

[guifa]

Are you insane? Crysis uses freakin' raytracing, apparently. It's for next gen PC's with physics cards and >$600 graphics cards in SLI and multicore processors.
OMG raytracing, like, that's never been done before wow. No, actually it has. In fact, I'm quite sure I saw the Quake III engine using raytracing at some point.

Of course, raytracing hardly means visual qualty. I can raytrace some of my 3-D scenes in Carrara but if I turn off shadows and refraction and GI, transparency, etc, it'll look like crap. The simple fact that a game has raytracing is not something that's jaw dropping to me. A game that can use raytracing faster than and at the same quality as major 3-D programmes out there would.

[GFLPraxis]

OMG raytracing, like, that's never been done before wow. No, actually it has. In fact, I'm quite sure I saw the Quake III engine using raytracing at some point.

Of course, raytracing hardly means visual qualty. I can raytrace some of my 3-D scenes in Carrara but if I turn off shadows and refraction and GI, transparency, etc, it'll look like crap. The simple fact that a game has raytracing is not something that's jaw dropping to me. A game that can use raytracing faster than and at the same quality as major 3-D programmes out there would.

You know, before you respond with sarcasm you should do some actual research.
There were some college students that re-wrote Quake 3 to use raytracing, and it required a computer cluster for a decent framerate.

I'll show the visual quality. Nothing ten seconds of google wouldn't have found.

http://ps3.qj.net/uploads/articles_module/52416_cry2.jpg

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/705/705664/crysis-20060508022308296.jpg

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/702/702309/crysis-20060419092919286.jpg

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/699/699050/crysis-20060329002212361.jpg

If you think Unreal 3 is better than this, you need to have your eyes checked.

[Chaszmyr]

I agree that Crysis looks more life-like than Unreal 3, but I wouldnt exactly call this yesteryear

http://pcmedia.gamespy.com/pc/image/article/605/605135/unreal-engine-3-project-untitled-20050418001052671.jpg

[GFLPraxis]

Oh, neither would I. Both look spectacular. But Crysis is notably better.
I don't know if Crysis can actually run on the PS3/XBox 360 though. The physics and graphics shown were spectacular and so far it's been only announced for the PC, using PhysX graphics chips IIRC.

[guifa]

You know, before you respond with sarcasm you should do some actual research.
There were some college students that re-wrote Quake 3 to use raytracing, and it required a computer cluster for a decent framerate.

I'll show the visual quality. Nothing ten seconds of google wouldn't have found.

[four images editted out ... sorry guys I forgot on some boards quoted images don't get auto-clipped]

If you think Unreal 3 is better than this, you need to have your eyes checked.
The point of my comment is that simply because an engine uses raytracing does not automagically increase its visual quality. In fact, most commercial renderers use an amalgam of techniques to produce their images, one of which includes raytracing, but it is slow and thus needs speed boosts for commercial productivity. In fact, simply implementing a ray-tracing algorithm (assuming your graphics card doesn't make, say, Z-buffer errors like was common in the olden days of graphics cards) doesn't really improve the quality unless the source also improves (standard GIGO) or additional rendering effects (HDRI, GI, etc) are added. Some of the best landscapes I've seen are done actually using a fully procedural method (see ArtMatic Voyager http://www.uisoftware.com/Voyager/VYGallery.html by U&I Software).

Technically speaking, a raytracing game engine could have been made years ago, it just wasn't practical. (and, at least according to Wikipedia's article on ray tracing, it has been done since the 90s in real-time game engines, albeit not in commercial games). The fact that a ray-tracing engine is available today has less to do with any amazing advancement in game engine development, and far more to do speed advancements and price drops on the hardware required to run it. The plain and simple fact is that an old Atari COULD run a raytracing engine, but whether it would be practical is another question entirely.

All points summed up: simply having raytracing in an engine neither implicates nor necessitates increased quality (all is dependent on source material) nor advanced rendering techniques (because raytracing is decades old).

[Dagless]

Quake 3 has a raytracing mod yes. Have you heard about the computer used to make it run at a decent frame rate?

This is realtime speed for a virtual intel CPU with about 36 GHz (to be more precise: a cluster with 20 AMD XP1800 was used)

Crysis runs on 1 PC at a good speed, it just needs to be a very good PC. Frankly I've never seen anything as powerful as Crysis, it's like looking at a Quad G5 setup compared to the numbers we're getting for Quad Woodcrest. both fast, but one is majorly better ;)

[MacRumorUser]

LADIES cant both be excellent?

It's the gameplay that will be important at the end of the day :rolleyes: Get back into your corners, pick uop your handbags and take out your lipstick and have a chill pill :D


Bitc* fighting on the games forum, what next :D :D :D


Crysis will eventually see a ps3/xbox 360 release. How close it will look to the demos we've seen so far remains to be seen, but the same can be said about an ordinary currently available top of the line pc a this stage....

[Mord]

personally i'd take crisis over unreal any day.

[Dagless]

Aye me too, probably because I haven't played a decent game with the Unreal engine since UT99.

I mentioned the Crysis engine because people seem to think this Unreal 3 engine is the be-all end-all engine. when frankly, it's just *another* engine which has lost its grip as the fanboys favourite to the uncanny valley of Crysis.
I should hope my upcoming PC built specifically to run Crysis should will run the Unreal 3 very, very well.

cheerio.

[HiRez]

Uhh...please don't quote 7 huge images. It's unnecessary and makes the thread hard to read, thank you.

[harveypooka]

LADIES cant both be excellent?

It's the gameplay that will be important at the end of the day :rolleyes: Get back into your corners, pick uop your handbags and take out your lipstick and have a chill pill :D

I second that!

[combatcolin]

Uhh...please don't quote 7 huge images. It's unnecessary and makes the thread hard to read, thank you.

2nd this.

And anyway, who wants to play another bloody PC FPS when when we can all start our Lightsaber training instead?

(Hopefully!)

:)

[Haoshiro]

Aye me too, probably because I haven't played a decent game with the Unreal engine since UT99.

Where have you been?

Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_engine and look down the list of games that have used the Unreal engines (1/2/2.5/3)... that is a dang good list, have you not played and liked any of those??

As for Crysis using raytracing... well... I'll go look into that but it is something I highly doubt! Why? There is no hardware available to accelerate raytracing, leaving it entirely CPU bound. Then if it is going to be rendered at all won't it need passed to the GPU? I'd need some proof to believe that claim!

EDIT: I looked up CryENGINE2 on both Crytek.com as well as on Wikipedia.org and found no mention of ray-tracing at all. A google search for "Crysis ray tracing" and "CryENGINE2 ray tracing" pulls up a bunch of nothing as well... how this rumor got started, I don't know!

[GFLPraxis]

Weird, have had a bunch of people telling me that. Thought it was a bit off.

This might by why:
http://www.xboxyde.com/forum_8_9689_1_en.html

how they’re accomplishing that “Real-time Ambient maps” effect? It’s very impressive. I thought that real-time ambient light rendering was only possible with raytracing. An interesting pixel-shader hack perhaps?

That's what I thought too.

[Dagless]

Where have you been?

Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_engine and look down the list of games that have used the Unreal engines (1/2/2.5/3)... that is a dang good list, have you not played and liked any of those??...

Maybe my tastes are different, but none of those game vaguely appeal to me. Psi Ops was good for a short while, till the novelty wore off. Duke Forever is the only Unreal engine game I'm looking forward too, whether or not it's good or bad is yet to be seen.

Americas Army, Splinter Cell, Postal 2... nah. not my cup of tea. Unreal 2 was absolute pants.

[Torajima]

does anyone know this for sure?

Why wouldn't it run? Once screen-size is factored into the equation, the Wii is nearly as powerful as the Xbox 360.

[Mord]

not in any way shape or form is the wii nearly as fast as the 360, ffs it has a crappy 700MHz ppc and a crummy low end ATI card Vs the 360's triple 3.2GHz core and a 500MHz 48 pipeline monster of a GPU with shader effects on a whole nother plane compared to "hollywood"

[Haoshiro]

Maybe my tastes are different, but none of those game vaguely appeal to me. Psi Ops was good for a short while, till the novelty wore off. Duke Forever is the only Unreal engine game I'm looking forward too, whether or not it's good or bad is yet to be seen.

Americas Army, Splinter Cell, Postal 2... nah. not my cup of tea. Unreal 2 was absolute pants.

Ashame, I'd say these games were quite good:

Deus Ex (original)
SWAT 4
Theif: Deadly Shadows
Splinter Cell series (you have to like stealth games in general though, I do and these are the best in the genre)
XIII (A very fun FPS actually, and love the comic book look)
Ragnarok Online 2 (Okay, it's not even out and I haven't played it, but RO1 was a blast)
Tribes: Vengeance (always been a fan since the original)
UT2K4 (runs so great on Mac too!)
Upcoming - BioShock (from the System Shock people, much hype I have for this)
Upcoming - Gears of War (reason to own a 360? perhaps?)
Upcoming - Mass Effect (Bioware, plus... see above?)
Upcoming - SWAT 5 (Hey, one of the artists is a guy I know, must support that, heh)
Upcoming - Too Human (see reasons: Gears of War?)


Anyway, it's a great engine, props to Epic and their Jazz Jackrabbit beginnings. UE3 looks to become the defacto-standard in game engines and is seeing more licensees then likely any other engine before it. id Software loses this time around... UE3 vs Doom3? hah!

[Torajima]

not in any way shape or form is the wii nearly as fast as the 360, ffs it has a crappy 700MHz ppc and a crummy low end ATI card Vs the 360's triple 3.2GHz core and a 500MHz 48 pipeline monster of a GPU with shader effects on a whole nother plane compared to "hollywood"

Well, no one knows the final specs of the Wii at this point, but it is rumored to be twice as powerful as the Gamecube. The Xbox 360 is said to be 4 to 5 times more powerful than the original Xbox.

Here's the kicker though... Wii games are optimized for SD resolutions, while Xbox 360 games are optimized for HD resolutions. Twice the resolution requires FOUR TIMES the processing power. So most of the Xbox 360's power is simply going towards producing a HD picture.

I've played the Xbox 360, and it looks great because it is in high resolution and has high resolution textures, not because it is puming out tons more polygons or is using a bunch of processor intensive special effects.

In the end, Wii games and Xbox 360 games should look quite similar when viewed on standard definition TV sets.

[harveypooka]

2nd this.

And anyway, who wants to play another bloody PC FPS when when we can all start our Lightsaber training instead?

(Hopefully!)

:)

Oh man, I didn't think of this - it's gonna be so cool! Raaaoowwww (Chewbacca noise...ahem).

[Mord]

it's more about the shader support, it's said that the wii will be near the same as the GC, aka crappy shader support,

and 720p is 3 the pixels as 480p and 1080i is 1.2 (interlaced 540x1920 picture)


current 360 games such as perfect dark zero are just xbox games run with higher details upscaled to HD but latter games and some games such as fight night 3 were written for the 360 and look amazing, just look at the halo 3 trailer and that is acctually rendered on a 360 in real time.

[Dagless]

UE3 vs Doom3? hah!

well, Doom 3 has been out for 2 years already. Where the U3 engine isn't even out... is it?

[harveypooka]

well, Doom 3 has been out for 2 years already. Where the U3 engine isn't even out... is it?

Don't think its out. But it will be! Do you reckon there'll be a Mac version?

[Haoshiro]

well, Doom 3 has been out for 2 years already. Where the U3 engine isn't even out... is it?

Yeah, you are right. A UE3 game isn't out.

But the Quake (and now Doom) engine has long been one of the biggest licensed engines. Id tends to take quite awhile releasing there games/engines so it is unlikely, given how recent the Doom3 engine was released, that they will be releasing a new engine any time soon.

Carmack is updating the enging with the "MegaTexture" tech but that is really that last think I've heard regarding the engine or future plans.

Which is really whay I was pointing out, that the big engine "contenders" as far as licenses go would seem to be UE3 and D3, with UE3 being the clear winner already in terms of contracts.

I don't recall another game besides Far Cry using the CryENGINE nor anyone talking about using the CryENGINE2. With Microsoft and Ubisoft using the UE3 engine almost exclusively, it is really proving to be the most popular engine every created.

As for Mac support, I actually wouldn't be surprised if it did. UE3 could be great for Macs because it is using an internally developed physics engine - NO HAVOK! That just makes it all the more possible to see it brought to Macs, which would in turn open the doors for a huge number of games to come to the platform.

[Dagless]

Aye the Farcry demo didn't really go that far. but it was so fantastic, and this uber real Crysis is just godly. I don't bother with little steps in graphics and that, but from HL2 to Crysis is one of those big steps that I get interested in.
Thats something... the Source engine. whats that in these days?

[Haoshiro]

Aye the Farcry demo didn't really go that far. but it was so fantastic, and this uber real Crysis is just godly. I don't bother with little steps in graphics and that, but from HL2 to Crysis is one of those big steps that I get interested in.
Thats something... the Source engine. whats that in these days?

Yeah, Source does have some catching up to do. Honestly I always thought HL2 beat out Doom3 (and the games based on that engine) visually. Perhaps it's just the artistry, or the lack of plastic-wrapped everything, but it still impresses me to this day.

I'm not sure what all would need added to Source. The addition of HDR was the last thing I've heard. I don't really know where it stands on Pixel Shaders, but I'm sure they could add in the latest support rather then making an entirely new engine. So for visuals I really think it probably just needs updated shader support, then the rest is really up to the artists and what spec machine they want to target (Crysis and Gears of War are obviously targeting a much higher spec then HL2 did, which works even on DX6).

The one thing I know Source would really benefit from is seemless background loading and caching. The "Loading..." pauses were really frusterating in HL2. With the UE3 engine there basically aren't any load times after the initial load, as it is all seemless (ala WoW).

[harveypooka]

I know people have covered this, but remember it's not all lights and graphics here. Half Life 2 is such a good game because it's got an ace story that never gives much away. Check out the fan sites, there's links to images of the war before the aliens took over and how it lasted only a few hours. That's the genius - detail. A lovely graphics engine should almost be second to an immersive story.
When Halo came out it was lovely looking - the story was absolute cack! Gutting!

[GFLPraxis]

it's more about the shader support, it's said that the wii will be near the same as the GC, aka crappy shader support,

and 720p is 3 the pixels as 480p and 1080i is 1.2 (interlaced 540x1920 picture)


current 360 games such as perfect dark zero are just xbox games run with higher details upscaled to HD but latter games and some games such as fight night 3 were written for the 360 and look amazing, just look at the halo 3 trailer and that is acctually rendered on a 360 in real time.

Chris Viggers at Blitz Games (I just keep quoting this guy, don't I? He's the only one that gave me solid technical information) basicly confirmed to me that the Wii has no new shaders or hardware functions on the GPU (that developers have yet at least), but is powerful enough to do stuff like Bloom via software.

I think that future Wii games will look like current 360 games. The stuff originally written for the current XBox- Kameo, PDZ, CoD2, GRAW, etc. Maybe, just MAYBE the level of Fight Night, or close (they may have to turn off some of the advanced liquid physics effects/shaders). They'll never get to the level of upcoming XBox 360 games though- while the Wii's GPU doesn't have to do HD, making up some of the ground, the XBox 360's processor is considerably more powerful, and the processor has nothing to do with the resolution. 360 will always have far better physics.

[MacRumorUser]

Funny how Vampire Masquerade was the first game commercially released to utilize the new source engine, a good 6 months or so before HL2.... It was a pretty good game too.

[GFLPraxis]

I don't recall another game besides Far Cry using the CryENGINE nor anyone talking about using the CryENGINE2. With Microsoft and Ubisoft using the UE3 engine almost exclusively, it is really proving to be the most popular engine every created.


So far that I can see, CryENGINE2 has not been ported to any of the consoles- it's PC only right now, which severely limits it's usage.

I wonder about Unreal 3 on Wii. If the Wii can't run Unreal 3, Doom 3 might become the preferred engine for the system. Or HL2's engine.

[Haoshiro]

Chris Viggers at Blitz Games (I just keep quoting this guy, don't I? He's the only one that gave me solid technical information) basicly confirmed to me that the Wii has no new shaders or hardware functions on the GPU (that developers have yet at least), but is powerful enough to do stuff like Bloom via software.

Haven't many sources indicated that no (or very few) developers actually have final hardware, and that the GPU and CPU are still, as of yet, not finalized?

I think that future Wii games will look like current 360 games. The stuff originally written for the current XBox- Kameo, PDZ, CoD2, GRAW, etc. Maybe, just MAYBE the level of Fight Night, or close (they may have to turn off some of the advanced liquid physics effects/shaders). They'll never get to the level of upcoming XBox 360 games though- while the Wii's GPU doesn't have to do HD, making up some of the ground, the XBox 360's processor is considerably more powerful, and the processor has nothing to do with the resolution. 360 will always have far better physics.

While I am not one of those people who would argue the Wii will have graphics just as good as the other systems (and run MGS4, etc), I do think it has much more potential then people give it credit - even fans of the system.

Hasn't there been reports, or at least rumors, of a dedicate physics processor? You take that, add in the rest of the hardware that is at least twice the power of the GCN (but could end up more once finalized), and lock it at 640x480 (480p), and you have a system that is much more then twice that of a GameCube - a system with more potential then people give it credit for. Especially compared to the "HD" systems.

Why?

1. Take the PPU, the GCN had to do any physics on the CPU, making physics and other CPU items be balanced. Taking that off the CPU can make a BIG impact.

2. Fill Rate. 480p is 307K pixels whereas 720p is 921K pixels. That means the GPU of the Wii could, theoretically, be 3 times weaker (regarding the very important fill rate) then the 360 and still compete with the 360 (even at its best).

I wouldn't be surpised if Wii launches with full (or near) SM4 support (Shader Model 4 could be classified "DX10" level).

Cleverly designed hardware can really pay off over brute force raw power. This already helped GameCube, with it's GPU having more hardware features then PS2/Xbox which helped it compete (and sometimes beat) more powerful systems in terms of graphics.

In the end it depends on how quickly the developers of each platform learn how to exploit each systems strengths. If Wii developers can do this we may very well have games that can compete on almost every aspect with other systems; albeit with a loss of visual fidelty/clarity do to the lower resolution.

I wonder about Unreal 3 on Wii. If the Wii can't run Unreal 3, Doom 3 might become the preferred engine for the system. Or HL2's engine.

Unreal Engine has usually scaled very well so it would seem at least possible/hopeful.

[GFLPraxis]

Well, Chris said that as far as he was aware of they were using the final kits. He specificly said as far as he was aware of, though.

Physics hardware seems so very unlikely though, when you look at the prices on it right now.


Cleverly designed hardware can really pay off over brute force raw power. This already helped GameCube, with it's GPU having more hardware features then PS2/Xbox which helped it compete (and sometimes beat) more powerful systems in terms of graphics.

That's basicly what he told me. He seemed really excited about the potential.

[stefan15]

@GFLPraxis

Thanks for the shots of the Crysis engine--I had not seen it before (and previously thought Unreal3 was the "pinnacle" as it were). However none of those shots are in motion. How it performs at that level of detail is important as well.

And with the Wii; why youldn't you buy it? Cheap, fun gaming!! I am definitely not ready to shell out the huge $ for a PS3 (not even an xbox360 at the moment)... I think fun is the keyword here.. isn't that why we all still play our SNES every once in a while?

[combatcolin]

Oh man, I didn't think of this - it's gonna be so cool! Raaaoowwww (Chewbacca noise...ahem).

Um, Chewbacca with a Lightsaber...:eek:

(pretty handy with a welding arc though)

[Dagless]

@GFLPraxis

Thanks for the shots of the Crysis engine--I had not seen it before (and previously thought Unreal3 was the "pinnacle" as it were). However none of those shots are in motion. How it performs at that level of detail is important as well.

And with the Wii; why youldn't you buy it? Cheap, fun gaming!! I am definitely not ready to shell out the huge $ for a PS3 (not even an xbox360 at the moment)... I think fun is the keyword here.. isn't that why we all still play our SNES every once in a while?

Well there are videos dotted around the net, and it's running very smooth. that said these are pinnacle machines at the moment. though when DirectX 10 is out, when Crysis is out these machines will be much cheaper. At the moment they are running on Quad SLI graphics cards, in a year they'll be fluid at high resolutions on regular top-end graphics cards.