Unreal Engine Plans

A post to the BeyondUnreal Forums (thanks HomeLAN Fed) has word from Epic's Tim Sweeney on where they've been focusing their efforts for the next iteration of their Unreal engine. Here's a bit:
We already have polygon count where it needs to be. We're going to be focusing on per-pixel rendering and getting the quality of each pixel on screen as high as possible. So there's a bunch of different technologies there: dynamic shadowing technology, stencil buffer and shadow z-buffers. But the whole idea is that every object in the scene should cast realistic shadows with respect to every light source in the scene, and every pixel you see should illuminate properly that way. Of course that's easy to say and there are some solutions for that, like stencil buffering. But to do that properly you really want fuzzy shadows everywhere because most light and most environments are quite diffused and if you look around you very seldom see a really sharp shadow edge somewhere. So a huge amount of effort and processing power goes into implementing fuzzy shadows effectively in real-time. That's been a significant part of our R&D right there.
View : : :
26.
 
Re: And then there was doom...
Jan 25, 2004, 17:42
26.
Re: And then there was doom... Jan 25, 2004, 17:42
Jan 25, 2004, 17:42
 
I like how this ignores the DOOM 3 engine has been (as far as we know) feature complete for a couple years and quite capable of all this. Catsup.

Even if this was true (and it's not), it wouldn't matter for how long the engine has been feature complete. Untill I can buy it, I don't care. Think about it, DOOM3 could be delayed for two years (alright, that won't happen, but...) and thus released at the same time then what-ever-game-use-this-unreal-engine. So what good would it have been that the engine had been "feature complete" for two years? Not only is your argument false, it's also irrelevent.

This comment was edited on Jan 25, 17:43.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
2.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
7.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
12.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
3.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
4.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
5.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
6.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
8.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
9.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
11.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
10.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
13.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
14.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
15.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
16.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
17.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
19.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
20.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
23.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
18.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
21.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
22.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
24.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
25.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
27.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
 26.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
 Re: And then there was doom...
28.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
29.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
30.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
31.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004
32.
Jan 25, 2004Jan 25 2004