What is the worst modern game engine?

>>277274906

Gamebryo, then Unreal Engine 3.

The new Frostbyte engine seems real shit too.

File: b23.png (171KB, 334x393px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 334x393px

Source.

FOREVER LOADING SCREENS : THE ENGINE

Gamebryo is fine, Bethesda just can't code for shit.

the sauce engineer

>>277275102

Source engine is great though. Loading is the only problem with it.

Luminous

They cant even make a game with this crap.

UNITY

>>277274906
unity

>>277274906
Either the breath of death vii/cutulu saves the world engine or whatever knights of pen and paper uses.
Seriously KoPaP is as demanding as 3 3d games while only having 2-3 frame animated sprites.

>>277275371

and crashing when Alt-Tabbing

>>277275725
Works on my machine, try not pirating it next time. :^)

>>277275524
>>277275535
>>277275630

I'm pretty sure most people bash Unity just because there's a shitton of horrible indie games slapped together using it. Unity itself isn't that bad, it's just so easy to get started with that people who can't make games flock around it.

Unity's pretty reliably shit. Might be easy to code for but the optimization is usually garbage.

>>277274906
What made you think people who play videogames know anything about tools used to make videogames?

>>277274906
Phyre Engine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpN_qAyv770

>>277274906
No engine is "bad" these days, it is more important to have somewhat good artists

>>277275102
Should Source even be considered modern?

>>277275524
>>277275535
>>277275630
noice trippel anaons

>>277275956
yes, as it contains most of the stuff that we need/have

>>277275725
>2014
>not using windowed-noborder

>>277274906
idTECH 5.

>>277274991
What's wrong with UE3? Sure, it's comparatively ancient, but there's nothing wrong with it.

>>277275785
nice bait

>>277275919

Where there is good, there is bad.

The worst is anyone who decides to code their own engine. Unity might not be as fast as a lot of other engines but it allows for fast iteration, meaning that it results in better gameplay in the hands of people who know how to use it. Anyone trying to make their own engine is going to waste a lot of time coding shit that's buggy and will run worse than any modern engine.

File: AssCreed-Bug.jpg (96KB, 640x443px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 640x443px

>>277274991
This.
I'd also place Anvil on the list of shit engines.

>>277275851
>but the optimization is usually garbage.
Care to elaborate? From what I've tried the engine itself seems to be pretty well optimized. Not a fan of the component-based architecture though.

>>277276051
and....?

>>277274906
Whatever GTA 4 runs on

>>277276057
>Unity might not be as fast as a lot of other engines but it allows for fast iteration,
So it makes it easier for Ubisoft to shit out a sequel every year?
Such wonderful news.

>>277275869
Why? It doesn't look bad.

The one square used in FF13

>>277274991
"New" frostbite is the 2nd one
And unreal seems to have most 3rd party tools

>>277276057
this

>>277276037
>What's wrong with UE3? Sure, it's comparatively ancient, but there's nothing wrong with it.
Let's see:
>clunky as fuck
>laggy controls
>everything looks like it's covered by celophane
>EVERY single action game with gore and/or gothic elements uses it
>fps games have shit aiming
>absolutely doesn't work for multiplayer

>>277276125
RAGE is fucking amazing, it's just GTA IV is barely optimized on PC.

>>277276153
Jokes on you, Ubisoft already have their own crappy engine. Just look at AC3, Watch Dogs, or ACU

>>277276125
RAGE is actually one of the best engines around. Extremely versatile. Even more than CryEngine.

>>277276153
What?

>>277276307
>implying that it's not the artists fault

>>277274991
What's wrong with Gamebryo? Aside from Bethesda's use of it there are quite a number of good games that run on it.

>>277276307
>clunky as fuck
>laggy controls
>everything looks like it's covered by celophane
>fps games have shit aiming
It's because most dev use the base engine and they're too lazy to custom it for their own. That's why UE3 is really noticeable that it use UE3.

File: 45673.png (133KB, 339x296px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 339x296px

>>277276307
>Judging the engine by the games made using it

You know, pretty much all of those are up to the developer to implement, so it's not the engine's fault if a dev fucks them up.

It seems like most people in this thread haven't even used the engine they're criticizing.

>>277276192
New Frostbite is the 3rd one, Anon. Second was used for BF3 and Warfighter.

This engine is actually very limited and I still don't see why does EA want to use it for every single game now.

>>277276369
Watch Dogs uses a different engine than Ass Creed games...

>>277276383
>every single artist does the same shit

>>277276560
No shit. Why would they customize the engine? It should work out of the box.

File: Killzone engine.jpg (211KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1920x1080px

Whatever Sucker Punch and Guerrilla Games uses in house. Both look really dated and character models look like plasticine.

I would pick Dunia as the weakest engine.

File: 20140123111447.jpg (592KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

592KB, 1920x1080px

>>277276668
That ain't Killzone, faggot.

Warscape engine, the one all recent total war games have been on since empire.

>>277276621
They used Frostbite for the latest Need for Speed game. Think it was Rivals. Regardless it wasn't a great idea because if you drove fast enough the game would stop rendering obstacles that could wreck your car. I traded in the game because of that.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (51KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1280x720px

>>277276731
It uses the same engine and it looks like shit.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2014/08/12/until-dawn-unveiled-for-ps4/

>>277276621
Technically Watch Dogs use Disrupt, which has elements of Anvil (the one that AC games use) and Dunia (the one that FC games use). Nevertheless, it's still damn similar engine, since it's still a ubisoft game anyway, they're all same shit.

>>277276621
>Why would they customize the engine? It should work out of the box.

That stuff doesn't even involve "customizing the engine". Controls and aiming are something that the dev has to implement, and it's not the engine's fault if they can't do it properly (assuming that the input handling in the engine isn't flawed or something, which it isn't in the case of UE3). The "celophane look" is also up to the dev to take care of, assuming that they're not using some pre-made assets that came with the engine.

Have you even tried UE3 or are you bashing it just based on games that run on it?

File: 20140123111438.jpg (864KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 1920x1080px

>>277276791
>Shitty devs use decent engine and it looks shit.
No shit? Killzone itself looks fine. You're a faggot.

Id Tech 5

Warscape engine

Gamebryo

>>277276668
But that looks quite amazing.

>>277276720
Why?

>>277276762
Yeah. Frostbite is retardedly buggy. It looks good on screenshots, or when everything loads correctly, but other than that - shit. Also everything looks like it literally has ice coating.

>>277276850
>Management of an open world city from the AnvilNext engine, and vegetation and AI mechanics from the Dunia Engine have been implemented in Disrupt.
That's all it uses. Other than that it's a new engine.

>>277276621
>Why would they customize the engine?
Not customize the engine, you dingus. I mean customize basic shit like the looks, controls, and else
>It should work out of the box
Devs thought that too and that's why every UE3 looks the same, just like what are you complaining

Mt Framework

File: 1596889_10153731051240721_1458584742_o.jpg (89KB, 1920x1080px)

89KB, 1920x1080px

>>277276959
It looks shit. I'm not a faggot.

>>277274906
XRay
pretty much the only reason I don't play STALKER

cryengine. just look at the disaster that is star citisn't

>>277277080
OP asking the worst, not the best

Well, from a DEV standpoint and from the available engines you can test or buy/subscribe.

Cry engine. Documentation is ass, support is ass, financing is ass

UE4 is shaping up good, needs more documentations tho

Unity, well C# is great

File: battlefield-4-irish.jpg (346KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1920x1080px

>>277276959
>>277276731
Looks a lot like Frostbite 3 actually.

>>277277124
CryEngine is decent. But Star Citizen people are completely incompetent people who literally know nothing. Also this >>277277173

File: 20140127124008.jpg (903KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 1920x1080px

>>277277084
Sure you aren't, faggot.

>>277277124
Wait, i thought they are not using that engine and pushing their own

>>277276913
You're not serious right now, are you?
How come every single game that runs on it has the exact same set of problems?

Well maybe because the problem lies in the engine itself, and not the devs. Even Epic couldn't handle their own engine well.

>>277274991
I hope you do realise that neither Gamebryo, nor UE3 are modern engines, right? UE3 is 8 and Gamebryo around 7 years old which is an eternity in vidya land.

>>277277195
Frostbite is leagues ahead.

>>277277229
That guy doesn't even look human. He's an alien.

>>277277283
Anon that's racist.

>>277277124
CryEngine is amazing. It can run on toasters while looking gorgeous and honestly it still looks better than any other engine out there. Just look at recent games like RYSE.

I wish more games used it.

>>277277262
>How come every single game that runs on it has the exact same set of problems?
Because the engine comes with a set of basic pre-made scripts for handling stuff like moving around and aiming, and most devs are too lazy to make a proper system specifically designed for their game.

And if you think the engine is shit because of the simple pre-made assets and scripts it comes with, I guess every engine is shit.

>>277275524
>>277275535
>>277275630
It work great for a game like Endless Legend, it work horribly for a game like Dreamfall.

File: no_collision.jpg (91KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1920x1200px

>>277274906
>nobody even bothered to mention Real Virtuality engine
It only shows how bad it is.

>>277277704
BI never made a bug-free game

>>277276309
>>277276370
>it's just GTA IV is barely optimized on PC.
on console too
and lanoire,
and rdr on ps3

>>277277589
Anon, you don't seem to understand what I said. EVERY fucking game made with UE3 is ridden with the exact same set problems. You'd think at least one dev, especially Epic, would handle the engine well, but no. Nobody did. So I'm guessing it must be the engine's fault. I don't know maybe it makes this shit too hard or something.

File: slowtaku.jpg (34KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 320x320px

Source and the engine behind Arma are the most dated pieces of shit in need of a serious makeover.
Frostbyte went to hell.
Unity and Gamebryo need to be eradicated.

What's AC Unity running on?

>>277277786
I don't know what you're talking about but RDR and LA Noire and even GTAV worked fine on my shitty 360. GTAIV had some trouble with streaming textures, but only when you ran if straight off the disc.

>>277277856
AnvilNext

>>277277783
The engine is actually pretty crap. It doesn't have the most basic features and every cool thing it has right now is some technology that's been bought from an external dev.
Besides, it seems to have script based animations? That's fucked up.

>>277277856
proprietary ubishit and its a bloated piece of crap

>>277277704
>fox engine have the same issue, but it's ok.

File: IhdS6.jpg (221KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1280x720px

>mfw this whole thread

Either learn what actually makes engine good or bad or stop posting anytime.
Especially retards like you
>>277276668

>>277277786
>Implying MP3 wasn't run well
>Implying GTA V wasn't amazing on the technical level considering the hardware it ran on

>>277277856
Modified Anvil from AC3

>>277277921
I correct myself. BI also never made good engine from the get go. OFP engine is a mess.

>>277277994
Fox Engine ran quite well on PES. GZ is probably super rushed since it riddled with bugs, unusual from regular MGS game.

We'll see about TPP.

This seems more like developer issues than engines.

>>277277994
This is just a single thing that I quickly got off google but the engine itself is a fucking nightmare. Arma would be so much better and approachable if it used a different engine.

Also, Fox Engine at least runs perfectly on toasters while RV requires some insane computer to run at max..

>>277277995
No. Killzone engine is a shit engine.

>>277274906

Definitely Gamebryo. Especially Bethesda's particular flavor of it.

>>277278035
>Implying GTA V wasn't amazing on the technical level considering the hardware it ran on
it can't even run at 60 fps on modern console.

Postal 2 engine.
Crashes often.

>>277278185
>fps is what important
SA barely ran on 30 fps on PS2. The fact it actually ran alone makes it impressive.

>all this frostbite hate

very well optimized, complete renderer, not buggy

it's great

>>277278176
And why is that?

File: arma3highestandlowest.jpg (817KB, 1920x2160px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 1920x2160px

>>277278163
>Arma would be so much better and approachable if it used a different engine.
What other engine would work for a map that big with arma ballistic ?
>
Also, Fox Engine at least runs perfectly on toasters while RV requires some insane computer to run at max..
>at max
and ?

>>277278220
So Unreal Engine 2.
Most crashes are because bad coding on RWS's part. I should know, I have tons of post in the testing section on their forums and speak with Toploader then and when

>>277278249
>>fps is what important
this guy, I swear...

>>277278292
Because it looks shit and the games are clunky and full of input latency. Animations in killzone games are also shit.

>>277277995
>devs with MILLIONS of budget can't release a game without game breaking glitches
>"you know nothing, how can you say it's bad?!"

cute

>>277278270
Fuck off Patrick Back.

>>277278220
>postal 2
>modern

>>277278185
>doesn't run well on modern console
Well fug xD

>>277278316
>What other engine would work for a map that big with arma ballistic ?
There's a multitude of engines that could be made to work for this. UE, CryEngine, RAGE, EGO, even Frostbite.

>and ?
Forgot to mention that Fox Engine also runs at max on toasters. Arma's engine is horribly optimized while not even looking all that well.

>>277276169
Shit bait:the post.

>>277278373
Learn to code and optimization before you actually talk shit

Real Virtuality probably.

Still love ArmA more than anything though.

>>277278406
what is the Master Chief Collection, Alex.

I'll take "Biggest Disappointments of 2014" again for $400

File: 1402333644662.jpg (17KB, 388x482px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 388x482px

This sounds more like a list of shitty developers rather than shitty engines

>>277278452
>play arma 3
>set the draw distance to maximum
>wah why can't it run well the engine is shit

>>277278452

BF3 ran great.

EA infected DICE with their cancer and imposed a schedule forbidding any optimization or even remotely clean code, so BF4 is shite.

If Bioware (!!!) can make a well optimized and good looking game with your engine, then you know it's good.

>>277278452
Forgot to mention that Fox Engine also runs at max on toasters
and arma 3 max >>> PZ max
but maybe if they gimped what arma 3 max is, the game would be suddenly more "optimized" according to you.

>>277278452
Also you're wrong. None of those engine except maybe CryEngine with some heavy fucking modification could do what RV does. But that doesn't mean RV is a good engine by any means.

>>277278452
>Well fug xD
great answer
>>277278495
sorry Cockstar. I guess I'm entilted for asking 60 FPS when you do a re-release on modern console.

>>277278402
and ? the engine is not responsible for shitty graphism , animations or input latency. you're blaming the art team and the codders , not the engine itself.

>>277278608
The ballistic system can be added to any engine, map size is another matter.

File: 1407188939130.jpg (5KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 200x200px

>>277278563
>set draw distance to whatever
>the game no longer render foliage outside 100m
>just a flat ugly ground texture

Also
>yfw there are games that can handle massive draw distances MUCH better and without such a performance hit

>>277278765

>I don't know what lod is

ayy lmao

back to reddit

On the contrary, the JC2 engine is fucking great. Looks great, mostly stable without crashes with fuckhuge maps, can run 60fps even on toasters.

>>277278709
It's not like GTA ever have history with good graphics or 30+ fps

>>277278163
>Arma would be so much better and approachable if it used a different engine.
There's no other engine that can handle the amount of (dynamic) objects, AI, or terrain size that arma contains. Obviously you have to sacrifice some things to have others. Which is why there are different game engines to begin with

>>277278720
The games runs like shit also and are glitchy.

>>277278571
BF3 didn't run great. It also had major problems when it was released and it all took time to patch. The engine ran fairly well performance wise but it was also buggy as hell. Netcode was also shit, but better than in BF4.

>>277278575
But Arma 3 at max still looks uglier than Fox Engine... Fox engine was designed to run well on consoles while delivering massive detailed open world just like Arma. Except, you know, Arma wouldn't even run on a console.

>>277278406
Yep, like i said. Fucking retards. Not cute. Fucking disgusting, actually.
Bugs aren't exactly engine fault. Take gamebryo so shitted on here for example. Many other games use it, like divinity II, el shaddai, Catherine or even civ IV. They don't have the same problems like skyrim or oblivion. Just because bethesda goes full retarded with it doesn't mean it's bad.

And no, gamebryo isn't exactly a good engine. Although it has decent documentation and can be decent if you prefer iterative development.

>>277278402
And how do you know it's engine fault? What if it's modular? What if the latency is handled by by some module and not the engine itself? What if it was dev choice?
Do you actually know something about this engine or do you speak out of your ass?

>>277278727
But that's what I mean. Most engines would shit itself if they had to do what RV does, with the AI and draw distance.

I'm kind of curious on how Snowdrop would do however, at least on how that handles cities. If RV used a similar system to their cities I think it could make urban warfare in ArmA actually tolerable instead of a 25 FPS shitfest.

>>277278919
>It also had major problems when it was released and it all took time to patch.

0 of which are engine related.

>>277278402
What's animations had to do with the engine?

>>277278837
JC2 engine might be great, but JC2 does nothing with it. The only slightly impressive feat is that there are alot of breakable objects on screen at once, namely tress. Other than that the game doesn't make the processor do any advanced calculations since everything from the ai to the bullets physics is basic at best. The draw distance is laughable and don't get me started on the almost instantly disappearing ruble and bodies.

The game had so much potential. I hope that JC3 will actually be interesting.

>>277278608
M8 do you even remotely have ANY idea what you're talking about? Any of those engines could deliver the same things Arma does but much better.
>UE can have great ballistics and big maps
>RAGE can have massive detailed worlds with great amounts of physics as evidenced by GTAV
>EGO already proved it can into big maps with ballistics this with OP Flashpoint RR
>Frostbite already has very big maps and ballistics
>wouldn't take heavy modding to introduce ballistics to CryEngine

>>277278709
>great answer
That's because your claim was retarded and should be met with a retarded answer...

>>277279086
Uh, everything, son.

>>277279149
great job kiddo

>>277279181
Nice response.

>>277278824
>back to reddit
>Do I fit in yet?
Also, look at how Dunia handles foliage in Far Cry 4 if you wanna see how it should be done correctly...

>>277279135
I think you might right. I guess because the console limitation held back the TECHNOLOGY on modern games.

I think RAGE is the only modern engine that wow me, and that's because it's helped by Euphoria.

>>277278838
Anon, but the main problem is that RV doesn't handle those things well either. It's just stupidly thought out and nothing in this game works well.

>>277279247
I guess that makes gamebryo a shit engine because fallout 3 animations is shit, right? :^)

File: arma3 2013-04-16 12-22-31-84.jpg (636KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

636KB, 1920x1080px

>>277278919
>But Arma 3 at max still looks uglier than Fox Engine.
le wrong face!

>>277278997
Most of them were engine related. One of the reasons why DICE released a new Frostbite so quickly.

>>277279145
>UE can have great ballistics and big maps
stopped right there.
Holy shit you know nothing.

ITT: propellor heads

>>277279339
Yes. Shit limitations from the engine and shit animators that can't work with shit engines.

>>277279145
You obviously have no fucking idea what you're talking about but you act like you do.

Frostbite does NOT have big maps, not even CLOSE to what is featured in ArmA. Frosbite would also explode if it had to deal with more than 5 AI's at once.

RAGE hasn't been proven to run something as big as ArmA with the draw distance. The biggest is GTA V and as you can see there the rendering distance is barely 10 meters and YOU STILL HAVE FUCKING POP IN MODELS AND TEXTURES

EGO, alright I'll give you EGO. It could actually do it. However it hasn't been updated for how long and looks incredibly outdated.

No but we're not talking about just fucking ballistics, we're talking about having to deal with all the dynamic objects, the lightning, the physics, the AI, the player, the ballistics, the models and EVERYTHING FUCKING ELSE IN THE DRAW DISTANCE THAT ARMA OFFERS THAT CRYENGINE CAN'T FUCKING DO OUT OF THE BOX.

File: NLSrkMa.jpg (246KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1280x720px

>>277279362
>bland plasticy image
>b-but it looks better than Fox Engine!
>I swear!
Fuck off

>>277275725
that was fixed in newer games, thank god

>>277279362
This looks like shit compared to fox engine.

>>277279610
I hope you realise that you're critiquing the games artstyle and not the engine it's running on. Also until MGSV actually comes out we have no idea about the texture popping, loading screen time and frequency, nor the complexity of the enviroment.

>>277276750
>>277277030
this, Warscape is absolute aids and the retarded fucks at CA still seem to think its amazing

>all these fags hating on UE3

Then tell me one thing, how did rocksteady manage to make Arkham Coty run so smooth and look so good?

Arkham Knight is looking even fucking better too.

>>277279423
It can lel. How retarded are you?

>>277279570
>Frostbite does NOT have big maps, not even CLOSE to what is featured in ArmA. Frosbite would also explode if it had to deal with more than 5 AI's at once.
Holy shit how fucking hard are you trying to be wrong right now? Just because Battlefield hasn't done massive maps yet, doesn't mean the engine wouldn't. Same goes for the AI that DOES work correctly. Unlike in Arma where the AI is just retarded.

>RAGE hasn't been proven to run something as big as ArmA with the draw distance. The biggest is GTA V and as you can see there the rendering distance is barely 10 meters and YOU STILL HAVE FUCKING POP IN MODELS AND TEXTURES
What are you even talking right now? Are you stupid? Have you never even seen GTAV played on shitty 360 consoles? It has a massive draw distance along with great amounts of physics and looks great. I can only expect it to work even better on PC.

>THAT CRYENGINE CAN'T FUCKING DO OUT OF THE BOX.
Anon, those are literally the things everyone praised first Crysis (and CE2) for. Because all those things were done right WAY before Arma. And of course WAY before Arma's tier of PC requirements.

>>277279362
Was that screenshot supposed to prove your point, since it did the exact opposite.

>>277279751
>I hope you realise that you're critiquing the games artstyle
>artstyle
>in games that go for realistic look
You're not very bright, are you?

>Also until MGSV actually comes out we have no idea about the texture popping, loading screen time and frequency, nor the complexity of the enviroment.
We do. We saw it all in the gameplays. It may only differ in console versions but the PC version will be at least as good as gameplays show it.

File: 1281209365863.jpg (86KB, 355x461px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 355x461px

>>277279967
It's like fucking talking to a wall, holy shit Anon.

I'm not even going to bother.

>>277279956
>smooth
It worked like any other game. It was also just as clunky and looked like covered by plastic foil. There just wasn't any precision aiming so it wasn't as annoying.

>>277280075
Haha, that's the reaction I'd expect from someone who realizes he's wrong and runs out of arguments.

Take your toys and go home now kid.

File: 1387577214781.jpg (64KB, 566x800px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 566x800px

ITT: plebs pretending they know shit about 3d rendering or game development

File: 1415882938746.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>277280064
>things can't have an art style if they look realistic

File: Metal-Gear-Solid-V-Ground-Zeroes-GameRekon-2-of-3.jpg (641KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

641KB, 1920x1080px

>>277279610
>>bland plasticy image
>unlike mgs
ayyyyy

Unity
Dunia
Unreal 3
What ever guild wars 2 ran on

Dunia is the worst though. Unoptimized trash. Maybe gw2 close by

>>277280227
Look at pedal 15
Tell me it look good
faggot

File: 6_Shooting.jpg (982KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 1920x1080px

>>277279980

Unity

Source

Gamebryo

That's about it. UE3 is too versatile to be called shitty. Mirrors Edge was made on UE3. Blame the lazy devs.

>>277280469
>showing a console screenshot

>>277280457
I don't think you know what art style is, Anon...

>>277280527
Pes 15

File: 39369359.jpg (357KB, 600x590px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 600x590px

>>277280075
This is the face of getting rekt.

>>277280401
>Massive map
>Recording online
>Not recording off the PS4/XBONE
That was your own fault

File: total-war-rome-2-bugs.jpg (44KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x360px

Warscape

File: 1412187382850.png (46KB, 930x794px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 930x794px

>>277280352
Yeah and you guys clearly do.

>>277280527
>>277280580
What? What does it even have to do with anything?

>>277280064

>Bland
An engine can't be "bland" you fucking moron, 3D models, texture, particles, etc. can be bland. MGSV doesn't go for realism the same way ARMA does because ARMA is a simulation, while MGSV is an action game trying to imitate the flair of Hollywood action movies with overdone post processing effects and saturated colours.

>We do. We saw it all in the gameplays.
Yes because "gameplays" are representative of the final quality of the game
>Wat is literally every AAA game presented in E3 or any other major game expo in the past 10 years

Some recent examples:
>Watchdogs - sure ran great and looked as great as in the gameplay trailers, right?
>Rage - sure had no graphical problems on release, rite?
>Asscreed Unity - sure worked and ran great on release, amirite?

Please admit that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about and just leave with a shred of dignity.

File: 1387577544757.jpg (59KB, 872x890px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 872x890px

>>277280693
Not much, but enough to know that 99 percent of these comments are absolute garbage.

>>277278163
Arma engine is fine.

VBS3 contains so much shit your mind would be blown and you'd forever hate consoles for holding technology back and it is relatively free.

Arma series is created by small "civilian" branch of BI, it's geared toward civilians to provide fun instead of towards governments to provide training for their armies. It gets all the optimizations, bug fixes, more technology! than you'd ever imagine, AI programming and shit like that, because they have better clients than 13 year old children who just want to play dayz.

Only problem is the engine is ancient, it is still largely the same as OFP one, but it is amazing what they have done with it.

Arma3 is a buggy, unfinished game but still blows others out of the water with what it does.

Deal with it.

>>277276057
The fox engine says fuck you.

>>277277084
How is it look like shit? Your screen looks good imho. You are a fagot.

>>277280763
>An engine can't be "bland"
It can. In Arma everything looks like a plastic toy. It's probably a lighting problem or something.

>MGSV doesn't go for realism
It does. At least in terms of graphics.

>while MGSV is an action game trying to imitate the flair of Hollywood action movies with overdone post processing effects and saturated colours
Arma also imitates Hollywood flares and post processing, and neither Arma nor MGS oversaturate colours...

>Yes because "gameplays" are representative of the final quality of the game
The recent ones, yeah. In the worst case scenario it was recorded on PC, not consoles, so only consoles will get shit graphics.

>watchdogs shown a very early gameplay that was staged for E3 and nobody actually got to play it
>either way we could bring back the e3 graphics

>RAGE never looked good except for screenshots

>asscreed unity was also a staged non-playable gameplay

Stay mad faggot.

>>277279967
>Anon, those are literally the things everyone praised first Crysis (and CE2) for. Because all those things were done right WAY before Arma. And of course WAY before Arma's tier of PC requirements.

>le modern gamer face

Okay concrete proof you have no idea what you're talking about.

You're so stupid I'm certain you're trolling, but still go to neogaf or wherever kids like you can have fun and not appear retarded.

File: kotikaljaa - Copy.jpg (15KB, 204x209px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 204x209px

>>277276668
>looks dated
>because of engine

The amount of people not having any idea what they're talking about in this thread is almost impressive.

File: shark on back.jpg (54KB, 900x500px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 900x500px

>>277281153
Most engines can do lighting in more than a few ways. Usually when shit seems "plastic" it's due to poor texture and shader work.

File: 1398186_590367544364033_563458035_o.jpg (103KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1920x1080px

>>277281091
Looks blurry as fuck to me. I'm not a faggot.

>>277278402
>Because it looks shit and the games are clunky and full of input latency. Animations in killzone games are also shit.
Exactly NONE of these are because of the game engine. Holy shit kill yourself for being this retarded.

>>277275102
One of the few things going for it is how it can still run on toasters.

File: abstract feel.jpg (46KB, 680x684px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 680x684px

>tfw you learn that one of your favorite games of the past two years was made in Unity

>>277281313
Shit, Killzone looks pretty good. Shame about the half-res DoF though.

>>277281313
>89 KB
>103 KB
>1920x1080

>I'm not a faggot
Yeah you are.

>>277281338
The game runs poorly and has heaps of tangling and glitching also.

>>277281389
You have low standards.

I like UE4 since I use it but as an artist
>modern engine
>lightmaps
I know it's WIP and all but holy shit what a waste of time. Not even arma3 engine needs dat shit, all it needs is a shadow model

>>277280954
>VBS3 contains so much shit your mind would be blown and you'd forever hate consoles for holding technology back and it is relatively free.
Yo, what? VBS3 uses RV but with a shitload of outsourced technologies. Besides it's not free, it's actually hard to get and expensive as fuck, because it's only meant for the military.

>Arma series is created by small "civilian" branch of BI
Nah. VBS is made by Bohemia Interactive Simulations that's based in Florida while Arma is handled by the original BI team from Czech Republic and it's not such a small team. They just decided to let modders do most of their work and just keep developing the game, so it's pretty much in an "early access" state all the time since release...

>Only problem is the engine is ancient
It's not. I mean sure it wasn't built from scratch for Arma 3 but it's surely not the same engine that was used in OFP.

>but still blows others out of the water with what it does
I wouldn't go as far to say this...

>>277281153
So if you say MGS looks realistic, are you saying it doesn't have an art style?

File: 2014.jpg (144KB, 719x898px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 719x898px

>>277281245
You don't even have any arguments beside "you're stupid" "le modern gamer".

Why don't you fuck off back to reddit or wherever you came from you fucking idiot.

>>277281425
>The game runs poorly
Because of PS4 hardware
>and has heaps of tangling and glitching also.
Glitches happen as a result of scripting. Not engine.
How long are you going to keep proving your incompetence?

>>277281434
Doesn't UE4 still use lightmaps on terrain?

>>277281474
"Realistic" isn't really an art style. It's more of art direction.

>>277281534
Shit optimized engine that doesn't utilize multithreading and still uses shitty cubemaps with bad bokeh, hard jaggy shadows and shit ass lighting along with glitches at every corner.

Killzone Shadowfall is a buggy mess. They had to patch it 9 times after launch within the first week just to get it running properly so people could finish the game.

>>277275102

After source 2 leak with Dota 2 workshop tools it has been found that it finally has normal streaming loading. By that I mean it can finally load things while you play.

>>277280705
It run on fox engine
and it look ass
if you were doing research while defending your shitty engine you would know

BYOND
anyone who says otherwise is completely and unquestionably wrong.

>>277281758
But we weren't even talking about Fox Engine at that point...

What were you even referring to when presenting me with this gameplay?

Engines don't really handle most any of the surface level crap you guys are talking about except may animation blending.

Engines handle low level graphics and sound apis.

All of the shaders and lighting and textures is dev work.
At most an engine may provide samples of this stuff as well as tools for designing games or pipelines or specialized systems for animation and stuff like blending.

Even this shit about optimization is mostly a developer issue.
While older engines are obviously not designed to scale with or take full advantage of newer hardware, if shit isn't running at a solid framerate it's because the devs elected not to manage the game's resources appropriately.

>>277281869
Well shit wrong post
on phone atm

File: btfo2.jpg (4MB, 1920x5975px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1920x5975px

>But Arma 3 at max still looks uglier than Fox Engine.

L
O
L

Fox Engine is absolute garbage. Stop sucking Kojima dick. It's shit. It's a poor ass engine made for consoles AND IT SHOWS.

The textures are absolutely abominable, the particles and FX are straight from 2001.

>>277281701
>Shit optimized engine that doesn't utilize multithreading
[citation needed]
>shitty cubemaps
>implying cubemaps are bad
>with bad bokeh,
As opposed to gaussian that is still more used.
>hard jaggy shadows and shit ass lighting
There's nothing wrong with way the engine handles lightning though.
>along with glitches at every corner.
Still not related to game engine.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

>>277282015
My personal experience.

>>277280401
Looks like someone's 360 is about to RROD

Whatever the fuck DayZ Standalone is running with

File: 14.jpg (1MB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x900px

>>277280553

>these textures
>that muzzleflash¨

L O L

>>277281985
I can see that Arma texture already repeat itself in such a small space. There's no proper normal mapping used either.

>>277282037
Then post your worker ID.

>>277280576
>showing a console screenshot
show me the same scene on pc then.

>>277280626
>>Not recording off the PS4/XBONE
holy shit, that's just fucking rich!

>>277282110

>grasping to the only smallest and pathetic straw he found

L O L

File: 1358378407539.jpg (456KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 1440x900px

>>277280651

>>277282223
Nope.
Repeat textures is the problem when you make them that small, denying it is just droning.

>>277282167
>Wanting me to compromise my job and identity
Fuck no. Just trust me.

>>277275102

This.

Source is a shit engine.

>optimized mean it run at 1080p/60fps on my computer at max setting, not matter what the max settings actually are.

File: arma3 2014-12-28 13-05-47-74.jpg (2MB, 1680x4383px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1680x4383px

>>277281985
I literally made it just 4 you faggot.
Gun is a mod so the shit texture there can be excused

>>277282354

I rather have repeating textures with proper IQ and resolution, looking sharp and where they should, ( plus, what were you expecting on a 250km2 terrain ? hand crafted textures per terrain ? fucking retarded cunt ) than non-repeating textures with a sub consolish resolution, that looks like undistilled blurry, pixelated shit. Like MGS V.

The screenshots are legit. There's no tricks. Both games are maxed out, yet the game with the biggest map and draw distance got the best textures. Why ? Because it's not a console game on a console engine.

>>277282169
I don't have GZ installed but I'm sure some anon can provide a PC pic if you ask nicely.

>>277282583
stay assblasted.

>>277282583

>he runs ArmA on a shit computer, doesn't know how to configure anything, and is blaming the game

Hahahahahahahaha.

RV >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FOXSHIT ENGINE

Faster you deal with it, the better.

>>277281985

and yet arma still looks like shit in comparison

when are you faggots going to realize that graphics mean more than polygon numbers and "texture quality"

>>277282671
> if you ask nicely.
please.
Now, i'm waiting :^)

>>277282621
>plus, what were you expecting on a 250km2 terrain
Not seeing that same stone for each 1,5m at least. Especially when the game has next to nothing to draw, it should have all the texture memory it needs to have proper looking ground.

>>277281153
>everything looks like a plastic toy

At this point I'm convinced that you don't know what a game engine is.

>MGS goes for realism in terms of graphics
>neither Arma nor MGS oversaturate colours...

I'm convinced you've never been outside.

>The recent ones, yeah. In the worst case scenario it was recorded on PC, not consoles, so only consoles will get shit graphics.
News flash, most if not all AAA PS3, 360, PS4, Xbone games presented on the show floor of expos are being played on a PC. And yet that has absolutely nothing to do with how well they will perform or look in the end. Also this is not a "recent" practice.

Your initial argument:
>We do. We saw it all in the gameplays. It may only differ in console versions but the PC version will be at least as good as gameplays show it.
>It may only differ in console versions but the PC version will be at least as good as gameplays show it.
> PC version will be at least as good as gameplays show it.
>B-but watchdogs can be moded
>R-RAGE never looked good
>b-but asscreed was staged

All this damage control.
You're the biggest mongoloid I've encountered on /v/ in the past month.

>>277281474
The guy is backpedalling and damage controlling left and right. His arguments since and including his initial post are utterly ignorant.

File: arma3 highest and lowest 2.jpg (1MB, 1920x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x2160px

>>277282583
lonl

>>277282776
see >>277280469
>>277280553

Unity is really fucking bad.

You get shitty indie games basically being awful developers with an awful engine, and the outcome is so laggy mess.

Unity is great for low paced games, but, anything intensive and it just falls the fuck apart.

>>277282721
>assblasted
You're getting rekt and I'm the one assblasted? Kek.

>>277282735
Lel. So you're saying it's okay comparing a vanilla max graphics GZ to Arma but only if it has some super configs and shit?

Also forgot to mention, the textures in screenshots are supersampled to 1080p texs so don't bother bringing up the 1680x1050 res I have.

>>277282735

>Owning a high-end PC to play a buggy, un-optimized piece of shit military simulator

Look dude I'm as mustard as the rest of you but even I know arma looks like shit all over

File: 8.jpg (1MB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x900px

>>277282790
>Especially when the game has next to nothing to draw

You have no idea what you are talking about. Stop posting at once.

>>277282876

both look shit

>>277274906
>ITT people dont understand the concept of a poor development team and blame it all on the engine at hand
>Oh vey the engine is the problem, we devs are not the problem!

Creation engine was created by Bethesda though and it is one of few that are legitimately really fucking shit.

>>277282976
What kind of burger joint is that?
Who would eat there? Just look at the sign and the paint job on the house.

Or is this some kind of zombie-approved restaurant?

>>277282835
>I'm convinced you've never been outside.
I'm sure you've never been, lel. MGS only blurs the image more but that's it. No oversaturation. If anything, it lacks saturation.

>News flash, most if not all AAA PS3, 360, PS4, Xbone games presented on the show floor of expos are being played on a PC. And yet that has absolutely nothing to do with how well they will perform or look in the end. Also this is not a "recent" practice.
Only consoles get graphics downgrade. Unless it's a downgrade to match the consoles...

>You're the biggest mongoloid I've encountered on /v/ in the past month.
Are you retarded? Can you really not tell the difference from a staged gameplay that's literally on stage with turned off controllers to a gameplay where they actually let you play the fucking game and see it upclose?

People like you are ruining the fucking industry I hope you die or at least stop playing games.

>>277279145
>great amounts of physics
Yeah, I guess a swing set launching a Greyhound bus into low-level orbit is a "great amount of physics" alright.

File: 1406521361525.gif (1MB, 280x210px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 280x210px

>>277282876
>Love playing Arma 3
>Game jumps from 60 fps on low to 20 fps on medium
>Have to wait an hour for Wasteland to begin to even play properly (Go from 4 to 20 FPS) on multiplayer.

>>277282976
>overdone contrast
>muh sweetfx

IDTECH 5

/THREAD

>>277279725
>what is context

File: 1409604260814.jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

>>277283235
We're talking about GTAV not IV...

File: yup_ot.webm (3MB, 640x360px)

3MB, 640x360px

>>277282926

>Look dude I'm as mustard as the rest of you but even I know arma looks like shit all over

Nope you're not. You're just an assblasted weeb, and you can't deal with the fact that your lord Kojima spouted a shit engine, which looks out of place on PC. It's a console port. It's not " mustard race " worthy. It's a shit port, locked to 60 FPS with PS4 tier textures. Don't damage control. Accept that as a fact and move on with your life.

The only reason you're hating on ArmA 3 is because, as a retarded weeb, you hate everything which is trying to be realist / tactical or any simulations whatsoever. Even if A3 had the best looking engine on the planet, you would still hate on it, because you hate the game. Therefore all your arguments are shit and moot. Fuck you.

>>277283365
But Arma 3 is legitimately shit and RV is a bad engine, regardless of what Fox Engine is like, Anon.

>>277275102
Rather that than streaming popup.

>>277283262

>wasteland

That was your first mistake.

Your second mistake is having a computer with a weak CPU.

>>277282993
indeed, mgs GZ look really bad on those screenshots.

>>277283365

holy shit all those assumptions

>Nope you're not. You're just an assblasted weeb, and you can't deal with the fact that your lord Kojima spouted a shit engine, which looks out of place on PC.

I'm not an MGS fan

>It's a shit port, locked to 60 FPS with PS4 tier textures. Don't damage control.

When did I ever say it wasn't that?

>The only reason you're hating on ArmA 3 is because, as a retarded weeb, you hate everything which is trying to be realist / tactical or any simulations whatsoever.

What? I like arma 3, I've clocked in many hours into it, I just said it looks like shit, which it does. I play on max settings and get a nice FPS and I still think it looks shit.

Oh fuck did I just get baited?

>>277283346
Ho yeah, context...
the same with Hatred, am I right ?

File: 1417289774626.webm (1MB, 600x338px)

1MB, 600x338px

>>277283456

And i'm perfectly fine with that statement, anon.

I'm just not okay when someone start bragging around about FOX ENGINE. Because right now there's nothing, far from it actually, to brag about.

>>277283357
>GTA V have better physics than IV
lil

File: 0OKtK.jpg (46KB, 260x169px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 260x169px

>>277283501
>>277281985
>>277280553
>>277280469
>game is only 2 gigs
>looks shit
Surprise everyone...

>Whiny elitists whining about how they claim graphics mean anything other than pretty pictures on a screen
>Go into a giant shit-fit over nothing
That's /v/ for you.
>>277283357
Then that's more of a reason to doubt the statement.

>>277283346
I'm pretty sure it's just a screenshot of a distant building in the previous gen version of GTA V.

>>277275371
also
>every game looks the same
>entity limits
>awful physics
>hammer editor
>out of date
>cpu centric
>doesn't do multicore

>>277275371
>source engine
>great
Enjoy your shitty editor from 2000 that hasn't been updated at all

>>277283624
It does... Are you one of those fags that hate Rockstar's games because they're too mainstream for your taste?

File: tumblr_ncgczy1Bjk1rdljluo2_250 (2).gif (2MB, 245x356px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 245x356px

>>277274906
Crysis and Arma. No jokes
>>277274991
>U3
>bad

>>277275371

It's a fun little engine, with playful physics but I wouldn't say its a great engine period, especially graphically

>>277283559
>look at this image, with no discernible features or even an image title hinting at a game.
>Now I expect everyone to know what it's from

>>277276603
lag is inherent to unreal engine

>>277281985
>there are still people who think "open world" in the context of MGS V means that it will be like GTA.

hilarious

>>277283625

>i-it will be totally different on TPP i swear

Delusion : the post. As long as the game is a console port it will look like shit on PC. You can already tell with the screenshots of TPP that it will still look like ass.

see

>>277279610

Game with PC as a main platform -> ported to consoles = usually good IQ on PC.

Game with consoles as a main platform -> ported to PC = shit IQ on PC.

WOW

I'm waiting for the engine that gets rid of textures completely, instead relying solely on tessellation and true global illumination/ray tracing.

Probably many generations away though

actual answer:
Lara Croft Temple of Osiris.
I'm serious, go try it.

>>277283865
>IQ
lol

ITT: PC mustard fags think they understand how graphics and aesthetics work

>>277283625
Just cause 2 ?

>>277283832

>missing the point

The only allusion to GTA V in this picture was to make a point about the map size.

>people jizzing over the fox engine because of GZ's performance
The fucking area was tiny and if you move the camera around fast enough you could see shit pop in

0/10 step it up kojima

I wonder why more engines don't use PBR instead of Phong.

Hedgehog engine is pretty shit.

>>277283939

>Image Quality

Learned something today Bobby ?

>>277283628
>Then that's more of a reason to doubt the statement.
Uhh... GTAV has improved physics. A lot.

>>277283865
I just hope you realize that even the best repacks with delta compression are still at least 8 gigs big and don't look remotely as good as GZ.

>>277283195
>MGS only blurs the image more but that's it.
>Only consoles get graphics downgrade.
>People like you are ruining the fucking industry I hope you die or at least stop playing games.

I really hope this is bait and this guy isn't actually that braindead.

>>277283987
It takes time to switch over to PBR

Plus that whole glossiness, roughness shit is confusing at least it's confusing for me

>>277283968
MGS V doesnt have one cohesive map, you retard. It's a series of mission zones similar to Ground Zeroes. You can go to them at any time from mother base when you need to do missions there.

It's a stupid fucking comparison and should be removed from that image. Did a russian write the text? the english made my brain hurt.

File: 1417429832862.jpg (41KB, 433x378px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 433x378px

>>277283946

Because you surely understand how graphics and aesthetics works with your 30FPS - 720P plastic box right ?

>>277283985

>people jizzing over the fox engine because of GZ's performance

This never happened

stop projecting

File: TESV 2014-12-21 21-35-16-96.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

ITT: people who dont know jack shit talk about graphics
picc related gamebryo engine, the picture might look good or bad but it has nothing to do with the engine

>>277283960
Oh shit you weren't kidding.
How?

>>277284134
>never happened
>it happened right in this thread

Fuck off

>>277284129

nice one idiot you just proved his point

>thread about shitty engines
>turns into a shit flinging contest between arma and mgs faggots

Fucking graphics faggots, who the fuck cares about textures on the ground

File: 1404856632884.gif (2MB, 178x120px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 178x120px

>>277284054
I love how hard are you trying to sound right.
You're not though.

>>277284119

>MGS V doesnt have one cohesive map, you retard

Then these shit graphics are even more pathetic and unjustifiable lmao.

Fuck off.

>>277284190

>get blown the fuck out
>y-you proved his point

Truth hurts m8.

>>277284217

Your mum when her face is buried in the pillow.

>>277284153
Some people are too dumb to understand what assets are. And think that low res textures or low polly models = bad engine.

ARMA 3's engine is just fucked.

The way server performance kills client performance, the way everything is just so fucking clunky and alpha quality - litterally because it didn't fucking improve a bit since the alpha.

Why does raising object render distance kill my framerate, from 80 to 15, when I'm looking DIRECTLY OUT TO SEA. What kind of culling system are they using?

>>277284327
>Your mum when her face is buried in the pillow.
that doesn't even make sense anon

>>277284253
>shit graphics

I mean sure, if you really care enough. Personally I don't have autism, and the graphics look pretty good.

Frostbite 2 and 3.

>>277284153

What the fuck are you even talking about. Do you think adding SSAO and DOF on top of a shit engine will make it better ?

End yourself already.

>>277284345
>play online arma
>every other player's animation literally slideshows

>>277284253
way to admit you have no idea what you're talking about one way or the other.

Arma's engine is capable of looking good on high end machines, but there is a very good reason more games don't use it. It's a clunky, mess with some incredibly weird design choices.
In terms of being a good engine, I and many other developers look for an engine which is robust and scalable. Could you make a game in arma's engine run on five different SKUs? I don't fucking think so mate. The developers got some good graphics out of it, but that doesn't make it a good engine.

>>277281060
It also says "fuck you" to alot of people running AMD cpus.

File: SW lightsabers evolved.gif (2MB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x197px

>>277274906
>What is the worst modern game engine?
that shit that TOR runs on

This thread proves that /v/ doesn't know shit about game development.

>>277284339

That's true to an extent.

If you can't mod out the said textures or model, all you will be able to see are shit textures and low poly models. Therefore you will make your own conclusions.

>>277284542
RV is as good as Google Earth's engine for gameplay...

>>277284240

>2015-4 days anno domini
>Posting "u mad" images
>Still trying to troll on 4chan
>Having terrible english

I legitimately feel sorry for you. Take care, anon.

>>277284129

Wait, are you implying that no one is incapable of understanding graphical fidelity/aesthetics within games unless they're a mustard?

didn't you kinda just lose the argument before it started?

>>277284460
no i dont think that, read my post

>>277284654
you could put the best textures on the planet into a unity engine game, anon. Assets have nothing to do with engine quality.

>>277284664
Maybe you should stop being so salty, m8.

>>277281985
>comparing game graphics as a means to compare engine fidelity

Oh boy anon, you are a special kind of retard.

File: unigine_valley5.webm (3MB, 960x540px)

3MB, 960x540px

>>277284716

That's exactly what i mean.

How could you understand graphic fidelity / aesthetics when your games are locked to a certain level of details ?

How could you understand graphic fidelity / aesthetics when all you see is shitty AAA console games, therefore dumbing your aesthetics standards downs and making you unaware of existing products like Space Engine or Outerra, which are two major achievements in their own league ?

The only platform which allows you to really understand the graphic fidelity withing games is PC. Because this is where the technical achievements are being made. That's simple as that. Deal with it. Accept it. Live with it.

File: 1416761284497.jpg (128KB, 708x664px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 708x664px

>>277282976
>>277285141
> there will be a time where this will become industry standard
> running around game worlds that look like this in VR

I am not prepared

>>277285141

Not that guy, but I think I agree with you on graphics, no peasant that has only grew up with console games would have their perspective shattered after seeing something ala unigine or any other benchmark.

But aesthetics, I think is a whole other ball game and is more to do with what you see as a collection of shapes and colours rather than the technology behind it. (I mainly play PC but even I can admit there are lots of beautiful console games out there)

>>277285141

I don't you understand what aesthetics are, anon

>>277276392

It can't into realtime.

>>277284627
So?

>>277284627
Neither does most developers.

File: 1419462319873.jpg (14KB, 250x233px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x233px

>>277285691

BUUUUUURN

>>277282218
Xbox and PS4 offer a silky smooth 30fps.
PC cannot guarantee that same performance with it's constantly jumping FPS.
This is what console devs are now clinging to as a defence mechanism.

>>277282110
>I can see that arma texture already repeat itself in such a small space
I don't see shit
Post pics or you're bullshitting faggot

>>277281569
no only on models, I think terrain is fine, the inbuilt terrain generator is quite nice

File: 1419768047253.jpg (1MB, 1902x1081px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1902x1081px

>>277285916
1024x1024 at best, the texture is just layered with others and rotated around to make it less apparent.

>>277283581
Is this space engine?
This isn't arma 3... is it?

>>277285325

Maybe in 10 years or more. And you won't care about video games anymore.

So yeah.

No.

>>277286363

Outerra>>277276392

>>277277283
>>277277283
Ayyyyyy lmao

File: ocd.jpg (341KB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 3264x1840px

>>277286298
Okay wow because the MGS game doesn't do even worse than that
I still had a hard time noticing it with your image even
Does this image upset you?
I would imagine it does alot

>>277277363
Space nigger

Fox Engine, overrated shit

Gamebryo is absolute shit.

>>277276621
>New Frostbite is the 3rd one, Anon. Second was used for BF3 and Warfighter.

Huh, this explains why I could max 3 at 60 frames while 4 I can have everything on low and still get below 20 frames for seemingly no reason at all.

BC2 is still the best casual shooter now that Vietnam servers are populated again.

>>277287019
>BC2 is still the best casual shooter now that Vietnam servers are populated again.
>BC2 is the best casual shooter
Fuck off pleb. You're the cancer that's killing the FPS genre these days.

What would you consider the best casual shooter?

>>277287197


>Likes pretty decent casual fps
>Is now deemed the bane of the entire fps genre

Oh grow the fuck up

>>277287318

Halo 3, Black ops 1 or BC2

>>277276107
Part of the problem is that it uses C# (unless you're horrible and use JavaScript) for its coding, and the objects are heavyweight. Flywheel absolutely everything and PRAY.

C# and Java are great languages, but they have specific patterns of usage.

One of them is that objects are lightweight, and that writing classes to encapsulate bullshit so you don't have to deal with it is cheap.

This means that a lot of bullshit details that are hard to keep straight can be kept away, and a lot of the housekeeping is done for you.

This leads to everyone writing 400 classes of different things, and then using those classes to build their application. This is why Java applications often use a lot of memory. They trade memory requirements for being easier to write, expand, debug, etc.
Buying an extra stick of ram for your server is cheaper than spending 2 months extra writing the program.

However, in Unity, objects are heavy, expensive things. Make an object, and you'll spend 512k of ram.

This might not seem like *that* much, since even consoles have gigabytes of ram (the weakest one, the Wii U has 2gb of it), but it's shit for two reasons.

First of all, the cache misses. The time it takes to fetch something from L1-L3 cache vs ram is so slow it hurts.

Secondly, you're stuck with large objects, so you can't do modern OOP with it, so you're stuck writing objectively shit code.

Thirdly, it runs on .Net, which has an MS implementation and a Shit implementation. The Shit implementation suck balls.

Don't get me wrong. Unity could have been great. But it prevents modern OOP, and you're thus stuck writing C++ in C#. Just without all the new fancy stuff.

File: Autist.png (45KB, 1342x544px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 1342x544px

>>277287197
Shut the fuck up, faggot.

>>277286298
I'm sorry Till someone make another engine that can make you go from playing a military game from the some what future to 1944 to the french revolution, zombie survival , Dinosaur survival, to just a fucking LIFE RPG.
Till then ArmA 3 Engine is one of the most flexible engine in the world sure not pretty to look at. but god damn nigga.