MABB v6.6.6

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/1 ... 3#slide-14

This and Frosbite 2.0 would seem to be the ones that are gonna be dishing out for the game engine crown this year and with (hopefully) better optimizations this time around. Both engines look absolutely badass.

I that depth of field effect!

The game engine itself

idTech has some catching up to do.

so I think Epic and CryEngine are on top these days?

[quote name="pulsar"]idTech has some catching up to do.[/quote]

I've got a feeling id's got something up their sleeves. They already demonstrated idTech 5 sometime before the release of Crysis 1 but I think the subsequent releases of games like Crysis, Crysis Warhead and Bad Company 2 forced the id guys to go back to the drawing board and to rework the engine itself. At least they know that they've got some stiff competition and will work to adapt.

I'll tell you who needs a new engine, Valve.



The Source engine is crazy outdated - looking forward to seeing how Portal 2 looks.

Good graphics.

id Tech 6 is in the works, I know that much. They've said, though, that the hardware to run it doesn't exist yet.



zim: I agree. Valve really could use a nice shiny new engine.

[quote name="pulsar"]zim: I agree. Valve really could use a nice shiny new engine.[/quote]



despite the graphics their games are still hella fun and that's what really matters

[quote name="zim"]
[quote name="pulsar"]zim: I agree. Valve really could use a nice shiny new engine.[/quote]



despite the graphics their games are still hella fun and that's what really matters[/quote]



Exactly, Source wasn't exactly graphically revolutionary when it was released. Considering the Doom 3 and cryengine1 were it's contemporaries.

[quote name="winburger"]
[quote name="zim"]
[quote name="pulsar"]zim: I agree. Valve really could use a nice shiny new engine.[/quote]



despite the graphics their games are still hella fun and that's what really matters[/quote]



Exactly, Source wasn't exactly graphically revolutionary when it was released. Considering the Doom 3 and cryengine1 were it's contemporaries.[/quote]

What was Doom3 built on, idTech 4?

[quote name="pulsar"]
[quote name="winburger"]
[quote name="zim"]
[quote name="pulsar"]zim: I agree. Valve really could use a nice shiny new engine.[/quote]



despite the graphics their games are still hella fun and that's what really matters[/quote]



Exactly, Source wasn't exactly graphically revolutionary when it was released. Considering the Doom 3 and cryengine1 were it's contemporaries.[/quote]

What was Doom3 built on, idTech 4?[/quote]

Aye.

Quake 4 and Doom 3 were a lot of fun.

There's a blade runner style video of unreal engine 3 out now, looks cool. samaritan.



[youtube]PUWyozQPFCU[/youtube]

Wow.

As a layman, I like the idea of the Unreal engine the most, because they've gone a long way to permitting independent developers to use the SDK and pay a more than fair share or any realized profit. Having more game engines available for a small up-front cost can only mean more quality games in the future. Independent developers take most of the risks these days.

[quote name="Meat Engine"]As a layman, I like the idea of the Unreal engine the most, because they've gone a long way to permitting independent developers to use the SDK and pay a more than fair share or any realized profit. Having more game engines available for a small up-front cost can only mean more quality games in the future. Independent developers take most of the risks these days.[/quote]



Epic recently increased the amount of money a developer will have to earn from a game before they owe royalties to the company (up from $10,000 to $50,000)



Epic