NCsoft buys unreal 3 engine.. could it be?

Unreal engine 3?? LOLS

piece of unoptimized crap tbh

I hate to break it to you but if your pc struggles on max settings on gw.... then your pc is to blame, not unreal engine 3. Even on a modest 8600gt, with a decent dual core, you can push a nice 50-60fps(or more, depending on the map) on 4(high) in ut3 on a moderate resolution(ex. 1280). Hell, even my old single core athlon 2400+(5 year old cpu) and low-end radeon x700(3 year old card) pushed more fps than yours set on 2(right between low and med) in 800x600 . Before you call an engine bad please take a look at the hardware you try to run it on. It'll make you look more intelligent that way. Cause in this case it's not the engines fault. The engine is very scalable, but it can't work miracles.

nope unreal is actually MORE optimized then the crytek engine

even thought their both poor lol

Correct. The engine is for another NcSoft game, not Guild Wars 2.

Read over the first few pages and my eyes started to hurt ... lolz ..

No seriously this is actually very logical~ NC soft announced last yr they were making some games for Sony Exclusively as sony was looking to get into the MMO market this can also be seen in some recent behind the scene upper level management moves that are goin on over there .... Epic and Sony have since been in a lil back door dealings since Epic [ owner of the UE3 engine] had a slight fall out with MSoft .... infact if not mistaken the PS3 is able to Utilize the Ue3 engine better than the Xbox 360 .... Anyhow parts of the PS3 are also made from the UE3 engine ... so in short

NC soft buys the engine to make the games that they contracted with SONY , infact some of these games were to be MMO's, which gives them a dev tool to create the games for a console platform since they are crossing over without having to figure out how to go from pc to platform or make an entirely new engine for a game all together.

last notes here i saw someone say earlier the cost was around 500,000 for the UE3 engine ..... Silicon Knights paid Epic 750,000 + so u were close but this engine is worth alot more as more and more use it .

Guild Wars is not 3D. It only looks like it. The illusion may be a bit more elaborate than in Doom, but functionally GW is 2D.

Sure, you can walk over and under a bridge, but people standing on top of a bridge can bodyblock those attempting to walk under it.

What other "3D" features does guild wars have? Can you jump? No. Can you walk off a cliff? No. Everything is done with pathing. Terrain is either passable or unpassable, and this gets really awkward when you're trying to cut corners walking down a ramp, for example.

Obviously, GWs engine can work miracles both in performance and visuals.

also, I hate to break it to you, but i could not care less about gaming hardware and no game is ever gonna make me buy it. And People like me are huge majority of gaming population, not minority as shader-jerking population thinks.

Crytek/Cryengine 2 http://www.gametrailers.com/player/31022.html (You'd have to be lying if you can't say atleast once during that video, you lost track of which was real life and which was the engine)

vs.

Unreal Engine III http://www.gametrailers.com/player/u...es/179565.html

Edit: I'm only talking about visuals, leaving the other three factors aside (optimization, performance, effects). UEIII and Cry2 are about tied as far as graphical effects go, UEIII is more optomized then Cry2- com'n it runs on an Xbox 360 (lawlawlawl can you say low end), performance really depends on the user's computer, but visually I think we all know who the winner is.

Yea, it is rather unfortunate that people who use intel graphics and blame game devs for their poor performance are the majority..

Really though.. If you don't care about hardware then you really have no place to judge any game engine or its performance. Cause in order to properly judge a game engine you need adequate hardware to run it. Personally i think you're the type who'd be right on home on a console.

Hmmmm...

I seem to remember something called Everquest....

No ty NCsoft, I can't run U3 and i obviously then wont be able to run GW2.

Actually. The core of the game is built of Granny 3D --> http://www.radgametools.com/granny.html

But is still pretty unique

Jumping and falling off something doesn't make sense, that's why it's not implemented. It has no more room in game that wheels on a tomato. But it has nothing to do with limitations of the engine.

GW maps are 3D. The collision maps are 2D. That's the difference.

And since collisions are a very big deal(tm) in GW, everything is limited to what can be tested on them - but there's no reason why person couldn't jump around the objects. It's not in game since such accurate collision tests would be far too expensive.

As a comparison, WoW's servers do no collision testing whatsoever, and if you hack your client, you can map anywhere anytime. This is something that's not possible in GW, where you'd rubber band back.

Typical answer from an arrogant gamer. You know very little about graphics engine if you think it this way. Years of "scene" (a specific term, you should google "demoscene" to find out more) teach you that having the biggest hardware (e-peen or other kind of manly physical attributes!) brings you nothing but trouble as you have to continuously run after the latest top-notch-big-pixels card (and one seems not enough so with SLI you can have 4! btw there's nothing wrong with having extremely powerfull rigs for playing games in highest settings, but it should stay in this very little "l33t" place, far far far far far away from the world of, mostly, everyone)

Anet is definitely going right with their choice to stay away from this world of madness of who will get the most colors inside the same pixel, or who can put more pixels in a face that there are neurons in your head! GW has mass appeal because it's a well-programmed (and well-designed) game that has core artistic values. I'm looking forward to the feats of GW2 as Anet will undoubtedly surpass themselves.

By the way, I quickly looked for computer specs on the web:
- UT3: proc 2Ghz, 512Mo RAM, NVIDIA 6200+ or ATI Radeon 9600+ (128-256Mo V-RAM?)
- GW NF: proc (pentium III!) 1Ghz, 512Mo RAM, ATI Radeon 8500 or GeForce 3 Series (64Mo V-RAM)
GW NF's recommend spec is very close to UT3's minimum spec!

Awesome! It's the first time ever I see this kind of information, it's the most accurate you could find Thanks!

Spot on comment!

id tech 5 > cryengine 2

I can't believe that you are all still talking about this after what Loki said in this post.

Well, believe what you want, but I'm personally gratefull that the discussion went on because of the link that Shadow Kurd provided. It's big news to me and extremely interesting. And I guess that people can still post nice contributions (I hope it's not going to end up in flamewars between partisans of one graphics engine camp or the other).

Just found this old but interesting article:
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/...ars_review_1/2
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/...ars_review_1/3

And look at these nice framerates on a little X700:
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/...ars_review_1/4

i think crytec engine is better..just look at aion.

I think it's a bit late to be licensing an engine when your beta is year-end.