Eldron on 18/11/2010 at 16:41
Quote Posted by lost_soul
Why has this game been pushed back for so long? I mean, August of 2011? As a technology developer, I would think you would want to release your engine early in a hardware generation's lifetime. Rage only uses Opengl 2.0 after all and how much longer can this batch of consoles compete with the PC?
ID aren't in the engine market anymore though, it's only going to be used inside theirs and the studios they work with.
Rage's engine technology is very much unrelated to what level of shader complexity it uses though, since it's all about the new megatexture stuff, and the new way to create environments with it.
SubJeff on 18/11/2010 at 17:08
What? Why are they not in the engine market anymore? Makes no sense and now all we'll get is Unreal Engine stuff and a few Crytek things. Variety is better!
Sulphur on 18/11/2010 at 18:07
Blame Bethesda.
Eldron on 18/11/2010 at 18:36
I bet bethesda has nothing to do with it, it's just that, it's rough to license out an engine, give support to those that license it, and trying to be a gamedev studio at the same time, there are a tons of engines built all the time that never see the outside of a studio because they're so tailored to that studio.
That and the unreal engine is so super flexible and comes with the tools that have always been way ahead of most other engines, it's hard to compete with that.
(
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/12/id-tech-5-exclusive-to-bethesda-published-titles/)
There are more engines out there, and in recent years indie-studio aimed engines has become very popular, even epic put together UDK for just that.
So basically, id has always made great engines, but it costs alot to be able to support them as licensed ones and I guess they don't see the worth in it anymore.
Sulphur on 18/11/2010 at 19:54
While I'd like to agree with a glass half full viewpoint like that, Eld, the very article you linked to says, 'From Bethesda's perspective, the engine is simply too good for anyone else to use.'
demagogue on 19/11/2010 at 00:24
Which is ironic because the engine was consciously designed to appeal to developers and make it more marketable. There's a quote from one of tech demos (the one where he's showing how they build on it) where Carmack says something like, where past engines focused on lighting and performance, this one is focused on developers and making it a dream for artists and designers. Sort of sad to watch that video now. The other sad thing is that it might mean little to no modding capability.
Eldron on 19/11/2010 at 00:55
Quote Posted by demagogue
Which is ironic because the engine was consciously designed to appeal to developers and make it more marketable. There's a quote from one of tech demos (the one where he's showing how they build on it) where Carmack says something like, where past engines focused on lighting and performance, this one is focused on developers and making it a dream for artists and designers. Sort of sad to watch that video now. The other sad thing is that it might mean little to no modding capability.
Yep, meaning, their own developers, mostly had to do with their megatextures though, since artists don't have to think about optimizations when it comes to creating terrains, since they can paint unique materials everywhere.
a publisher will turn anything into a positive meaning though :P
Artists don't want to work with commandline tools.
EvaUnit02 on 19/11/2010 at 04:03
Quote Posted by demagogue
The other sad thing is that it might mean little to no modding capability.
The game was confirmed to ship with mod tools during the last E3.
demagogue on 19/11/2010 at 14:15
Quote Posted by Eldron
Yep, meaning, their own developers...
That talk was a year or more before they made the decision to make it exclusive, and the engine had been in development for probably years before that, so I'm pretty sure he meant it (in part) as a pitch to third party developers to license the engine. Of course he meant it as good for their own devs also, but he talked about devs generally too, and at the time the engine was still contemplated to be licensed and the actual focus on its dev-friendly tech was oriented towards licensing it. Remember it was a public tech demo with the sole purpose of pitching the dev features. (As far as the public is concerned, they don't care and the art speaks for itself.) The decision to make it exclusive came later and by other people (the publisher). That's why I thought it was ironic. It was
so marketable as a licensed engine, by intention, that they took it off the market.
Quote:
The game was confirmed to ship with mod tools during the last E3.
I guess I remember that now, but I still wonder if it's going to be as mod friendly as Doom3, and will it go open source someday like the others?
Eldron on 19/11/2010 at 14:46
Only problem is, the megatexture stuff doesn't really help with keeping downloads small, but I'm really looking forward to trying out the new tools.
And back to the lack of licensing.. Compare the amount of times idtech4 was licensed vs how many times the unrealengine3 was.
Quote Posted by demagogue
Remember it was a public tech demo with the sole purpose of pitching the dev features.
Id has always been an engine tech company, and they've always shown off their new tech, and their new stuff in idtech5 is pretty amazing stuff.
