T4 on UE 3.0? Rumors about the engine.

Judith on 25/11/2009 at 21:17

I just saw this on the DX3 forums (thx to Abru): (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showpost.php?p=1221192&postcount=28)

Quote:

(By the way, do you know that Thief 4 is built with the Unreal Engine 3? I was on EM studio when the development team has confirmed this last Nov. 15.) But this is for Thief 4 forum....

I bet Rene can't confirm it yet but personally I'd be in heaven if they used UE/UDK for T4, we could get one of the best 3d editors ever created ;)

bukary on 25/11/2009 at 21:39

If that's so... they better chain the guy who does engine modifications to the desk for the next two years. No running away this time!

New Horizon on 25/11/2009 at 21:42

I really can't see them doing that....especially when they're supposedly sharing the load between the DX3 and T4 teams. To have both teams using different engines would be a waste of resources. I think it's a good bet that T4 will use the same engine as DX3.

d'Spair on 25/11/2009 at 21:51

Considering that Unreal Engine has been shit for a decade, I hope this is not true.

Digital Nightfall on 25/11/2009 at 22:05

Dunno, I've been pretty impressed by the improvements they've made to it since UT3... however I am fairly certain that they're sticking with one engine for DX3, T4, and the next Tomb Raider game.

d'Spair on 26/11/2009 at 12:50

I've been messing with both UE1 and UE2 quite a long time ago, and in terms of space creation it was total garbage. Unless one makes cubical rooms and 90 degree corners stricltly snapped to grid, there is a fair chance one will start getting BSP holes 30 minutes after starting making a level. In UE2, all gometry details are static meshes, while BSP remains almost as primitive as in the first Unreal engine (born 1998). Guys who work with T3Ed will easily confirm that making detailed error-free spaces in Flesh is pain in the ass. I would be very surprised if that is changed with UE3.

However, I'm not sure that DX3 and T4 will share engines. T4 production started years after DX3, and I believe Stephane D'Astous stated once that EM would consider to develop Thief 4 for the next-gen consoles. If this is true, UE3 is one of the most obvious choices, unless Eidos think harder and get an id Tech 5 license.

jtr7 on 26/11/2009 at 13:20

2007 was when EM began, and it's a company goal to create "Next-generation games for Xbox 360, PS3 and PC consoles, and for the Wii." They had some kind of relationship with Crystal Dynamics, but CD left them a few months ago, and it's unknown to us what they brought in or what software/hardware is still integrated with EM.

Judith on 26/11/2009 at 17:34

D'Spair, I bet you know that the necessity of making static meshes in the external 3d package was a pain back in the day, now it's an obvious thing. It was since Unreal 2004, UE 2.0. These days noone's making maps/levels using BSP only, maybe except for hardcore UT fans, making low-poly DM maps for UT3.

In case of T3ed its painful because you need a specific version of 3dsmax (5.1) which isn't available anymore and it uses DirectX 8.1 which was one of the most buggy versions ever.

But that's the exception, for UE 3.0 today you have 3dsmax 2010 (license is cheap if you're a student), Modo, Maya, Blender and other modeling soft working with this engine (ASE format for import) all those are stable and accessible applications (well, Max isn't but it never was ;) ).

UE 3.0, at least the UT3/UDK version, is very promising, supports vast terrains it has incredible shader editor, nice kismet (scripts), matinée, particle editor, and supports things like global illumination. I remember that UE 1.0 had some serious problems and had enormous requirements at the time, but I never had bigger issues with UE 2.0/2.5. Since the very beginning this was the most user friendly editor, and it still is, despite the graphic complexity increase and all the additional stuff you have to make, to ship your map.

In UE 3.0 BSP can be used extensively, since the polycount limit has been raised much higher, but it's rarely used for more than just a frame and as a measurement method - it's wise to build it all in BSP to see whether you got dimensions right and whether the gameplay will be decent.

d'Spair on 26/11/2009 at 18:34

That's fine. However, if I make a room packed with details made with polys in Doom 3 engine, it will be fine. If I make the same thing in Unreal, my computer will explode.

Judith on 26/11/2009 at 18:39

Doom 3 way of building levels by using patches and BSP is quite a separate trend in 3d design. It's not for me to judge it, since first Unreal game I've been fiddling mostly with UE incarnations (Worldcraft or Hammer being a small exception), but I guess most game engines abandoned extensive use of BSP for mesh sets. It's not a good sign for people, who for years worked in Dromed but that's the trend.

Right now I'm working with T3ed (bugged UE 2.5/2.x version), Gears PC and UT3 editor (UE 3.0) and I choose static mesh over BSP in every case, for it's easier to achieve a desired effect using external modeller. I guess none of the UE incarnations was made to create advanced BSP structures in a first place.