Game engines are basically like a set of tools, they don't fit every single case.
Games
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
Just remember how plasticky and stiff the characters in Dragon Age Inquisition looked because of the mandate to use the Frostbite 3 engine for ~everything, no matter how unsuited it was to a high fantasy world.
Exactly, engines can be as good as they get and still be the wrong fit for a game.
Creation gets a lot of criticism but it's the whole reason why Bethesda games have that unique feel to them and are as moddable as they are.
Lamborghini Huracan: fast and exciting
Fiat Panda: outstanding fuel efficiency
Trucks: lots of hauling space
Why not build trucks with the chassis of a Lamborghini and the motor of a Panda. It would solve all of our problems...
Optimization is extremely complex and the game engine, while factoring into the equation, doesn't determine if something is optimized or not inherently.
Yes, this is all a horrible post, game engines can't really be compared directly. There is no one size fits all.
EA thought that and tried to apply Frostbite to their entire catalogue. What worked amazingly for Battlefield/Battlefront was a disaster for Dragon Age: Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda, and let's not forget Anthem. Engine was optimized for small maps and quick gameplay, but was horrible for large open worlds and RPG elements.
The reason Unreal requires such heavy hardware is because they're trying to be a one tool fits all, but that requires making sacrifices.
OP's entire post here is incredibly naive. It's apples to oranges.
the games/engines you cite as being “extremely well optimized” are both a lot older than UE5 and do a lot less than some of the “less optimized” games discussed (i.e. simpler lighting, no geometry virtualization, simplistic simulation, very static environments, etc.)
these are very apples and oranges comparisons
Gamebryo being brand-new, and Doom (2016) being from the stone age. What?
The beauty of the RE engine is that it looks fucking spectacular while running like a dream too
Major Problems with game industry right now... Cost to make a game, and from that the repercussions if it fails.
Making an engine doesn't happen overnight, and then you need new Devs to learn that engine throughout its lifetime. Fine for a big player, but even a large company like CDPR had issues, hence moving.
It's a shame, but you can't write off engines like UE. Epic and the Coalition do incredible work with it. UE5 is still VERY new. Look at Fortnite and wait for the next Gears game. Even if the game is dull I'm sure it will be a showcase for UE5.
The opposite is also true. You created an engine already, why do you want a new one? Just add to the existing one. Starfield is not the only industry game working on legacy engines
I always wondered on what engine the first Xenoblade Chronicles is running. Absolutely massive beautiful landscapes and it runs absolutely smooth even on the 3Ds! No pop ins either!
they made a totally new and optimized engine for those games
The most difficult part of the development was getting the game's scale to work within the new hardware. This entailed the creation of a new graphics engine with a custom visibility culling and complex level of detail systems. All of the environments were rebuilt and optimized for the new system while keeping the original aesthetic intact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoblade_Chronicles_(video_game)
-
I've built this table with a saw and it's level
-
I've built this table with an axe and it's not level
Does that mean that saw is superior to making tables? No, I just suck with an axe and it was far easier to chop the wood than saw it.
I would say 99.9999% of the times it's superior to make a table with a saw instead of an axe
Yes. But what if most people in your team suck at using saw?
If they can't use a saw to chop something straight I'm sure as shit not trusting them to do it with an axe. I think it was a bad analogy.
See. It's easier to use but of an axe to hammer the nails rather than to use the handle of saw to hammer the nails. Both have advantages and disadvantages.
All Unreal engine and Unity games run like ass. Any decent engine can create the same visuals and run at least 5x better.
I just do not bother with Unity or Unreal-based games. Absolute trash.