CryEngine? Frostbite?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PCMasterReece

Guest
#2
DICE wouldn't allow an indie company to use their Frostbite Engine even if we begged them, which is unfortunatebecause I do love the way the Frostbite engine works (also don't forget Frostbite has graphics that can be said to be on par with CryEngine, if utilized properly).
 

DARKB1KE

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2016
409
461
63
#3
DICE wouldn't allow an indie company to use their Frostbite Engine even if we begged them, which is unfortunatebecause I do love the way the Frostbite engine works (also don't forget Frostbite has graphics that can be said to be on par with CryEngine, if utilized properly).
Yeah ever since BF3 released I was quite impressed with its capability.
 
Likes: PCMasterReece
P

PCMasterReece

Guest
#4
Yeah ever since BF3 released I was quite impressed with its capability.
I found Battlefield: Bad Company 2 showed off what Frostbite could really do in terms of destruction. Battlefield 3 was just the icing on the cake because of the majorly improved graphics.

I seriously can't wait for Battlefield 1
 
Jul 27, 2016
20
53
13
#6
UE4 is free until you start selling and then Epic takes 5%, so for indie developers, it looks pretty cost effective.
I'm inclined to agree. With this sort of progressive-funding path forward for Ember, having a powerful engine (there's some really beautiful stuff that I see on twitter occasionally) that also allows free time to develop before any money flows back to Epic makes a ton of sense to me.
 

PlzBanMe

Gatestrider
Staff member
Community Manager
Ember Moderator
Jul 27, 2016
109
147
43
#8
Just because your favorite games are made on it doesn't mean it is a good engine. Good gameplay can be done on almost any engine.
 

Arkii

New Member
Jul 27, 2016
1
1
3
#10
UE4 comes with so much tooling out of the box and ready to go, its publicly avalable so you have a pool of devs that are already experienced with the engine to hire from.
On top of all that the engine is designed to be licensed off and used by third party devs unlike Frostbite.
and in comparison to Cryenine its art pipe line is alot more stream lined (pretty much everything is)
 
Likes: Dzzel

Fryepod

Active Member
Jul 26, 2016
66
100
33
Hudson Valley, NY
#15
I used to work on a mod team on the CryTek forums for side projects and i agree.

It's honestly my opinion that after CE2 it just wasn't made to develop games. I'd begin to list off the amount of games that found the engine was more of a hassle for the little bit of extra eye candy but i can use CryT's Crysis 2 and 3. They're both basically super short tech demo's of the engine and neither of those games work properly. Geometry is LOL, the UI is buggy 99.9% of always, textures don't load, scripts go missing in the matrix. You'd think oh well that's just poorly put together games but nope. You can save a session on the Cry3, reopen it immediately after what you just tested and something will be broken.

I've always liked to just fool around and world design for fun (the easiest stuff) and of Unity, Unreal4 and Cry3... Cry3 has the highest potential to look pretty, hardest to work with.
 

p0wd3r

New Member
Jul 27, 2016
2
0
1
#19
Whatever engine is chosen, I don't care, as long as the UI doesn't feel like 15 different developer's vision of how things should be. Make it sensible and easy (valid tool tips anyone?), and this game will be strides ahead of what FireFall has become. I really liked FireFall, but figuring it out felt more like arguing with a toddler over the best flavor of ice cream than an entertainment source... :(
 

NitroMidgets

Tsi-Hu Hunter
Jul 27, 2016
588
460
63
Dupont, WA
#20
If your company or game requires a Wiki or any other external website just to explain how to use your UI, you have fucked up.

Let's try and remember that this time around.

There was a post by a different developer in their alpha forum that had a list of things that display when you have fucked up. Wish I had saved a copy of it.
 
Likes: phoenix
Status
Not open for further replies.