Jump to content


Unreal Tournament III?


  • Please log in to reply
175 replies to this topic

#41 PeopleLikeFrank

PeopleLikeFrank

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2690 posts
  • Location:The Republic of Soviet Canukistan
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 12 July 2009 - 08:55 PM

View PostJ, on July 12th 2009, 06:50 PM, said:

What's Unity?

My statement was a question, as I didn't know either way.  I know the crap PhysX add-on stuff was why Mirror's Edge's port to PC was delayed.  Silliness I say!

That was adding extra elements to the game though. Not really so much the fact that it used PhysX in the first place.
The dork formerly known as nobody
---
MBP: C2D @ 2.66 Ghz | GeForce 9600M GT 256Mb | 8GB RAM | 120GB SSD + 500GB HD | 10.6.2 / W7 x64
PC: Q9550 | 6950 2GB | 8GB RAM | 80GB SSD + 750GB HD | W7 x64

#42 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 13 July 2009 - 02:20 AM

yup, once you take into account the holiday break after the game's release, the first maintenance patch for the consoles, thats probably about 2 months, then you need to go through all the games' levels and add all the new PhysX elements and put the game through a whole new beta test on PC... Easily adds up to 4 months.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#43 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 14 July 2009 - 05:24 PM

View PostIchigo27, on July 13th 2009, 06:51 AM, said:

UT3 is that horribly programmed? If it wasn't UT3 would be out on os x and linux 2 years ago.
I would draw the opposite conclusion. A delay this long could only be caused by non-technical issues.

#44 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8075 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 15 July 2009 - 01:20 AM

View PostTesseract, on July 15th 2009, 01:24 AM, said:

I would draw the opposite conclusion. A delay this long could only be caused by non-technical issues.
That's what Ryan Gordon also alluded to some while ago.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#45 J'nathus

J'nathus

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts

Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:07 AM

Has ANYTHING based on the UE3 been ported to OS X?   The BioShock port is taking a while too (although that's not a pure UE3). I wouldn't be surprised if there's not some technical issue... DX10 goodies or the need to get the port 'right' as UT3 and the UE3 are sort of gateway drugs to a slew of other games.

#46 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 15 July 2009 - 03:27 AM

The Bioshock port was semi-announced very early in the process. I think the Feral team were so stoked by getting the contract that they decided to show off as soon as possible. Usually they only announce when they've got a nearby release date in mind, but this time they came out with it early.
So don't hold any opinions on UE3 based on that. I believe the general target was Summer '09, so they've still got a good few months at least, and dropping back to autumn or winter wouldn't be too bad since its a beast of a game.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#47 Vulpine

Vulpine

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 38 posts
  • Location:Bristol, UK

Posted 15 August 2009 - 05:01 AM

If Amazon is to be believed, it's out now, albeit out of stock...

#48 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8075 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 15 August 2009 - 06:39 AM

The Linux version is apparently still in the works – but slowly. The same probably applies to the Mac version. I wonder what the heck is holding Ryan Gordon up to finish this thing? The last thing we heard was bug fixing and optimising, not anything legalese.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#49 J'nathus

J'nathus

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 07:15 AM

View Postteflon, on July 15th 2009, 02:27 AM, said:

So don't hold any opinions on UE3 based on that. I believe the general target was Summer '09, so they've still got a good few months at least, and dropping back to autumn or winter wouldn't be too bad since its a beast of a game.
Does the porting of BioShock reflect any development on the front of UE3?  

Are engine-specific problems relative to Mac ports?  I wasn't aware, so I'm asking.

UE3 opens up lots of games INCLUDING the new Batman Arkham Asylum.  

I remember the first demo of UE3 at E3 around the time the world had the GeForce 6800 series (or 6-series if you prefer).  I also remember thinking that hardware would have to advance a couple of generations before computers could handle that level of graphical goodness.  Well, I was right!  When I finally got Gears of War for the PC I had an 8800 GT and it could run it perfectly.  I doubt my old 6800 GT could say the same. So, aiming a couple of years out worked for Epic.  Too bad it didn't for Crytek.

#50 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 15 August 2009 - 09:03 AM

Bioshock is a different beast to most other UE3 games because its UE2.5 with bits of UE3 thrown in, plus a lot of custom work on water effects and Havok physics...
So it doesn't really have much bearing on other UE3 games.

I don't really get what you mean with "Are engine-specific problems relative to Mac ports?"

When UT3 finally gets released on mac, that would mean that Epic would be able to license UE3. Except that the codebase has been advanced to UE3.1 for GoW2, so I mean... any future licensees would have to wait on Gordon to update the mac codebase... Older UE3 games shouldn't be too bad, so long as they haven't played around with the innards of the engine too much.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#51 ltcommander.data

ltcommander.data

    Positronic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 12:43 PM

If the core UE3 is ported to Mac it'll probably make it easier to port future games, but probably wouldn't help port existing games much except serving as a reference since they'd be using older UE3 builds probably with custom modifications.

http://forums.eidosg...ead.php?t=88087

For Batman Arkham Asylum, it seems Eidos is open to bringing it to Mac regardless of official UE3 status, since they dropped a hint to a Mac version when the Windows system requirements were released. If Feral isn't too busy with Bioshock, I'd be inclined to think they would be handling it given their previous association with Eidos games and the Batman franchise with Lego Batman. Perhaps porting Bioshock will be a plus for them as well in terms of experience.

http://icculus.org/~icculus/resume.txt

In terms of UTIII, I'm actually very concerned that it's been cancelled. I'm almost positive that Ryan Gordon's resume used to list handling the port of UTIII and Gears of War as part of his previous projects. However, both references no longer appear in his resume. Either I was seeing things, he removed them since they aren't released yet or they are dead projects.

http://www.devklog.n...ially-released/

On a related note, I'm disappointed that Snow Leopard may not include full OpenGL 3.0 support at least reports from developer builds don't show it. In terms of porting games and other DirectX accelerated applications to Mac, it'd be very helpful if Apple supported OpenGL 3.2 as soon as possible. The OpenGL 3.2 adds features to make it easier to port Direct3D titles to OpenGL so this is definitely something to push for to help Mac gaming gain momentum. It might also help tip the scales for companies like Autodesk who have already expressed interest in expanding AutoCAD into the Mac market. OpenGL 3.2 works with all DX10 hardware so the installed base is already in place.

#52 J'nathus

J'nathus

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts

Posted 15 August 2009 - 04:48 PM

So, what you're saying is yes and no.  *whew* Glad you cleared that up. I was worried it'd be confusing.

I know about the Bioshock being hybrid 2.5, etc . . . That's what was throwing me off about your referencing it being something to do with UE3 and how that might reflect on future ports.  

Do I get your drift correctly that the wait on UE3 games is the actual UE3 port to Mac by Epic themselves?

UT3 is fun and all, but not really worth this kind of wait IMHO.  Gears of War I played on the X-Box 360 and the PC... I have to say it plays better with the controller... it feels strangely disjointed on the PC (although it did run well).

#53 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 15 August 2009 - 05:30 PM

View PostJ, on August 15th 2009, 11:48 PM, said:

Do I get your drift correctly that the wait on UE3 games is the actual UE3 port to Mac by Epic themselves?

Yes, pretty much.
Basically, since Bioshock is such a strange mix, any work thats done porting it won't really be applicable to any other title (except maybe a little bit to Bioshock 2).

As to porting other UE3 games to the mac, I think it might have some kind of stigma attached to it now. UT3 has, to all intents and purposes, been ported bar some optimisations and debugging, but its been held back and back and back. I don't know if the rest of the industry knows why, but its being hushed up for whatever reason.
And if you were thinking of porting a fairly straight forward UE3 game, but decided to wait for UE3 to be finished on the mac, so that you could get the source code direct from Epic, instead of having to work from the PC version of whatever game it is, then you're on tender hooks stalling and stalling because UE3 is still just around the corner.

In many ways, this is far more annoying than Havok and Gamespy were a few years back. At least then we knew who to blame and why certain games wouldn't come across. Now we haven't got a bloody clue what the hold up it. And its not as if many people care about these games any more!
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#54 dr.zeissler

dr.zeissler

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Location:GERMANY

Posted 16 August 2009 - 04:29 AM

i think we should not talk about ut3 and gow anymore and not buy it if/when it comes out.
this is the only way to show the publishers that we don't like this behavior.
 iMac 2.93C2D ATI-4850 4GB 640GB BT AP SD
 MacbookPro 2.4C2D 9600GT 4GB 250GB BT AP SD
 iPod Video 30GB - Airport Extreme - Synology 406 1.6TB@Raid5

#55 The Liberator

The Liberator

    Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3707 posts
  • Steam Name:Meriones
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 16 August 2009 - 06:09 AM

View PostJ, on August 15th 2009, 11:15 PM, said:

…So, aiming a couple of years out worked for Epic.  Too bad it didn't for Crytek.
I am interested in what you mean, would you care to elaborate?

View Postdr.zeissler, on August 16th 2009, 08:29 PM, said:

i think we should not talk about ut3 and gow anymore and not buy it if/when it comes out.
this is the only way to show the publishers that we don't like this behavior.
Do you not think that is at least a little harsh?

Liberator.

iMac: 2.8GHz i7 | 16GB RAM | 10.10.5 | ATI Radeon HD 4850M | 512MB VRAM

Custom: 3.4 GHz i5 | 16GB RAM | Win 7 SP 1 | nVidia GeForce GTX 660 OCII | 2GB VRAM


We hang in D.C. with them CIA killers

Baraka Flacka Flames - Head of the State


#56 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 August 2009 - 08:32 AM

He means that these days, you can quite happily run a UE3 engine on a fairly mid ranged GPU with most settings turned up and at a high resolution.
Meanwhile Crysis is still a pig of a game to run unless you've got a high end card from the last year or so.

I think it's a little harsh to completely ignore UT3 and GoW from now on. After all, CMR, Fable and B&W2 each took Feral a good few years to port, and we've only been waiting a year and a half so far for UT3. What was annoying then, though, was that the release dates kept getting pushed back. What's annoying here  is that there isn't an intel transtion or a change of developers here to blame, there's an unknown shadow hovering over the release and preventing it from coming out and there isn't even vaguely a hint as to what it might be.

Maybe  Epic's pulled the plug?
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#57 J'nathus

J'nathus

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts

Posted 16 August 2009 - 09:46 AM

View PostThe Liberator, on August 16th 2009, 05:09 AM, said:

I am interested in what you mean, would you care to elaborate?
Teflon nailed it.  Pretty much everything (well any 'gaming machine')can handle the UE3 based games these days.  What shocks me is the life nVidia has breathed into my 8800 GT.  When I first played BioShock, I had to set it to 1280x800 and dial back a few things to keep it running smoothly.  Now, I can set it to 1680x1050 and it runs perfectly.  Same thing for Black and White 2 (although that's not a UE3 based game). Recent driver revisions have even sped up Mirror's Edge, which was already running at a near perfect 60 fps at 1680x1050. I even tried it on a 1920x1080 monitor and it still ran well. All-in-all... I have to say nVidia has been good to me with this card.  When I build again, it WILL be an nVidia based solution.

On another note... it looks like Crysis has gone the way of the dodo.  I don't see a lot of sites using it as a benchmark anymore.  It was too forgettable of a game with far too intense graphical requirements to survive.  I hope the new CryEngine does better.

#58 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 24 August 2009 - 03:53 PM

View Postltcommander.data, on August 16th 2009, 04:43 AM, said:

On a related note, I'm disappointed that Snow Leopard may not include full OpenGL 3.0 support at least reports from developer builds don't show it.
That's pretty meaningless without stating which features are missing.

#59 The Liberator

The Liberator

    Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3707 posts
  • Steam Name:Meriones
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 24 August 2009 - 05:19 PM

View PostJ, on August 17th 2009, 01:46 AM, said:

Teflon nailed it.  Pretty much everything (well any 'gaming machine')can handle the UE3 based games these days.  What shocks me is the life nVidia has breathed into my 8800 GT.  When I first played BioShock, I had to set it to 1280x800 and dial back a few things to keep it running smoothly.  Now, I can set it to 1680x1050 and it runs perfectly.  Same thing for Black and White 2 (although that's not a UE3 based game). Recent driver revisions have even sped up Mirror's Edge, which was already running at a near perfect 60 fps at 1680x1050. I even tried it on a 1920x1080 monitor and it still ran well. All-in-all... I have to say nVidia has been good to me with this card.  When I build again, it WILL be an nVidia based solution.

On another note... it looks like Crysis has gone the way of the dodo.  I don't see a lot of sites using it as a benchmark anymore.  It was too forgettable of a game with far too intense graphical requirements to survive.  I hope the new CryEngine does better.
Hmmm, okay. Maketh me think.

Thanks, Liberator.

iMac: 2.8GHz i7 | 16GB RAM | 10.10.5 | ATI Radeon HD 4850M | 512MB VRAM

Custom: 3.4 GHz i5 | 16GB RAM | Win 7 SP 1 | nVidia GeForce GTX 660 OCII | 2GB VRAM


We hang in D.C. with them CIA killers

Baraka Flacka Flames - Head of the State


#60 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 24 August 2009 - 06:44 PM

View PostTesseract, on August 24th 2009, 10:53 PM, said:

That's pretty meaningless without stating which features are missing.

Think of it like this. OGL 2.1 is DirectX 9c. OGL 3.0 is DirectX 10. Sort of.
For more on the matter, this is a very interesting read about whats gone wrong in the OGL camp, so right in the DX camp and how the future looks for both. After reading it, you can sort of see why Apple aren't keeping on top of things. OGL development is too slow and too far behind DX10 with a total rewrite always on the cards, why should they invest so much time on implementing features only for them to have to start afresh at an indeterminate point in the next few years?

Either way DX 9 functionality is still very much current given the huge numbers still using XP and both 360 and PS3 being on DX9 level GPUs. UE3 is basically DX9 with one or two DX10 features bolted on by developers, and even idtech5 is eschewing DX10 in favour of 9...

So at the end of the day, whats the point for Apple to add some barely needed functions? Im not saying that they should switch to DX, but that they're far more invested in OpenCL right now than OpenGL. After all they have a large amount of control over the former and the latter is floundering.
Here's hoping that Khronos either sort themselves and OGL3 out or give up and hand the reins over to a company which can get the job done even if it does p*ss off a few people running CAD.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor