PDA

View Full Version : EPIC Games unveils new game G.O.W!!!


danRod
05-14-2005, 09:02 PM
http://gameinformer.com/News/Story/200505/N05.0512.1902.42028.htm

(make sure to follow the screenshots link)

Check those guys out at Epic man!, absolutely awesome!! Rumor is, that everything seen in the screenshots is actual game play!! Looks like the UnrealEngine3 is as powerful as they said it was!!!:bounce: :bounce: :thumbsup: :buttrock:

Anyone know if this is going to be shown at E3? Or if there are any other screens out there??

archerx
05-14-2005, 09:08 PM
oh my ! that made my pc cry because it would probably go down on its knees and then some trying to run that !

also is that motion blur in the first screen shot ? its about damn time games start using motion blur !

artist71
05-14-2005, 09:16 PM
The word is that all of those images are 100% in game. They use the Unreal 3 engine. I believe this will be on the X-Box 360.

Cheers yall

lildragon
05-14-2005, 09:17 PM
Hopefully not an exclusive, would love to see it on Ps3. But Epic's been tight with M$ lately.

-lild

PhilOsirus
05-14-2005, 09:18 PM
Like I said before great graphics is fun and all but I want to see how characters react with the environments now, such as in the second picture, what happens when you walk over those rocks? Will you be blocked? Will you have to jump? Will the character float in the air? Will his feet detec the rocks and be placed accordingly? If not all of the fancy graphics are just going to clash with such issues.

By the way I already saw an in-game video of this thing at www.gamesarefun.com (http://www.gamesarefun.com), you can probably find it elsewhere too.

danRod
05-14-2005, 09:43 PM
I remember seeing the physics demos and the gameplay shots around GDC this year, and all I got to say is that I am sure GOW will utilize that technology greatly!! The game play vids was absolutely insane!! When I saw the video I thought it was cinematics, but as you watched the video you realized the seamless transition from the the cuts to gameplay, thus reveiling that everything was indeed in game and running beautifully!! Looks like E3 is going to be awesome this year!!! Cant wait to see the Epic booth!!

Geta-Ve
05-14-2005, 09:46 PM
hrm... i give up im just gonna drool :p

if you guys say these are ingame I will believe you!

Although I was under the impression these were (or at least the first screenie) was u3.. weird

anyways, phil has a point.. especially with these good gfx its going to look ultra weird having the character suddenly jump on top of the ruble on the ground.. but sadly thats what i see happening..

either that or you get blocked, or you go right through..

man I want to see some actual wall damage being dealt by bullets and such.. if you cant find a way into a place I wanna shoot my way in. Dont have the key? I think 2 rockets look like the proper key to me.

ah well these look great either way.. still wheres the UI? haha

Solothores
05-14-2005, 09:59 PM
it seems that most of the vid stuff what we have seen from the tech demos of U3 engine so far, was pretty much stuff for G.O.W.

Cheers
Solo

dominicqwek
05-14-2005, 10:01 PM
Guys, check out the trailer if you have not. It's mind blowing. Now I'm getting xbox 360 for sure.

lildragon
05-14-2005, 10:03 PM
If you want to see some in game graphics for 360 along the lines of the U3 engine, head over to www.gametrailers.com (http://www.gametrailers.com) and watch the Condemned footage. Reminds me of Chronicles of Riddick (the game that made me love FPS again)

-lild

Geta-Ve
05-14-2005, 10:52 PM
just watched both the GOW and the condemed trailer.. firstly condemed looks alright.. neat but nothing im interested in..

gow looks insane! I love the run of the big monster at the end.. i was just like HELL YA! :D

Heber
05-14-2005, 11:22 PM
http://www.gamesarefun.com/games/xbox2/gearsofwar/teaser.avi

gears of war is the most impressive xbox360 graphics ive seen yet! i cant wait to get this!, theres a few more titles that impress me as well check out full auto/alan wake/ghost recon 3 and test drive they all look very promising but i hope they play as good as they look.

Gamoron
05-14-2005, 11:50 PM
OMFG!

Those look so nice! And its a console!

EDIT: Even if the gameplay sucks, technology like this is simply amazing for all us artists out there. Us indies just need the tools to put our work out there on those consoles.

The future looks bright and promising for video games. It'll be considered as much an art as film soon.

richcz3
05-15-2005, 12:02 AM
Like I said before great graphics is fun and all but...
I'll have to agree with the animated villain.gif. Games are focusing entirely too much on model detail and not enough on how they interact with the impressive game worlds. Such realistic characters that turn on a dime when running or pop up an down when walking up stairs detracts from all the detail.

artist71
05-15-2005, 02:32 AM
I'll have to agree with the animated villain.gif. Games are focusing entirely too much on model detail and not enough on how they interact with the impressive game worlds. Such realistic characters that turn on a dime when running or pop up an down when walking up stairs detracts from all the detail.



I do agree with you mostly. However Game studios don't focus on art and just bail on gameplay. The graphics engines are always going to get better. No engine will ever improve on gameplay. That is up to the designers, animators, and producers. You can't create an engine that impliments awesome gameplay. Sometimes studios ship a game and feel that it is fun and looks great. But you never really know till you get to read those reviews. Everybody just gives there all. Sometimes the graphics are great and the game is just not fun. You just never know.

I know what your saying about charcters turning on a dime and weird interaction with worlds. It would be nice if those shortcuts were not taken. It does kinda kill the feel of the game.

Well thats my 2 cents. Cheers!

Solothores
05-15-2005, 07:50 AM
If you want to see some in game graphics for 360 along the lines of the U3 engine, head over to www.gametrailers.com (http://www.gametrailers.com) and watch the Condemned footage. Reminds me of Chronicles of Riddick (the game that made me love FPS again)

-lild

lildragon, have you seen the trailer for Starbreeze's next title "the darkness"? Go check it out here (http://xbox360movies.ign.com/xbox360/video/article/613/613700/DarknessTrailerFinal_qthigh.mov), it looks gorgeous. :)

cheers
Solo

BillSpradlin
05-15-2005, 08:15 AM
Looks like you have to be an "insider" for that link.

Solothores
05-15-2005, 08:20 AM
Hm that's too sad - maybe the low resolution one works, all versions can be found here (http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/720/720416/vids_1.html)

cheers
Solo

Kion
05-15-2005, 09:11 AM
heres a link to some gameplay footage enjoy!!! damn e3 is going to be good! http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/747/747891/vids_1.html

lildragon
05-15-2005, 10:57 AM
lildragon, have you seen the trailer for Starbreeze's next title "the darkness"? Go check it out here (http://xbox360movies.ign.com/xbox360/video/article/613/613700/DarknessTrailerFinal_qthigh.mov), it looks gorgeous. :)

cheers
Solo

Saw a small clip before, but dang this is very cool. E3 can't come soon enough :)

-lild

ghoul
05-15-2005, 04:11 PM
"Like I said before great graphics is fun and all but I want to see how characters react with the environments now...."

does anyone know of any game or demo of some physics engine that is capable of using dynamics for characters all the time, so there is no feet sliding and such things that destroy all good looking characters?

Geta-Ve
05-15-2005, 05:14 PM
does anyone know of any game or demo of some physics engine that is capable of using dynamics for characters all the time, so there is no feet sliding and such things that destroy all good looking characters?

I think that was his point, games have to start doing more than just gfx and good gameplay (hmm that sounds awefully stupid...)

character/enviroment interaction!

archerx
05-15-2005, 05:22 PM
well there was red faction where you could destroy the world and that was pretty cool i wish more games were like that, red faction 2 sucked because it was consolized and lost the feeling of the first one....

Geta-Ve
05-15-2005, 05:26 PM
well there was red faction where you could destroy the world and that was pretty cool i wish more games were like that, red faction 2 sucked because it was consolized and lost the feeling of the first one....

they were both console games though... I dont understand what you mean?

But actually the second red faction was pretty good. good gfx, sound, control, etc. the only thing I disliked about it was that you couldn't blow as much up in the second one.. it was all down to pillars, windows, and select walls. You couldn't really cause mayhem. Although to be fair, it was damn fun when you shot off a few rockets/rounds and had the walls break apart in front of you, heh.

ShadowHunter
05-15-2005, 05:28 PM
does anyone know of any game or demo of some physics engine that is capable of using dynamics for characters all the time, so there is no feet sliding and such things that destroy all good looking characters?

Prince of Persia : Sands of Time, had some code to make sure that the prince's feet always touched the ground when he was running down/up stair cases etc. Not quite what you were asking for, but it seems developers now tend to spend time to make sure that the game characters don't hover :D

I think if all the physics of motion (walking, running etc) work properly, that it would take away from the fun of the game. For example, when playing an FPS on a PC (e.g. CS) the turns that you do with your mouse to look around while running are not physically possible (e.g. swing 180deg in under a 1/10 of a sec!). Or imagine running, right now you can instantly change direction in a FPS, in real physics sims you'd probably have to lean on your side and turn on a circlular trajectory (but how would that be realized with controllers without taking away the control from the gamer?)

Personally, I don't like the move to more real world sims. I loved playing POP:SOT because of all the gravity defying stunts (running along walls, jumping 4 feet into the air etc.)
I love mario games too, because they are fun not because they try to emulate the real world! Imagine if Mario was only able to jump 1 feet into the air, and could not chage direction in mid-jumps! The only exception I see is racing and flightsim games. I could go on like this 4ever :scream:

PhilOsirus
05-15-2005, 06:38 PM
Well I didn't say games had to be super realistic, but if you make the graphics very realistic while still keeping all of the usual environmental interaction limitations, such as your gun pass through halfway through walls when you stand next to one, or the character just stops suddenly when you run into a wall with no little transition animation, etc etc, it will clash and make all the time spent on making realistic graphics and particular animations pointless. Nobody said that in the movie "The Incredibles" the characters didn't look like real humans, but they did say that about "Final Fantasy TSW" you know?

Keith Osborn
05-15-2005, 06:43 PM
I think if all the physics of motion (walking, running etc) work properly, that it would take away from the fun of the game. For example, when playing an FPS on a PC (e.g. CS) the turns that you do with your mouse to look around while running are not physically possible (e.g. swing 180deg in under a 1/10 of a sec!). Or imagine running, right now you can instantly change direction in a FPS, in real physics sims you'd probably have to lean on your side and turn on a circlular trajectory (but how would that be realized with controllers without taking away the control from the gamer?)

It's an interesting situation for sure. When the games start looking more like the real world, you start expecting them to behave more like the real world. There may be a happy middle ground somewhere. I think "POP: Sands of Time" was able to achieve that compromise pretty well.

richcz3
05-15-2005, 08:03 PM
Well now that you can get degrees in gaming, maybe some schools will start programs that start to work outside current game design conventions. If the US Government and other governments are going to pay for development or licensing of game engines for training and recruiting, we may see the bar get raised on all levels out of neccesity.

A greater degree of simulation would become and integral part of gaming. I believe the US Army game wil be using the Unreal 3 engine in its next release. The UNreal 3 engine will support the physics processor. It's a matter of time before we have a dedicated AI processor.

archerx
05-15-2005, 09:23 PM
they were both console games though... I dont understand what you mean?

But actually the second red faction was pretty good. good gfx, sound, control, etc. the only thing I disliked about it was that you couldn't blow as much up in the second one.. it was all down to pillars, windows, and select walls. You couldn't really cause mayhem. Although to be fair, it was damn fun when you shot off a few rockets/rounds and had the walls break apart in front of you, heh.

well yes but RF2 changed everything that made RF cool, i think RF had more style and more complex and a better game, i gave up on RF2 after a couple hours of play, wishing it was more like RF1 which i beat....

and i think RF1 was developed PC game first PS2 game second, but RF2 was PS2 first PC second.

richcz3
05-15-2005, 09:59 PM
... i think RF1 was developed PC game first PS2 game second, but RF2 was PS2 first PC second...
That whole design for PC port to Console and design for Console port to PC can be a hot button issue on some forums. I think this next generation of consoles are going to widen the console adoption for developers for the next two years. I don't know if PC only development will be viable market to much long after that. That comes from someone who doesn't own a console and plays on a PC. There is something to be said about developing for dedicated hardware.

EpShot
05-15-2005, 10:08 PM
everybody always says that when the next generation of consoles comes out. But last i checked, my computer kicks the crap out of the x-box. the most powerful console out right now.

The thing is the next generation of consoles will kick the crap out of my PC.. but only for about a year, tops. then i'll upgrade, and once again, the games will look better on my pc. IF they make consoles upgradable, then maybe.. but this is why i stick away from consoles. that an di can't stand controler input, especialy for FPS.

PhilOsirus
05-15-2005, 11:45 PM
Well have fun spending thousands of dollar to only improove the graphics of the games you play:p

richcz3
05-16-2005, 12:32 AM
Yeah, the upgrade path for the PC to remain a viable game platform has always been steep.
If I didn't work in 3D, Video and graphics I would have needed to stop my PC gaming about 6 years ago. A consoles dedicated hardware with a shelf life of 4+ years is much more desireable to a publisher than the PC enthusiast gaming market that advances every 6 to eight months.

The short comings of the console remain their control schemes, lack of game mods, and lack of network (LAN) capability. Since a big chunk of change will be made with online multiplayer subscriptions I don't expect consoles will ever offer that level of control. What a PC user gets in an expansion packs, Console players pay for an entirely new game. It's not hard to see the teh money in consoles.

archerx
05-16-2005, 01:32 AM
Well have fun spending thousands of dollar to only improove the graphics of the games you play:p

we also use our pc's to do work :twisted: so its 2 birds one expensive stone... better looking games + faster rendering and viewports....

EpShot
05-16-2005, 01:58 AM
Well have fun spending thousands of dollar to only improove the graphics of the games you play:p

well, that is what people do. and besides you can if you are careful you can get very good rigs for around a thousand(kiks the xboxs ass, and its still the top system out). and while a lot of people can't afford it. a lot of people can. and wil continue to buy and play games that will be a lot better than console games. and not just graphics. more power also means better ai, larger levels lower load times. improved resolution and physics.

you may say that it irrevelant now becaus eof how powerful teh consoles are, but i heard the same stuff when the ps2 and xbox came out, but wait 2 years.

FlyByNight
05-16-2005, 03:15 AM
this is the game that i have been waiting for all my life.... this is the SH*T :drool:

i dont see how anyone is muttering a word of complaint... of course its not gona bloody animate as good as it looks... these photos are hyper realistic... it would be impossible to have hyper realistic animation.... i dont see that happening for decades, purely because we wouldnt even know how to play a game that animated realistically...

how do u play a character who scratches his nose, how do you play a character that twitches cos he jus stepped on something sharp, how do u play a character that trips up and needs to keep his balance?? realistic animation is something that will not happen in a game for along time because it is nigh impossible to even fathom playing let alone program for...

stop expecting the world in a cup delivered to your door and apreciate whats here... i wont sleep tonight after seeing that video... the possibilities.....!!

Psyhke
05-16-2005, 03:45 AM
everybody always says that when the next generation of consoles comes out. But last i checked, my computer kicks the crap out of the x-box. the most powerful console out right now.

The thing is the next generation of consoles will kick the crap out of my PC.. but only for about a year, tops. then i'll upgrade, and once again, the games will look better on my pc. IF they make consoles upgradable, then maybe.. but this is why i stick away from consoles. that an di can't stand controler input, especialy for FPS.

There's another phenomenon exclusive to consoles though, which doesn't get stated often enough, and that is that while it's inevitable that within a year of nextgen console releases it will be possible to build a PC with higher specs, it does not mean that developers will make games that ASSUME an audience that has a PC with those ultra high-end specs.

Console game developers have the luxury of being able to assume everyone will have the same high specs of the console, and therefore have more freedom to push the code to the most theoretical extreme that it can muster.

PhilOsirus
05-16-2005, 05:20 AM
how do u play a character who scratches his nose, how do you play a character that twitches cos he jus stepped on something sharp, how do u play a character that trips up and needs to keep his balance??

This has been done before, it's just that more of it is needed now with such graphics.

Example: In an FPS, the character would automatically squint if the sun is facing him, reducing the blindness effect partially but blurring the player's vision. Problematic gameplay-wise? No, it's realistic and just like in the real world you could lower your sunblocking visor, which even adds some gameplay. And with some good AI the process can be automated so that the player automatically lowers his head to avoid direct eye contact with the sunlight and raises it again when the sun is not in the way, unless the player is currently moving the head.

This kind of programming might sound too complex but it can be re-used in various games and built on. I'm sure we will see more of this in the new generation of games and more and more will be added which will build on this realistic aspect of environmental reactions.

Stonepilot
05-16-2005, 06:13 AM
That looks pretty damn impressive. I hope its in game stuff unlike the pre render stuff that EA has been releasing and has fail to mention it to anyone.

EpShot
05-16-2005, 09:48 AM
There's another phenomenon exclusive to consoles though, which doesn't get stated often enough, and that is that while it's inevitable that within a year of nextgen console releases it will be possible to build a PC with higher specs, it does not mean that developers will make games that ASSUME an audience that has a PC with those ultra high-end specs.

Console game developers have the luxury of being able to assume everyone will have the same high specs of the console, and therefore have more freedom to push the code to the most theoretical extreme that it can muster.

except even with my computer far beyond the xbox, i still can't run all the new games at the top settings. so as far as i'm concerned, thats a moot point.

now i'm not bashing consoles or anything, they have their place, particuraly with low costs. however, there will always be a PC game market, no question about it.

BillSpradlin
05-16-2005, 12:43 PM
"Console game developers have the luxury of being able to assume everyone will have the same high specs of the console, and therefore have more freedom to push the code to the most theoretical extreme that it can muster."

Last time I checked, game developers for the PC have different modes for different hardware. You can turn the settings way up if you have the rig to do it, or play it at nominal settings.

It is true however that there is a lot more that goes into developing a game for the PC than consoles. Many more variables involved and the hardware debugging alone is quite time consuming compared to consoles.

Psyhke
05-16-2005, 06:28 PM
True about the higher settings/modes for PC games. But I think the kinds of effects you see from adjusting those settings all the way up are different than the kinds of things that are possible if developing for a higher common denominator from the ground up. I'm not stating that as fact, just my impression. I play mostly RTS games on the PC, and the higher settings (which my PC can generally handle :) ) do look nicer, no doubt, but they seem to only effect a narrower set of variables than what I was thinking of when I made my first comment. E.G. the settings don't adjust things like how complex the a.i. is, or physics that effect the actual gameplay in a meaningful way, etc.

BillSpradlin
05-16-2005, 09:29 PM
That's because AI and Physics are considered essential game play factors in which everyone should have access to, whereas higher resolution textures, more complex particle and lighting effects are not considered "essential" game play requirements for the "average" joe gamer.

PhilOsirus
05-17-2005, 01:07 AM
Sorry to return on topic but is Gears of Wars also going to be on PS3? That seems to be what IGN is saying but I'm not sure anymore. News overflow!

novadude
05-17-2005, 01:35 AM
Sorry to return on topic but is Gears of Wars also going to be on PS3? That seems to be what IGN is saying but I'm not sure anymore. News overflow!

I think they are referring to the Unreal engine being on PS3 as well, as the topic is about UT2k7.

CGTalk Moderation
05-17-2005, 01:35 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.