PDA

View Full Version : Halo 4 + CryEngine 3


iBuzz7S
09-16-2012, 02:49 AM
Looks a little something like this.

http://www.gameranx.com/img/12-Jul/halo-4-in-cryengine-3-1.jpg

Bee-a-u-2-full

LickableLemons7
09-16-2012, 03:00 AM
Where do you find this stuff? Jesus.

fax5jrj
09-16-2012, 03:03 AM
I know. This looks amazing.

I think I'd rather have Halo's engine, because it doesn't have that annoying pop-in pop-out shit going on.

They might have fixed it in Crysis 3, but is Crysis 2 it was distracting. I would rather have an engine that ran efficiently than better looking. Halo 4 looks beautiful anyway.

Ty-Rex
09-16-2012, 03:04 AM
Is there more? That looks incredible.

iBuzz7S
09-16-2012, 03:13 AM
Where do you find this stuff? Jesus.
Ha ha. Well I thought it was new, but it's actually over a month old. Just came across it on Twitter.

Is there more? That looks incredible.
This is the only one.

Just realised, it was done by a developer at DICE. :eek:

http://www.artbyrens.com/

That's his portfolio.

Hitman H94
09-16-2012, 08:53 AM
Daym that looks good.

Vectorman953
09-16-2012, 08:59 AM
It's like they gave the wheel to JJ Abrams this time around

Seriously though, I'm not a fan of that amount of lens flare. The light just doesn't seem 'right' to me, I guess.
But goddamn if those aren't some beautiful games. Definitely worth saving and adding to the desktop-wallpaper rotation.

Homaz
09-16-2012, 03:18 PM
This looks pretty awesome. I'm excited how Halo 4 is gonna look like in the end!!

CMCX360
09-16-2012, 03:20 PM
CryEngine is soooooooo overrated. It hasn't been used in one good game yet.

Homaz
09-16-2012, 03:24 PM
Well, Crysis 2 wasn't worse than Halo 3 or Halo:Reach ...

iBuzz7S
09-16-2012, 03:26 PM
CryEngine is soooooooo overrated. It hasn't been used in one good game yet.
I would like to think Far Cry was a good game. Same goes for Crysis and Nexuiz.

CMCX360
09-16-2012, 03:46 PM
I would like to think Far Cry was a good game. Same goes for Crysis and Nexuiz.

All terrible games made by the same terrible company.

LickableLemons7
09-16-2012, 07:20 PM
Just realised, it was done by a developer at DICE. :eek:

http://www.artbyrens.com/

That's his portfolio.

There's a lot of great stuff in there. Always nice to see a Halo fan appreciate the franchise in different ways.

CryEngine is soooooooo overrated. It hasn't been used in one good game yet.

I liked Far Cry. But that's just my opinion, not like it matters to anyone else. And strangers on the Internet can't change my opinion so easily.

Joker0fLife
09-16-2012, 07:27 PM
That's actually pretty cool. If only that DICE artist had a say in turning down the brightness of EVERYTHING in Battlefield...


I like Far Cry as much as I like men. But that's just my opinion, and my opinion sucks. And strangers on the Internet can actually very easily change my opinion.

So blunt and forward :p

xXmyxxmastaXx
09-16-2012, 09:02 PM
UDK All the way!

DarkReign2021
09-16-2012, 11:20 PM
I enjoyed Far Cry 1 and and Crysis 1, but other than that Crytek doesn't seem to be much of a developer. That said, this is an amazing piece of work. I agree the glare could be toned down a little, but it's an artistic preference more so than a flaw. I would love to see a live tech demo for this just for the hell of it.

DEG23
09-17-2012, 01:52 AM
...And people say there is no rush for next gen:p

All terrible games made by the same terrible company.

The Cry Engine itself produces amazing results, the graphics in Crysis 2 were remarkable. Whether the games are good is a matter of opinion?

fastNcurious
09-17-2012, 04:27 AM
The Cry Engine itself produces amazing results, the graphics in Crysis 2 were remarkable. Whether the games are good is a matter of opinion?

AI enemies being unable to navigate properly around obstacles is a big plus in my book. Nothing is more satisfying than watching them walk insistently into barriers like angry hyperactive sleepwalkers.


But yeah, the graphics were pretty good. Too bad they didn't spend as much effort on the other aspects of their games.

Der Fuhrer
09-17-2012, 12:42 PM
Why is anyone even talking about this? If Halo's engine has not changed significantly in 11 years, why all the sudden would they change it now?

iBuzz7S
09-17-2012, 01:39 PM
Why is anyone even talking about this?
Because this is how Halo would/could look with CryEngine 3? :confused:

fastNcurious
09-18-2012, 12:03 AM
Why is anyone even talking about this? If Halo's engine has not changed significantly in 11 years, why all the sudden would they change it now?

Because this is how Halo would/could look with CryEngine 3? :confused:

And it lets us imagine what Halo could look like on the new Xbox....

DarkReign2021
09-19-2012, 09:56 PM
...And people say there is no rush for next gen



The Cry Engine itself produces amazing results, the graphics in Crysis 2 were remarkable. Whether the games are good is a matter of opinion?

The problem is in actually utilizing the power of next-gen consoles and the development costs that result in that level of development. Sure companies like Guerilla, Bungie, and Epic are good at utilizing the power of next-gen consoles, but when you look at most of the games we get these days they haven't even fully utilized the consoles we have currently. Why get new consoles when 9/10 developers won't even be able to use them effectively while at the same time the the new development kits and handling all-new hardware (plus the lack of sales due to people unwilling to commit to new consoles until later in their lifespan) will only serve to drive the cost of development upward while the willingness to take a risk on creative new IPs will only be driven lower in favor of more sequels, prequels, and spin-offs to the same 15 games we already play for years to come. I'm all in favor of a new Xbox for the simple fact that the 8GB storage space that the HDDVD uses in the 360 format simply isn't enough. All we truly need is a Blu-Ray player to be added to the console's format support registry and the 360 and PS3 would honestly be set to go for another 5-10 years while the rest of the community catches up and development expenses can level out. The world's economy certainly needs more time to balance out so we can see a day where releasing a game like Kingdoms of Amalur or L.A. Noire don't result in a company being completely shut down for no reason.

LickableLemons7
09-19-2012, 10:51 PM
The problem is in actually utilizing the power of next-gen consoles and the development costs that result in that level of development.

Which makes me confused about the WiiU.

The Wii definately needed a push when the hype died out 2 years after release. It excelled in promoting a more social gaming environment, but having to mop up sweat in the living room after a 3 hour Wii Tennis tournament on Saturday nights made the fun-o-meter tank for me.

Nintendo seems to be sitting on a lot of money, in my eyes. So what's with the WiiU? It seems ok at a first glance, but Nintendo aren't trying to fly ahead like they tried to with the Wii. They aren't the first to implement a "tablet" gaming experiance. And the launch titles are terrible. New Super Mario Bros U doesn't seem as great of a jump as Galaxy was. And where's Zelda? Where's Metroid?

I'm just as dissapointed with the newly announced PS3 "Super Slim."

And then there's this.

http://www.xbox360achievements.org/news/news-12826-Microsoft-Holodeck-Patent-Reveals-the-Future-of-Games.html

JASEL84
09-20-2012, 02:48 PM
Halo 4 on Cry engine = dream !

Snowed
09-20-2012, 04:44 PM
The problem is in actually utilizing the power of next-gen consoles and the development costs that result in that level of development. Sure companies like Guerilla, Bungie, and Epic are good at utilizing the power of next-gen consoles, but when you look at most of the games we get these days they haven't even fully utilized the consoles we have currently. Why get new consoles when 9/10 developers won't even be able to use them effectively while at the same time the the new development kits and handling all-new hardware (plus the lack of sales due to people unwilling to commit to new consoles until later in their lifespan) will only serve to drive the cost of development upward while the willingness to take a risk on creative new IPs will only be driven lower in favor of more sequels, prequels, and spin-offs to the same 15 games we already play for years to come. I'm all in favor of a new Xbox for the simple fact that the 8GB storage space that the HDDVD uses in the 360 format simply isn't enough. All we truly need is a Blu-Ray player to be added to the console's format support registry and the 360 and PS3 would honestly be set to go for another 5-10 years while the rest of the community catches up and development expenses can level out. The world's economy certainly needs more time to balance out so we can see a day where releasing a game like Kingdoms of Amalur or L.A. Noire don't result in a company being completely shut down for no reason.

First of all, Bungie is not a particularly good developer graphically. Either they didn't care or they weren't able, but Halo has never been at the cutting edge of graphics.

We have pretty much fully utilized the current generation consoles. Graphical increases are negligible at best. In this regard, it's definitely time for an upgrade.

Making games for launch consoles is a great investment. Look at the sales of games at launch compared to now. Obviously some titles (like Halo, CoD, etc) sell more nowadays, but most titles don't sell more despite having millions more potential customers. Why? Because when a new console comes out there are not nearly as many games out, and the marketplace is full of consumers with money who very much desire to get the most out of their new consoles. They'll buy games they wouldn't otherwise buy later on.

DarkReign2021
09-21-2012, 12:51 PM
First of all, Bungie is not a particularly good developer graphically. Either they didn't care or they weren't able, but Halo has never been at the cutting edge of graphics.

We have pretty much fully utilized the current generation consoles. Graphical increases are negligible at best. In this regard, it's definitely time for an upgrade.

Making games for launch consoles is a great investment. Look at the sales of games at launch compared to now. Obviously some titles (like Halo, CoD, etc) sell more nowadays, but most titles don't sell more despite having millions more potential customers. Why? Because when a new console comes out there are not nearly as many games out, and the marketplace is full of consumers with money who very much desire to get the most out of their new consoles. They'll buy games they wouldn't otherwise buy later on.

In regards to your last paragraph, it's a two-way street really. While some smaller games may get more attention due to the lack of titles, the issue results in the large AAA titles. The way games like that sells mean they won't be able to fully utilize a console launch. Like you said, games like Halo and CoD sell multiple times what the launch titles did and ever would've. Granted more people would probably jump ship to a new console IF a title like this were available for launch, but in the case of games like these we know they'll exist eventually, so buying the console anyway is only logical. People refrain from doing so because of financial purposes primarily and concern of what kind of content said console intends to produce. You can build a console on Halo, Forza, and Fable, but you can only appease people with them for so long before they demand something fresh and new. But new things require risk and most developers don't wish to take that risk because of how costly it can be to them if it fails and nobody buys it.

In regards to Bungie and the consoles being tapped out, I think the issue is you're looking at it strictly in regards to graphics. Graphics are only a very small part regardless of what the 10-year-old CoD players have to say about it. A consoles computing power can be stretched in multiple fashions and just because Bungie never graphically blew away the competition doesn't mean they didn't push the power of the console. You have to consider processing power as well. Think of how large and seamless all of the Halo levels are. Think of how many vehicles are moving, how many exploisions are occurring, keeping up with the vastly different AI characteristics of every enemy unit. Halo, which is graphically breathtaking in it's own unique way even if it doesn't run the most detailed models in the world, has always pushed the limits of what the 360 can do. I'm actually amazed they've managed to do what they have with Halo 4.

That said, I understand the console is tapped out to some developers, but the issue is that nobody else has tapped it out. Again, while a few games like Halo and Gears of War might have pushed the console to it's limits, most companies have not. I still see games come out with poor graphics, choppy animations, terrible framerate, tired mechanics, bland environments, etc... and while part of this problem can be placed on the developer itself, it still proves that developing for a console of the 360/PS3's hardware power is beyond the capabilities of most of the industry. So why create a whole new console for the 9 or 10 devs that can use it while the rest of them will continue to give us games that would've made the 360 laugh and say "That's all you got?"

I'm definitely no supporter of the WiiU as I think it's going to have the same consumer success and shelf-life as the Wii, but by having only the slightly-more-powerful-than-360 hardware is going to be an advantage to developers that use it.

Burnout x360a
09-21-2012, 12:55 PM
This looks pretty awesome. I'm excited how Halo 4 is gonna look like in the end!!

The screenshots seem to have a increase over Reach so i'm down.