|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which means you can view posts, but can't make any of your own.
Registration is easy and absolutely free, so why not join the longest-running Battlefield community on the web! |
| General Battlefield: 1942 Your thoughts on Battlefield: 1942; patches, vehicles, the community, people and more |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
11-04-2003, 09:06 PM
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Private 1st Class
 Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 111
 |
Battlefield Game Engine
Can anybody enlighten me on the game engine technologies used to run games like battelfield? I was told that the most superior game engine out at the moment is used in UT2003. If so, would battlefield benefit from it?
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003, 12:12 AM
|
#2 (permalink) | |
|
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,700
|
Re: Battlefield Game Engine
Quote:
UT2003 has the Unreal Warfare Engine from Epic, which is also used in Unreal 2 (i dont know which one is more uptodate) What could BF profit from the Unreal engine : Erhmm nothing ? If DICE used Unreal engine, they would have had to pay licencse + it would be unplayable even on high end PCs, and remember there are many ppl even complaining how much gfx power BF needs. So most superior is relative. The Unreal Engine can show great eye candy, but try making a BF map with it, which is much more bigger than any UT2003 Map, the greater view distance, terrain modelling, the vehicles models etc will make it unplayable.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003, 12:28 AM
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Colonel
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia.
Posts: 6,071
|
The most supirior will be the Source engine, not just for graphics but especially for MP. Remember that Valve have had over 5 years of mod makers pulling apart their code and streamlining it for optimized online gaming, not to mention the millions of beta testers than they have had thru all the half life mods.
__________________
 |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003, 12:30 AM
|
#4 (permalink) |
 General  Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,605
 |
Q3 engine reins supreme for netcode. Thats a fact. Carmack is god.
__________________
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989 |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003, 01:08 PM
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
General
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,166
 |
Yes, BF1942 runs on the Refractor 2 engine, which is an inhouse engine made by DICE (Digital Illusions CE). It's based on the Refractor 1 engine that was used in DICE's earlier game, Codename Eagle.
The strength of the Refractor 2 engine is the relatively large maps, good physics and vehicle handling. It's also very flexible, too bad you don't see that in BF1942. You should have seen the stuff I saw in Sweden  |
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003, 02:43 PM
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
Specialist
 Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Norway, Ulsteinvik
Posts: 245
  |
Quote:
__________________
\'halflife 2 is the biggest bowl of crap\' \'halflife 2 is relesed in england\' - www.Googlism.com |
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2003, 08:11 PM
|
#8 (permalink) | |
|
Private 1st Class
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 111
|
Quote:
I have been reading a little bit about new game engines that micking the physics of a human body e.g. when the player get killed and the body goes limp, the engine works out how the body falls in relation to its environment, i.e. it can fall in any number of ways instead of a pre-animated sequence. I'm sure battelfield uses pre-animation when human bodies fall around. The other interesting article I once read that the EA developers tried to incorporate dynamic environments in battlefield, for example, if a shell hits the ground it blows a crater. But abandoned it cause they found that it doens't work to well when played on the internet. Anybody enlighten me on that paticular subject? Shame it couldn't be incorporate... |
|
|
|
|
|
11-07-2003, 11:45 AM
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
General
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,166
|
Just want to point out that EA didn't actually develop anything but the patches for Battlefield.
The refractor 2 engine is very flexible in the way that it can be used for alot of different things, and it's really a shame that they won't allow you to mod more then what you can at the moment. I'm sure if you could take advantage of the full potential of the engine, mods would be far more customized then what you are seeing now. And yes, you are quite right about dynamic enviroments. Battlefield did have craters appearing after an artillery round hit it, buildings blowing up in pieces and such, but Battlefield was always planned to be a multiplayer game. That level of interactivity with the world would require alot of syncronizing, which again would lead to more lag. Alot of lag. So they took it out and focused on developing other aspects of the game. |
|
|
|
|
11-07-2003, 09:44 PM
|
#11 (permalink) |
|
Private 1st Class
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 111
|
Ahh the future. Dynamic environment would be something to look foward except some n00b grapping a tank and blowing craters into a pattern so as to spell his name. One thing I would like to see is corpses that don't dissapear after a short while. This works well on CounterStrike as you can see where the main battles have taken place, and with battlefield, it certainly would be a sight with burnt out tanks and corpses littering the landscape. I think we would appreciate what a tough battle it has been.
Rexxie, you know your stuff. What is the engine used to run Hitman? I liked hitman where some of the interaction level was quite high. It would be nice to see some those features in battlefield. |
|
|
|
|
11-08-2003, 01:30 AM
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
Sergeant Major
 Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 632
|
dammit i've always wished that they could have dynamic environments in battlefield! now i realize they could have. damn. i love the geo-mod in red faction I & II. you can just blast through shit, and also it takes a really lonmg time for the bodies to go away.
if ingle player BF had Dynamic Environments, i would not care about multiplayer at all! i can imagine trashing the germans at el al with the b-17. one moment... **Shudder** ooooohoheeeeee aaahhhhhhhh**Shudder** wow!*Shudder* aaanyway. to see craters from the massive destruction would be great! i t wouldalso be cool to expack the ground for cover!just boom boom boom and get down inside! those fucking straw huts couldnt withstand bmbs and shells! it would be cool if you could set that kind of shit on fire.
__________________
 \"wakka wakka wakka.\" Surrender now and win the Free Hat! |
|
|
|
|
11-09-2003, 06:47 PM
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Captain
 Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,309
|
Battlefield: Vietnam will be a whole new game. It will still use the Refractor 2 engine (or they would be saying how cool their Refractor 3 engine is by now).
You should just expect redone physics (thus not being able to die by falling 5 feet), higher quality models, better sounds (considering 1942's are crap), and optimized net code. It really isn't changing much, just enough to go with newer hardware.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
