I don't know if I'm late to telling you, but Gabe Newell stated that they are not building Source 2, and they are not making Episode 3, since they are through with episodic content, That means that we'll have towait for HL3.lllumpy said:
The IW Engine comapred to the Source Engine
- Thread starter Midnight Crossroads
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The one time I've complained about IW's engine is when comparing it so Frostbite.
My main reason for complaint in this regard is that the new version of Frostbite for Battlefield 3 has been in the works since they started using it in Bad Company 1, whereas IW's engine has been in use for 6 years now.
With a game franchise as hugely popular as Call of Duty, I'd expect them to really do more than make a few upgrades each time.
My main reason for complaint in this regard is that the new version of Frostbite for Battlefield 3 has been in the works since they started using it in Bad Company 1, whereas IW's engine has been in use for 6 years now.
With a game franchise as hugely popular as Call of Duty, I'd expect them to really do more than make a few upgrades each time.
The thing is, movement wise, they do feel very similar. Gravity wise, similar. The sounds, similar.Dense_Electric said:
What Valve is good at doing is making you not notice. I swear, they're technology magicians. You look at this thing and you don't notice this thing.
I'm finding myself more and more drawn away from games with the Source engine. The greatest thing about it is GMod. HL2 was okay, the episodes were alright. Alarm bells rang for me with Portal and TF2, it just felt like I was playing a mod for HL2 with them and with the Left 4 Dead games that was reinforced. I haven't even bothered with Portal 2 because after watching my friend play it it just looked like more of the same!
Now I know the IW engine is hardly innovative, but it's kind of different. Each progressive game using the IW system does still feel familiar yet I feel there's something at least a little unknown in them. At the end of the day I guess I don't care which engine a game uses, as long as that game can hold my attention.
Now I know the IW engine is hardly innovative, but it's kind of different. Each progressive game using the IW system does still feel familiar yet I feel there's something at least a little unknown in them. At the end of the day I guess I don't care which engine a game uses, as long as that game can hold my attention.
And where in there did I say it looked like it? I think you should get the eye check upBags159 said:
Tomfoolery aside, they don't look like one another, they FEEL like one another, at least to me.
Well, my reason for not getting angry about the source engine is that it is so versatile and the games made on it still look decent even by todays standards, on top of that it is very well built given that it has had so much time to sort out the bugs; don't get me wrong, they really could do with a new engine, but at least it's still looking and running good.
I didn't even know the IW engine was so old and that makes it worse in my opinion because despite how long they've had to make it all run smoothly the latest CoD game runs like a massive turd.
I didn't even know the IW engine was so old and that makes it worse in my opinion because despite how long they've had to make it all run smoothly the latest CoD game runs like a massive turd.
Because portal 2 looked really good as did L4D2, where mw2 and blops looked like higher res textures slapped on the same low poly crap they keep putting out.
Actually, Valve does catch flak for it, that's why everyone wants a new engine, because in l4d2 it was showing it's age pretty well.
Actually, Valve does catch flak for it, that's why everyone wants a new engine, because in l4d2 it was showing it's age pretty well.
Are you playing on PC? I should have specified I was referring to the tech on 360. All the source games are 30FPS or less on console, but the IW runs at a smooth 60.Zabriskie Point said:
I'm just imagining HL2 at 60FPS. Drool.
have you met:Kheapathic said:
Final Fantasy fanboys
Call of Duty fanboys
Battlefield fanboys
LoL fanboys
WoW fanboys
oblivion fanboys
minecraft fanboys
or anyone on http://boards.4chan.org/v/
?
Doesn't sound like it.
Yeah, I'm talking about PC. I've played MW2 on a console a few times, it never seemed to have a very high framrate to be honest.MiracleOfSound said:
Source games look good at 60FPS, but they're not quite at the level of something like the new Dues Ex. It's just good, not great. But I'd rather play a good looking game at 90FPS than a great looking game at 30.
I.W. 4.0 is the same one MW2 used, which is fine by me.Midnight Crossroads said:
In my personal opinion, it is because the Source has been used for so many things, and because people here seem to like to hate popular things, because it makes them "edgy" and shit.
Assuming you are a valve fanboy, you essentially just proved his point.marcelluspye said:
If you aren't, I disagree with you, because it is just a vocal majority.
Anyone else play both at the same time and notice that they don't really interfere with each other?Korten12 said:
That makes my brain hurt looking at it, yet it still makes sense in a convoluted, time consuming way.Owyn_Merrilin said:Yayy, finally a chance to break out the Quake family tree picture!
As you can see from this image, both the IW engine and the Source engine are ultimately descended from the quake engine. They may as well be called Idtech 30A and Idtech 30B, but they aren't because major changes to an engine sometimes necessitate a change in name as well. What's more, today's Source engine is no more the source engine of 2004 than the 2004 version was GoldSRC, or GoldSRC was Quake 1. Similarly, IW 4.0 is not the same engine that they used on CoD 2. Companies have just started marketing more on the name of the engine than they have the version number; think about it, the Source engine is a really famous engine. If you were valve, would you throw out that name recognition just because you put out a new version of the engine?
what, if i may ask, feels new (?) or "unknown" about any game using infinity ward's engine? i did not expect anything like portal before i played portal (let alone dozens of mods made using the source ending, which i think automatically makes it win this discussion) whereas i've never played a call of duty game that doesn't feel like the previous call of duty game, plus or minus the ability to lean or a couple arcade-y vehicle sections.piratejames said:And where in there did I say it looked like it? I think you should get the eye check upBags159 said:
Tomfoolery aside, they don't look like one another, they FEEL like one another, at least to me.
Oh you dummies, just because these engines don't get renamed every week like Unreal does not mean they stay the same.
And with CoD people just grab the wrong end of the stick, it's not the engines fault if people decide to release the same game over and over again.
And with CoD people just grab the wrong end of the stick, it's not the engines fault if people decide to release the same game over and over again.
What are you smoking? Can I have some? L4d 1 and 2 both look downright bad. Considering they were made in 2008 and 2009, they look absolutely awful compared to older titles [such as cod4 and halo 3] I've played HL2, and I notice no difference between that and l4d, except that l4d doesn't wank off it's physics engine in your face [Hl2's only noteworthy selling point]Owyn_Merrilin said:
Other games that came around 2008, Dead space, crysis, Bioshock, 3 beautiful games from different engines, so how do this many developers keep up to dates with making things look good but Valve stay behind so much? I'll tell you. They're making money from just modding Hl2, and selling it to saps full price.