Gunjack Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 I own Halo, UT2K4, and Far Cry. What I am wondering is how did Ubisoft make the graphics on Far Cry so amazing? Medium detail on FC is way better than high on Halo and UT2K4. And will we see more games based on this graphics type engine?And if so what and when??? :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit MEM Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Not sure myself how they did it but I agree, Far Cry kicks @$$. Hopefully we will see the game engine used again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Didnt some german company built the Crytek engine ? UbiSoft is a banner, correct me if I am wrong. How did they do it ? I think they used Shaders & bump mapping more than the other games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted May 6, 2004 MVC Share Posted May 6, 2004 The reason why Far Cry looks so "great" is probably the same reason it runs at a speed which I considder unplayable, where as Halo and UT2004 run very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishie Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 they are magic (: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickemoney Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 The reason why Far Cry looks so "great" is probably the same reason it runs at a speed which I considder unplayable, where as Halo and UT2004 run very well. Idiot. Do you have any idea on the specs of HALO, and how long ago it was? it's about the same as the specs for farcry NOW, what six months later? Stupid people upset me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
123_kid Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Unplayable? As long as you have a DirectX 9 video card and a modern CPU, I think you should be able to play it on medium with a decent frame rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted May 6, 2004 MVC Share Posted May 6, 2004 Idiot. Do you have any idea on the specs of HALO, and how long ago it was? it's about the same as the specs for farcry NOW, what six months later? Stupid people upset me. Moron. The only reason why I compared to Halo is because it was compared to by the topic starter. People with moronic names like 'chickemoney' deserve to die. Now, either go kill yourself or shut the hell up. Unplayable? As long as you have a DirectX 9 video card and a modern CPU, I think you should be able to play it on medium with a decent frame rate. I am dead before the enemies could even be drawn on the screen, which I considder unplayable. That is if I can get it to load without exiting to the desktop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Idiot. Do you have any idea on the specs of HALO, and how long ago it was? it's about the same as the specs for farcry NOW, what six months later? Stupid people upset me. You are right but there is always a better way of responding than name-calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insurektion Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 haha you are all dumb. FarCry is amazingo n my 9600 pro and athlon 2500+. whats the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crackler Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Moron. The only reason why I compared to Halo is because it was compared to by the topic starter. People with moronic names like 'chickemoney' deserve to die. Now, either go kill yourself or shut the hell up. No need for such posts either. Lets stay on topic people...FarCry has some amazing graphics. I too would like to see future titles using the Crytek engine. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZTrang Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Well, if we all knew that, it wouldn't be a secret, now would it? ;) Really, though, the graphical fidelity of a game relies on several factors: the quality and resolution of the textures being used; the type of effects being applied to the textures; and the interaction between textures and the environment (which can include people, trees, light, shadows, etc.). For Far Cry, Ubisoft simply increases the detail in the textures being used in the game, uses advanced shader technologies to make the textures more realistic, and creates intricately detailed physics, shadow, and lighting engines, and viola! It has a very good-looking game. The trade-off is that performance is shot to heck when all of the high-tech shader effects that today's videocards can't really handle well are applied. I'm not sure there is any sort of "secret" to Far Cry's visual quality. Somebody just spent a lot of time tweaking and improving textures and the graphics engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunjack Posted May 6, 2004 Author Share Posted May 6, 2004 Well, if we all knew that, it wouldn't be a secret, now would it? ;) Really, though, the graphical fidelity of a game relies on several factors: the quality and resolution of the textures being used; the type of effects being applied to the textures; and the interaction between textures and the environment (which can include people, trees, light, shadows, etc.). For Far Cry, Ubisoft simply increases the detail in the textures being used in the game, uses advanced shader technologies to make the textures more realistic, and creates intricately detailed physics, shadow, and lighting engines, and viola! It has a very good-looking game. The trade-off is that performance is shot to heck when all of the high-tech shader effects that today's videocards can't really handle well are applied. I'm not sure there is any sort of "secret" to Far Cry's visual quality. Somebody just spent a lot of time tweaking and improving textures and the graphics engine. Yeah but in the past games either had great graphics or great gameplay, not both. Farcry has amazing everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insurektion Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 (edited) lets review: -Halo -Far Cry -POP2:SOT -Splinter Cell (PT) I ask you do not all of these games rock. Go Ubisoft! edit: I dont know what your talking about :p Edited May 6, 2004 by insurektion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamsINdigital Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 lets review:-Halo -Far Cry -POP2:SOT -Splinter Cell (PT) -UT2k4 I ask you do not all of these games rock. Go Ubisoft! Ubisoft didn't do UT2k4. Isn't Ubisoft just a publisher? They don't actually make the games themselves do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Hook Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 First of, Ubi is only the publisher; they did not develop the game. As for your question as to why the Unreal Engine is used more than the Crytek engine - well, that's simple. 1. The Unreal engine has been out far longer than Crytek's engine. FarCry has been out what, 4 months? The Unreal engine gets updated here and there. I imagine we won't see any big advancement from Epic until the Unreal Warfare engine is out. 2. The Unreal engine is tried and true. The Crytek engine is in it's infancy. As for Halo, the game has actually been out for years (remember, it was release on the XBox first). Not many updates were made to bring it to the PC. Yes, DX9 is used, but nothing too exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunjack Posted May 6, 2004 Author Share Posted May 6, 2004 Ubisoft didn't do UT2k4.Isn't Ubisoft just a publisher? They don't actually make the games themselves do they? UT2K4 = Atari Halo = Microsoft Yes the game was made by Crytek but Ubi slapped an azz load of Ubilogos on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvbfan Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Idiot. Do you have any idea on the specs of HALO, and how long ago it was? it's about the same as the specs for farcry NOW, what six months later? Stupid people upset me. Upset people upset me. VALIUM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunjack Posted May 6, 2004 Author Share Posted May 6, 2004 Upset people upset me.VALIUM Im not upset, so you can calm down now. :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XavierHyde Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 What I am wondering is how did Ubisoft make the graphics on Far Cry so amazing? UBI Soft is a publisher, that means they had exactly nothing, zip, nada to do with the development of the engine itself. So any secret to the impressive graphics would be the property of the devteam, which is an independent company. Also, UT2K4 was not MADE by Atari. Atari is a publisher JUST like UBI Soft these days. In fact, Atari is the chosen alias of Infogrames, and they are most likely only using it to gain some credibility in the oldschool gamer community. I'm not laughing. And I would highly doubt that Microsoft actually MADE Halo. When it comes to games, Microsoft loves publishing games under their "MS Game Studios" label but in fact I have yet to see even one game actually made within Microsoft offices. ALL of them have been made by independent companies and then licensed to MS. So for all intents and purposes, all games mentioned in this thread were made by skilled independents and then the big guys (MS, Infogrames and UBI) just slapped their big-name logos on them. A practice with which I am not entirely comfortable, because it makes people think the publishers are developers and moves the focus from the people with the skills, who deserve credits for their hard work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirEvan Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 The reason why Far Cry looks so "great" is probably the same reason it runs at a speed which I considder unplayable, where as Halo and UT2004 run very well. you my friend must be doing something wrong, I get 40+ fps, and that is definately playable for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmerz28 Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 When it comes to games, Microsoft loves publishing games under their "MS Game Studios" label but in fact I have yet to see even one game actually made within Microsoft offices. ALL of them have been made by independent companies and then licensed to MS. Hello? Minesweeper & Solitare? You can't tell me you've never played those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XavierHyde Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Hello? Minesweeper & Solitare? You can't tell me you've never played those. Were they ever released as a separate commercial package? No, didn't think so. :) But you are right, Minesweeper is just about the only funny program in a vanilla Windows installation... :D In my rant post above, I'm reffering more to MS recent forays into PC games, with titles like Midtown Madness 3, Zoo Tycoon, Age of Empires series, Freelancer, Crimson Skies and the rest, all of which were developed out-of-house and then published under the umbrella "MS Game Studios" label, without hardly a mention of the real developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varsity Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Nobody will lisence the Far Cry engine, because it was made with pirated software. :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts