PDA

View Full Version : Crytek vs Epic



Yew-Yevon
01-29-2008, 10:18 PM
Wich 3D engine is better Unreal engine 3 ( Unreal Technology (http://www.unrealtechnology.com/) ) , or Cryengine 2 ( Welcome to Crytek (http://www.crytek.com/) ) ?

Discuss

heres some shots:

Unreal engine
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o313/joshuakobsar/Incorporated_3.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o313/joshuakobsar/989819.jpg

Cryengine 2
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o313/joshuakobsar/Jungle-Action-07.jpg

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o313/joshuakobsar/Comparison-01.jpg

Shoeberto
01-29-2008, 11:02 PM
Crytek has proven that they can make an amazing future-proof engine but is still pretty lacking in the ability to craft a solid game experience around it. Then again I'm a big Epic fan so I have a bit of bias towards them.

Serapy
01-30-2008, 01:58 AM
In my opinion, the HL2 engine is better. Not only it's quality but is also capable of running many, many, many things all at once.

Markus. D
01-30-2008, 02:38 AM
I wish my PC could run those kinds of things rather smoothly~

Rostum
01-30-2008, 03:31 AM
In my opinion, the HL2 engine is better. Not only it's quality but is also capable of running many, many, many things all at once.

The source engine is old and outdated when compared to the Unreal3 Engine and the Crytek2 Engine. So I don't know how you'd come to that conclusion.

For me, I think the Crytek2 Engine is fairly amazing, but I like the Unreal3 Engine better -- I also love working in the Unreal 3 Editor (tournament version).

Serapy
01-30-2008, 04:31 AM
In my opinion, the HL2 engine is better. Not only it's quality but is also capable of running many, many, many things all at once.

The source engine is old and outdated when compared to the Unreal3 Engine and the Crytek2 Engine. So I don't know how you'd come to that conclusion.

You can't compare them as they are all completely different engines, each engine has thier own advantages, I chose source because I like the taste of it.

Hell, Valve is a huge company. Let the obvious predictions rest assured.

Rostum
01-30-2008, 10:02 AM
In my opinion, the HL2 engine is better. Not only it's quality but is also capable of running many, many, many things all at once.

The source engine is old and outdated when compared to the Unreal3 Engine and the Crytek2 Engine. So I don't know how you'd come to that conclusion.

You can't compare them as they are all completely different engines, each engine has thier own advantages, I chose source because I like the taste of it.

Hell, Valve is a huge company. Let the obvious predictions rest assured.

Yes but from a technical standpoint the source engine is inferior technology than compared to the newer engines. Anyway, the hammer editor is a pain in the butt to work with.

(btw you can compare them)

Fatal Impurity
01-30-2008, 10:49 AM
I like UT3 as it provides beautiful graphics and physics at a reasonably playable framerate. The UT3 engine (eventhough at this point it doesnt provide the same level of realism as CE2) is more optimised and less buggy therefore would be my choice if I were to make a game.

Serapy
01-30-2008, 02:47 PM
In my opinion, the HL2 engine is better. Not only it's quality but is also capable of running many, many, many things all at once.

The source engine is old and outdated when compared to the Unreal3 Engine and the Crytek2 Engine. So I don't know how you'd come to that conclusion.

You can't compare them as they are all completely different engines, each engine has thier own advantages, I chose source because I like the taste of it.

Hell, Valve is a huge company. Let the obvious predictions rest assured.

Yes but from a technical standpoint the source engine is inferior technology than compared to the newer engines. Anyway, the hammer editor is a pain in the butt to work with.

(btw you can compare them)

That's your opinion. To me, it's not inferior, it has got potential. I'm sorry for you not understanding how I got to my conclusion.

Generally, comparing those things isn't giving you the answer - finding out which one is actually better, because like what I said again: those engines have different advantages.

Cleansation
01-30-2008, 04:55 PM
I love the cryengine but i really hate crysis... Damm boring game but really nice engine.

Maxico
01-31-2008, 08:49 PM
Hell, Valve is a huge company.

Valve is a comparatively tiny company, what are you talking about?

Yew-Yevon
01-31-2008, 09:40 PM
In my opinion, Valve's Sorce engine has gone under a big graphic over-hawl in the Oringe box making it look very impresive but still comes up short of Epic and Crytek's technology.

Rostum
01-31-2008, 10:17 PM
That's your opinion. To me, it's not inferior, it has got potential. I'm sorry for you not understanding how I got to my conclusion.

Generally, comparing those things isn't giving you the answer - finding out which one is actually better, because like what I said again: those engines have different advantages.

They have advantages / disadvantages, but you can not say the Source engine could beat the Unreal3 engine. The Unreal3 engine has too many technological advancements -- Source engine is old.

Do you even know much about the engines? Have you ever worked in the editors a lot? If you require information about the engines, I'd be happy to supply it to you.

Odaisť Gaelach
02-01-2008, 03:21 AM
I like the Unreal 3 engine and the Source engine more than the CryENGINE. As beautiful as it looks, it demands a lot from the system itself. I had a fairly low-end system when Half-Life 2 came out, but it ran pretty well on my computer. Same with the Unreal engine; I've always found it to be kind to my computer when I'm playing games built with it.

Special mention goes to the X-Ray engine by GSC Gameworld, which renders the best dynamic lighting I've ever seen in a game.

EDIT: And Build. Let's not forget Build. :D