PDA

View Full Version : Interesting comparison about D3 engine v.s. Cryengine


Intel17
10-23-04, 12:34 PM
On the UbiSoft forums, I asked the CryTek engine guy, how he felt CryEngine compared to Doom3's engine. Here's what he said...



1.) Me: How do you feel the CryEngine compares to the Doom3 engine?

CryTek Guy: We have at least the same set of features Doom3 does. Some of them could be more sophisticated in our engine like shaders (to support photorealistic character and object rendering), dynamic lighting (our engine has more certain techniques included and can deliver more accurate results on more complex scenes) and shadowing, post-processing effects (HDR rendering)

You will get a chance to compare the engines once we release a new version of ours.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I believe that this statement is incorrect. Doom3 has a Cg interface for shaders. Doom3's dynamic lighting is unified, and everywhere. The shadowing in the engine isn't nearly as good as Doom3's. I mean the flashlight doesn't cast a shadow, and the stencil volumes dont move correctly, and seem static.


Discuss!

***CENSORED***
10-23-04, 12:57 PM
Well of course he's gonna try to make his own engine seem superior!

Anyway, I think they're both great!

Intel17
10-23-04, 01:01 PM
They are both great!

I love the cryEngine. But the fact is, Doom3 is technically superior.

jolle
10-23-04, 01:36 PM
when it comes to shaders, CryEngine is prolly more advanced due to it being DX9, while D3 is OGL, I think OGL is a bit lacking when it comes to modern shaders.. dunno for sure tho..
Also the engine is based around older hardware as a target then CryEngine seems to be..

Tho I think the unified lightmodel D3 uses is more advanced then what CryEngine offers, unless ofcource CryEngine supports the same, but isnt using it for Far-Cry..

EDIT
um.. since when is HDR a postprocess thing?
isnt that included in the entire rendering process?
what would the point be to "upmix" a rendered 32bit image into "64bit FP"?

aAv7
10-23-04, 01:40 PM
Of course he'll say that, he's not gonna bash his own engine. Were you expecting something more on the lines of... " Yea doom 3 handed us our arses...we got owned...what can ya do?" lol. =)

I agree though Intel, they're both greeeeeeeeat. (Say it like the tiger on the frosted flakes box)

I think Doom 3 has better character models and lighting while FarCry has much more detailed textures and better enviornments.

aAv7
10-23-04, 01:45 PM
what would the point be to "upmix" a rendered 32bit image into "64bit FP"?

to kill performance of course! :retard:

Intel17
10-23-04, 01:49 PM
when it comes to shaders, CryEngine is prolly more advanced due to it being DX9, while D3 is OGL, I think OGL is a bit lacking when it comes to modern shaders.. dunno for sure tho..
Also the engine is based around older hardware as a target then CryEngine seems to be..

Tho I think the unified lightmodel D3 uses is more advanced then what CryEngine offers, unless ofcource CryEngine supports the same, but isnt using it for Far-Cry..

EDIT
um.. since when is HDR a postprocess thing?
isnt that included in the entire rendering process?
what would the point be to "upmix" a rendered 32bit image into "64bit FP"?

About the shader thing. You're incorrect. Doom3 has a Cg interface, and Cg is basically HLSL only under OpenGL.

Intel17
10-23-04, 01:50 PM
Of course he'll say that, he's not gonna bash his own engine. Were you expecting something more on the lines of... " Yea doom 3 handed us our arses...we got owned...what can ya do?" lol. =)

I agree though Intel, they're both greeeeeeeeat. (Say it like the tiger on the frosted flakes box)

I think Doom 3 has better character models and lighting while FarCry has much more detailed textures and better enviornments.

Engine wise, Doom3 is better. Graphically, well I have to say FarCry is better.

Doom3 is a new rendering paradigm.

Ninjaman09
10-23-04, 01:54 PM
Jesus man, you need to stop comparing game engines so much and just enjoy the damn games. Christ, this is like the millionth thread you've started about this.

aAv7
10-23-04, 03:28 PM
Jesus man, you need to stop comparing game engines so much and just enjoy the damn games. Christ, this is like the millionth thread you've started about this.

Intel compares engines as much as I whine about the lack of the 1.3Farcry patch :lol2:

Gaco
10-23-04, 03:45 PM
More advanced shaders in Far Cry than in Doom3? Ok, I can go with that. More advanced lightning- and shadow system in Far Cry? Thats where I say "BULLSH!T" !!!
They simply have to prove that claim before I would even consider it the truth. It might be capable of doing something pretty near to what Doom3 is doing, but I just don't think it would be anything near as effective and it would run with less than 1 FPS!

majortom
10-23-04, 04:11 PM
here's what was really said:


1.) Me: How do you feel the CryEngine compares to the Doom3 engine?

CryTek Guy: We have at least the same set of features Doom3 does. Some of them could be more sophisticated in our engine like shaders (to support photorealistic character and object rendering), dynamic lighting (our engine has more certain techniques included and can deliver more accurate results on more complex scenes) and shadowing, post-processing eff... sob sob, who am i kidding!? oh god, our engine sucks! and we dont even put out decent updates for it either! we're carmack's bitches, we all know that. i curl up in a fetal position every night and hope that noone laughs at our weak little engine...sniff sniff... please dont tell anyone i cried like a little girl :cry:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------



hmmmm
:rolleyes: