why unreal engine 5

[itzinferno1]

first stalker game ai and npcs used a very specific technology from their own engine that allowed them to create some unique behavior patterns that were staple of the series in the past. the list goes on and on. So many studios now days developing in UE5 that itself isnt a bad thing on surface but there are several concerns i have. Unreal games often have performence issues. thats why i havent pre-order the game.

[Genosse Kommissar]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย itzinferno1:

first stalker game ai and npcs used a very specific technology from their own engine that allowed them to create some unique behavior patterns that were staple of the series in the past. the list goes on and on. So many studios now days developing in UE5 that itself isnt a bad thing on surface but there are several concerns i have. Unreal games often have performence issues. thats why i havent pre-order the game.

Everything about the OG Stalker games can be recreated in UE5 for that matter.
Engines are just tools and the UE5 is a very capable one at that. Developers also modify their UE5 if they have the knowledge and resources to suit their needs.

Why did they choose UE5? Well because creating your own engine is hard and time consuming, therefor expensive and GSC does not seem to have the funds to do it. It is much easier and faster to take a powerhouse like UE5, modify it to your needs instead of creating one from scratch.

Even CD RED went for UE5. Epic handles the engine, the devs handle the games. Everyone wins.

[KripTed]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Genosse Kommissar:

Even CD RED went for UE5. Epic handles the engine, the devs handle the games. Everyone wins.

Except the consumer who is plagued with launch errors, performance issues and micro/traversal stutters lol.

[Genosse Kommissar]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย KripTed:

Except the consumer who is plagued with launch errors, performance issues and micro/traversal stutters lol.

I will be honest.

I have a strong PC. Ryzen 5800x + 32 GB RAM + RX 6800xt.
My experience with games like Dead Space Remake or Silent Hill 2 Remake on high settings without RTX were mostly positive. Stutters do occur rarely but I am not as spoiled for them to blow my mind.

I dont care. I like UE5 so far.

[Ray]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Virake:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Foxrun:

I feel like it would’ve been pretty good on source 2. I don’t mind UE5 though.

I like Source engine, but it's made for corridor shooters.

Titanfall and Apex use source engine. I myself would prefer source over Unreal Engine.

[Genosse Kommissar]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Foxrun:

One of the main reasons they are sticking with the creation engine is that is easy for modders to use. There wouldn't be a Bethesda without mods.

Good one. Good to know you bought this excuse.
They just dont give a single f about that.
Why invest into a new engine if people are buying every Bethesda product anyway?
Starfield and Fallout 76 are great examples. Two game concepts that needed proper rework/update of their engine and the devs knew it.

Did they do it? Why should they? People will buy it anyway.

[KekMemScreamer]

ue5 trash

[rehsinuP]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Genosse Kommissar:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย KripTed:

Except the consumer who is plagued with launch errors, performance issues and micro/traversal stutters lol.

I will be honest.

I have a strong PC. Ryzen 5800x + 32 GB RAM + RX 6800xt.
My experience with games like Dead Space Remake or Silent Hill 2 Remake on high settings without RTX were mostly positive. Stutters do occur rarely but I am not as spoiled for them to blow my mind.

I dont care. I like UE5 so far.

Unreal 5 have massive problems with open world games. The games you mentioned are "Liniar" games, not open world like stalker 2 will be.

stalker 2 seems to be pretty badly optimized if you only get above 100 fps in 1440p with a ♥♥♥♥♥ 4090 when dlss enabled and raytracing is not even in the game yet

[Xash]

Because UE5 is beast.
Nothing gets close to it. And it offers a huge benefit to developers as well, since they have EVERYTHING in the engine, so making stuff is just way easier once you get the hang of UE.

Is it perfect? No, but the next best thing.

[C-zom]

UE5 for an Enterprise business like GSC vs us at home in our sweatpants is a very, very different game. Where we fumble in asset stores or homebrew workarounds to fill in blanks, or raw talent to bridge gaps, they can just phone up Epic and get proprietary or horses-mouth solutions to anything. They pay insane royalties for full control of the engine; they just recently came out and said A-Life 2.0 will be in the game, which is arguably a very first for an open world/sandbox Unreal game. They aren't limited to scratching their heads against youtube tutorials.

It sucks that in-house engines are a thing of the past, but they're costly and silly to maintain. Rimworld and Caves of Qud both use Unity, whereas their proprietary ancestors (Dwarf Fortress, Rogue) were homebrew. You see the idea I'm getting at.

[StormhawkV]

In-house engines are not a thing of the past it's just that Stalker has a pretty generic shooter setting and UE5 does well there. Go to simulators or space games that have dozens of kilometers of sight-lines. This is where purpose made engines shine and are often even necessary.

[Stalker2010]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย abel:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Stalker2010:

What other option there is?

UE 4, Cryengine, Frostbite?

It was originally on UE 4 until they migrated to 5, clearly it did not meet their demands.
Frostbite is exclusive and non licensable as far as I know.
Not well informed about CE but I'd easily assume UE5 is light years ahead, maybe I'm wrong. But then again they aren't just choosing UE for the engine. Epic offers training and they probably found their licensing options reasonable.

[lockwoodx]

Personally I've never been a fan of the unreal engine but they're doing it because EPIC gives devs a bigger cut.

[space]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย LockwoodX:

Personally I've never been a fan of the unreal engine but they're doing it because EPIC gives devs a bigger cut.

epic doesn't pay devs to use unreal, it's the opposite

[lockwoodx]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย space:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย LockwoodX:

Personally I've never been a fan of the unreal engine but they're doing it because EPIC gives devs a bigger cut.

epic doesn't pay devs to use unreal, it's the opposite

Royalty fees duhhhhh. Oh there was a typo. before cut I had typed price.

[Bunuffin]

Because the devs wan't you to enjoy the TAA vomit inducing trailing (You spent big money for low latency display then you get trailing anyway)...
High storage requirements and up to 75% GPU power wasted on overdraw. The marvel of modern engines!
Nanite is grossly inefficient to standard LODs.