23 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Mark Darrah says...

We are working on a new engine which we believe will allow us to deliver a more expansive world, better visuals, more reactivity to player choices, and more customization. At PAX East, we talked about armor and followers… Yeah, that kind of customization. We’ve started with Frostbite 2 from DICE as a foundation to accomplish this.

Yay

Ding dong Eclipse is dead

Edit: Read hoorayforicecream's Game Engine FAQ.


MODEDIT: Updated title.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 27 mars 2013 - 09:48 .

[Allan Schumacher]

tmp7704 wrote...

The development time DA3 has gotten so far was allegedly spent on poking the engine, converting tools and other preparation work.

Since you're going to nitpick a comment I made to support your assertions, I'll be taking a break from this forum.

I'll not have the words of myself, nor my colleagues, used against us because you are evidently failing at understanding the context of them and are looking at distorting comments to support the perspective you already believe to be true.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 18 septembre 2012 - 08:50 .

[Brian Mills]

It's far too early for us to comment on game hardware requirements. Those can be expected much closer to our shipping date, once we've had time to implement all of our features, do hardware compatibility testing, do engine optimizations, and all of the other things needed before we can ship.

[Allan Schumacher]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Sp3c7eR wrote...

Frostbite 2 = Battlefield 3. And if any of you have played that, it's a beautiful game, cutting edge graphics and particle effects. I'm very happy to hear DA3 will run on that engine - the world of Thedas will look spectacular!

Because DICE made it. BioWare isn't DICE.

Not sure I understand your point.

[Allan Schumacher]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

DICE made the engine and was able to achieve those visuals featured in Battlefield 3 because of their knowledge of Frostbite after having worked on it for so many years. Battlefield 3 is also a next-generation game designed to take advantage of modern PC hardware. Dragon Age 3 will be targeting current-generation consoles that are close to eight years old. 

You realize that Battlefield 3 was also released on the current generation consoles.

Frostbite also has is some really impressive memory management stuff with level streaming as well as very good LOD support.


I actually agree that anyone expecting BF3 level of fidelity will probably be disappointed, but that's as much due to our art style goals than our actual abilities to make stuff look good.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 23 septembre 2012 - 02:42 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Don't get me wrong, Frostbite 2 scales really well and it still looks 'good' on consoles, but still low settings and smaller levels and player count in the multiplayer.

I don't agree with the "small levels" in BF3.  Many of the MP maps are quite large.  Even the single player and co-op still have some decently large levels.

Having said that, I do know that they drop the LOD a lot for the consoles.

It's hard to have confidence in the DA team after DA2's lackluster visual presentation. Origins didn't look that good either. Both games still look worse than ME2 and ME3.

That's fair.  Also,both games were also built on an engine that had roots back to 1999.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 23 septembre 2012 - 05:33 .

[Allan Schumacher]

The levels aren't dramatically downsized, but they have to be made smaller when you only have 24 players on a map. They sort of did the same thing with the Bad Company games. The maps were smaller than the ones in BF2 for the same reason.

Are there maps on the PC version of the game that just aren't available on the console version?

[Allan Schumacher]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Frostbite also has is some really impressive memory management stuff

Does that mean we can get weapon holstering this time?

DA2 already "holstered" weapons.

[Allan Schumacher]

Eh, I was able to convince at least one COD fanboy to try BF3 and convert, so I call that I win!

(even despite my status as gigantic EA shill I've preferred the Battlefield series since 1942. Yes, since 39 years before my birth!)

[Allan Schumacher]

The best example I always use to show how engines can be modified is that Civilization IV uses the same engine as Oblivion.

[Allan Schumacher]

It would be more fitting to compare ME3 MP popularity with... I don't know, CoD MP or BF3 MP popularity or... I don't know, I don't play MP games anyway. Then, do as you like, for me it's still apple and oranges.

Eh. I have seen a lot of people cite the backer number as proof that there's a significant group of individuals that appreciate the old school IE games, and I think if those people are dismissive towards the popularity of ME3's multiplayer and how it wasn't necessary aren't really being fair.

What I mean, and I will stop it here since I haven't any need to
start a flame is pretty simple. There were a lot of people angry with
DA2 because of its abandonment of the whole "BG spiritual successor"
theme. Not because they are angry lunatics but because they still like
the IE games and they liked how DA:O tried to modernize that model. DA:O
was the first game in years to cather to their tastes. And Bioware
mostly abdandoned the whole model behind just after one game even if
DA:O was quite successfull and praised critically.

Now, there's
PE and other cool games that will cather to that niche. I guess that
will stop at least in part the backlashes coming from that part of the
potential DA player base.

I think this will happen in some capacity, but I've also seen jabs and other passive aggressive types of comments that use the Kickstarter as support/ammunition for their critiques of BioWare.  Hopefully it becomes more of a "Well I am getting what I want elsewhere too" but I'd be surprised if those that lurk on the BSN simply to take potshots at BioWare really change much, unfortunately.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 octobre 2012 - 08:18 .

[Allan Schumacher]

About the jabs... consider that Bioware comunication during DA2 launch wasn't that forthcoming for the tastes of those people too. It has been a reaction in many ways.

I'm sure most, if not all, of those that fire off jabs feel justified in doing so.

[Allan Schumacher]

In what ways is it superior? (I have no visibility on it at all)

[Allan Schumacher]

Back scaling in frostbite 2 might be better(don't play console), but that does not match the CryEngine 3's ability to upscale. CryEngine 3's ability to upscale, far outreaches Frostbites 2 ability to do the same.

I'm sorry you've lost me somewhat here.

[Allan Schumacher]

Just curious, what are you basing your statements on? You showed some Youtube videos but I'd like to read more on the technical specifications for CryEngine's scalability.

I just get confused because you started using terms like "Back scaling and upscaling" and I'm confused what is motivating your statements that Frostbite may be better at "downscaling" but isn't as good at "upscaling?"

I think what you're trying to say is, on a scale of 1 - 2 with 1 being current gen consoles, 2 being top end PC, you think Frostbite 2 might be a 1.5 that can go back to 1 really easily, with Crytek being a 2 that maybe struggles to go back to 1, but that isn't really "upscaling" rather than just a more full featured engine.


Although this gets a bit beside the point. The biggest advantages to us using Frostbite extend beyond the graphical fidelity it provides over Eclipse. That's just a bonus.

[Allan Schumacher]

I was more thinking memory/streaming and stuff like that. The memory streaming system itself should allow for significantly larger levels. There may be aspects for things like combat that I unfortunately don't have much visibility into.

In terms of game mechanics, Frostbite does not do everything that Eclipse can do (and I'm just speaking from a digital acting point of view). Which is what we're spending a lot of our time on adding to the engine. The lower goal is to have the same development functionality as DA2 (same level of conversation editor, cutscene editors, etc. etc.), but obviously there is room and opportunity to expand those systems as we implement them. There has been some areas that have been expanded upon for sure, and David is hinting at some with his comments, but I'm hesitant to give more details than that

[John Epler]

Ivandra Ceruden wrote...

^ Watch out, we got a bad@ss here.

Unless you'd care to add something constructive to the thread, I strongly recommend recusing yourself. This is not the comments section on Yahoo.

[Allan Schumacher]

So again, I ask... does anyone from Bioware have any feedback on what Frostbite 2 brings to the table other than nicer graphics and a better bottom line for EA?

I already stated that memory management and streaming are significantly improved.

It was a few posts before you stated that the only thing you had heard was improved graphics, just on the previous page.


While I'll agree with hoorayforicecream's initial response on the previous page (i.e. whether or not our game has NPCs that are all interactiable and can move around and do their own things) is less engine focused, the argument since then is starting to carry on.

By the technical description, hoorayforicecream is correct. Though even in my own posting I'll often use the word "engine" to include the baggage that comes with it (the current development tools) so in that regard, I've helped to obfuscate the issue too.

If your concern is "whoa, you're going to have to do a lot of work that you've already done" then yeah, that's valid.  But we don't just decide to switch engines without there being some level of benefit to them.  And yes, graphical fidelity IS also one of the benefits.  Much of that is effectively free, however (we can take a DA2 asset and plop it into Frostbite and it already looks better).

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 05 novembre 2012 - 07:34 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Another big advantage of Frostbite (as opposed to some other engine) is also tech sharing.

The likelihood of us backporting changes to the Unreal Engine for Epic to license off to other people is pretty much zero. Backporting changes back to DICE happens regularly. The engine and tools is becoming more full featured because we collaborate directly with DICE as well as EA Canada.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 05 novembre 2012 - 07:55 .

[Allan Schumacher]

axl99 wrote...

Fast Jimmy: You owe horrayforicecream an apology.

Apologize.

This isn't necessary.  It's the internet and as I've stated by liberal use of the word engine can easily lead to confusion as well.

[Allan Schumacher]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Another big advantage of Frostbite (as opposed to some other engine) is also tech sharing.

The likelihood of us backporting changes to the Unreal Engine for Epic to license off to other people is pretty much zero. Backporting changes back to DICE happens regularly. The engine and tools is becoming more full featured because we collaborate directly with DICE as well as EA Canada.

Is there an inherent risk to this resource sharing of everyone having a similar interface/mechanics further down the road?

Not really.  The types of things we push back are decidedly generic and the low level types of improvements.  If something is Dragon Age specific, it doesn't get pushed back.  As such, things like our Conversation Wheel are data driven, while the meat and potatoes of the dialogue system are more generic and can be used in different ways by different teams (or not used at all).

[Allan Schumacher]

I'd be surprised if Mirror's Edge 2 isn't using it, however.

[Allan Schumacher]

Frostbite 3 is built upon Frostbite 2 (most engines are, in fact, built this way).

We get constant code drops from Frostbite (in fact I'm testing one right now).

[Allan Schumacher]

Frostbite 2 pretty much grew into Frostbite 3, and yeah we get regular code drops from Frostbite team. In fact we're currently integrating one this week.