Slashdot Mirror


Unreal 3 Engine to Skip the Wii

Mark Rein, speaking with Chris Kohler and Game|Life, has stated that Epic's next-gen Unreal engine will never make it to the Wii. Touting the virtues of high-definition gaming, the 360, and the PS3, Rein said that their engine is simply not designed for Nintendo's hardware. He also quickly mentioned the upcoming deal between Epic and Square Enix: "It's definitely a challenge to convince Japanese developers to work with a third-party technology like ours. But Square Enix, they're the granddaddy. I'm hoping that'll be pulling the stopper out of the drain, and we'll gradually crack that nut. We've been looking to hire somebody in Japan, to be our representative there. " Update: 02/06 04:19 GMT by Z : Accidentally misattributed the interview to CVG when it was a Game|Life piece. Fixed. Also, Chris made sure to point out that a partner of Epic's is trying to get UE3 onto the Wii, so ... maybe someday?

24 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. What will wii do by DesertBlade · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am sure they will plenty of other engines for Wii. Maybe even a few just for it.

    --
    Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
    1. Re:What will wii do by HappySqurriel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, maybe you don't understand but the one of the major selling points of the Wii to developers is they could continue to use the same technology and their development costs would not increase ...

      With the Wii you get to produce an Unreal 2 Engine game with some graphical enhancements over a Gamecube game but costs don't explode; in contrast to make a PS3/XBox 360 game your budget will probably explode to being 3-4 times what a PS2/XBox game cost. Now, what I hope happens is that the Wii demonstrates that pushing graphical limits is not necessary so that in the next generation developers produce games which focus on gameplay and have graphics on the level the developer can afford.

    2. Re:What will wii do by SirSlud · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, it is you who is incorrect. Development costs do "explode" for the 360/ps3 games over the ps2/gc/wii kind of games.

      These games are capable of much more power, and with more power, you do not simply not "downscale" as much. Next-gen games feature more assets (more particle emitter assets, more model assets) nevermind that producing environments for next gen games is far more time consuming due to the increased scale.

      More power also means you can do far more in code, so typically, you have larger teams of developers in order to produce more complicated AI systems, more complicated physics engines, more complicated shaders, etc.

      Also, since the assets 'weigh more' on disk, your tools and technology infrastructure to support explodes. More disk space, more powerful hardware to work on, more files to support (because of more assets being created.)

      Game budgets ARE far higher on next gen games, for all the reasons listed .. even more than 3-4 times higher in some cases when comparing a triple A PS2 title to a triple A PS3 title. One of the biggest issues within the industry is how to keep costs down on next gen games since the financial risk is much higher. Procedural art assets is one common discussed potential approach.

      And how do I know this? I'm a game developer, at a company that produces both current (ok, well now last) gen and next (okay with now current) gen games, for the xbox, ps, and nintendo families.

      So really, he doesn't have a reality distortion field. Its a reality .. a reality that has a lot of developers and publishers concerned.

      "Textures and models are typically downscaled for consoles anyway."

      Textures and models are typically "baked" (and LoD models set) relatively early in a single-generation production process, in order to ensure that artists are working on exactly what appears in the game. If you downscaled every time you made a build (ie, proceduraly,) you'd never know exactly what you'd end up with. Your comment regarding two ports at the same time, is of course correct. Especially so if you're producing a next and current gen version of the same game, which is why you just won't see it done very often. (Legends was one such example.) But your comment about budgets being generation specific are completely contrary to what the industry is experiencing and trying to grapple with.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:What will wii do by pilkul · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Outsourcing art doesn't work nearly as well in games compared to animation, since the art people need to work closely with the programmers to deal with the constantly evolving engine and tools. It's not a bad idea but game technology would have to stop evolving as quickly for it to work.

  2. Mexed Mitaphors by Khakionion · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I'm hoping that'll be pulling the stopper out of the drain, and we'll gradually crack that nut."

    Yeah, better jump under that bandwagon before the train leaves the station!

    --
    OMG! Wau!
  3. OOPS by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sorry, didn't realize they were only referring to the next-gen version of the engine. I know, I know, "Please read the summary before responding. It's fun. It's like reading, but ... of the summary."

  4. Re:No Wii? by mingot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Huh? Nintendo came out said (and proved through actions) that the Wii was not about graphics, but gameplay. Why should it be a surprise that Epic took that to heart and decided not to invest in getting it's latest engine to run on underpowered hardware?

    And really, is this a loss for Epic or Nintendo? If a killer game comes out using unreal 2 I think I'd still buy it.

  5. Hasn't this been known for awhile? by HappySqurriel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought this was known back in August/September?

    I swear I saw an interview saying that Red-Steel was an Unreal 2 Engine game and it was unlikely the Wii could support an Unreal 3 Engine game ...

    The fact is that the Unreal 3 Engine was designed with a reasonably powerful GPU (probably in the Geforce 6800 range) and a reasonably powerful CPU (AMD X2 3800+ as a guess) in mind and the Wii simply isn't in the same league. The Wii should be able to handle the Doom 3, Unreal 2 and (maybe) the Source engine which are all solid game engines which should be good for several years.

    1. Re:Hasn't this been known for awhile? by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Although on the whole the Wii is more powerful than the original XBox, and Source did appear on the XBox in the form of Half-Life 2, Valve has stated (although I can't find the quote) that Half-Life 2 will not be coming to Wii.
      ... But if you're bored, you can always play HL2 with the Wii's controllers. On a PC!
      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  6. One of the related links reads by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    "never make it to the Wii"

    That sounds like a painful medical problem.

  7. Re:No Wii? by Pc_Madness · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, its because the Wii's graphics card isn't capable of doing the kind of things that this engine is designed for, which is obviously delivering realistic graphics, which isn't the focus of the Wii. Seems abit stupid to gut the main feature out of the engine just to get it to work, only to have an engine equivalent of the previous generation.. I could be wrong, but didn't they say the Unreal 2 engine would work fine on the Wii?

  8. Misreadind trends by NotthatFrankie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So Epic wants to have a "representative" in Japan, but their newest engine doesn't support Wii? Doesn't Nintendo own the market over there?

  9. who cares... by thedogcow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is not a troll. Anyway, who cares? The whole point of the Wii is not to deliver stunning movie-quality graphics. The point of the Wii is to change the way games are played. High end graphics are overrated anyway. Doom 3 and Quake 4 both have fantastic fx but the game play is not innovative and is boring. WarioWare for the Wii has minimal graphics, but IMHO, is very replayable. I know I'm sounding old here but I'm sick of the argument that graphics are everything. In other words, the PS3 and the Xbox 360 may render a piece of crap in high detail... capturing all the intricate details and using 16X anti-aliasing to render the post steam convecting off of it... but it still a piece of crap. I want to be able to play with that piece of crap... toss it around like bowling or in tennis. I can do this with the Wii and it smells fantastic.

    --
    Yes! I listen to NYC Speedcore and do math at 3AM. I suggest you try it too.
    1. Re:who cares... by Spikeles · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Aye, the exact reason Starcraft, Morrowwind, Baldurs Gate, Betrayal at Krondor, Commander Keen, Doom, C&C (list goes on) are all very fun games that i still play these days. They don't have the gfx of todays games, but heck they are still fun! And here is why Bloom sucks.

      --
      I don't need to test my programs.. I have an error correcting modem.
  10. Re:No big deal by be-fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're forgetting the flip-side to that argument. There are a large category of games that are *expected* to look great. Zelda: TP got a lot of flack for looking last-gen, because people expect Zelda to both have great gameplay *and* look pretty. Licensing something like Unreal 3 frees a lot of developer resources to working on other things besides the graphics engine, allowing for better gameplay.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  11. Re:No big deal by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly! I actually think the graphics on the Wii are _too_ flashy! All those polygons are detracting from my gameplay experience, when really they could satisfy me with simple cubes and squares to represent the players. Why not have Wario be a cube with a W on it, Link a green pyramid with an L, etc. And now seeing as they aren't going to have one of the industry standard engines on the Wii, well, we should probably reduce the expected level of graphics requirements that gamers want since getting anywhere will be that much harder. ...

    Ok, I can't continue with that. But seriously, just because it doesn't have the "leading edge in graphics" doesn't mean it has no graphics, or is going to get along with stick figures. Its more powerful than the Gamecube, and the cube had some pretty nice looking games last generation, at least on par with the Xbox and PS2, and in many cases (personal opinion, of course), exceeded them. And yes, yes, the Wii is all about gameplay and not graphics, BUT getting to at least the bar set by the last gen is hard enough - the bar is only going to get higher. Line up a late gen PS1 game next to a late gen PS2 game (or N64 to GameCube). Its a pretty big difference. How do you get to that bar and possibly surpass it while still having lots of resources to focus on the gameplay? By having someone else do the work of course! That's where engines like Unreal come in - they do all the fancy shading techniques so you don't have to. You have extra costs in the terms of artists, but in your average shop the realities of the situation are artists and art techs are cheap, graphics engineers are not. Its a shame they're losing Unreal, which is a great engine. I don't know if Unreal2 is on the Wii, but it seems likely given the similarities to the GameCube.

    To sum up: gameplay for graphics was a trade-off made by Nintendo to reduce costs for the system. Its not quite the same for gamedevs - you don't magically get a game thats more fun by firing all your graphics engineers and hiring 2x more designers. You still make models, textures, build sets, etc. Its at least as much work as it was last-gen. BUT those tasks can be done in parallel, and having the code partly done for you gets them completed faster.

  12. Not News by My+name+is+Bucket · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is anyone really surprised that UE3 won't run on the Wii?

    I mean, far be it from me to drone on about hardware limitations, but the Wii wasn't even made for that kind of software. It's all about gameplay, man, the gameplay! When will you people learn that the ability to wave a stick around offers endless gameplay possibilities?!? You can pretend it's a sword or a bat or a racket or a longer stick or some bat/sword hybrid. A bword, if you will. The Wiimote responds to your every movement, duh. It then translates that movement into a general "the Wiimote is moving" signal which then triggers one of three generic sword-swinging animations. How can you not see the potential?

    Seriously, though: there may be a shortage of horsepower for the Wii, but thankfully the world will never run out of people to say "Man that game would be soooo awesome using the Wiimote".

  13. Who Cares by Rev+Jim+(AKA+Metal+F · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The people who own wiis, or the target audience for wiis compared to the target audience of Unreal are like comparing Slayer fans to Radiohead fans, they're so far apart it's like night and day almost. I mean there's really no reason to have unreal on the wii when it's on every other platform. That said, there will be FPS titles on the wii and I'm sure a developer with a 3d engine developed for the wii will emerge as the defacto wii 3d engine soner or later, or a ported engine will take that place until something beter comes along. It obviously won't be able to compete graphically, but the gamers on the wii are looking forward to Mario Planet (or whatver it's called) or Metroid Prime to establish what we can come to expect from the wii in graphics as well as gameplay, we don't particuariuly care if unreal makes it to wii or not and we know the hardware isn't going to support Crysis or Company of Heroes really - but that's not the wii's niche anyways.

    --
    Gaming for over 25 years
  14. Re:High def gaming? by JanusFury · · Score: 3, Informative

    Running a DX9/DX10-class game engine or graphics application on a DX7-class or DX8-class GPU is not remotely close to being as easy as 'compiling it for the Wii and the PS2'. No offense, but if you knew *anything* about game engines, you'd realize this. There are significant hurdles preventing an engine like Unreal 3 from running on hardware like the PS2 or Wii without being designed specifically for it in the first place.

    The problem here is that UE3 was designed for a system with a modern graphics processor and fairly high end CPU. The Wii and PS2 have neither of these things, so UE3 simply won't run on them. Obviously, stuff like the previous Unreal Engine (used by Red Steel) runs fine on the Wii, so it's not as if the Wii can't run games. It just can't run UE3.

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
  15. So no uncanny valley for Wii? by Jartan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok so basically nobody is going to be able to make horrendously ugly "realistic" graphics that end up looking like a 12 year old made them in bryce and poser right?

    Nintendo must be sweating bullets.

  16. Re:No Wii? by Gulthek · · Score: 3, Informative

    Your 5 step process falls apart around #2. It's not as trivial as you imply and you make two assumptions that aren't justified.

  17. Shaders by Drilian · · Score: 3, Informative

    In a nutshell:

    The UE3 engine is heavily built around pixel shaders. Everything it does is based around shader support.

    The Wii is not capable of doing pixel shaders. The hardware can't do it. Period.

    Take away the shader support, and UE3 becomes no different than UE2. Note that UE2 does, in fact, support the Wii platform.

    This is a hardware issue, it has pretty much nothing to do with Epic.

  18. Re:What? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) Calling its Texture Stages with Logical Operations a 'shader' is abusing the terminology. At best, it has a PSEUDO-pixel shader, like the DX7 style texture stages, not the PROPER DX8 pixel shaders.

    2) The Wii doesn't have vertex shaders -- unless you write your own. Are you going to call CPU skinning a 'hardware vertex shader' ??

    So it's not ridiculous to claim the Wii has no shaders. I agree with the gp "the Wii doesn't have full-fledged shaders" At best, it has 1/2 a pixel shader.

    Or do we need to take this to the 'rvl.graphics' group?

  19. Epic in Japan... a lack of professionalism by midnightJackal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had the pleasure of hearing a speech from Epic at The Tokyo Games Show earlier this year (titled "Opportunities for Japanese Corporations in Middleware for Next-Generation Hardware"). While Sweeney did a good job of coming off as confident, but not overly so, in the Unreal engine itself. He was willing to offer the mostly Japanese audience a handful of reasons why their engine is and isn't the right way for companies to go, based on what sort of game you're trying to make. I could tell that the Japanese developers around me were on the same page as Sweeney, based on their gestures and the fact that they were actually taking notes about things that he said.

    After that, Jay Wilbur decided to add a few words. Or rather, to be American. Now, don't get me wrong, I generally approve of being direct and selling your selling points, rather than mentioning that, yeah, our product isn't going to butter your toast every morning... BUT... when dealing with a Japanese audience, upfront honesty is the best way to go. Sweeney also had the "I'm roughly Japanese-sized" thing going for him. When rotund Wilbur stepped up to the plate, he set a bad tone by telling the rather humble but proud crowd of Japanese developers that "You need this engine". I heard one guy whisper to his friend, "Where does this guy think games started? Huh? *WE* __NEED__ them? Pfft." (in Japanese, so that's paraphrasing, of course)

    What started as a good, solid discussion into the benefits of buying A game engine, ANY game engine, was quickly derailed into a product pitch for THEIR game engine. The thing is, Japanese companies, despite what modernizations have happened here, are still rather loyal when it comes to their big huge purchases. They'd rather go with someone they know, and I'm fairly certain that if Wilbur had just said nothing, or said much less than he did, and used much less arrogance and self-pimping in his speech, that the Japanese crowd would have gone home thinking, "You know, there's a company that's honest about their product, and that's willing to come all the way out here to persuade us that game engines are worth buying. We should seriously think about buying theirs". Instead, a lot of people left the room shaking their heads, muttering things about "Typical Americans. All talk. All about them. (etc)"

    The thing about dealing with a foreign country is to go in and appreciate their background, their culture, and their style of work. To go in and trample all over their acheivements in an attempt to hock your wares just doesn't cut it.