Q: EA signs Unreal Engine 3 for next-gen games
Electronic Arts has inked a deal with Epic Games, the developer of the game engine used for several upcoming game titles.
By Andrew Park, GameSpot
Posted August 18, 2006 9:14 p.m. PT
The more ubiquitous Unreal Engine has a different name added to his long list of publisher license holders. Electronic Arts and game and technology developer Epic Games today announced a licensing agreement to Epics Unreal Engine 3 technology for powering a number of next-generation games. The publisher adds the engine, with its own internal tools for the production of the game projects currently under development.
The technology is already confirmed to power the long-awaited next-gen games on both Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 consoles as BioWares Mass Effect, Silicon Knights Too Human (a game that, like Gamespot Rumor Control has recently confirmed, is to continue to use the engine despite rumors to the contrary) and Epics Unreal Tournament 2007 and own Gears of War.
EA studio president Paul Lee said that the deal is part of the strategy from EA to “licensed edge tools, such as cutting the Unreal Engine 3 and combine them with] own [EAs systems to state-of-the-art development of technology. ” Epic vice president Mark Rein added that his company “obviously pleased that the Unreal Engine 3 license to EA, the world leader in our industry. “Neither company has named no games that use the technology going forward will make. GameSpot News will provide further updates as they become available.
gamespot.com
Re:Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
There's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. You can't say "it's a good game except for the fact that it's incomplete, buggy as hell, and not what the customers asked for".
What's left?
There's a difference between a frustration over features/bugs and a game being just plain crappy.
I guess the difference between you and I is that I think most of the games that come from EA are, in fact, crappy.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Well, at least guy, we will see some games that actual use the engine instead of just licensing it or talking about it. Right; Right?
wasn't the first U3 game due this year . . . isn't it out by now?
and . . . guess What>
they are ALREADY working on Unreal 4 . . .
:Q
actually since 2003!
:shocked:
Unreal 3 is old news 
{actually it is expected to be used till 2010}
!
Oh yeah .. . . RoboBlitz is Unreal 3
RB demo U3 engine – intel only (http://www.fileshack.com/file.x?fid=8124)
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
And can we finally say that iD is irrelevant and should die. They don't know how to make games OR engines anymore
I'm still pissed at having shelled out $50 for the craptacular monstrosity of a game that was Doom 3
Someone is afraid of the dark. Flashlight mods for the win. (although I'd agree, the game is way too dark its just unrealistic – any scientist working on mars for more than a week with that lighting would commit suicide)
Perhaps you missed the part when there's a hostile takeover and whatnot right? There's limited power and things aren't right.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
And can we finally say that iD is irrelevant and should die. They don't know how to make games OR engines anymore
I'm still pissed at having shelled out $50 for the craptacular monstrosity of a game that was Doom 3
Actually the Doom3 engine is really well done.It has really good lighting effects and shadowing. It runs pretty flawlessly on most hardware too.
The only thing I'm wondering is why there hasn't been any releases based on the Source Engine worth mentioning. The source engine is supurb and extremely fast on a variety of hardware and it still has some of the best looking water I've seen. I wish someone would use the engine for a stand alone project (unless there's a reason they can't and if so please elaborate).
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
There's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. You can't say "it's a good game except for the fact that it's incomplete, buggy as hell, and not what the customers asked for".
What's left?
Not quite an oxymoron, but thanks for trying. I didn't say anything about "incomplete" game, or "buggy as hell" games. Besides, who's to say a game is incomplete?
Games can still be great fun despite irritating bugs and things left out that the customer wants. Take BF2, for example. It's a great game, but it's stupid little things like the red tag over friendly heads that take forever to fix (among other things), and not listening to the players when they scream and yell for things, like nerfing particular areas of the game, etc.
There's a difference between a frustration over features/bugs and a game being just plain crappy.
Re:Well, at least guy, we will see some games that actual use the engine instead of just licensing it or talking about it. Right; Right?
Re:that's WHY they have purty pictures on the box.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
There's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. You can't say "it's a good game except for the fact that it's incomplete, buggy as hell, and not what the customers asked for".
What's left?
the graphics
with the U3 engine they can have purty pics on the box and people will flock to buy garbage.
Nah… the average Joe doesn't even know what a game engine is, let alone who provided the one in any given game. At most, this buys EA a second chance with some of the more hardcore gamers.
They better use that chance wisely.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
There's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. You can't say "it's a good game except for the fact that it's incomplete, buggy as hell, and not what the customers asked for".
What's left?
the graphics
with the U3 engine they can have purty pics on the box and people will flock to buy garbage.
Re:i'm sure they know their customers just love logo screens they can't easily skip each time they start a game.
Re:Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
There's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. You can't say "it's a good game except for the fact that it's incomplete, buggy as hell, and not what the customers asked for".
What's left?
Re:Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
Hey, for EA progress is progress…
Re:Originally posted by: guy
And can we finally say that iD is irrelevant and should die. They don't know how to make games OR engines anymore
I'm still pissed at having shelled out $50 for the craptacular monstrosity of a game that was Doom 3
ET: Quake Wars looks like it could be good, but iD's latest engine doesnt seem to have sold well, unlike Unreal Engine 3 with (from counting Wikipedia) 125+ games being made, and according to another source, over 300 titles in the works.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
I say use the Unreal Engine 3 to make Command & Conquer: Renegade 2!!!
(KIDDING!)
They are going to make Madden '08 using this engine. Can you imagine it?
Re:Originally posted by: blurredvision
Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
Lies, EA ruined the C&C series. ****** EA.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
And can we finally say that iD is irrelevant and should die. They don't know how to make games OR engines anymore
I'm still pissed at having shelled out $50 for the craptacular monstrosity of a game that was Doom 3
Someone is afraid of the dark. Flashlight mods for the win. (although I'd agree, the game is way too dark its just unrealistic – any scientist working on mars for more than a week with that lighting would commit suicide)
Re:Hmm, this is good news.
EA = crap
Epic = teh awesome
So as the earlier poster mentioned, maybe the results will be average instead of BF2 etc, errr, crap.
Re:And can we finally say that iD is irrelevant and should die. They don't know how to make games OR engines anymore
I'm still pissed at having shelled out $50 for the craptacular monstrosity of a game that was Doom 3
Re:Originally posted by: guy
so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
EA makes great games, it's just that their quality checking and attention to what the customer wants sucks ass.
Re:Damn, I wonder if Epic have their second money room built yet.
Re:so EA is gonna use a good engine to make crappy games. Good + crappy = average?
Re:I say use the Unreal Engine 3 to make Command & Conquer: Renegade 2!!!
(KIDDING!)