switching to Unreal is a godsent now they can actually focus on making the game and not messing around with the tech.
Not quite, they'll still most likely have to modify UE5 to fit their needs but that's just part of the course really.switching to Unreal is a godsent now they can actually focus on making the game and not messing around with the tech.
UE doesn't have Quest graph and Dialogue editor which are essential tools for creating a story driven RPG. So they still have to do lots of modifying and messing around with the techswitching to Unreal is a godsent now they can actually focus on making the game and not messing around with the tech.
UE doesn't have Quest graph and Dialogue editor which are essential tools for creating a story driven RPG. So they still have to do lots of modifying and messing around with the tech
The project utilizing UE5 will most likely not be a very heavy RPG. As expressed above, it's not an engine that works really well for RPGs -- by design. The reason Unreal Engine is so powerful at creating sharp textures, dynamic and accurate lighting, etc. is because it does not busy itself with all of the background robustness that's needed for complex layers of RPG functionality.
A little more clarification is needed, I think.
Firstly, the studio is not "switching to Unreal Engine". They're working with the Unreal Engine for a future title. The REDengine is right where it has always been and will be used again in the future, I'm very certain.
The project utilizing UE5 will most likely not be a very heavy RPG. As expressed above, it's not an engine that works really well for RPGs -- by design. The reason Unreal Engine is so powerful at creating sharp textures, dynamic and accurate lighting, etc. is because it does not busy itself with all of the background robustness that's needed for complex layers of RPG functionality.
So, if my purpose was to build a super-complex RPG or Strategy game with tons of intricate mechanics...UE5 would be a terrible place to begin. I'd be much better off using something like Unity for a wide range of different features, Gamebryo if modularity is key, or REDengine if I want to include lots of cinematics and unique, set-piece scenes.
So what was that Havok thing with Unreal and Autodesk etc... all about?This is totally incorrect information. TW1 was written on a heavily modified version of a licensed engine. That was the major inspiration for the studio to just write their own engine. REDengine is built and developed in-house. It does not use Unreal.
*shrugs* Maybe I'm confusing it with another game. I'm pretty sure I'm not. But, agree with SigilFey, he's the insider. I've lost interest. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I play way too many damned games LMFAO!!!!!!!! I'm seriously trying to figure out which game may be the one I've confused, but the intro was one of the things that were most notably changed upon 1.52. I play on PC with the Steam version, not that it probably makes a difference. But, usually my memory is pretty good. All those associated technologies that were shown along with Red Engine are no longer shown when the game loads. I'm cool with being wrong. *shrugs*No Crytek in the intro
Where is that? havok is a bolt on solution for physics. Autodesk is a company that makes among other things a CAD software... they also makes Maya and some other software for 3d modeling and so on.So what was that Havok thing with Unreal and Autodesk etc... all about?
Yeah, it's "third party" softwares that every studios on "every engine" can use for add features to their gamesSo what was that Havok thing with Unreal and Autodesk etc... all about?
I'd like to believe they won't just do away with red engine. I feel like it would be a huge waste of time and funding to just drop it.No one said they're switching everything forever to UE5. The next Witcher game is going to be made using UE5, that is all we know. Could very well be that CDPR will be updating it's own engine and they'll come back with it for the next Cyberpunk game, who knows?
It is way too early to say they are moving on from it.
And it is never going open source.
I'd like to believe they won't just do away with red engine. I feel like it would be a huge waste of time and funding to just drop it.
I'd like to believe they won't just do away with red engine. I feel like it would be a huge waste of time and funding to just drop it.
I remember which game that I might have been confused with, Mortal Kombat XL It has a similar ensemble of tech. It's the only game that I've been playing as much as I play CP77. I think it stuck out to me because of the Scorpion thing. Actually, I think I started playing MKXL because of the Scorpion thing in CP77. *shrugs* Good info! Hmm!PS : I talk about Xbox (next gen update on Series X), the loading/boot screen didn't change at all. It's exactly the same as in the video
Really?! That's interesting! I would have never put Unity in the same sentence as REDengine. Hmm! I'll have to check out Gamebryo, I've never heard of it until now. I'm curious, what do you mean by modularity?I'd be much better off using something like Unity for a wide range of different features, Gamebryo if modularity is key, or REDengine if I want to include lots of cinematics and unique, set-piece scenes.
Not to mention they're the most handsome looking graphics by farI'd like to believe they won't just do away with red engine. I feel like it would be a huge waste of time and funding to just drop it.
I never said it was impossible:If you go to unreal store for 50 bucks you can dowload a module for UE4/5 that adds all the stuff for action RPGs... Obsidian pulled out an Action RPG in UE4(The Outer Worlds)with a team and budget that was probably smaller than just CDPR marketing team.
Sure,you might want to differentiate and not use generic module #346 in your game but is why you have a technical partnership with Epic. Its not a 2 days work, but we are talking of a company that till now was writting his own engine.
Really, if next CDPR game has less "RPG depth"-i know, depth is subjective and controversial- than CP2077 don't blame the engine is a company decision.
PS: as a side note Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines was made with a shooter engine (Source Half-Life2) and they were able to put enough RPG mechanics to make gunfight clunky until you start putting skill points.
I think you're pre-supposing that all the games CDPR intends to make are gigantic RPGs. Gwent is not an RPG. The Witcher Adventure Game is not an RPG. Neither is Monster Slayer, really. Yes, I'm sure we'll see more RPGs. But I'm sure we'll see a lot else, besides.But isn't that counterproductive? I thought the whole point of the partnership with epic was so CDPR has a bigger say in how the UE5 is developed and ensures it has the features CDPR need for their games. And doesn't have people (CDPR) working on the engine and not on the future game ofcourse.
I'd say that Unity gets a really bad rap simply because it opts to release for free, and it's not really picky about who it licenses to. The free bit alone means that there are a LOT of really rubbish games on Unity. But the engine is not to blame for how developers utilize it. No, Unity is not as specialized in its approach as either Unreal or REDengine, but it's extraordinarily robust:Really?! That's interesting! I would have never put Unity in the same sentence as REDengine. Hmm! I'll have to check out Gamebryo, I've never heard of it until now. I'm curious, what do you mean by modularity?
This is also a great example that using Unreal Engine doesn't mean a "bug free" game and a well optimized game...ARK: Survival Evolved utilizes a whole mess of RPG mechanics in Unreal, on top of being an gigantic open world.
Even if I like CP2077 , the present iteration of REDengine doesn't look like a great example of robust,smooth,trouble free development cycle. And if you need to rely on crunch due to engine issues, i would say you have a problem.said it was not a great choice. In fact, it's a pretty terrible choice. Go research the time the developers had trying to get their ambitious, robust games built in Unreal. Read up on similar dev cycles, like trying to get Dragon Age Inquisition built in Frostbite.
You might be able to point me "gameplay features" that were only possible in REDengine and not visuals/cinematics, but if I have to guess they switched to 3rd party engine because they cannot(or they dont want to) afford a big enough engine team able to realease a stable engine with all the (mostly visual) technical advances ahead of game development.CDPR has spent well over a decade building their own, powerful RPG engine from the ground up for exactly the type of games they wanted to make. Why would they then decide to build something in Unreal Engine, requiring them to pay out for the use of a third-party product...rather than just using their in-house product for free?
You know that you can interface your own modules right? , that example from marketplace is made by an individual who makes some money selling modules to small teams/individuals.it because a toolkit released for Unreal is somehow better than REDengine
If you have the chance,fire up the Outer Worlds is completely opposite example of what you claim.They want to do something light on RPG elements, with spectacular graphics, and faster, more action-oriented gameplay. That's exactly what Unreal Engine was built for.
i think finding people that are already familiar too UE is a big factor too. Selfmade engine has selfmade stuff and req much more time too learn then UE is also my guess. Heck i can probably learn it myself trough videos and so on right now. The tool is free too so you can actually learn it before you start working at CDPR. With the whole restructuring and agile way too work im also guessing this is a big factor. perhaps it has a much smoother workflow and so on(im not a gameprogrammer so im just guessing here). I do have some experiance with workflows and fast/just in time production tho ^^CDPR has spent well over a decade building their own, powerful RPG engine from the ground up for exactly the type of games they wanted to make. Why would they then decide to build something in Unreal Engine, requiring them to pay out for the use of a third-party product...rather than just using their in-house product for free?
Is it because a toolkit released for Unreal is somehow better than REDengine overall for making RPGs? I seriously doubt it.
Is it because Unreal works better on more diverse systems (Windows, Playstation OS, Android, etc.)? Possibly!...but they did get TW3 to run on the bleepin' Switch. Not sure that's the core reason.
Is it because the game they're making may be more action-oriented and linear, rather than a full-on RPG? <--- That makes total sense. They want to do something light on RPG elements, with spectacular graphics, and faster, more action-oriented gameplay. That's exactly what Unreal Engine was built for.
I think you're pre-supposing that all the games CDPR intends to make are gigantic RPGs. Gwent is not an RPG. The Witcher Adventure Game is not an RPG. Neither is Monster Slayer, really. Yes, I'm sure we'll see more RPGs. But I'm sure we'll see a lot else, besides.
This is also a great example that using Unreal Engine doesn't mean a "bug free" game and a well optimized game...
ARK still a "very buggy" game even after years of regular patches/updates and still run horribly on consoles. Way worse than Cyberpunk at release, that's for sure (if you have played ARK on XB1, even XB1x which was the best console possible at its release, you would know it^^)
You might be able to point me "gameplay features" that were only possible in REDengine and not visuals/cinematics, but if I have to guess they switched to 3rd party engine because they cannot(or they dont want to) afford a big enough engine team able to realease a stable engine with all the (mostly visual) technical advances ahead of game development.
Perhaps this is a reason for partnership too, too make more UE modules with RPG games in mind.
“One of the core aspects of our internal RED 2.0 Transformation is a much stronger focus on technology, and our cooperation with Epic Games is based on this principle. From the outset, we did not consider a typical licensing arrangement; both we and Epic see this as a long-term, fulfilling tech partnership.
“Epic has been building Unreal Engine 5 to enable teams to create dynamic open worlds at an unprecedented scale and level of fidelity. We are deeply honored by the opportunity to partner with CD PROJEKT RED to push the limits of interactive storytelling and gameplay together, and this effort will benefit the developer community for years to come.”
Honestly, I think the "project" was a little bit "too big" for Wildcard which is not a big studio.To be fair, it's less about the engine and more about the team behind the game. The ARK developers seem more focused on getting that next DLC/expansion out than they are on fixing the game's issues.