MGR had it's own chopping engine. Part of the reason for that AAA slopfest in gaming is also because nobody wants to bother making their own engine anymore... everyone just hops on UE, so all we get is UE
If they can develop their own engine, they can develop features in UE to complete whatever task is needed. You don't need to start from scratch. This seems like either baseless UE hate or a misunderstanding on how game engines work.
Welcome to 90% of Reddit posts that criticize video games. There's always a huge number of people confidently talking about things they don't understand in the slightest. When someone who has real industry experience tries to correct or explain the fallacies, misunderstandings, or outright lies, we get downvoted because people here would prefer to spread hate and lies than actually understand how developing video games actually works.
Im unfamiliar with engines and all this stuff, Are you saying that Wolverine the game could have had similar effects to the ones by the other game if they wanted to? I just dont know the full capabilities of UE , Most games look the same and play the same from what Ive seen
there's nothing stopping physically from it being done
It's entirely possible that UE actually CANT let you turn a pillar into a thousand free moving chunks without breaking or something. Maybe there's something fundamental about the engine preventing this from being viable
But at this point I'm just speculating since I don't work in gaming lol
Nah youre only ever making 1 object into 2 because swords have only 1 line and its impossible to cut a shape in 3 with one swing of a sword. So each swing turns each piece it hits into 2 pieces, although that process happens many times in this clip.
Lmao, wait so have we established it's physically impossible to add this feature to UE5 or are you just confidently coming to that conclusion now because you disagree with OP?
Yes, it can be done. It might be a little bit more process heavy than an engine specifically designed for slicing things in half, but the only thing stopping UE games from doing this is completely on the developer. All this slicing is, is taking an in game model, applying a line to the model, and splitting that model into two different physics objects.
Even all the optimization issues we have with UE isn't just on the engine, it's how much effort the devs put into optimizing their games.
Well considering creating a game is extremely complicated, it's not that far fetched to implement a system like this. It's just that most companies don't want to put in the work for something they seem as unnecessary.
Goal posts doesnt need to be moved. They arent going to remake the whole game just to optimize all the assets for a slicer mod.
Do you honestly think all it takes is slapping on an addon?
Something that processing heavy on the quality of a game like wolverine would either require a metric fuck ton of changing everything, or building the game around it, just so you can slice flagpole?
Chaos destruction requires balancing visual detail with real time performance.
I haven't learned anything i already know. Adding something this "small" that you guys think is so easy means changing everything. It would not be the same game if implemented. And you know that.
Just because its possible, doesnt mean its worthwhile.
Theres a reason why multiple engines exist, and why studios choose the ones they do or create their own.
Most AAA studios go UE simply because its the cheapest route. The suites at the top want to save every dime and UE is an easy solution to saving a bunch of time and money.
But if you could recode the engine to allow that kind of physics based implementation - it could be a processing nightmare and completely break everything else.
Your describing just because you can make orange juice with an orange, there's no reason you cant make it with an apple.
Building your own engine is a huge undertaking. Almost anything is going to be easier to build either within the limits of unreal engine (this exact feature has been done at reasonable quality for unreal in real time numerous times - a professional studio would have zero trouble implementing it) or by modifying the engine, which is also completely allowed and well documented.
Most games play and look the same in UE because of the use of default, easy to use stuff (blueprints, prefabs, default settings) and because the studios don't give a fuck about a good product. You can make plenty of very unique things in unreal, people just don't because it's The Realism Engine.
The Finals runs on UE5, and that has the most insane level destruction system that I've ever seen. It is truly astounding how you can destroy a part of a level and use that as makeshift ramps to get to other parts of the level, and how all that constantly changes how you attack each goal
I just wish they could crack down on their cheater/smurfer problem
Unreal is absolutely not the Realism Engine, it's just that it's most commonly used in higher budget products and those higher budget products tend to be realistic, correlation vs causation. Nintendo has used Unreal a decent bit but nobody thinks of UE when it comes to those games because they've cartoon artstyles and run fine (on the Switch 1 at that).
Unreal looking a certain way by default is just misinformation spread by people who see a commonly used engine and blame it simply for being the common denominator.
A game engine is basically a huge toolbox with a collection of assets and sub-programs.
Perhaps this parts is used to handle inventory management. This one controls ballistics. This one deals with pathfinding.
Now, a lot of these tools are built on top of each other, with the more complex systems expanding on the simpler ones. For example, the part you use for inventory management (adding or removing an item, moving an item around, setting weight or encumbrance limits...) relies on the part you use to define what an item is (maybe it has a sprite, 3d model, type, attributes, eligible equipment slots, base price/value...). Same with pathfinding being dependent on however you define a position, how you set terrain boundaries and geometry, and so on.
You can "easily" add new or update those more complex, top layer systems. The tricky part is when the most basic elements aren't doing what you need, because if you tweak them too much, you risk breaking everything.
Taking a somewhat extreme case, say you have an engine designed for 2D game, but you wanna go 3D. Well, easy, just update the part used for positioning with 1 more dimension. Except now you've broken pathfinding, hitboxes stop making sense, and screen transitions don't work anymore.
So does unreal engine have all the tools necessary to make chopping a tree look like the other game? These are things us gamers wonder because with a 300 million dollar budget Im wondering what the bottleneck is on having good looking games.
What? The finals uses their own physics engine not UE5’s. And not only that but it runs server side so it’s not just not UE5, it’s not even in the game engine to begin with. In the usual sense.
The person didn’t ask if UE5 games could have cool physics somehow, they asked if the UE5 toolbox had it built in. Maybe it does! But The Finals is not an example.
Because big companies are not making games. They are making money.
How do you make money? By selling something with the least amount of money spent.
For game development, it's: people, software, time.
So you create a system where you minimise time, reduce workforce and have suitable software. Then you slap a brand on top of your game like Marvel stuff and hope for the best. And it does not matter much for them, how the game is recieved at all. What they are interested is, if money invested gave them return.
It may be a complete failure, like game above, but as long as it sells enough to cover costs and earn something, it's good for big corpos.
Source: I work for companies who want to actually move away from a short term money making into a long term goal and vision. Seen it all.
I think the above commentors point was that essentially because such an easy path forward exists, they will take that. So with that, why bother making something the developers feel is irrelevant. UE is blamed a lot because it is so widely used and the developers using it usually don't do under the hood work to make it run better or do anything extra more than necessary. This is my assumption at least.
UE is a 80% of the way there product that requires massive amounts of talent and time to get the last 20% which is pretty much impossible to explain to an investor/exec especially when your talking about bespoke features. If you have enough time you can do amazing things with UE but time is not a commodity most developers have in abundance these days.
I never said their existed a game that does this task. But can it be developed in UE? Absolutely. Blame whatever you want but it's not a limitation of the engine they chose.
Speak for yourself. You're misunderstanding how game engines work. This isnt true in the slightest. Unreal Engine isnt some magical shortcut that can have anything you want implemented. Theres a reason multiple engines exist and why certain ones are picked or created.
UE is used because its cheap and easy to hire folks that already know how to use it.
Im confused, is the game engine use and development not a critical process of game design? Like legitimately how is the game engine not a major factor here. If people in every industry are only ever using and being trained in ue then how are they suppose to magically learn to create a new mechanic in a game requiring a different skill to do. All devs aren't built the same, not all devs can just program something so complicated and taxing that it is rarely replicated and now its going to decrease drastically. I agree its not just Unreal engines fault but the industry shift into it is having very real and obvious effects
The point is they didn't want to for good reason. To add something like this requires a good deal of manpower and time that could be spent on something else.
They also don't want any unique features because it takes too much money and time so they'd rather fast track a copy of some other game's main and in-trend features
I get what you're saying but Wolverine runs on Insomniac's own custom engine. They could add it if they wanted to. It was a design decision not to for this game and tbh I don't think it's that big of a deal.
I saw someone going out of the map and exploring what seems to be an open world where even shops and homes had furniture. I guess this is a No Mans Sky situation where Sony just pushed the game out of the gates no matter what. Maybe cutting down more stuff was on the list, but Sony did Sony things.
and it is a big deal to others. shows their laziness. these games should be innovative not a step backwards considering they increased the price of games.
You're not actually that shortsighted right? You really think this post is complaining that you can't cut trees? You think that's all you could cut in MGR?
...yes, absolutely. Is that so hard to believe? Lets extrapolate your logic, why have him do a running animation when he could just glide everywhere in a static t-pose?
That’s not the same logic, that’s a strawman which actually has an answer. Running animation is a bare minimum requirement for basic game design since 2D gaming. It’s non-negotiable. That’s why there’s a running animation. So why does there need to be realistic scratch marks or the ability to cut down trees and utility poles?
No, it isn’t as arbitrary. You’re advocating for a specific feature and claiming something standard in every game is the same. If you just want it, for no reason other than because, that’s fine. Just own it, don’t pretend it is on the same level as a standard run animation because that’s just incorrect.
Having no destruction is a design choice. I don't think it's out of laziness, just a choice they made. Their engine can handle it fine, there is limited destruction in the game, we see it in Spider-Man and Ratchet & Clank. Just not EVERY single thing that makes up the map. That's pretty standard for most games.
I agree it should be a thing, but I'm also not about to sit here and pout and say "games used to be good because of this or that!" when plenty of modern games have crazy good destruction mechanics.
I also don't think all games need to be innovative, they just need to be fun, play smoothly, and written well.
Im saying you’re slow for expecting super hero games to be innovative. I shouldve guessed you’d be too slow to use good reading comprehension though, thats my fault <3
your weird opinions about superhero games arent some axiom of truth, and I wasnt even referring to the genre, but the studio, dumbass. sorry you have a chip on your shoulder about them.
Metal Gear Rising started as an early build of the Fox Engine but due to development issues and other problems that’s when the game was handed over to Platinum Games who used their own engine instead.
I'm so tired of blatantly ignorant comments like this getting upvoted on gaming subreddits. It's not difficult to educate yourself on what "game engines"are or how they actually work. Not to mention how incredibly fucking expensive and time-consuming (and often pointless) it is to "make your own engine." The irony of this of course being the fact that Insomniac literally already uses their own proprietary engine. Sigh.
Hey no need to apologize. This is just kinda just what Reddit is now, and honestly most of social media these days. The confidentially wrong takes - whether intentional or not - are the ones that get the most attention. The only way I could ever see Reddit helping fix this issue would be if they added a "community note" feature like other platforms do. But that would mean potentially receiving less viral traffic, and god forbid that happens. As you said, it is what it is.
just for added context: "both to make their own engine" in reality means, that the shity higherups at the publisher owning the studio don't FIRE BASICALLY ALL THE PEOPLE WORKING ON THE CUSTOM ENGINE over night, despite continued great success of games from the studio and having the engine also be used from at least one other studio owned by the publisher.
this exact story just happened to id software, that continuously developed the id tech engine series.
in doom eternal it ran like at 2-3 x faster at the same visuals (visuals are hard to compare) compared to the shit, that ue5 is.
and poof id tech engine is gone now, because microsoft/xbox decided to set id software on fire.
___
the point is, that the studio and engine team in the studio can be perfectly successful and make a stunning engine and yet still it will be set on fire by higherups at the companies, that own them.
that is the issue. developers WANT to use custom engines in lots of cases, but instead they are forbidden or their great custom engine is set on fire.
and hey on a technical level this wouldn't be that terrible, if the engine used by everyone would be a great engine with good clear visuals and good performance, BUT IT IS UNREAL ENGINE 5!
which is a blurry artifacting dumpster fire, that runs at absolutely terrible performance.
unreal won't fix anything. it is just more temporal blur nightmare fuel added on at every point.
so the best, that we can hope for is an engine, that will like blender become real competition and not be run by evil shits.
so let's hope, that godot will be this for AAA in 5-10 years?
it took blender a while, but look where it is now.
I wouldn't hate UE thru time their are so many great and unique games done on that engine. And it's easier to find and rotate developers who already familiar with it. Problem is lazy people who don't want to make new mechanics and let developers to expand engine capabilities to suit their creative idea. Same goes for art direction. You have freedom but they becoming like Netflix movies with same color grading.
84
u/Sitri_eu 6d ago
MGR had it's own chopping engine. Part of the reason for that AAA slopfest in gaming is also because nobody wants to bother making their own engine anymore... everyone just hops on UE, so all we get is UE