Whats Wrong with Epic? Dynamic Lighting, GI and Shadows!!

[Maximum-Dev]

@MonsOlympus;713102

Road tool, LPV, the Kite Demo for eg and Epics games are also hardly indoors, things like outdoor lodding used in Paragon. There are alot of tools that are simple not needed for smaller games but Open World is a popular buzz term so it makes sense Epic went along with it for marketing but the realities of the genre are far less optimistic. The Witcher 3 and Breath of the Wild being exceptions.

My point is they rushed to support people making open world games because everyone was jumping up and down (to repeat myself for the 3rd time btw) and implemented the tools in a fashion that was not largely beneficial for everyone and actually detrimental in the damage it caused to the stability of the codebase.

I cant honestly do this because the engines I know with the better feature sets for open world games are all in house, Snowdrop, Frostbite 3… Decima and there are more but Epic is actually an oddity in the industry not the rule. The issue for me is largely that bleeding edge graphics do not represent the games industry at large and those that need that level tend to have inhouse engine teams (even if they are using UE4) so I would much prefer to see the focus on features which help to make better games with the engine because its clear thats where the competitive advantage is atm not graphics

I just think the world could do with a few less clones and a for more large ambitious games that arnt simply a string of buzzwords tied together! Game projects die every day even for the biggest badarsed studios on the planet.

Road tool? you mean landscape spline? I’m aware people ask for spline decals to have proper roads: Unreal Engine Issues and Bug Tracker (UE-13142) and no one is answering the call though.

As for Kite demo, from my perspective (and many others) it was a form of marketing to pull more audience, because you know, majority of the communities are all about open worlds and an AAA engine without any open world support is to be laughed at so they implemented a set of tools to pull people in and say “we have it”. I think the fact that open world support ended right after GDC showcase proves the point. If Epic ever intended to have any proper support for open world then kite demo should’ve been polished to the point it’d run on all PCs of mid range hardware with ~100 frames.

But hey, Epic answered every performance complaints by “It’s a tech demo, not supposed to run well”. I was among the people who also happened to say the same like to complainers, but after a while, let me remind you epic, this is not a tech demo community, this is a game dev community with intention to create games that scale well on vast majority of hardware. Yeah let’s not blame the texture sizes and tri counts we both know that’s not the real issues, the real issues are all those accumulated backlogged bug reports that tend to not align with Epic’s goals to be addressed.

I think the matter of fact is they rushed to have the open world tools for the showcase stage. I don’t see any point in blaming the community for asking the tools they need. If it was for people then the support should’ve been continuous until the tools worked flawless before switching to support VR partners and car manufacturers.

As for graphics, I agree with you graphics isn’t the first factor, but I also believe we’re not discussing graphics in this thread, we’re discussing existing tools and supporting them before adding in new features and changing agendas.