PDA

View Full Version : !!!! CryEngine does Virtual Cinema toolkit !!!!



lardbros
03-18-2011, 08:29 AM
http://mycryengine.com/

Watch the video on the right side of the page!!!!

Now this looks VERY VERY impressive!! Utilising motion tracking cams and real-time feedback, where on earth does this leave Lightwave and it's implementation of the Virtual Studio... it's just not going to be enough.

I realise the Avatar Virtual Art Department were awesome with what they did, but it was all very bespoke stuff etc. Putting all the power of the CryEngine and the ability to have real-time performances in there or in a head-set with stereo is just incredible, and you can edit the landscape/foliage etc, all whilst playing! It has to be tried to be believed! :D

Does Newtek need to compete with these kinds of tools? Or do you see it as a completely different market, so they are safe?

My problem is, I want Lightwave to do everything... and because they have implemented some Virtual Studio tools (which, by the way, isn't widely enough supported... I'm sure we'd use it if LW had stereo shutter support, and could take in Vicon Tracker data), do they need to keep in line with the big boys like the CryEngine?

Discuss!.... :D

borkus
03-18-2011, 09:27 AM
Oh my good god... That was impressive! I so can't wait for Crysis 2 to be released. And seeing this video, one wonders how much of a dream it was to work on the game.

DonJMyers
03-18-2011, 10:57 AM
Crysis was a fun game but the real star was the game engine and now they are coming out with a new version. But you can't necessarily compare the two because the game engine is optimized for specific things, like triangles or tree placement. Lightwave is not as slick as some of the things the game engine does.

But lightwave does things games engines can't. Like four sided polygons or the anisotrophic texture on a compact disk. It's the jack of all trades.

COBRASoft
03-18-2011, 11:37 AM
Impressive!

Vincenzo
03-18-2011, 12:09 PM
I am not impressed! CryEngine imports content from apps like Max, Maya etc. It doesnt create models. It also costs a few hundred thousand and a few percent of the game revenue. They are really not in competition.

lardbros
03-18-2011, 12:27 PM
I realise it imports content from Maya and Max, and even Lightwave using a plugin that was kindly made by our community (sorry, your name escapes me)... BUT, the engine is going to be packaged with the game for people who don't want to buy the engine (it is out of most people's price range :D ) but the results are incredible... and they are one of the only game developers to be seriously pushing the boundaries of where games go. Their implementation of a single-pass stereo shader... with just a 2% drop in speed over a single rendered display... this is just incredible.

I realise this isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, but this kind of real-time rendering will become the standard in a few years. I know LW Core has shaders that work for rendering and for viewport display at the same time, so if they implement DOF, Motion Blur, (when I say these, I know they are in LW 10.0, but the CryEngine one is very pretty! :)

I can't wait to start using the new features in the engine... this is the future in my mind! Like that TwinMotion software, but actually fast and a more usable.

probiner
03-18-2011, 02:24 PM
You can play the Multiplayer Demo.

Visuals looks good. Game mechanics... meh... liked first Crysis more.

Nangleator
03-18-2011, 02:32 PM
As artists, we've got to stay on top of the tools, and not be held back by them. Otherwise, we'll be like John Henry trying to beat the steam hammer.

3D apps will be overcome and rendered obsolete by game engines, eventually. But there'll still be a need for art!

Mr Rid
03-18-2011, 05:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgS67BwPfFY&hd=1

lardbros
03-18-2011, 05:51 PM
Holy crap... stunning!

We've tried the Unreal Dev kit at work for a few months, and CryEngine is far superior for editing and using as a base, we don't look to modify the engine code at all. No doubt that Unreal is developing at a faster rate and has been improving greatly each and every month... that video is remarkable... better character work than most pre-rendered stuff I've seen. Thanks for showing!

cresshead
03-18-2011, 05:53 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgS67BwPfFY&hd=1

that was..................unreal!:D

walfridson
03-18-2011, 06:00 PM
we don't look to modify the engine code at all.

that's cryengine biggest flaw. and it's big enough to make people choose unreal engine.

lardbros
03-18-2011, 06:00 PM
I understand that... but the base engine is good enough for us to work with...

I think the next biggest flaw is their pricing... it's absolutely crazy. A good tool, yep, but certainly not a cheap one. You don't see many games released that have utilised the CryEngine.


Unreal do have it right with the open-ness of their engine, and their team, whether it's sales or development are very keen to help and provide demos and material.

Vincenzo
03-18-2011, 08:59 PM
The revenues that Epic and Crytek make of AAA games dwarfs Newteks revenue many times! They are not going after LW or Modos market!!!

JCG
03-18-2011, 10:32 PM
Crytek plans indie-friendly CryEngine licensing

"We have a business model in mind for this--which I can't get into details of right now--but it will be extremely user-friendly," Yerli said. "The barriers for entry will be very low, and perhaps even for free. Of course this will be compared to UDK and Unity and so on, but we think this sort of competition is very good for the community."

link (http://www.shacknews.com/article/67834/crytek-planning)

Matt
03-18-2011, 11:00 PM
But you can't necessarily compare the two because the game engine is optimized for specific things

Exactly right, to look at a game engine and go "why can't we have that" is to completely miss the point about the difference between a 3D application that allows the creation of any type of content and an optimised-very-specifically-for-a-certain-application game engine.

Mr Rid
03-19-2011, 01:20 AM
I dont know about this, but I've seen a lot of game tech promise that turns out somewhat less impressive or practical than the dazzling, advance demos.

lardbros
03-19-2011, 03:13 AM
Exactly right, to look at a game engine and go "why can't we have that" is to completely miss the point about the difference between a 3D application that allows the creation of any type of content and an optimised-very-specifically-for-a-certain-application game engine.

I do understand that, but they are converging. At work we create models for realtime and for prerendered and a few years ago we'd have two separate assets... but these days we can pretty much use the prerendered models of stuff if we bake everything in.

I'm certainly not worried about Lightwave and it's market getting swallowed up by game engines, but don't see any difference between what CryEngine have made with their engine and what Rob P did with the virtual art department). Unless I'm missing something.

Just wonder if it's a niche market that Newtek should venture even further down that's all? They could add more support for other systems or will they leave it with the intersense cams?

I don't disagree with anyone's comments, and if you've tried to get stuff into realtime engines then you know it can be a pain... but CryEngine was relatively simple... and when you're in the toolkit it doesn't feel any different than using content generation software.

So, what would happen if crytek bolted a viewer/gaming environment into 3ds max? Would anyone use it for realtime architectural flythrough's in stereo? Or is it not suited to the work you're doing?

lardbros
03-19-2011, 03:15 AM
I dont know about this, but I've seen a lot of game tech promise that turns out somewhat less impressive or practical than the dazzling, advance demos.

Yeah, very true... this happens alot. Poetry in Motion never made it and TwinMotion was quite a let down after the hype.

evolross
03-22-2011, 11:06 AM
...to look at a game engine and go "why can't we have that"...
That was my knee-jerk reaction when I read a blog post showing the new Unreal and Crytek demos... these engines are doing this in realtime (motion blur, DOF, raytracing) and the LW render is ticking away and the VPR is slow and low quality?

Then I figured there's probably a lot of optimization and "rules" being followed with the content, not to mention a crazy-beefy machine with an array of GPUs inside it. As someone on the blog I was reading posted... if these are all "real-time" demos... why don't they release an executable and let us watch it in "real-time" on our systems? :tsktsk:

However, over the course of time these rules and optimizations will become more and more flexible and open as the hardware gets faster. There's a very interesting future to game engines. I know that Zoic (a popular LA VFX company) has already started doing commercials and cinematics using game engines. The industry is starting to embrace it, not necessarily as a replacement but an alternative option.

lardbros
03-22-2011, 12:00 PM
As an alternative it certainly is an option... many 3d packages are offering more and more complex shaders for their real-time viewports, and I know CORE will have too. After all, these game engines are built to cheat real-world occurrences but so are the 3d animation and rendering packages we all use...

I know game engines don't have to put up with so much clunky geometry nor thousands of 4k textures, but to be honest they still deal with a great deal of textures, more so than most of my Lightwave scenes, but they use techniques to make sure they are not all loaded all of the time... I just have this belief that we could do more of these viewport optimisations in Lightwave just to speed things up a bit.

(Although saying that, Direct X in 3ds max is much less accurate than OpenGL, because of it's optimisations. Draw a box, and check out the lines that should be on top of each other... zoom right in, and they won't be coincident... change to OpenGL and they will be... :) )

fablefox
03-25-2011, 06:45 AM
Cryengine will not replace Lightwave, however, it might render (ha ha ha - very punny) lightwave obselete. Notice it's connectivity to Maya? Look like vicious circle is becoming even more vicious. Maya got popular. Tools support Maya. For people need to use these tools, they buy Maya. Maya got even more popular. Tools support Maya - and maybe Max too, thinking that it's not worth it to support other app (see Electric Rain Swift for Lightwave). And people buy even more Maya license to support tools that only support Maya.

And suddenly, we are left with handful of plug-in. AFAIK, no plug-in inside UDK support Lightwave, mostly Maya & Max. Specially character animation and facial. Maybe I'm wrong here, but like I said, AFAIK, mostly only support Max & Maya. Even machinima tools IClone right out of the box have a plug-in that support only Max, and later Maya, before finally develop importer that support popular file format.

In today 3d animation, no man is an island, and any 3d app that not connected to popular tools are going to die a silent death. I hope Lightwave is not one of them, I just bought the license last month (and it arrived a few days ago) :-)

evolross
03-25-2011, 11:38 AM
Lightwave has always had a good crew of independent street hackers that find a way to connect it to other tools/workflows. Lightwave finds a way.

philippe
03-25-2011, 04:06 PM
Lightwave has always had a good crew of independent street hackers that find a way to connect it to other tools/workflows. Lightwave finds a way.

Yeah, one of them is named Waldfrison :
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=109082&highlight=cryengine

Basic model exporter but it works and if i remember correctly he did it in a few days !

fablefox
03-26-2011, 02:42 AM
nice tool, but the Maya connectivity is more complex than that. and trust me, with max, maya, and xsi to support, i don't know where lw stand out.

still, i'll just focus on my own project for now.