Re: Future trends for commercial game engines

Ing. Jacobo R=EDos wrote:
> With the more and more complex technology for games has become over =

> time, the decreasing interest of students/amateurs wanting to get into =

> game industry to learn DirectX/OpenGL and preferring to use an =

> existing game engine instead, the increasing popularity and =

> accessibility of TorqueEngine, CrystalSpace, etc among =

> students/amateurs/indies, and big corporate companies like EA, etc. =

> licensing UnrealEngine3 for their next-gen games...
>
> What are the future trends for commercial game engines? Will there be =

> a time were game studios will no longer create their own home-made =

> game engines and buy existing licenses (as we do today with =

> Maya/3DSM)?  Will there be a day were it won't be worth for students =

> to learn Dx/Ogl and how to create their own engine?, and where game =

> development schools will focus on teaching how to use a specific game =

> engine like UE3 (as there are animation schools today to teach =

> Maya/3DSM) and focus their curricula on other areas of game =

> development not game-engine-related? Can eventually this day come =

> someday?
>
> And if so=85 how soon or how far do you think we are until that day comes?
Basically, the question is what's cost effective? These days, major =

market games are expected to do a lot. Thousands of objects, millions of =

particles, physics, intelligent AI, realistic animation, brilliant =

graphics, 3D sound...

If you're going to build all of that into your game, you'd almost be =

foolish to build it all yourself, unless it's more your business to =

build a better game engine rather than to build a great game. And there =

will continue to be people who do that. But if your budget is growing =

north of $10 Million and you're building a game that "fits" into one of =

the existing engines, you'd be wise to spend a million of that on a good =

game engine.

If your game doesn't feet neatly into one of those categories, or you're =

building a game with a different emphasis than on technology, you may =

find it worthwhile to build your own engine, or to start from a =

different place.

In an industry that changes as fast as ours, building education programs =

that rely on a particular technology is foolish. I don't care whether =

it's Maya or Unreal or Max, I want artists to be able to create in 3D -- =

who cares what tool they use? The same can be said of programming =

languages. Hell, it can be said of human languages. Wouldn't it be nice =

if we'd all just settle on English so we could drop language education =

in our schools?

I think your desire is to get the discussion away from the engine and =

technology and more toward the gameplay, and that's not a bad desire. =

Because the complexity of game engines is getting so high, for education =

to start students off with game engines is generally good, because it =

lets you concentrate more on some of the gameplay issues and less on =

blitting rectangles to the screen. But expecting a fast-changing =

technology industry to settle on one target platform isn't gonna happen. =

There'll be a steady increase in the complexity of the foundation tools =

(we don't use assembler much anymore in this business), but I don't ever =

want the schools to get too comfortable with one technology.

    Kent



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easi=
er
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D1=
21642
_______________________________________________
Gamedevlists-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general
Archives:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=3D557