27 replies to this topic

[Rhialto]

Will it even happen? FWIK MWO currently run a heavily modified CE 3.5, could that be the reason why moving to latest 5.2.3 is not possible or a too complex task?

Following Russ question the other day if we still want more Mechs added to MWO, I said I would prefer a break and read that MWO is slowly moving to latest and greatest CryEngine 5.

I'd like to hear PGI on this, Russ ignored my tweet on that specific question.

I know MW5 run Unreal. MWO will keep running CE for a long time if not ever.

[Metus regem]

Rhialto, on 08 December 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

Will it even happen? FWIK MWO currently run a heavily modified CE 3.5, could that be the reason why moving to latest 5.2.3 is not possible or a too complex task?

Following Russ question the other day if we still want more Mechs added to MWO, I said I would prefer a break and read that MWO is slowly moving to latest and greatest CryEngine 5.

I'd like to hear PGI on this, Russ ignored my tweet on that specific question.

I know MW5 run Unreal. MWO will keep running CE for a long time if not ever.

Based on how MW5 looked in Unreal, I wouldn't be surprised if MWO gets ported or rebuilt for that engine at some point... Cry engine looks nice, but isn't very coding friendly, lacks several things PGI has chosen to use... Long story short, I would be very happy to see them go to Unreal, as they are already doing mech assets in it, that would be of use in a MWO version.

[Kotzi]

I am an absolute noob so please excuse my potentially stupid example. But i do imagine it something like this. Someone learning english to tell a story. Its basic english and thus the story is good but lacks a lot of things and details. The author then decides to advance his skills but starts learning french because it sounds fancier instead of keeping learning english. Wouldnt it be easier to keep on learning english?

[Bombast]

Rhialto, on 08 December 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

I'd like to hear PGI on this, Russ ignored my tweet on that specific question.

Then you're not going to get an answer anytime soon.

If MWO gets an engine change, it will likely be to Unreal, after MW5: Mercs is finished. As of this moment, PGI almost certainly has more Unreal coding muscle in the company then CryEngine, and if their current CryEngine is as butchered as some people have claimed, it'll likely be just as much effort to update to the newest version as to switching to Unreal.

[Metus regem]

Bombast, on 08 December 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

Then you're not going to get an answer anytime soon.

If MWO gets an engine change, it will likely be to Unreal, after MW5: Mercs is finished. As of this moment, PGI almost certainly has more Unreal coding muscle in the company then CryEngine, and if their current CryEngine is as butchered as some people have claimed, it'll likely be just as much effort to update to the newest version as to switching to Unreal.

Don't even need to claim, when they (PGI) did adjustments to AC/2's they broke Clan Lower Arm Actuators....

[Bombast]

Metus regem, on 08 December 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

Don't even need to claim, when they (PGI) did adjustments to AC/2's they broke Clan Lower Arm Actuators....

I didn't mean butchered as in 'They broke the game,' but as in 'So far from standard that updating the engine to a newer version is just has hard and costly as switching to an entirely new engine.'

[Metus regem]

Bombast, on 08 December 2016 - 10:45 AM, said:

I didn't mean butchered as in 'They broke the game,' but as in 'So far from standard that updating the engine to a newer version is just has hard and costly as switching to an entirely new engine.'

What I meant by what I said was, that they tried to fix one thing, but due to how their code is written it effected something that should not have been effected by that change. Also from my understanding Cry Engine is not natively server authoritative, so that had to be changed for MWO, PGI claims that weapon ammo switching is not supported by the engine, yet secondary weapon systems is supported by the engine, for example get a rifle in Crysis that has a grenade launcher attached to it, you can use the secondary grenade launcher or the rifle... in a sense that is ammo switching of a form.

[Konrad]

Having spent lots of time in both Cry and UE4 (and UDK) I can certainly confirm that using UE has been a lot easier.

[Bombast]

Metus regem, on 08 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

...PGI claims that weapon ammo switching is not supported by the engine...

Uh... didn't Crysis 1 have a shotgun that switched firing patterns?

Now that I think about it, it literally had an LB-X in it. All you'd have to do would be change it from Wide Spread/Tight spread, to Wide Spread/Zero Value spread.

...Wow.

[Chuck Jager]

Do not completely blame PGI for the clunkiness of Cry ATM.

I was part of upgrade to a University website that needed to put 1000s of pages into a database system and also allow web access to record and events. The vendors adobe included will show you plenty of examples of how EZ it is to implement and execute across multiple platforms. Even though Universities all have similar needs and make up a huge software/hardware purchasing group, the vendors seem to miss the items that their systems do not play friendly with. Note once this was accomplished 2+ years laters, large site wide changes and tech upgrades became extremely simple.

You can say why not modify the code it yourself. The custom coding is what is hurting the ability for the other features to integrate. Also every time another competitor gets an element of their product working, now everybody needs it yesterday. So more quick custom coding, that will crash someday. It is a "king has no clothes battle", that is greatly magnified by a large user population with different IPs and hardware/software.

PS just because one company using engine gets one feature working, does not mean that another companies similar feature can be defined and executed to function in the same manner.

Hopefully another engine can do away with the need for customized server side authority and solve some issues. [it could be client side or a well integrated native module for SSA - just not customized]

Edited by Chuck Jager, 08 December 2016 - 11:08 AM.

[Metus regem]

Bombast, on 08 December 2016 - 10:59 AM, said:

Uh... didn't Crysis 1 have a shotgun that switched firing patterns?

Now that I think about it, it literally had an LB-X in it. All you'd have to do would be change it from Wide Spread/Tight spread, to Wide Spread/Zero Value spread.

...Wow.

Yup.... really makes you stop and think about either PGI's ability to code or that they have a Frankin-Engine to work with now...

After seeing the trailer for MW5, I'm inclined to go with the problem is their Frankin-Engine they use for MWO....

[Konrad]

Bombast, on 08 December 2016 - 10:59 AM, said:

Uh... didn't Crysis 1 have a shotgun that switched firing patterns?

Now that I think about it, it literally had an LB-X in it. All you'd have to do would be change it from Wide Spread/Tight spread, to Wide Spread/Zero Value spread.

...Wow.

Yes it did have that.

[Coralld]

Metus regem, on 08 December 2016 - 11:04 AM, said:

Yup.... really makes you stop and think about either PGI's ability to code or that they have a Frankin-Engine to work with now...

After seeing the trailer for MW5, I'm inclined to go with the problem is their Frankin-Engine they use for MWO....

It was a while back when PGI still talked on these forums, a forum member asked one of the PGI guys on the state of the game engine. PGI responded by saying the engine had been completely contorted and pushed beyand what it was designed for that accessing existing aspects of what the Cryengine already supported, let alone modifying, would inevitably brake something else. Every time they fixed one thing it ended up braking 50 other things. They were surprised the engine worked at all.

If PGI transfer over MWO to UE from CE, we could see a number of back end issue being solved and possibly new features being added that would otherwise cause the existing engine to explode.

In short, CE is an unforgiving biznatch and the UE is full of win.

Edited by Coralld, 08 December 2016 - 11:33 AM.

[Johnny Z]

All the Battletech titles are working on 3 different engines atm.

[Tibbnak]

Cryengine was a mistake.

[MechaBattler]

They said it would take just as much work to port this to Cryengine5, or whatever, as it would to go over to Unreal. If it were up to me I would go with Unreal. Because then they can build the game under similar code to MW5 and make the swapping of personal from either project that much smoother and effective.

[Metus regem]

MechaBattler, on 08 December 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

They said it would take just as much work to port this to Cryengine5, or whatever, as it would to go over to Unreal. If it were up to me I would go with Unreal. Because then they can build the game under similar code to MW5 and make the swapping of personal from either project that much smoother and effective.

Not to mention the advantage of shared assets, that alone would reduce development time....

[Lorian Sunrider]

My thought on the matter was that once they have begun the import of models/recreation of models for MW5 they will move onto importing the rest of the mechs. At which point we will either see MWO switch or see an MWO 2 style launch in the EU4 engine.

Of course, all new mechs would be built into both as well.

[Rhialto]

Following MW5 announcement, If MWO was to be ported on UE then pretty sure Russ would have told us. I see no reason why he would have not taken that opportunity to explain why MW5 use UE and what will happen with MWO.

[Bombast]

Rhialto, on 08 December 2016 - 05:07 PM, said:

Following MW5 announcement, If MWO was to be ported on UE then pretty sure Russ would have told us. I see no reason why he would have not taken that opportunity to explain why MW5 use UE and what will happen with MWO.

Really? I see a bunch of reasons.

They could be planning on letting MWO die. They could be waiting until they have a better handle on Unreal. They may not want to publically commit to something that wont happen for 2 years. They could be saving an improved engine upgrade for a time when people are pissed off at them again and they need more good will. Maybe they are planning to make MWO2, and wont be doing account transfers, so they wont announce it until sooner so they can keep on raking in Mech Pack money on MWO1.

This is a failure of your imagination.

Edited by Bombast, 08 December 2016 - 05:12 PM.