Obsidian, Gearbox Developing Aliens Games
The sharp eyes at Gaming Target noticed that an Aliens teaser page on Sega.com revealed two companies involved with the new Aliens games mentioned...
The sharp eyes at Gaming Target noticed that an Aliens teaser page on Sega.com revealed two companies involved with the new Aliens games mentioned this morning. The page, since updated, listed both Obsidian Entertainment and Gearbox Software in the copyright section. Obsidian most recently worked on Neverwinter Nights 2, while Gearbox is best known for the Brothers in Arms games. It's not much of a surprise seeing these two companies involved, as the official press release announcing the deal between Sega and 20th Century Fox mentions the development of a role playing game as well as a first person shooter. The press release also corrects this morning's Hollywood Reporter story in saying the first game will be released in 2009, not 2008.
-
Beady
replyObsidian? NWN2?
Oh well, at least they will get the "full of bugs" part of Alien right.-
-
-
Hahaha Just ignore him. He holds some kind of grudge against Unreal.
http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=12137901 -
It's not a grudge, only customer feedback, without the marketing and presentation fluff you get when viewing Epic's tech demos.
I've had to develop with it, so I know its shortcomings. For instance, you can't just toss in several dynamic lights. It craps out after a few are used (don't forget weapons typically have dynamic lights, which you have to take into account).
After using the other engines like Source, Lithtech, Farcry and similar proprietary tech, I was surprised at how limited Unreal is. And that's where I'm disappointed -- the ease at which you can take an idea and apply it to an Unreal production. There's a reason most areas in Gears of War are square gymnasiums.
Unless you've actually used Unreal and used other technologies to realize that making fantastic games doesn't have to involve sucking a brick through a garden hose, then you can't really debate the usabilities issues.
Less Time to Operate = More Time to Create
;P
-
I too have used it. For over a year, in fact. And the previous Unreal Engines. And a few other engines. Maybe I didn't subject myself to the marketing fluff so I wasn't disappointed when I opened the editor for the first time.
For me though, it's been a good engine to work with, the best I've worked with actually. As with any engine, you have speed bumps and hiccups, but it's been pretty smooth, even considering that the studio where I work has even implemented some of it's own solutions for some fairly big engine systems. And I'm not talking about a team of 100 programmers, think more like 10.
My experience has been completely opposite. It isn't that UE3 is limited, it's that it's new. Wait a couple of years from now, when hardware is further along by several generations. UE3 can do a lot of dynamic lights, just not on the crappy systems most of us use today. It's designed for tomorrow, not today. But it can scale back to today just fine, you just might have to remove a few dynamic lights.
It seems like the developer you work for didn't make a good choice when engine shopping and now you guys are feeling the pain. That doesn't mean UE3 sucks. It just means that UE3 might not be right for what you are trying to accomplish. An older, more solid piece of tech may have been a better solution.
I don't know. The vast amount of feedback I hear from other developers I know is positive.
-
-
-
-
