Unreal engine 3 interview

[Ace Pace]

Jesus fucking H. christ thats some nice specs.

Nothing suprising, except quad core users will be happy.

31.05.2007 13:02 Uhr - The original printed version was first published in issue 06/2007 of the german PC Games Hardware magazine. Here you'll find the unabridged interview of PCGH with Tim Sweeny. The Interview was conducted via email by Frank Stöwer on behalf of PC Games Hardware, all rights reserved. (2007)

PCGH: You rescheduled the game to Q3 in 2007. Was one of the reasons behind this that you had to do some technical changes with the engine or that you found ways to improve your game technology?

Tim Sweeney: We didn't reschedule anything. UT3 has always been about being done when it's done. We're taking our time with the game because the UT franchise is very important to us and we want to get it right for this, the third generation in the series.

PCGH: You are using deferred shading. Will there be any chance to get FSAA working with DX9-Level-cards? What about DX10-cards?

Tim Sweeney: Unreal Engine 3 uses deferred shading to accelerate dynamic lighting and shadowing. Integrating this feature with multisampling requires lower-level control over FSAA than the DirectX9 API provides. In Gears of War on Xbox 360, we implemented multisampling using the platform's extended MSAA features. On PC, the solution is to support multisampling only on DirectX 10.

PCGH: Can you at this point of development tell our readers what kind of hardware will be required to play the game with all detail in 1024x768 (No FSAA/AF) and 1.600x1.200 (with 4xFSAA - if available - and 8:1 AF)? Will there be any fallback modes for gamers with older hardware like Shader 2.0 cards?

Tim Sweeney: Optimization is still ongoing, so these numbers change on a daily basis. In general, our Unreal Engine 3 games run quite well on DirectX9 class hardware that NVidia and ATI released in 2006 and later, and amazingly well on the high-end cards including DirectX 10 cards. We also support Shader Model 2.0 hardware with minimal visual difference.

PCGH: Can player speed up performance remarkably by buying a second card for a SLI- or Crossfire system? Have you already measured/experienced differences between those two systems?

Tim Sweeney: We test on SLI configurations on a regular basis. There impact at higher resolutions is significant so if you want to experience the full beauty at high resolutions this is a great way to preserve performance while doing so. We haven't had a chance to run on Crossfire yet, but would expect similar results.

PCGH: Could you in a couple of sentences sum up the technical as well as the visual highlights of the Unreal Engine 3 and especially UT 3 that will make your product superior to other competitors like Crytek (Cry Engine 2) id (doom 3 engine with megatexture technique)?

Tim Sweeney: We let our games speak for themselves.

PCGH: When did you get your first next-gen-hardware (DX 10-cards) to fiddle apart from console stuff?

Tim Sweeney: Our early access to hardware is generally covered by non-disclosure agreement.

PCGH: What is your experience with Nvidia's and Ati's next generation graphics hardware? Could you already make a statement which card will be better for UT 3, the 8800 GTX or the Radeon 2900 XTX?

Tim Sweeney: The relative performance scores between NVidia's and ATI's best cards vary from day to day as we implement new optimizations. But, for the past year, NVidia hardware has been ahead fairly consistently, and a few months ago we standardized on Dell XPS machines with GeForce 8800 GTX's for all of our development machines at Epic.

PCGH: Are there any plans at Epic to upgrade the engine for DX 10? Have you already made experience with Microsoft's new API?

Tim Sweeney: Yes, we'll ship Unreal Tournament 3 with full DirectX 10 support. Support for multisampling is the most visible benefit. We're also able to use video memory more efficiently on Windows Vista under DirectX 10, enabling a given machine to use higher-detail texture settings than are possible in Windows Vista under DirectX 9. Most of Unreal Engine 3's effects are bound by fill-rate rather than by higher-level features like hardware geometry processing, so the real impact of DirectX 10 is incrementally better performance rather than entirely new features.

PCGH: Do UT 3 gamers profit from a 64 Bit environment? Will there be a 64 Bit version? What are the advantages of the 64 Bit version? Are there any differences as far as visuals or performance is concerned?

Tim Sweeney: We're testing Unreal Tournament 3 with Windows Vista 64-bit to assure compatibility, but we're planning to wait for the OS and application base to mature before doing anything further to really exploit 64-bit.

We were the first developer to port to the 64-bit environment back in 2004, with 64-bit Windows XP and Unreal Tournament 2004. We were very eager to embrace Windows Vista 64-bit also, and hoped to have moved all of our development machines over to it by now. Unfortunately, the software and driver compatibility still isn't quite there. The base OS is very stable, and it's a joy to work with in isolation. But, then, you need to print something, or run Max or Maya along with a collection of third-party plug-ins, and it all unravels. I'm sure the issues will be worked out with service packs and app updates within the Windows Vista generation, as machines with 4-8GB are finally becoming economical, and could be mainstream in the next 12 months.

PCGH: How important will main memory be for the overall performance? How much memory would you recommend?

Tim Sweeney: We require at least 512MB, and you'll want at least 2 gigabytes for optimal performance and detail. Unreal Engine 3 is very scalable in terms of memory usage, so it runs well on low-memory machines at the low texture-detail setting.

PCGH: It is well known that your engine supports multi core CPUs. What is the maximum number of threads the engine can calculate? What is the performance gain when you play UT 3 with a quad core CPU? Will the engine even support future CPU with more than four cores?

Tim Sweeney: Unreal Engine 3's threading support is quite scalable. We run a primary thread for gameplay, and a secondary thread for rendering. On machines with more than two cores, we run additional threads to accelerate various computing tasks, including physics and data decompression. There are clear performance benefits to quad-core, and though we haven't looked beyond that yet, I expect further gains beyond quad-core in future games within the lifetime of Unreal Engine 3.

PCGH: Can UT 3 be played with full detail on a single core machine?

Tim Sweeney: You can play UT3 at any detail level on any machine; the dependent variable is the frame rate! If you have a fast GPU (and thus aren't GPU-bound), then you'll notice significant performance gains going from a single-core PC to a dual-core PC, and incremental improvements in going to quad-core, at a constant clock rate.

PCGH: Are there any things you learned while developing Gears of War for next gen consoles that you can now benefit from when finalizing UT 3 for the PC?

Tim Sweeney: The Gears of War experience on Xbox 360 taught us to optimize for multi-core, and to improve the low-level performance of the key engine systems. This has carried over very well to PC. The division of UE3's rendering and gameplay into separate threads, implemented originally for 360, has brought even more significant gains on PC where there is a more heavyweight hardware abstraction layer in DirectX, hence more CPU time spent in rendering relative to gameplay.

Also, the 360 work we did resulted in an engine that also runs well on low-end and mid-range PCs. This is very important for games today; the high-end PC gaming market alone is not big enough to support next-generation games with budgets in the $10-20M range. You need to run on ordinary mass-market PCs as well. In reading PC gaming websites, one might get the impression that everyone owns a dual-core PC with a pair of $600 GPUs in SLI configuration, but the reality is very different. More than 80% of PCs sold today are still single-core, and have very low-end DirectX9 graphics capabilities. Unreal Engine 3 supports those configurations well.

EDIT: This is the original stuff, uploaded by the original party.

[Resinence]

Wooooooooooow , I guess they really put alot of work into this engine, the best from all of the others in one package! Guess who's going to get all the modders again? Can't wait, I was a huge huge fan of mods like inflitration and alien swarm when the original UT engine was the best around. I'm sure the actual game will be good too though

[Stark]

But don't you remember? HL2 was a way better engine with better mods! I think one or two were even released without Valve's help. But the actualy GAMES for Unreal always suck. Unreal 2 anyone?

It sounds pretty bitchin. Might all the threading take advantage of the PS3's architecture?

[Ace Pace]

But don't you remember? HL2 was a way better engine with better mods! I think one or two were even released without Valve's help. But the actualy GAMES for Unreal always suck. Unreal 2 anyone?

A partial list of games using the Unreal engine 2 and 3. They all suck?

It sounds pretty bitchin. Might all the threading take advantage of the PS3's architecture?

Why just the PS3? This multicoring is based off several things. The Xbox360 itself is a 3 core,6 threads computer, which already makes things dicey for the engine. The PC is now a dual-core, quad-core land. The PS3 is radically differant, since it's it's a 1 core,2 thread CPU + 6 smaller and teenier SPUs.

The threading is to take advantage of the trend of multi-coring rather then speed bumps.

[Stark]

I mean the 'Unreal' games. You know, like the example, Unreal 2, a shockingly bad game. The 'game' Epic releases with the UE3 will either be UT or a stunningly bad single player game.

And the PS3 because it's architecture seems like a huge waste. Maybe Epic can get those tiny processors doing... well... something.

[Ace Pace]

I mean the 'Unreal' games. You know, like the example, Unreal 2, a shockingly bad game. The 'game' Epic releases with the UE3 will either be UT or a stunningly bad single player game.

Unreal Tournament 3, with 'real' single player packaged in.

And the PS3 because it's architecture seems like a huge waste. Maybe Epic can get those tiny processors doing... well... something.

Eh, theres advantages there, been hashed over in this forum a few dozen times.

[Stark]

Unreal Tournament 3, with 'real' single player packaged in.

I wonder if anyone will ever play the solo game. UT2k4+mods was awesome enough for me.

Eh, theres advantages there, been hashed over in this forum a few dozen times.

*sigh* Yes, and I was asking if UE3 might leverage those advantages, giving the PS3 an actual tangible advantage over the 360 in this case.

[Praxis]

But don't you remember? HL2 was a way better engine with better mods! I think one or two were even released without Valve's help. But the actualy GAMES for Unreal always suck. Unreal 2 anyone?

A partial list of games using the Unreal engine 2 and 3. They all suck?

Red Steel and Star Wars: Republic Commando were Unreal 2?!?

[Stark]

One of the reasons UE3 is so exciting is that it's going to end up in all kinds of awesome games. It seems some serious progress has been made in the last year or so, as comparing GoW and Mass Effect shows a startling disparity in lighting and shaders.

[Ace Pace]

One of the reasons UE3 is so exciting is that it's going to end up in all kinds of awesome games. It seems some serious progress has been made in the last year or so, as comparing GoW and Mass Effect shows a startling disparity in lighting and shaders.

Which is something that needs to be said to Crysis-wankers. It's not about the basic tech stance, it's about how extendable it is. With UE2.5, you could go from simplistic shooters, to RPGs, strategy(in theory),etc.

UE3 should be just as flexible, and have a better toolset.

[Vendetta]

*sigh* Yes, and I was asking if UE3 might leverage those advantages, giving the PS3 an actual tangible advantage over the 360 in this case.

Not likely, since they'd still have to overcome the memory architecture of the PS3, which was what was cited by Epic's QA manager as the reason that Gears of War couldn't be done on the PS3 (not enough video memory to render all the objects in the gameworld).

UE3's flexibility is already starting to show though, with as many non-shooter games using it as shooters.

[Count Dooku]

One of the reasons UE3 is so exciting is that it's going to end up in all kinds of awesome games. It seems some serious progress has been made in the last year or so, as comparing GoW and Mass Effect shows a startling disparity in lighting and shaders.

Now if BioWare would only give us a release date for Mass Effect. It's definately the game I want more than any other this year (except maybe Crysis).

[Vendetta]

Sometime not near September 26th. The game's being published by MS Game Studios, and they're not going to let two big titles steal each other's sales.

The rumour mills are saying August.

[Shinova]

So how does the UE3 now compare to the Crysis engine?

[Vendetta]

Crysis thus far is more graphically impressive, but, of course, UE3 is real, and has to work on systems available now, whereas Crysis is still in development, and will likely be targeted at the systems available when it finally does come out.

[Ace Pace]

EDIT: The original magasine uploaded the interview, without all the translation errors. check the opening post.

[Count Dooku]

Crysis thus far is more graphically impressive, but, of course, UE3 is real, and has to work on systems available now, whereas Crysis is still in development, and will likely be targeted at the systems available when it finally does come out.

The Cry Engine 2.0 has demonstrated the ability to have massive enviornments that are completely destructable. Is that something that is built into an engine, or is that is engine independant? I tend to see a 'next-gen' game being one where the enviornment is very interactive, and destructable (where applicable).