Epic Games and Darkworks might have just captured the 3D gaming market. With the addition of TriOviz 3D technology to the Unreal Engine 3 and its development kit, a massively popular game engine now has built-in 3D integration, for use with either 3D televisions or green/magenta glasses. It stands to increase the number of games implementing 3D dramatically, creating a de facto standard for 3D in the process. Incidentally, it adds an attractive new bullet point to Unreal's feature set.
Epic Games itself, however, somehow has yet to fully jump onto the bandwagon it is now driving. "That's not part of the announcement," Epic VP Mark Rein told Joystiq when asked if this partnership would mean Epic games in TriOviz 3D. "Don't know." The implementation of 3D is certainly not the reason Gears of War 3 was delayed into holiday 2011. For one thing, the companies claim it only takes a week to integrate 3D into a UE3 game. For another, "That was Microsoft's business decision."
Epic CEO believes the gaming industry is undergoing gravitational change. Many games are released with high budgets, and they’re not selling nearly as well as expected.
They are selling.
Gaas are a very risky model to follow.
Epic is lucky with fortnite, it’s the reason why they’re making such claim.
Development costs increased yes, but for me it’s due to folk relying too much on advanced hardware.
A great game is regardless of raw power, ask Nintendo
You blame powerful hardware? It’s most certainly because devs aren’t given enough time, mismanagement by superiors, forced dei and shit writing all around.
Taking advantage of more tech means more time and therefore more cost, which can be risky if the sales don’t follow.
It’s what i meant.
With high inflation, government money printing, and rising debt, many people will have to cut back on entertainment to afford food and shelter, especially with no increase in living wages.
Sweeney is worth $7.6 billion, and a sell out. Turned his back on Unreal Tournament. With that much money he has way more than enough to make a new UT with UE5. If not he should just give the license away to fans and they will most likely make it better. Never liked Sweeney after he abandoned UT.
Do you really want a new Unreal Tournament though?
Games like Resistance, Warhawk, Unreal, Halo, Last of Us Factions, Unreal Tournament.... they just don't exist anymore.
If a new Unreal came out, it would have a battle pass, skins, nonsense currency, and would have to be free to play.
One time payment online multiplayer games that don't hold people's attention for infinite hours [service] just aren't enough for publishers anymore. This new generation of players too - they just seem to get bored if there's no endless progress bar to fill and unlock emotes.
I miss when multiplayer games were fun too but they aren't anymore.
(If anybody else is with me here, come play Warhawk on RPCS3, we've still got a sweet community of players over there and always love new people joining)
I do want another one yes, just build upon what made UT2004 so good, one of the best arena FPS ever made. I still have it installed and play sometimes. To me it seems these types of shooters is where you see the most skill, no hero shooters where you have someone healing/helping you rack up kills, with Quake and Unreal there is no crutch is kill or be killed lol. Best for fans to make it, it can be free with no season pass shit. Maybe Quake 5 might come out one day and be like Q3.
Warhawk, resistance, socom confrintation, killzone 2. Ps3 was amazing with the multiplayer shooters
@emixx116:
Still is mate. All 4 of those games have active communities on the real PS3 or emulation through simple DNS changes (and getting whitelisted through the Discord I suppose). MAG as well !
Get rid of all the political crap along with DEI. Then they’ll start selling again. When you attack your fanbase and the consumer, what do you expect to happen?
No. Tim Sweeney is not so subtly spreading the bullshit narrative again that single-player games are dying - he's saying that people want to play games with their friends instead.
If anything, the big budget projects that are consistently failing to make money are the type of games that he is pushing. Metaverse, live service shit. Single-player games are more likely not to bomb.
But rather than sniffing out this bullshit, you're opportunistically going along with it to mindlessly scream about DEI. C'mon, man.
The main issues that do exist are outdated game design (Ubisoft, Bethesda), budgets getting too big in general and shoving live service into traditionally single-player projects.
The Supreme Court seems to have given it's final verdict on Epic and Apple's legal battle in the US.
Three years after Fortnite-maker Epic Games sued Apple and Google for allegedly running illegal app store monopolies, Epic has a win. The jury in Epic v. Google has just delivered its verdict — and it found that Google turned its Google Play app store and Google Play Billing service into an illegal monopoly.
oooo shiiiit
well, there ya go
but i think the biggest issue are the judges in these cases.
most of them have no clue about all them things.
ii wonder what the judge will decide Epic actually "won" or what the out come is.
Why are you saying the judge have no cases?
I think the judges shows lots of clairity that in a duality market (APPLE and Android) there's no competition when both are already agreeing on the price.
Do you think there would be deals if Wallmart was the only store where you could buy food?
How would the argument of "but there's competition between Cookies and cereal brands" would hold up when Wallmart could decide that each provider must pay a 30% comission just to display product in store?
There's already tons od laws to make sure that there's not only 1 physical store brand and that store owners can't be in cahoot with competition in order to fix price so why would this be different for Virtual storefront?
i didnt say that.
read properly next time.
and the digital market is more complex than supernarkets.
"Do you think there would be deals if Wallmart was the only store where you could buy food?"
This isn't even the same types of argument, you have a variety of different devices you can get content on, like Apple pr Google or PC or consoles, all these things plus more compete with each other.
The only winner in this decision are Epic, Microsoft and other people who are already rich. All these greedy companies are using the law to steal profits from each other and it's going to be the consumers who pay more.
All these devices we use are heavily subsidized by the profits these platform holders make from selling peoples products. If you think Epic is going to start charging less for their MTX now or whatever your crazy, consumers are not going to get anything back from the winners here. All consumers get is the privilege to pay more for devices.
Edit:
"Wallmart could decide that each provider must pay a 30% comission just to display product in store?"
Walmart does take a cut of every sale in their stores....thats how they make money. They also sell shelf space, the products that are are in the center instead of the top or the bottom pay to be there and to have higher visibility and easier access. They also sell access because obviously they don't have enough space for every brands products.
Using your Walmart analogy, how long do you think Walmart would stay in business if they just let anyone walk into their store and sell things without helping to pay for the upkeep of the stores and other costs? They wouldn't that's why things don't work like that.
That is what Epic wants, they want to use these devices with out paying to help maintain them.
@Gold _Drake
Sorry bad writting from my part I meant to say Why do you think Judges have no clues?
@Einhander1972
Last I checked tons of small developpers and consummer association complained about the 30% tax cut that Sony Steam, Google, Apple are charging so why do you say only Epic benefit from that decisision is beyond me. Heck I recall this article making the headline recently
https://www.gamesindustry.b...
As for Walmart Upkeep, I would like to remind you that it's Wallmart and other store who need to cut in THEIR profit margin if they want to match price seen in other stores and not the other way around like in the digital market where Game publisher must sign price parity clause to please Google, Apple, Valve and Sony
https://www.linklaters.com/...
https://www.ign.com/article...
Thst isn the issue here. Thr issue ws the secret deals Google was doing to lower its cut for certain big apps publishers and only them and the fact that a requiremenf for said deals was nof helping epic games sefup its own mobile store.
"Last I checked tons of small developpers and consummer association complained about the 30% tax cut that Sony Steam, Google, Apple are charging so why do you say only Epic benefit from that decisision is beyond me. Heck I recall this article making the headline recent"
Yes, yeah developers and other people who are selling things to you may benefit but the main benefit is these large companies who want to bypass fees.
But at the end of the day they are not going to start charging you less, they are going to charge the same but get more profits.
And the link you posted about the case against Sony is filed by Alex Neil a certified con artist who doesn't care about consumers they just want a huge personal payout.
And as for parity clauses again the money is going to come from the consumers one way or another, these people are fighting to take each others profits, if the parity clauses are blocked we'll pay more for hardware.
The idea that any of these changes are going to make things cheaper for the consumer are a joke, the only thing that changes is who gets the profits.
And as for Walmart, you missed what I was saying Walmart may lower the price on an item but they just charge the manufacturer of that item more to stock it on the shelves.
In some ways the digital stores are better because they don't charge an upfront fee to put an item on the store they instead charge a fee per sale. Which if they have to reduce the fee that charge for sales they would likely recoup that money by charging a fee to sell something on the ap store. Which also would benefit the rich companies over small developers who would be able to pay upfront fees that smaller developers may not.
Which is the reason Walmart only stocks the major brands and not a bunch of start up small brands, because the major brands can pay for shelf space.
Don’t hold your breath yet there’s a long road ahead with the appeals process then the Supreme Court will have the last words and I don’t see this court going against the big corporations earnings.
I’m been known to be wrong some times and truly hope I am on this one
This is terrible news for consumers, while Epic and others get richer we'll now have to pay more for our devices.
How? Android phones like Samsung Galaxy are not subsidized by purchases from Google Play Store. And Google can’t quit on Android because of how much money Google makes from Google search on Android.
Google pays Samsung billions to have their store on Samsung phones.
Samsung also offers it's own store.
Einhander1972
samsung has it's own store but how many know about that store? its like comparing MS store to other well known stores
No. The cases argued were different.
Epic sued Apple for a monopoly over iOS. Apple said iOS competes with Android, MS, Nintendo, Sony, etc for Fortnite. Therefore there is market competition and no monopoly. The judges agreed.
Epic sued Google over a monopoly on android devices. Because Google was found to have shady deals preventing phone manufacturers from putting competing stores on phones as a default app, among other shady dealings, they found google has a monopoly on android marketplaces specifically.
Basically, Apple being a walled garden actually kind of protected them
Android isn’t a walled garden tied to hardware like iOS. Android is like Windows or Linux for PCs. Any phone manufacturer can use Android and any seller can have their own store on Android. But Google used its muscle to tie up 90% marketshare for apps on Android. That’s monopolistic behavior.
Phil and slimey company sitting up and plotting.... expect to hear how Sony is anti-gamer for refusing to have GamePass on their ecosystems they may very well do this to avoid 2027 . I can imagine his email to Satya...."we got them" lol.
