Rumor: Too Human dumps Unreal Engine 3 [update 1]
by Ross Miller 
{ Aug 14th 2006 at 2:25AM }
[Update: This has been debunked.]Advanced Media Network is reporting, via their anonymous sources, that Silicon Knights has dropped Unreal Engine 3 for use in its epic (both in scale and development time) title Too Human. The developer, citing difficulties with the Unreal Engine working well on the Xbox 360, will supposedly build their own engine from scratch.
Silicon Knights declined to comment on the rumor. While it's possible the developer had issues optimizing the Unreal Engine (their E3 showing undulated from 30 frames per second to a "slide show" presentation), other titles like Epic's own Gears of War have shown that the engine is capable of working phenomenally. And Silicon Knights building their own engine would cause another monumental delay.
We're tentatively calling BS on this one, but with a game already a decade in development, what's another year?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Vazel @ Aug 14th 2006 2:33AM
"Epic's own Gears of War have shown that the engine is capable of working phenomenally."
Let's just hope that phenominal performance doesn't come at the expense of no v-sync. Say no to tearing!
arch @ Aug 14th 2006 2:50AM
now before the sony fanboys have a parade, let me post one part of the article
"This is not the first we have heard in regards to developers having trouble developing software using the Unreal Engine 3. For months now, we have heard stories that the engine is not easy to work with and is very buggy"
its not the 360s fault.
Dave @ Aug 14th 2006 2:51AM
I agree. V-sync should be a requirement. I've had a number of arguments with people who turn it off to "increase [their] frame rate". I tell them that they don't get to see any more frames than their monitor will allow. They don't often listen.
electro^plankton @ Aug 14th 2006 2:54AM
Having played Too Human at E3, I think the A.I. (or potential of) is far more advanced than Gears of Wars. On top of that, the environments are "wider" if that makes any sense. The physics system along with the complex lighting rigged up in Too Human looked much more complicated. I mean, we're talking about a particle system that blurs, has shadows that track the objects - all affected by the same lighting mechanics as non-moving objects.
I'm also sure since it's Epic's own engine, they would have the most experience retooling it to their needs.
Too Human has been in development for way too long. I know Silicon Knights is notorious for its development times but judging by the craptastic frame rates at E3, if shifting to a new engine helps, go for it. All I know is, when this game finally comes out, it better be OFF THE HINGES!
rf @ Aug 14th 2006 3:00AM
@1 - Totally Agree. If there is tearing, I will cry.
James K @ Aug 14th 2006 3:01AM
If I actually cared about Too Human, this might matter to me.
Kit @ Aug 14th 2006 3:02AM
The Unreal Engine 3 has become!
eh? @ Aug 14th 2006 3:04AM
Dave/3 - the frame rate is only limited to the monitor refresh rate with vsync turned on, which is why they turn it off. You can go from say max 85 smooth frames to 150 fps with tearing so you will get faster response (sometimes in input also if the game isn't coded well)
PCs are different, they can handle vsync because it's up to the user - on consoles it should be left ON and deliver smooth frame rates with no tearing and I won't buy anymore games for 360 that have tearing, it is incredibly annoying!
KawF @ Aug 14th 2006 3:17AM
Rebuilding the engine from scratch at this point in development... yeah... not so good.
A full 3D engine and kit like UE3 isn't something you whip together in a month.
Fish Face McGee @ Aug 14th 2006 3:24AM
The whole 10 years of development is not entirely true, considering that the game hasn't been in full development for 10 years, as opposed to what we assume Duke Nukem forever has.
elmer92413 @ Aug 14th 2006 3:40AM
Will SK become the new Rare...???
Will Too Human become the next Duke Nukem Forever...???
...
..
.
BrotherEstapol @ Aug 14th 2006 4:20AM
That's the most rediculous thing I've heard.
You can just change a game eninge willy-nilly, it's the freaking core of the game ffs.
Bogus.
Azerael @ Aug 14th 2006 5:17AM
I was under the impression this game wasn't in development for 10 years, it was just something they've wanted to do for 10 years...
elmer @ Aug 14th 2006 5:41AM
@electro_planton
All I know is regardless of frame rate issues, despite advanced effects and apparently imaginative art, Too Human looked remarkably boring. The enemies certainly didn't seem that smart, and if it was all placeholder stuff at E3, then I think this game really does have another year on the clock. In the end it all feels like a waste, of money, time, hype, talent and power.
Jdoki @ Aug 14th 2006 6:00AM
Perhaps this is a simple case of not having the right tool for the job.
The Unreal 3 engine seems to have been designed for a very specific purpose... FPS or 3rd person games.
Too Human, seemed to be more expansive and utilise the engine in a different way. Perhaps they just couldn't overcome the problems of using the engine outside of it's 'comfort zone'. With so many games using the Unreal 3 engine I doubt SK ditching the engine (if true) is indicative of any inherent problems with the engine and tools.
This does raise the question of 'Why choose an engine that doesn't perfectly suit the needs of the design'.
If SK are ditching Unreal engine 3 I hope they have more success with their own.
GSI @ Aug 14th 2006 6:02AM
"and is very buggy"
That's b/c it's not completely finished and is still a WIP.
I have a buddy that uses it everyday (he's workin' on Stranglehold @ Midway) and he actually likes it A LOT better then the previous engine. While there are still some problems, it still does crash occasionally but that is B/C it still being worked on.
vandensd @ Aug 14th 2006 7:30AM
Wasn't this the same reason for Frame City Killer being canned?
rene @ Aug 14th 2006 7:47AM
12. I was under the impression this game wasn't in development for 10 years, it was just something they've wanted to do for 10 years...
Posted at 5:17AM on Aug 14th 2006 by Azerael
O'RLY?
Check this link.
http://www.n-sider.com/gameview.php?gameid=972
Started out 10 years ago as a PS1 then an N64 game now a 360. It will be ready for the XBOX 720 in the next 10 years. And even when it is ready it will never top Nintendogs sales and numbers, what a shame all that time and money.
VerticalEvent @ Aug 14th 2006 7:51AM
Wasn't this game set to be released in the fall of this year? By going back and making their own engine NOW, basically means going back to Square 1 in development, pushing the release of the game back by about a year, if they're lucky.
slay3r @ Aug 14th 2006 8:42AM
"PS3 Buggy with Unreal 3 engine" - would have been the title for a PS3 title,if it have been scrapped. But Since its Xbox 360 the title is "Too Human dumps Unreal Engine"
Xbox 360 is not a great piece of Hardware in comparison to the PS3. I wonder if Gears Of War would have a drop in framerates, and freezes like the 360.
"Too human" would take "Too long" to come out...
Slay3r,
http://www.gamebot.co.nr
elmer @ Aug 14th 2006 8:45AM
If the development budget was $80-$100 million before, how much will it be now?
bm @ Aug 14th 2006 8:54AM
Both "Dave" and "eh?" need to learn a thing or two about vsync and computer monitors. Respectively.
KR @ Aug 14th 2006 8:54AM
Re: #19
Jeez. Sony fanboys have taken so much abuse at this point that they sit in their trailers with their tinfoil hats thinking everyone is against them.
The 360 is fine. It's not as powerful potentially as the PS3, but I'll take the word over developers working on games for both consoles over the word of some guy named "Slay3r" who has questionable punctuation and capitalization skills.
Jack Coleman @ Aug 14th 2006 9:32AM
hahaha naw i was told they were using the "project offset" engine
AoE @ Aug 14th 2006 2:45PM
Hmmm... they should talk to 3D Realms... perhaps the DNF team can give them some engine pointers.