First footage of Frostbite 2.0 engine

#1 Edited by Vitor (2812 posts) -
#2 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

Interesting, though, didn't Mirror's Edge use UE3? 

#3 Posted by floodiastus (1262 posts) -

Doesnt BC2 use fronstbite 2.0?

#4 Posted by Dedodido (235 posts) -
@floodiastus: 
BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5
#5 Posted by floodiastus (1262 posts) -
@Dedodido said:
" @floodiastus:  BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5 "
Oh alright, too bad they don't show of more destruction in 2.0 if anything that should be their focus, seeing as 1.5 looks graphicly superb already :)
#6 Posted by Vitor (2812 posts) -
@TooWalrus said:
" In class on iPod touch right now- I'll watch when I get home. "
Don't get your hopes too high while you wait. Even by tech demo standards, this is pretty dull.
#7 Posted by TooWalrus (13139 posts) -
@Vitor
@TooWalrus said:
" In class on iPod touch right now- I'll watch when I get home. "
Don't get your hopes too high while you wait. Even by tech demo standards, this is pretty dull.
Ha, I probably won't even end up playing BF3, I'm just curious to check it out.
#8 Posted by Dedodido (235 posts) -

People thought that was boring just because it didn't have any explosions in it? I thought it was interesting, raises my hopes for a proper PC Battlefield game.

#9 Posted by jim_dandy (891 posts) -

They modeled what looked like a European area. 
 
Fighting under the Eiffel Tower would be neat. B|

#10 Posted by Venatio (4482 posts) -

That looked exactly like Mirror's Edge! Raises me hopes that a Mirror's Edge 2 will be made using this engine
 
Still find it strange that they used UE3 for the first one

#11 Edited by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -

I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video.
God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.
 
Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day.
Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in.
Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine.

#12 Posted by A_Cute_Squirtle (680 posts) -

Good Lord the lighting looks awesome. 

#13 Posted by RobotHamster (4171 posts) -

That was pretty awesome to me.  Being a modeler there was a lot of things I really liked and noticed in the video, I hope they show more soon.

#14 Posted by emem (1962 posts) -
@A_Cute_Squirtle said:
" Good Lord the lighting looks awesome.  "
I don't know, I've seen stuff like that 5 years ago and I'm probably missing something technical there, but that is the most boring and unimpressive tech demo (for the time when it was released) I know. 
 
I'm really looking forward to playing the game, though.
#15 Posted by onarum (2021 posts) -
@PhatSeeJay said:
" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
I don't know, I felt like that was a pretty weak display, real time lighting is by no means something new, also only a very small area rendered, all in all it looks neat, but so did frostbite 1/1.5 so....
 
I doubt there will be day/night cycles in game, that's the sort of thing devs will ALWAYS do when showing an engine, seriously look for past engine tech footage and I guarantee that at least in 80% of em there will be a part were they'll do a day/night cycle to show off the lighting.
 
What I really want to see is how much improved is the environmental destruction system.
#17 Posted by RiotBananas (3600 posts) -

I want my 4:20 back.

#18 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Superold video from some gamedeveloper conference last summer.
 
That said. I really dig the lighting capabilities. Can't wait to see the proper reveal trailer and read hands-on previews from GDC.
 
The beta must be around the corner too. Sometime this summer I guess. Probably around E3?

#19 Posted by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -
@onarum said:

" @PhatSeeJay said:

" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
I don't know, I felt like that was a pretty weak display, real time lighting is by no means something new, also only a very small area rendered, all in all it looks neat, but so did frostbite 1/1.5 so....   I doubt there will be day/night cycles in game, that's the sort of thing devs will ALWAYS do when showing an engine, seriously look for past engine tech footage and I guarantee that at least in 80% of em there will be a part were they'll do a day/night cycle to show off the lighting.  What I really want to see is how much improved is the environmental destruction system. "
 But you know why I'm more interested in the Frostbite engine than the other tech videos I've seen of other engines. Because they showed quite the impressive display of how the 1.5 engine performed when using DX10 resources. But hey sure, let's just stick to the only thing matters to gamers. Destruction and explosions. Speaking of which,  I never said anything about day/night cycles. I was talking about a constant moving light source proving that you don't give a toss about what I write really, aside from the fact that I cared more about lighting than destruction. I know very well that tech demos always look good to lure people in, but I have also not seen too much of the DX11 stuff yet, have you?
 
It's not hard to guess what the Frostbite engine will do in terms of destruction, we've all seen the iterations. At this point I'm more interested to see what they can do to improve the environmental effects affect the combat, like light, wind and so on,because I personally would like to see iterations there.
If that will happen or not I left unsaid, I'm just imagining and guessing at what they want us to look at given they've shown lighting rather than destruction this time around.
#20 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -
@PhatSeeJay said:
" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
On consoles, where players can't force 'disable bloom', lighting already is gameplay relevant. On maps like Laguna Presa Rush maptier 2, defenders get blinded by the sun. Of course, such a thing can't stand on PC, where people meddle with their .ini-files to get the drop on the competition. Instead of embracing gameplay relevant lighting, they say 'lighting sucks, it meddles with my visibility'. Thus, I'd rather not play shooters on PC. Guess I must play BF3 on PC though. Got a DX11 rig for it and the differences will be substancial enough (3x more players) for me to do it so. Nontheless, one can't have nice things with ignorant folks given the opportunity of meddling with a game on an open system.
#21 Posted by Jeffsekai (7026 posts) -
@TooWalrus said:
" In class on iPod touch right now- I'll watch when I get home. "
Thanks for letting us know.
#22 Edited by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -
@Seppli said:

" @PhatSeeJay said:

" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
On consoles, where players can't force 'disable bloom', lighting already is gameplay relevant. On maps like Laguna Presa Rush maptier 2, defenders get blinded by the sun. Of course, such a thing can't stand on PC, where people meddle with their .ini-files to get the drop on the competition. Instead of embracing gameplay relevant lighting, they say 'lighting sucks, it meddles with my visibility'. Thus, I'd rather not play shooters on PC. Guess I must play BF3 on PC though. Got a DX11 rig for it and the differences will be substancial enough (3x more players) for me to do it so. Nontheless, one can't have nice things with ignorant folks given the opportunity of meddling with a game on an open system. "
True. PC players can't have nice things because they can just tinker with files to have it go away and improve their play, making it an unfair advantage to the ones who's not able to do that, or like to keep those settings.
It's a shame in my book because having a 100% clear view becomes a hassle for ground infantry to stay alive now that Bad Company 2 could sport pixel inch precision with shots being easier to place. I would personally welcome wind conditions that a sniper has to take into consideration when placing a shot or more ways to blind them. That's of course wishful thinking.
#23 Posted by Jeffsekai (7026 posts) -

That was boring as hell.

#24 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8534 posts) -
@PhatSeeJay said:
" @Seppli said:

" @PhatSeeJay said:

" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
On consoles, where players can't force 'disable bloom', lighting already is gameplay relevant. On maps like Laguna Presa Rush maptier 2, defenders get blinded by the sun. Of course, such a thing can't stand on PC, where people meddle with their .ini-files to get the drop on the competition. Instead of embracing gameplay relevant lighting, they say 'lighting sucks, it meddles with my visibility'. Thus, I'd rather not play shooters on PC. Guess I must play BF3 on PC though. Got a DX11 rig for it and the differences will be substancial enough (3x more players) for me to do it so. Nontheless, one can't have nice things with ignorant folks given the opportunity of meddling with a game on an open system. "
True. PC players can't have nice things because they can just tinker with files to have it go away and improve their play, making it an unfair advantage to the ones who's not able to do that, or like to keep those settings. It's a shame in my book because having a 100% clear view becomes a hassle for ground infantry to stay alive now that Bad Company 2 could sport pixel inch precision with shots being easier to place. I would personally welcome wind conditions that a sniper has to take into consideration when placing a shot or more ways to blind them. That's of course wishful thinking. "
There was a bug, pre later patches on BC2 where the whole screen would go white and stay that way on PC, thus a lot of people had to disable bloom.  Punkbuster didn't register this as a hack because it's not, it's cosmetic on PC.  See, HDR  style bloom is supposed to increase suddenly and then fall off, not stay on indefinitely like it does due to the bug.  it's since been patched and people don't disable it anymore.  Meanwhile, stop blaming PC for hacks when lag switches and the like are so common place in console gaming that there are tutorials for such game breaking mechanics on youtube.  There are cheaters and hackers on any platform you can think of when it comes to gaming and console gaming is not without its tinkerers too.  Borderlands hacked weapons on 360 says hi.
 
Also, without 'meddling with a game on an open system' we wouldn't have modders.  And so we wouldn't have Counter Strike, Team Fortress Portal, Left4Dead, Synergy or a whole swathe of maps and mechanics which MW2 and Black Ops both use.  Seppli, your anti PC stance is getting to be really annoying. 
#25 Posted by TooWalrus (13139 posts) -
@Jeffsekai said:
" @TooWalrus said:
" In class on iPod touch right now- I'll watch when I get home. "
Thanks for letting us know. "
No prob Bob, thanks for thanking me.
 
Peace out girl scout.
#26 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

Okay, so this might be a little bit beyond DX9's capabilities. But you're not really seeing it here in these videos other than the shadow rendering.

#27 Posted by TheHBK (5466 posts) -
@Dedodido said:
" @floodiastus:  BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5 "
But it uses Destruction 2.0 bro!
#28 Edited by KaosAngel (13765 posts) -

...when will we get a PC game comparable to Crysis?  It's been 4 years and we have yet to have a game that can even go toe-to-toe.   
 
This new engine just looks like an upgrade from BC2.

#29 Posted by teh_pwnzorer (1482 posts) -
@Seppli said:
" @PhatSeeJay said:
" I think this looks amazing and almost instantly I lose more faith in the player base when reading the comments under the video. God forbid they'd release a tech video that shows anything but explosions and destruction.  Know what I see when I watch this video? A display of how the DX11 stuff will look like and, with the real time lighting effects, I almost get hopes for real time day cycle that affect where the sun will shine during the day. Imagine that? Snipers getting a hard time in the second half of the match because suddenly the sun has moved over to their angle of fire and shadows have moved for people to hide in. Amazing stuff. I look forward to see more of the performance of the Frostbite engine. "
On consoles, where players can't force 'disable bloom', lighting already is gameplay relevant. On maps like Laguna Presa Rush maptier 2, defenders get blinded by the sun. Of course, such a thing can't stand on PC, where people meddle with their .ini-files to get the drop on the competition. Instead of embracing gameplay relevant lighting, they say 'lighting sucks, it meddles with my visibility'. Thus, I'd rather not play shooters on PC. Guess I must play BF3 on PC though. Got a DX11 rig for it and the differences will be substancial enough (3x more players) for me to do it so. Nontheless, one can't have nice things with ignorant folks given the opportunity of meddling with a game on an open system. "
Putting a crosshair on the screen really helps in BF Vietnam hardcore mode since there are no sights for the vehicles, btw.  ;-)  Just run an overlay and put the text/image in the center...there are fps counters that allow you to center the fps counter... ;-) Tihihi.
#30 Posted by floodiastus (1262 posts) -
@Jeffsekai said:
" @TooWalrus said:
" In class on iPod touch right now- I'll watch when I get home. "
Thanks for letting us know. "
that made me lol
#31 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -
@KaosAngel said:
" ...when will we get a PC game comparable to Crysis?  It's been 4 years and we have yet to have a game that can even go toe-to-toe.    This new engine just looks like an upgrade from BC2. "
Crysis is fairly dated by today's standards, Metro 2033 stomps all over vanilla Crysis and Arma II is up there as well. Modded Crysis is another story, but that's probably an unfair comparison. 
#32 Posted by Infininja (881 posts) -
@floodiastus said:
" @Dedodido said:
" @floodiastus:  BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5 "
Oh alright, too bad they don't show of more destruction in 2.0 if anything that should be their focus, seeing as 1.5 looks graphicly superb already :) "
You mean Destruction 3.0? :p
#33 Posted by Scrawnto (2436 posts) -

Are you guys serious? Maybe the people saying this isn't impressive just don't realize what's going on or how difficult it is to do. They aren't just changing the color of the lights, which would be pretty lame these days. Quake 2 did that. Here the light is reflecting off of colored surfaces and onto the rest of the room. That is super difficult to do in real time. Most games don't bother to try to do that in real time and just bake it into shadow maps or the textures themselves. 
 
As for the video being boring, I'm pretty sure that when it was shown off there would have been a person talking over it and explaining it. Gametrailers got the video, but probably couldn't record the presentation.

#34 Posted by Akrid (1356 posts) -

 Fantastic realtime lighting/bloom/color bleeding effects. Rest assured, this is above and beyond many other engines.  

#35 Posted by Jimbo (9776 posts) -

4:20 because, like, because Joint Ops, bro.  Joint Ops like Battlefield, bro... you know?

Online
#36 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

im not sure what to think

#37 Posted by JoelTGM (5596 posts) -

looks nice and vibrant

#38 Posted by floodiastus (1262 posts) -
@Infininja said:
" @floodiastus said:
" @Dedodido said:
" @floodiastus:  BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5 "
Oh alright, too bad they don't show of more destruction in 2.0 if anything that should be their focus, seeing as 1.5 looks graphicly superb already :) "
You mean Destruction 3.0? :p "
I didnt mean destruction 3.0, I meant destruction "IN" 2.0 (as in frostbyte 2.0).. but im sure youre just trolling the naive floodiastus ;) 
#39 Edited by amir90 (2154 posts) -
@Geno: 
You mentioned one game and call crysis dated?
sorry, fail.
 
 edit: also, It is a bit unfair to compare them, Metro 2033 is 90% of the time corridor, crysis is often open battleground, and wherever it is better or not is all for discussion, metro is a dark game. 

Anyways, looks like a good tech demo, however I fear that much of those effects are dx11, which my card doesn't support :(
#40 Edited by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@Geno said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" ...when will we get a PC game comparable to Crysis?  It's been 4 years and we have yet to have a game that can even go toe-to-toe.    This new engine just looks like an upgrade from BC2. "
Crysis is fairly dated by today's standards, Metro 2033 stomps all over vanilla Crysis and Arma II is up there as well. Modded Crysis is another story, but that's probably an unfair comparison.  "
I don't think its unfair to compare usermade mods of a 4 year old game to proffesionally made modern games. If they can't keep up with mods, why the fuck arent the modders making the games. 
In fact, shit, its unfair to the mods to compare their shit to professional games. That's how it normally works. If the bleeding edge is some motherfucking user mod, something went horribly wrong along the way. And I love mods. But if this were a case where somehow Fallout 3 with mods was the best looking game around, that would speak poorly to devs as well. That some random dude with a bit of free time outclassed a team of proffesionals.
#41 Posted by Infininja (881 posts) -
@floodiastus said:
" @Infininja said:
" @floodiastus said:
" @Dedodido said:
" @floodiastus:  BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5 "
Oh alright, too bad they don't show of more destruction in 2.0 if anything that should be their focus, seeing as 1.5 looks graphicly superb already :) "
You mean Destruction 3.0? :p "
I didnt mean destruction 3.0, I meant destruction "IN" 2.0 (as in frostbyte 2.0).. but im sure youre just trolling the naive floodiastus ;)  "
Lol, when buildings were able to completely collapse in BC2 they named it Destruction 2.0. If you kill someone that way it even says <Gamertag> DESTRUCTION 2.0 <Gamertag 2>. 
 
No harm meant.
#42 Posted by GravityProof (282 posts) -

Can someone explain to me how this video of a lot of empty, untextured city scenes was impressive?

#43 Posted by Cold_Wolven (2214 posts) -

The engine does remind me of CryEngine 2 when it was being demoed for the original Crysis. But unfortunately tech demos only go so far as in the end the tech has to rely on the hardware.

#44 Edited by Geno (6477 posts) -
@ryanwho: There are many reasons why a mod can outclass professionally developed games. The professionals have to focus on the AI, story, music, gameplay etc., while a dedicated modder can just spend a month of their leisure time on a very specific graphical thing, such as an SSAO shader for instance. They can also get the mod community to test it out for them for free. Developers simply don't have that luxury. It would be difficult to justify to your boss that making the SSAO 30% more accurate is worth tens of thousands of dollars of man-hours (including the time and people needed to beta test), or post-poning the game for a month when it's only a drop in the bucket in terms of the whole game. It's sort of similar to how Wikipedia is more comprehensive and up to date than any encyclopedia out there, even though it's free and not "professionally written".  
 
Another reason is, most such graphical mods are very demanding. Suiting Crysis up with all the right high res mods, shaders, and time of days easily doubles its performance demands, making it pretty much the most demanding game around. Considering the average system still runs only something like an 8800GT in the general PC gaming community, and only something like an HD 6850 in the enthusiast community, improving graphics after a point is simply a case of diminishing returns.  
  
The industry isn't entirely swayed in the lowest common denominator direction though. For example, Crytek regularly hires the top modders at Crymod. Hawkeye Puppy, Helder Pinto, etc. Game developers just have to balance out their priorities with financial and technical reality. 
 

@amir90

 said: 

@Geno:  You mentioned one game and call crysis dated? sorry, fail.    edit: also, It is a bit unfair to compare them, Metro 2033 is 90% of the time corridor, crysis is often open battleground, and wherever it is better or not is all for discussion, metro is a dark game.  Anyways, looks like a good tech demo, however I fear that much of those effects are dx11, which my card doesn't support :( "

Crysis is dated compared to what it was considered to be 1-2 years ago, that is, the best looking game of all time. Without mods, there are at least a dozen things obviously broken about its graphics (low res textures, bad ToD, no AF with POM etc.), and games like Metro 2033, even though they are set in a different environment still clearly do some things better on the tech side. And I'm not bashing Crysis either by the way, I've finished the game numerous times and have spent countless hours modding it. It's one of my favorite games of all time and probably the best shooter of this generation, but I'm simply telling it as it is. 

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.