Considering the first version came out many moons ago in 2005,  THOUSAND-FIVE, I am going to say that it is currently the best Engine on the market.  It doesn't have all the fancy bells and whistles of Unreal 3 or Cryengine 2, but it is the oldest, and it can run on anything that can be considered a computer.  It still has the most realistic faces and lip sync of any engine ever.

Portal 2 isn't the best looking game, but it holds up on a 6 year old engine just fine on my computer.  I can run it on max settings with AA and AS turned all the way up(8x/16x).  I can't even run Crysis ONE at a steady 30 FPS on high at 1680x1050 on my computer.

If Valve is working on Source 2, or whatever the next engine will be called, for whatever there next big game is(IT BETTER FUCKING BE HALF LIFE 2: EPISODE 3 OR HALF LIFE 3), I can't even start to think about how it is going to look.  What mind bending feature are they going to add to it this time?

Im sorry nothing beats GameByro.

Yeah, I was just thinking that some half hour ago. I was playing one of the earlier Test Chambers that involve lasers and all that and I found myself amazed at how well the game looks, running at constant 60FPS with everything at max (and that's because I can't stand screen tearing, otherwise it reaches 120 FPS without VSYNC easily). Valve has done a terrific job keeping its in-house engine up to date, never ceasing to polish it and make it better.

Oh, Gabe, you charming bastard. Come on, take my money and make me happy with your games already.

 I can't even run Crysis ONE at a steady 30 FPS on high at 1680x1050 on my computer.    

The changing surfaces I imagine was a bitch to programme.

It's no Lithtech Engine.

They're going to add advance hat technology. You'll be able to bend the brim of your hat, you'll be able to fold your hat...

Sorry duder, but Speed Tree is where technology is at.

" It's no Lithtech Engine. "

I have a shitty, shitty computer. It's not good for gaming at all. I have trouble playing small indie titles from the last couple of years and big titles from 2006-2007, like Bioshock, will run, but at a low resolution with graphics settings turned all the way down and at about 12 fps. However, modern Source games like Left 4 Dead 2 and Portal 2 run very well. I can't go up to native resolution on my 22" monitor, but 1280x800 works with most graphics options in the middle of their ranges and at a decent framerate. It doesn't look quite as good as the 360 version, but it's solid and like other Valve games, I'd rather play it on the PC. The first Portal is something that I know I'll be returning to in 10 years and from what I've played so far, the same goes for Portal 2. That, combined with future maps, is why I wanted this game on the PC. I'm glad Valve can make a game in 2011 that looks and plays great on my hardware.

Source has been a good engine, but it definitely showed it's age in Portal 2.  The game still looks great, mostly because of attention to detail from Valve, but textures are pretty blurry, particle effects look distinctly last-gen, geometry is pretty simple, etc.
Because of this, it scales well on modest hardware.

I should add that this isn't a knock on the game.  The game still looks good because it has really strong art direction, fantastic animation, and intricately detailed environments.   The limitations of the Source engine are just really apparent now.

- Scott

As far as I understand, Source is an evolving engine that doesn't have distinct versions (like Unreal Engine 2 -> Unreal Engine 3).

" As far as I understand, Source is an evolving engine that doesn't have distinct versions (like Unreal Engine 2 -> Unreal Engine 3). "

No proper streaming = shit in my book. 

Source isn't perfect, but it does run phenomenally well. My netbook runs HL2 almost as well as HL for shit's sake. It's also worht keeping mind that games with strong art direction tend to age better than technically profficient games. Super Mario 64 is still one of my favourite looking games, simply because everything looks totally right.

I really do hope that the next HL game uses a significantly revamped engine though.

" @ajamafalous said:

" As far as I understand, Source is an evolving engine that doesn't have distinct versions (like Unreal Engine 2 -> Unreal Engine 3). "

I'm sure it has been heavily modified since Half-Life 2, but the core framework is definitely still there. "

I really like Cryengine 3. Well in the one game we've seen from it so far. Who knows, maybe Crytek are the only ones who'll know how to actually use it much like how Epic is much better with Unreal Engine 3.

First parties always know how to use their engines best.

...but yeah, I like the general look and feel of Source.

"

                    No proper streaming = shit in my book. 

But at the end of the day, an engine is just a tool. What matters is how you use it. Still... no streaming tech...

                   

                "

" @Hashbrowns: I don't like that they made the switch over to separate loading screens, I missed just loading in the elevators. "

Ha, yeah it's pretty good. Portal 2 still totally looks like Half-life 2 though.

I know that the late-game levels are pretty expansive (not the part you play in, but the outside area), but still, is Half-Life 2: Episode Three/Half-Life 3 going to be this loading screen-filled? Maybe it was the separate loading screen instead of the classic Half-Life "LOADING," but it seemed like there were more loading screens in Portal 2 than any Half-Life game :\

" @Arkanti said:

" @Hashbrowns: I don't like that they made the switch over to separate loading screens, I missed just loading in the elevators. "

The levels in portal were much smaller with less assets to load.  WIth Portal 2 they probably couldnt get away with it. "

" Ha, yeah it's pretty good. Portal 2 still totally looks like Half-life 2 though. "