From experience only, I would accept your idea if you got enough test as evidence. PUBG and Insurgency Sandstorm are in Unreal 4 engine, they generally give 60%-80% FPS on my device (5800H 3060Laptop) at almost max graphics which “looks quite close”, DLSS off, and also less stable frame time causing less smooth movement.
I would be happy if they use Unreal 5 and optimise it effectively.
you are mixing graphics and game implementation with engine performance. if you are rendering same object with same complexity with same settings and one engine has clear advantage then i would agree with your assessment, but when developing game there are so many graphic options that could impact your fps even if they are looking “almost” the same.
graphics in those games could use 20-40% more details that you dont see (usually raising quality has diminishing returns), or they could render more complex objects on longer distances etc.
Do you think bipot will work if they use the Unreal Engine?
This is also one important ability of a game engine, in terms of trade-off less visible detail with more feelable performance, I believe this is a major advantage of Dagor engine as Gaijin can provide specific support to optimise graphic performance.
and this has nothing to do with engine and everything to do with developer. i will drastically simplify next example, so dont nitpick. this is just example for computation and values arent real values used in games. there are also loads of other settings that impact gpu performance.
lets say that you have 1 MC with high complexity modeled character with 150k polygons, 10 near objects modeled with 50k polygons, 100 medium distance objects modeled with 10k polygons, 1000 long distance objects modeled with 1k polygons. gpu would need to compute 150k+10x50k+100x10k+1000x1k=2 650 000 polygons.
other developer could model same models more reasonably and/or could optimize render distance. lets see what happens when he optimizes models. he could leave MC and near objects the same, while reducing medium and long distance objects by 30%. math would be 150k+500k+100x7k+1000x700=2 050 000. you get ~30% improvement in performance with almost the same graphics.
there is also render distance and complexity of objects depending on render distance. i know watching 1 unreal demo where they showed how they handle long distance and near distance rendering. i will simplify cause idk exact terms and values. so near MC you will have 100% complexity rendering, on medium distance you will have 50% complexity rendering and on long distance you will have 10% complexity rendering. even in same engine with same graphics you could impact performance by having different values for various distances or you could change amount of polygons rendered on different distances.
Thank you for your detailed explanation, then I would say it is mainly Gaijin’s knowledge of their own game engine and their support to darkflow helped in this case. It is still a shame a lot of game developer team using Unreal 4 may not know, do not care, and do not give option to players on efficient using of GPU resources, which caused serious waste of performance.
simply they have different audiences. gaijin targets toasters so that they can have broadest audience possible. while companies who use unreal 4 use them mostly for AAA games and they target premium market.
10 years ago 1GB gpu was enough for 1080p gaming, now that gpu cant run any of the AAA games that came out in last 5 years.
Maybe not all, while there are some AAA games using Unreal 4, many others using Unreal 4 did not show any visible advantage of graphic quality such as what I just mentioned.
High graphic quality need more effort than just chose a game engine which is capable to achieve it, otherwise the result is mediocre graphic quality and low efficiency. The main reason for these small developer teams to use Unreal 4 is more likely to be low cost. As I know, Ready or Not is also using their own game engine which produced very good performance and nice graphic quality.
like i said there are thousands of settings and design choices that ultimately impact end result and performance.
indie devs choose mostly from unity or unreal. developing their own engine simply is monumental task and would require years of development and it would probably never come close to giants like unity or unreal.
i am getting conflicting results (maybe UE4 in alpha, and UE5 for release?), but it is not their own engine.
Ready or not use UE4, UE5 dont was even a thing wen the game come out
Its performance is way much better than other games with Unreal 4, sorry for my misestimation, it may be reasonable to believe its current release is running on Unreal 5.
engine ≠ graphics
engine ≠ performance
this is best said in this article
At its simplest, a game engine is a set of tools that allow a game developer to reach their goals simply through many pre-made utilities. A game engine is to a developer what Photoshop is to a professional photographer or what Maya is to a movie VFX creator.
The most recent wave of game engines allows developers to more easily maintain high visual quality. Yet, having the right engine in a game doesn’t assure that the game will look fantastic and perform well simultaneously. It is the developer’s responsibility to optimize their product.
so what makes unity and unreal better than dagor. they have more options, bigger libraries, more tutorials more available assets. bigger user base means someone can point you in direction of what you are looking for and there can be ready made solution available somewhere.
This may only be true for only hard-working development team. How considerable this advantage is really depend on how effective developers use it.
When developers do not make effort themselves, this become more important. I do not trust developers of Enlisted who do not fix bugs before release update is willing to invest so much to make a new set of code run efficiently without support of Gaijin.
I never bothered to check this (game engine).
Thanks for sharing.
They f**ked that up when they nerfed/removed bunny hopping.
it is exactly opposite. having bigger libraries means having less work. i mean enlisted has lots of its bugs cause dagor engine wasnt developed for infantry. they have to develop lots of stuff that is already readily available in other libraries for other engines and it is probably more optimized.
let me give you an example. when i made program to datamine the site i used these libraries
import json
import mysql.connector
from mysql.connector import errorcode
import time
import requests
if i didnt have these libraries with ready made code and easy to use commands i would need to spend day/weeks/months recreating same code in them my way. it would be full of bugs, would need testing etc.
but with these libraries i could make fast datamine program along with testing and setting up the database and playing enlisted in couple of hours. these libraries come with error handling, so you can relatively fast debug if you have problem.
so do you think it is smarter to use ready made open source solution that hundreds if not thousands of programmers have checked, fixed and optimized, or is it smarter to research and develop same solution by yourself or your team of programmers and spend days/weeks/months of your dev time and still end up with barely working solution with bugs.
i am not saying for enlisted to migrate to unreal, just that they should have started developing game with it (starting from crsed). darkflow would have made better product, but gaijin had interest to expand their dagor engine and not pay royalties to third party.
It would be really nice if they can optimise a less buggy game to the similar performance level of Enlisted and Ready or Not now.
I got your idea. I have no evidence but one guess I had is while they can find resources for other more popular engines, they get them from Gaijin for free with even less effort. Because look at how slow and ineffective they fix bugs shows how unfamiliar they are to their codes, which should not happen if they researched and understood the code or wrote the code by themselves. Something like they announced a bug have been fixed but in fact not have happened a lot of times. Remote TNT still can not be picked up when placed on vehicles // Gaijin.net // Issues Also they implemented DLSS 3.1 before War Thunder and made silly mistake. DLSS bug cause ghosting behind gun front sight - English speaking section / Suggestions - Enlisted
While Ready or Not shows the potential of Unreal engine, there are still a lot of games with Unreal engine perform inefficiently due to ineffective developer teams. I had really bad experience with them on low-end hardware.
It may not be reasonable to believe a developer team unable to fix bugs can do better than some example with low performance I mentioned previously, so it may still be the relatively good solution to exploit resources from Gaijin if the lazy and money-orientated culture of the developers can not be changed, compare to maybe less bug but at 60% FPS and likely worse graphic quality.
imagine engine as a toolbox. UE is an toolbox that contains tools for almost every situation, while Dagor is toolbox specialized for vehicles.
DF cant get tools that havent been previously made for WT. if they want specific tool, DF need either make it themselves or request gaijin to make it, while if they used UE they could have gotten tool without problem.
idk how their bureaucracy is. i have worked in companies that wasted half of programmers time in various meetings that were and werent critical for the project. then you have work priority. maybe they are prioritizing developing new content more than fixing bugs. also fixing bugs is never easy. when you have thousands of lines of code you may think you fixed something, just for that fix to break something else. i remember in uni i needed to make some encoder/decoder. i found a bug morning before i needed to give it to professor and fixed it on decoder, but i forgot to apply corresponding fix on encoder. when i came to professor my program worked half the time and when i couldnt explain why it breaks he thought i copied code from someone or somewhere else. 10 minutes after i finished with professor i found the bug and fixed it.
it is not that it is inefficient or ineffective, it is just developers decision to optimize their game up to certain point that satisfies their market goal. if they want 80% of the market they will target gpu with 4GB VRAM, if they want 66% of market they will target 6GB VRAM. those with higher end computers are more likely to spend money on AAA game and enjoy its graphics. there is always cutoff point and there is always point of diminishing returns.
what if gaijin is the problem for those bugs? what if gaijin is whole bottleneck in actually fixing them? and how do you even imagine those resources? code? assets? manpower? when making enlisted they could only have part of code and assets cause it was vehicle oriented. loads of code and assets needed to be made from scratch.
Thank you for your explanation today.
Maybe one good thing we still have is “usually” more realistic and “less buggy” vehicle damage model.
lol