Use a Modern RTS engine vs FA?

[Morax]

Question for all the modders and coders out there:

Would it be easier to use a modern RTS game engine that has mods enabled to make FAF rather use the old engine?

I know this means mapping, modeling, etc, but the base engine is the most difficult part of the game, is it not? I mean, imagine making FAF in a game like Company of Heroes so long as the "strategic zoom" is possible...?

Am I dreaming too much?

[BRNKoINSANITY]

I think your best bet is to hope that Oxide gaming licenses out the Nitrous game engine (ashes of the singularity) so that someone can clone SupCom in that engine. As crappy as I think Ashes is turning out to be, that engine is a technological marvel that is EVERYTHING you could possible ask for in an RTS engine. It could easily handle a Supcom clone and double the unit cap available to each player, while performing significantly better overall and maintaining full sim speeds through the game. The biggest problem I see with other game engines is that there are very very few that are optimized enough to handle the sheer amount of units you are talking about with supcom. Can CoH handle 8000 unique units?

[Sheeo]

The most modern proper RTS engine is still Moho, by a conservative definition of modern, of course.

Porting assets is simple, porting logic is hard.

[Aulex]

The most modern proper RTS engine is still Moho, by a conservative definition of modern, of course.

Porting assets is simple, porting logic is hard.

I'm just wondering, in what aspects?

Edit:
Actually I was reading some comments by Jon Mavor in this post and the rendering side itself seems fairly complex, but that just may be similar for a lot of games.

http://www.adriancourreges.com/blog/201 ... ics-study/

[Sheeo]

The most modern proper RTS engine is still Moho, by a conservative definition of modern, of course.

Porting assets is simple, porting logic is hard.

I'm just wondering, in what aspects?

Edit:
Actually I was reading some comments by Jon Mavor in this post and the rendering side itself seems fairly complex, but that just may be similar for a lot of games.

http://www.adriancourreges.com/blog/201 ... ics-study/

While the rendering is cool, this is not what I was referring to. Modern games have more sophisticated rendering.

What's unique and still pretty 'modern' about Moho is the simulation itself; which may not be parallel, but it is deterministic and distributed and manages to be so with a very large amount of logic written in a dynamic language, which is quite a technical feat.

Of course, Moho can be upgraded in many ways to inspire the cool kids. Moho2's flow field pathfinding is an example of such an upgrade.


Sorry for keeping my answers short; while this is an interesting conversation it is just that: a conversation. One that I've had quite a few times by now. We won't get anywhere by discussing this. Actions that could be taken are A) Get moho2 source and rights or B) get supcom rights and port to a new engine (maybe a moho reimplementation) or C) develop a new game entirely.

[Morax]

The most modern proper RTS engine is still Moho, by a conservative definition of modern, of course.

Porting assets is simple, porting logic is hard.

I understand the concept of "logic" being something like how an interceptor decides to attack targets within range and how to track that target, but...

What exactly do you mean by an "asset?" Game models, textures, UI interface?

Honestly I kind of want to see a remaking of the game more than pouring time and effort into things. I don't really code by I have some high expertise in modeling (not something to be discounted as the end-product is more visual).

Why won't we get anywhere by doing this, Sheeo? What are the arguments for and against?

[briang]

Who owns the Supcom source and would the price of it be reasonable for a fundraiser?

[Exotic_Retard]

the supcom source is a mess.
not sure about this but it goes something like this:


the IP is owned by square enix,

the source is owned by gpg which is owned by wargaming

the publishing rights are owned by nordic games.

to make a new engine im pretty sure you need all 3 to cooperate for a new game.

afaik it is worth ~3million (could be as little as 1 though)

tldr: making supcom 3 is harder than making a completely new game, making some port or game engine upgrade might be easier

[zeroAPM]

the supcom source is a mess.
not sure about this but it goes something like this:


the IP is owned by square enix,

the source is owned by gpg which is owned by wargaming

the publishing rights are owned by nordic games.

to make a new engine im pretty sure you need all 3 to cooperate for a new game.

afaik it is worth ~3million (could be as little as 1 though)

tldr: making supcom 2 is harder than making a completely new game, making some port or game engine upgrade might be easier

Fixed that for you.

Seriously, i know you want a sequel but please, restrain yourself, skipping numbers does no good

[Aulex]

the supcom source is a mess.
not sure about this but it goes something like this:


the IP is owned by square enix,

the source is owned by gpg which is owned by wargaming

the publishing rights are owned by nordic games.

to make a new engine im pretty sure you need all 3 to cooperate for a new game.

afaik it is worth ~3million (could be as little as 1 though)

tldr: making supcom 2 is harder than making a completely new game, making some port or game engine upgrade might be easier

Fixed that for you.

Seriously, i know you want a sequel but please, restrain yourself, skipping numbers does no good

I liked sup com 2, it was a fun game