That's because the editor skipped several earlier demonstrations of UE3 engine, most notably the early Gears of War demo from 2004, instead highlighting--inexplicably--a rendered cinematic from very late in the engine's life cycle. UE3 was released in 2006, yet he chooses a 2011 demo.
@@danebeee1 The UE3 "demo" shown here was actually a pre-rendered video animation. Since it's not real time, the artists could render anything they wanted without considering performance (a la Pixar). It's a terribly misleading example of the engine. If you want to know what UE3 actually looked like upon release, see Gears of War E3 demo.
The jump from standard def to hi def remains the defining visual leap of the 21st Century. So it's really the main thing that matters - more than analogue to digital, more than 3D, more than 4K, and yes more than framerate. But honestly, Featheon's critique is the more compelling one - it is true that Pixar-like demonstrations are unburdened from the considerations of money and real time performance, and need to be treated in the context of rendering on the fly. This is exactly why the "Netflix of games" metaphor for a game streaming utopia is misleading because what Netflix is doing is significantly less demanding on infrastructure.
These are the trailers not the demos. There are trailers like movie trailers in this video. And then there are demos which are narrated and run through in real time.
@@joeh858 yeah, except for the unreal 5 section. Thats a demo, not a trailer. Which is exactly what the other commenter said. Its impressive that ue5 doesnt showcase sth that might become the standart in 5-10 years, but right now
@@tomekz6841 lol ue3 trailer looks better than any game released so far, but the chimps still think that unreal 5 demo will become a reality in a month or two. They should stick to fortnite :)
@@MrMegaMetroid Don't fall for the smoke and mirrors, its a very very controlled demo. No game will be that detailed for quite awhile. They're just showing what they hope can be achieved with it once devs really push it to it's limits
For those wondering why the UE3 demo looks better than the UE4 demo, it's because the "Elemental" UE4 demo was their demo of the engine running on MOBILE. The UE4 PC Demo is called "Infiltrator".
As time goes on improvements will become more and more minuscule. I'm glad I lived in a time when such important rapid developments were made in computer graphics.
it still take decades to actually deliver the product once the engine is actually made, that'll be the next new leap, making it viable to create in less time to travel to Neptune
UE3 demo in this video was a demo made like 6 years after the engine had already been out and refined. i think this video would have been more accurate czcams.com/video/1m7T5ay_8DI/video.html
It was way before it was actually used in a game, and it was one of the earliest versions, so it was more Unreal 2.5 than Unreal 3. Plus there weren't any games using UE3 that could actually show off it's full power, since it was mostly popular on consoles, which obviously set a bunch of limitations.the best looking thing in it we got was Gears if War 3, and it was an Xbox exclusive, so it couldn't show off any of the high end PC tech of the time.
@@okaybutwhythough7456 Yeah. That's my biggest complaint about the UE3 demo really. We never got any games that looked even close to it, even today as well.
Man I remember when UE3 dropped. It changed just about everything, it was so easy to use, and my 7600 gt was rendering things I never thought possible with that card. (Had to upgrade from a 6600)
For anybody curious about trying to download previous versions of unreal engine... you sadly can’t. UE1 and UE2 currently can’t be found in any downloadable way. UE3 isn’t possible either though some download archives of the UE3 DK still exist deep on the web.
Not true at all in the case of Unreal Engine 1. The editor program is still easily accessible with a copy of Unreal or Unreal Tournament '99. The engine even still gets patched and modded by a tiny community of antique game engine enthusiasts.
After reading some of the other comments that pointed out things I missed, I've decided this has to be one of the worst comparison videos ever made. Some representations are mobile tech demos while others are rendered animations from five years into the engine cycle.
The UE3 demo is from 2011 which is late in the lifecicle of UE3(UE3 was released in 2006) and the UE4 demo ran on mobile. Most consoles can’t replicate the UE3 demo
After a few years and a ton of learning, this demo honestly isn't that crazy, just incredibly well directed and utilizing the tech well. Shiny and very dark environments are very easy to make look good. The one thing that was out of the consoles reach for a while I'd say is the dynamic tessellation on characters, but that's about it. The lighting tech is sort of unknown, but would most likely be the baked lightmass system, the materials are likely not true PBR like was the standard in 8th gen games, the post processing is REALLY good, most games just don't use it that intensely, the particle rain, animated raindrop textures, wnd wind simulation have been seen all the way back in Watch Dogs, and the texture and geometric fidelity were extremely high for 2011, but now arent really special for a heavily directed scene(and I mean now as in mid-gen 8th gen games). As a piece of art it's really great, just the more i looked at it, the more feasible it seemed.
The only slightly annoying thing about these demos is that although they show what the engine is capable of, no game that uses them ever comes close to looking like the demo. Or devs (or even gaming hardware) isn't able to match the standards. (Apart from the Unreal Engine 5 one though since that one actually WAS gameplay) But yeah. The Unreal Engine 3 demo showed a level of graphics we've never really gotten, even by today's standards. Even some of the very best looking games (a few examples like Order 1886 or Calisto Protocol) haven't matched what that demo showed.
The sad part is that in the current industry less and less games are using these engines, in favor of mobile and low end pc performance. Not even in consoles.. I want to see a new tomb raider or mass effect in ue5.
High level and texture detail LOL 1:36 (But hey, that's progress for you). The leap of visual fidelity form UE2 to UE3 is astonishing. UE3 to UE4 more 'refinements' while UE5 seems photo-realistic almost life-like. Having said that, UE6 (maybe 2024/2025) will be indistinguishable with real-life imagery. Ray Tracing a norm. UE7 (2029/2030) will refine the already life-like UE6. I can't imagine UE8 (2035/2036 perhaps).
For a fair comparison, hi res video should have been used for UE1 and UE2. Videos too poor in quality. For example the Bioshock games (1&2) were made with UE2, but looking at the demo in this video you wouldn't think so
The UE 3 and 4 comparison is not accurate UE4 is way much better than the demo you have chosen; UE4 was an entry point for UE5; but thanks for your effort though
After watching unreal engine 5.. all i can hope for is games to look like unreal engine 3 in the future. Lol, unreal engine 5 level fidelity isn’t happening soon if we still haven’t hit ue3’s level of fidelity.
You don't know how long time it took for them to render that demo in UE3. Probably many hours. UE5s demo is in real-time, that is a huge difference. Nanite and Lumen are huge deals, they will definitely transform the next games' graphics. We will probably not see games as beautifully crafted as the UE5 demo in some years, however, the games will still look amazing
What the hell can they improve?? I mean animations maybe but even then that's just slightly tweaking them, some lower end games look uncanny but by no means bad. AAA games however are literally perfect it's just hard to run so increase technology I guess. Oh and resolution but even then just like animations it's just slight tweaks because with the RTX 4000 series 8k is already becoming playable and 4k is becoming standard and 4k already looks insane
I see many people here that do not understand how huge the new Nanite and Lumen techniques are in UE5. Guys, the UE3 tech demo is not in real time, it probably took hours to render that demo while the UE5 demo is running in real-time. Sure, the UE5 demo is carefully crafted, but if you have tried UE5, then you understand how game-changing it really is.
I realized that. There is indeed a God. Because the games seem realistic and this means that we are in a similation world similar to this. If the ruler is Allah, 'the secret behind matter'. maddenin ardındaki sır
مرحبا , كل شيء جميل في هذا الفيديو ماعدا ثماثيل لكن لماذا تماثيل ثماثيل مقرف في اللعبة او فيديو ارجو تعديلها وحذف الثماثيل ليكون رائع لنا ولكم وللجميع وشكرا
![UNREAL 25 лет спустя [Начало Unreal Tournament]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HuIddjltDCc/mqdefault.jpg)
The jump between 2 and 3 is, well, unreal.
That's because the editor skipped several earlier demonstrations of UE3 engine, most notably the early Gears of War demo from 2004, instead highlighting--inexplicably--a rendered cinematic from very late in the engine's life cycle. UE3 was released in 2006, yet he chooses a 2011 demo.
PurushaDesa it’s crazy man we haven’t even reached the full potential of u real engine 3 yet and we are already on to unreal engine 5.
@@danebeee1 The UE3 "demo" shown here was actually a pre-rendered video animation. Since it's not real time, the artists could render anything they wanted without considering performance (a la Pixar). It's a terribly misleading example of the engine. If you want to know what UE3 actually looked like upon release, see Gears of War E3 demo.
you can't compare 360p and1080p clips
The jump from standard def to hi def remains the defining visual leap of the 21st Century. So it's really the main thing that matters - more than analogue to digital, more than 3D, more than 4K, and yes more than framerate.
But honestly, Featheon's critique is the more compelling one - it is true that Pixar-like demonstrations are unburdened from the considerations of money and real time performance, and need to be treated in the context of rendering on the fly. This is exactly why the "Netflix of games" metaphor for a game streaming utopia is misleading because what Netflix is doing is significantly less demanding on infrastructure.
Great thing is that UE5 is actually being played through and not just a trailer
These are the trailers not the demos. There are trailers like movie trailers in this video. And then there are demos which are narrated and run through in real time.
@@joeh858 yeah, except for the unreal 5 section. Thats a demo, not a trailer. Which is exactly what the other commenter said. Its impressive that ue5 doesnt showcase sth that might become the standart in 5-10 years, but right now
@@MrMegaMetroid Look at the demo specs to run it at 30 fps lel, maybe these kind of specs will become standart in 2030
@@tomekz6841 lol ue3 trailer looks better than any game released so far, but the chimps still think that unreal 5 demo will become a reality in a month or two. They should stick to fortnite :)
@@MrMegaMetroid Don't fall for the smoke and mirrors, its a very very controlled demo. No game will be that detailed for quite awhile. They're just showing what they hope can be achieved with it once devs really push it to it's limits
For those wondering why the UE3 demo looks better than the UE4 demo, it's because the "Elemental" UE4 demo was their demo of the engine running on MOBILE. The UE4 PC Demo is called "Infiltrator".
Thank you, I was wondering why UE4 tech demo does not fell better than UE3 ones
that and that the UE3 demo was very late and optimized, just a year before UE4
After watching the unreal 5, I got curious about the previous version. This satisfied my curiosity. Thanks.
Jed0730 Glad I made you clear lol
Samzies
@@JustBeam do you have link to download unreal engine 3 tech demo? i cant find it anymore even through google search or youtube this sucks lol
I wish someone gets very bored and decides to reproduce the previous demos using Unreal Engine 5. Would be amazing seeing it side by side.
This man needs to be listened.
It truly amazes me how well the Unreal Engine 3 demo holds up graphically.
As time goes on improvements will become more and more minuscule. I'm glad I lived in a time when such important rapid developments were made in computer graphics.
it still take decades to actually deliver the product once the engine is actually made, that'll be the next new leap, making it viable to create in less time to travel to Neptune
It will all mostly be better and better lighting and environmental effects I think.
1:47 When your best friend tells you a joke that isn't funny, but you don't want to be rude and you try a forced laugh
Your best friend's jokes are just like yours
@@nitinm9234 Thank you
The 1996 one is super impressive considering the graphics of games like Spyro 2 and 3 which came out after that.
thing is they were meant to be cartoony AND to run in consoles, which had a bigger processing power gap to computers at the time
Facial animation, still better than Mass Effect Andromeda's (1:43)
True! Can you believe 50 million dollars invest in that game and aomehow ended up like shit
UE3 demo in this video was a demo made like 6 years after the engine had already been out and refined. i think this video would have been more accurate czcams.com/video/1m7T5ay_8DI/video.html
It was way before it was actually used in a game, and it was one of the earliest versions, so it was more Unreal 2.5 than Unreal 3. Plus there weren't any games using UE3 that could actually show off it's full power, since it was mostly popular on consoles, which obviously set a bunch of limitations.the best looking thing in it we got was Gears if War 3, and it was an Xbox exclusive, so it couldn't show off any of the high end PC tech of the time.
@@okaybutwhythough7456 Yeah. That's my biggest complaint about the UE3 demo really. We never got any games that looked even close to it, even today as well.
And now we are finally seeing UE4 graphics in-game. Only took 8 years to catch up.
Took shorter amount of time
it does take 7yrs to actually make the game, its not like when the engine is released to the public they can make cyberpunk in 4 months
Man I remember when UE3 dropped.
It changed just about everything, it was so easy to use, and my 7600 gt was rendering things I never thought possible with that card. (Had to upgrade from a 6600)
You made me remember my old 6200, the times where i used to play at like 15 fps. Nice times
@@decay9831 my dawg!
"Coming in 1997" lmao Holy shit I'm going to die soon
For anybody curious about trying to download previous versions of unreal engine... you sadly can’t. UE1 and UE2 currently can’t be found in any downloadable way. UE3 isn’t possible either though some download archives of the UE3 DK still exist deep on the web.
I still have some UE3 fangames on my PC (Sonic GDK)
But not the actual engine program itself
Not true at all in the case of Unreal Engine 1. The editor program is still easily accessible with a copy of Unreal or Unreal Tournament '99. The engine even still gets patched and modded by a tiny community of antique game engine enthusiasts.
After reading some of the other comments that pointed out things I missed, I've decided this has to be one of the worst comparison videos ever made. Some representations are mobile tech demos while others are rendered animations from five years into the engine cycle.
Well honestly...that's like Unreal Engine 2 to 3.5
The Samaritan demo still looks good by today's standards, and games got to the quality of the Infiltrator Demo only in 2018.
The UE3 demo is from 2011 which is late in the lifecicle of UE3(UE3 was released in 2006) and the UE4 demo ran on mobile. Most consoles can’t replicate the UE3 demo
After a few years and a ton of learning, this demo honestly isn't that crazy, just incredibly well directed and utilizing the tech well. Shiny and very dark environments are very easy to make look good. The one thing that was out of the consoles reach for a while I'd say is the dynamic tessellation on characters, but that's about it. The lighting tech is sort of unknown, but would most likely be the baked lightmass system, the materials are likely not true PBR like was the standard in 8th gen games, the post processing is REALLY good, most games just don't use it that intensely, the particle rain, animated raindrop textures, wnd wind simulation have been seen all the way back in Watch Dogs, and the texture and geometric fidelity were extremely high for 2011, but now arent really special for a heavily directed scene(and I mean now as in mid-gen 8th gen games).
As a piece of art it's really great, just the more i looked at it, the more feasible it seemed.
And with every iteration followed a team of developers who pushed it to its limits. Can't wait to see how far ue5 can be pushed.
The jump from 2 to 3 will NEVER be matched.
Today’s console can render a game like the UE3 2011 demo. Wish developers created games like this
Very interesting, thanks for uploading.
it has been 4 years, no way near those ue5 shots. 4k 60fps with those graphics won't be achievable until ps6 era
what a time to be alive!
It took them one year to make unreal 4? 🤨
Why are you using 144p footage for the first game, not representative of how the game looked at all
1996 tracker music is awesome
2 to 3 major jump; also 4 to 5
The leap in technology in just 20 years is mind boggling and it really makes you wonder what will be possible in another 10-20 years.
I think it was a real flex to show off UE1 the same year that Quake launched to try and steal its thunder.
The only slightly annoying thing about these demos is that although they show what the engine is capable of, no game that uses them ever comes close to looking like the demo. Or devs (or even gaming hardware) isn't able to match the standards.
(Apart from the Unreal Engine 5 one though since that one actually WAS gameplay)
But yeah. The Unreal Engine 3 demo showed a level of graphics we've never really gotten, even by today's standards.
Even some of the very best looking games (a few examples like Order 1886 or Calisto Protocol) haven't matched what that demo showed.
All of this and somehow you managed to miss the Unreal 1995 demo's.
Демо unreal 3 наверное лучшее. В unreal 4 такое чувство, что персонаж из доты, а в 5 показали вещи, которые интересны только разработчикам.
The sad part is that in the current industry less and less games are using these engines, in favor of mobile and low end pc performance. Not even in consoles.. I want to see a new tomb raider or mass effect in ue5.
High level and texture detail LOL 1:36 (But hey, that's progress for you). The leap of visual fidelity form UE2 to UE3 is astonishing. UE3 to UE4 more 'refinements' while UE5 seems photo-realistic almost life-like. Having said that, UE6 (maybe 2024/2025) will be indistinguishable with real-life imagery. Ray Tracing a norm. UE7 (2029/2030) will refine the already life-like UE6. I can't imagine UE8 (2035/2036 perhaps).
What a leap from UE2 to UE3
Should've used infiltrator demo for UE4
unreal has always been pushing the envelope
FUNNY how they call low detail level “high”.
Wait, they used to call themselves epic megagames. I can see why they shortened it.
the unreal 3 demo is from 2011..... 5 years after it was debuted?!? What?
UE5 : I have got may good features
Me who is just a kid game dev : Ok, that ain't gonna help me
2011 demo..i do not think there is a game like it yet with this much detail no? Maybe PC star citizen ? Cyber punk? that is coming later this year...
You missed a few demos between the second and third, that would have made the transition smoother
Wow, you forgot the original UE3 demo from cirka 2006. Gears of war was based on it, and came out late 2006.
That first one looks like a modern game
You forgot the original unreal 3 engine demo
Good Samaritan is actually unreal engine 4 technical demo
Good life for developer
For a fair comparison, hi res video should have been used for UE1 and UE2. Videos too poor in quality. For example the Bioshock games (1&2) were made with UE2, but looking at the demo in this video you wouldn't think so
Samaritan demo higher 🔥🔥🔥💯
Ever since unreal engine 3 the tech demos never accurately depict what could be possible with an actual video game
UE5s demo is in real time
Were videos for unreal engine 1 and 2 always looked blurry.
1:26 LOL
*THE third demo is kind of fake.*
It is just a pre-render that took hours to make. And it is five years late than the actual UE3 was introduced.
Am I the only one who thinks that UE3 demo looks 100x better than UE4 demo?
It's about showcasing the technology, but the UE3 one was a good one yes.
@@mac5er Ye I get that ue4 is better than ue3 by logic, but the showcase made it seem worse somehow xD
The ue4 one was running on a ps4. The ue3 one was probably running on the fastest hardware they could get at the time.
Yes, because that was the UE4 mobile games demo. There's a different demo called "Infiltrator" for the full verion of Unreal 4, looks way better.
That's actually a showcase for the unreal engine 4
unreal 2 to unreal 3 was a fucking MASSIVE leap jesiscrist
So the original demo is basically Minecraft
Unreal engine 3 and 4 never brought games with that quality. So do not expect too much on unreal engine 5
The UE 3 and 4 comparison is not accurate UE4 is way much better than the demo you have chosen; UE4 was an entry point for UE5; but thanks for your effort though
After watching unreal engine 5.. all i can hope for is games to look like unreal engine 3 in the future. Lol, unreal engine 5 level fidelity isn’t happening soon if we still haven’t hit ue3’s level of fidelity.
You don't know how long time it took for them to render that demo in UE3. Probably many hours. UE5s demo is in real-time, that is a huge difference. Nanite and Lumen are huge deals, they will definitely transform the next games' graphics. We will probably not see games as beautifully crafted as the UE5 demo in some years, however, the games will still look amazing
1:29 Thats Locust logo from GoW
official?
gold sorce is unreal engine 1?
We all know why we're here
2:55 Is Unreal 3.5 demo. Unreal 3 demo very different))
I have in stock UDK 14-02
What the hell can they improve?? I mean animations maybe but even then that's just slightly tweaking them, some lower end games look uncanny but by no means bad. AAA games however are literally perfect it's just hard to run so increase technology I guess. Oh and resolution but even then just like animations it's just slight tweaks because with the RTX 4000 series 8k is already becoming playable and 4k is becoming standard and 4k already looks insane
this is so weird how unreal 3 demo looks better than unreal 4 demo WTF
I see many people here that do not understand how huge the new Nanite and Lumen techniques are in UE5. Guys, the UE3 tech demo is not in real time, it probably took hours to render that demo while the UE5 demo is running in real-time. Sure, the UE5 demo is carefully crafted, but if you have tried UE5, then you understand how game-changing it really is.
What's track is playing on 1:07?
I realized that. There is indeed a God. Because the games seem realistic and this means that we are in a similation world similar to this. If the ruler is Allah, 'the secret behind matter'. maddenin ardındaki sır
why ur 3 demo look better than ur 4 ??? (I mean it was made better obviously 4 is technically better )
It's just commercial purposes, The real one is really bad compared to UE4
Look,
czcams.com/video/1m7T5ay_8DI/video.html
Wrong video for Unreal 4, that was the mobile games demo. Look up Unreal Engine 4 Infiltrator for the console/PC demo.
Is actually unreal engine 4 technical demo
what is the game from 2:28?
That’s unreal tournament slapped onto unreal engine 2
مرحبا , كل شيء جميل في هذا الفيديو ماعدا ثماثيل لكن لماذا تماثيل ثماثيل مقرف في اللعبة او فيديو ارجو تعديلها وحذف الثماثيل ليكون رائع لنا ولكم وللجميع وشكرا
😯😯😯😯😯😯
Unreal 3 still is next gen hahahaha
They literally spoiled their engine after ue3
No improvement since 3 and all games still look worse than that.
UE4 looks bad compare to UE3
The demo is bad