Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
UE5 Fluid Flux 2.0
TheDarkSorcerer
Member, Alpha Two
Speaking of today's post with fishes being added to the ocean in Verra. Imagine having this realistic water while fishing! 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLmiqJJI5ZQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLmiqJJI5ZQ 
5
Comments
I want to know what stormy weather would look like!
It's not scope creep if Intrepid has intended to keep their engine up to date all along. That's what they've been doing anyway, so I fully expect that to continue as long as they see a benefit.
This isn't really keeping engine up to date, it is just a water solution. Doesn't mean it will work for what they are trying to do though. There is a point where it would be scope creep technically, though not in this case since they need water.
If it saves them time and works for what they want great, though they most likely are working on their own water solution but you never know.
Water looks cool and id mess around with it, but not at a 500$ price point.
Water is pretty fun to work with when you have a good shader and you can tweak to get what you want. I created some water back in college for one of my projects so this is like 9 years ago and i lvoed it at that time, though being UDK is is pretty out of date now.
Whilst love to see something like this for oceans and rivers, the level of detail would need to be congruous with all other elements to feel balanced.
For UE5, it does not take much to bloat the file size..
Huge improvement on the flow of the water in the waterfall and rapids though, compared to what I have seen before. I really hope they implement that. Especially if they pick up my idea of a river disappearing into a big hole to the underrealm, to become a river down there.
This has nothing to do with engine update, this tech was made by independent devs and will be sold in the unreal market place, intrepid already have their own water solution so buying something like this and implementing it is 100% scope creep
I see, so not made by Epic, but still added to UE5.
It doesn't change much really. This discussion is a semantic argument for sure, but it really comes down to what their stated intent is, even if it's only stated internally. If it's planned to keep updating the engine and adding features that makes things prettier or improves or simplifies development until release, it's by definition not scope creep even if it adds development time compared to not implementing it. Implementing naval content will also add to development time compared to not implementing it. Same thing.
adding realistic assets isn't scope creep =x
anyways I'm impressed by that water. getting water right in games is really hard
IF you are adding a bunch of random things on the EGS because it looks pretty it is scope creep. You have aa dev team you hired with a set goal for the game and should work towards that with your plan in mind. If it is inline with your vision using some store stuff is fine, but they hired dev's for a reason not to buy the work off the store that might not be the best solution for their game. But that is for them to decide.
Also buying store assets is not updating the engine.....and again adding features not originally intended for the game is scope creep and literarily what star citizen does.
Also i wouldn't expect them to be updating the engine every update, you don't put experimental features in your game on the first pass of them. The engine literally warns you against it. You let them work out all the bugs and than more than likely they will update down the road, or not update if the features are not helping the project vrs time it takes to do it.
All new features are experimental you can feel most will be worked on and eventually not be in testing phase but sometimes there is a chance they don't go further with it and it isn't updated anymore. So if it causes issues it will be on your own to fix them.
You think they just add the water and its good? That isn't how development works lol.
What are they trying to accomplish with the sea content and features is it going to have. Now all those features need to work with whatever store asset they are throwing in. So if they have custom water that preforms a certain way they need to look into how all elements of the other water is built and how they can get it to work how they want.
So if they have their own water solution in progress they will have to spend time figure out some other water to get that look and the additional features it brings. This extends with anything, but it hard to judge without knowing their pipeline.
For example lets say you saw realistic trees that looked like the best trees you have ever seen. And some market place link, are those trees set up to use their pipeline with the features you want. Lets say most likely not, that means they need to further adjust however those trees are set up and get it to work.
If you are talking about a more complex game with systems that use assets in certain way the is most likely more work they need to do to get it working.
what you are saying doesn't make any sense, naval content is a core feature of the game... of course it needs to be done and will add development time
this Flux tech is a THIRD PARTY solution that has absolutely nothing to do with Unreal engine, Epic, and adds absolutely nothing besides it looks good, this its just water physics tech made by some random developer that intrepid would need to Pay for, to replace their own tech that they already spent a lot of money and time doing, that's the definition of scope creep
That's exactly what they think.
still not scope creep =x
I will enlighten you all in about 2-3 hours.
Feel free to let me know and explain in detail why ever increasing detail won't be scope creep.
Right, it's a core part of the game because Intrepid has stated that it is in the past. If they hadn't stated that it is part of the game, adding naval content would probably be scope creep. My entire point is, what is or isn't scope creep depends entirely on what Intrepid has set out to do, and if it's done in a controlled way. Steven and others have said multiple times in the past that they are continuously looking at new tech and implementing it if it makes sense for the project. Thus, new tech is within the scope of the project.
To quote chatgpt, who stole it from somewhere else I am sure:
Note the "uncontrolled" and "without proper evaluation" parts. No tech upgrade that Intrepid has done so far has been any of that IMO. None of them have really changed the scope of the game. The upgrade to UE5 was a big change that possibly delayed the release, but it wasn't an uncontrolled change or done without proper evaluation. It was also the right call, or the game would have suffered by being limited to UE4 tech.
To contrast, if Intrepid decides tomorrow to add space combat and exploration to the game as a major feature, that would be scope creep, as well as feature creep obviously. And a little weird.
I am not saying they need to implement this new water tech. That's up to them really, but if it solves an issue they have, it's perfectly within the scope of the project to do so.
Because Intrepid has stated that they plan to have naval and water-based content, does not mean that doing everything and anything under that umbrella is within the scope of the project. If you state that your project is going to contain water. That means you have water in the project. It does not mean that you keep the water represented in your game at the literal bleeding edge of graphical fidelity at all times. It's why games have remasters, developers can go back to a project and improve upon it when the tech has improved and they have released the initial project. They can go back and do things that were above and beyond the initial scope of the game. Graphical fidelity is always a WIP and you can iterate on it forever, however, significant graphical changes are increasing the scope of the project. That doesn't mean that I think that all scope creep is bad, there are plenty of times (especially if the resources are there) when incorporating more stuff as development goes on is a positive, but there needs to be a cut-off.
If it solves a issue they have anything is good at that point if it makes sense. But again you don't just pick it up and issue is solved. What are they trying to accomplish and can the blueprint / shader do that (something looking pretty has nothing to do on the technical aspect what they are trying to accomplish with their content and optimization.
Just cause something looks pretty doesn't mean it counts as updating the engine. If they really like it and their artist are unsure how it was made. They could buy it, take it apart and use the good aspects that work to further update their own water. Though there is a chance you could just be wasting a lot of money and time doing this if it doesn't work with what you are trying to do.
If it interest them I'm sure they can reach out to the technical artist that made it and see if it can work for their project.
Pretty sure this is a forum where anyone can talk not just in dms.