Talk:List of game engines

Engines Not Included

... and the reasons why.

3D Game Builder

Why when I add the 3D Game Builder (http://www.eternix.com.br/en/3dgamebuilder/) someone remove it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edirlei (talk • contribs) 20:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't have an article, and had no claim of notability. Marasmusine (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Panda 3D

How come I don't see Engine Panda3D?

It's under freeware engines CaveyCoUk (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quake III Engine?

The Quake III engine isn't here under open source or proprietary? It currently powers at least two OSS games, Open Arena and Tremulous, as well as Quake III: Arena, Quake III: Team Arena, Star Trek Elite Force II, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Enemy Territory, Call of Duty, Call of Duty United Offensive, Soldier of Fortune II, Star Wars Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy and Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast. Check the article on the Quake III Engine :P.--68.126.148.14 06:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's now known as id tech 3, so it is in the list CaveyCoUk (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Engines

A short list of other engines that do not appear to be in the list.

The engine for Freelancer
GeoMod, as used in Red Faction

Although are these actually classed as something else?

ORE ?

"ORE stands for Online RPG Engine"

ORE is not even mentioned - is it talking about OGRE? Zorruno 21:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ORE refers to Online RPG Engine by Baronsoft : www.baronsoft.com - it is in NO WAY related to OGRE.

List at bottom of page

Would it be feasible to do a list of engines (at least some of the major ones) at the bottom of specific game engine articles? (For instance, the winners of the World Poker Tour also have links to the other winners at the bottom of their pages.) Does anyone else think this might be a worthwhile idea? AJ Letson 15:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

I removed the sentence 'Excellerates far above the rest of the Visual Basic ORPG engines' from the vbGORE engine. Descriptions should be neutral and not read like a commercial. I'm sure the users of the engine can decide for themselves how good it is. --General Hard 09:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DARKSMASTER923

I'm not registered. I added Reality factory free open source engine and Deep Creator

Major and Minor engines

The previous division between "Major/Popular" and "Minor" engines was very subjective and unsubstantiated, so I combined the lists. If we're going to put the engines in different popularity categories, we need to have some kind of data to back it up and provide a tangible measure of popularity. Gremagor 01:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vital engine

was up with this engine? can somebody add it? my english is not the best :) here are some links: http://www.deep-shadows.com/en/gallery.php?pr=5 http://www.devmaster.net/engines/engine_details.php?id=35 greets

World of Warcraft

I know that this is probably out of line and only superficially related to the evolution of this article, but could somebody find out what engine Blizzard is using for World of Warcraft? And possibly what engine they are going to combine Havok with in the future? (They have no licensed Havok for PC and Mac.)

I haven't been able to find out what engine they're using. Or if its their own proprietary software, if anyone else is using it, or what its called, its development history, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.206.83.152 (talk) 16:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

See here. Shinobu (talk) 19:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Available to license vs in-house engine?

I'm just wondering if this section couldn't be made more useful by including a listing as to whether an engine is available for licensing by third parties (like Unreal) or is strictly being used in-house by its creators.

Engine Overview

This table is a list of external links. Possibly some of them have Wikipedia articles. Since Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory, I will first convert the external links to wikilinks, then remove those with no article. If anyone feels I have removed a notable game engine, feel free to create a stub for it (following WP:V policy, naturally) and pop it back in. Marasmusine 09:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'll remove the whole thing. Beyond the fact that it's a badly designed table and the external links, it's sourced from another wiki (therefore unreliable per WP:Reliable sources and WP:EL) and riddled with POV. It's just not worth cleaning up.Marasmusine 09:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Differences?

Currently this article is not very useful because it just consists of a long list of names and commercial jingles. Some real meat on what the differences in capabilities between all these engines are would be appreciated. Shinobu (talk) 19:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freeware vs. Free Software ?

What's the difference ? --195.137.93.171 (talk) 08:53, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read freeware and free software and you'll know. Shinobu (talk) 03:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of non-game engines in the list

A lot of these entires seem out of place, as they are not in any sense game engines. For example

Visual3D.NET
IMUSE
EMotion FX
Havok
Euphoria

And im sure there are more. This is middleware software and not related to this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.151.47.91 (talk) 13:30, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Separation

There should be a separation between those that are merely libraries and those that are more fully-featured —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.85.42.110 (talk) 01:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with SineBot. For example, even by the admission of its author, OGRE is not a game engine but a 3D rendering engine.

Also it would be worthwhile to separate engine that are production ready (aka have working games) and those in construction or without any existing games. This would permit engine that are struggling to be included in the list without too much risk of being deleted as "not notable". yep - my engine OGE was removed because of this :/

--Steven Gay (talk) 04:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dual-licenced engines

Quite a few engines are available under either commercial or free software licences, so why should they only be listed in one of the two sections (usually the free software one)? I say they shall be listed in both or in an extra section especially for them. RFC.

Also, what is up with the "Games and the game engines they use" table? There is not any need for that. -- Darklock (talk) 01:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Separate Quake based from non quake based in Free engines

We definitely need that done. This is so confusing! A feature table would be better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.11.13.28 (talk) 16:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freespace 2

I don't see it in the list, but where to add it? The source is freely available, but the license is for noncommercial use only; Is is technically freeware despite being commercially-owned? -98.17.4.3 (talk) 08:17, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]