Valve's Source Engine for 360

By Tom Bramwell Published 17 October, 2006

Giving Unreal some competition.

Valve's Source Engine is now available as a middleware solution for Xbox 360, where it will compete for market share with the likes of Unreal Engine 3.

Optimised to make the most of Xbox 360's graphical hardware, and to support Xbox Live, the newly refined Source Engine for Xbox 360 is suitable "whether [developers are] pursuing a traditional FPS, RTS, RPG or delving into new genres," according to Valve boss Gabe Newell.

Valve is already using the Source Engine on Xbox 360, naturally, to develop Half-Life 2: Episode Two and accompanying titles Team Fortress 2 and Portal (Half-Life 2 and Half-Life 2: Episode One will also form part of the bundle).

That package is also due out on PlayStation 3, and being co-developed by Electronic Arts' UK studio, but a representative admitted last night that it was not currently working with Sony on middleware for PS3.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (22) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Macross #1 5 years ago

    lol

  • Pirotic #2 5 years ago

    Hehe, not much of a surprise. I think it probably comes down to Valve and ATI having a lot of shares in one another, Nvidia architecture will always have to work a bit harder for an engine which was predominantly designed for ati graphics cards, my moneys on the xbox360 port looking and running nicer than the eventual PS3 version.

  • sharpfish #3 5 years ago

    good luck against Unreal Engine 3... you'll need it.

    I just hope the issues that plagued Source Engine games on the PC don't transfer over to the 360.

  • Darren #4 5 years ago

    The Source engine is fairly sound but the games it seems to produce look nowhere near as visually accomplished as those that use the Doom 3 or Unreal 3 engines.

    I don't know whether that's the fault of the developers or whether it's a limitation of the engine but I found the environmental textures in Half-Life 2 pretty average close up, there's a lack of normal or bump-mapping (which adds depth of textures), the environments fairly angular and blocky looking and the shadows are pretty poor too. I know Valve added a pseudo-HDR lighting effect to the engine which works on NVIDIA graphics cards with anti-aliasing but to me the Source engine feels slightly dated but that does means it runs well on even mid-range PCs.

    I suppose what I'm trying to say is that the Source engine should run well on the Xbox 360 but I can't see it producing visually spectacular games that will rival Gears of War or Unreal Tournament 2007.

  • Darkedge #5 5 years ago

    source cannot come close to Unreal 2 or even Cryengine really... it's nice to look at but it's really so many bodges and hacks to make it look good that means in my opinion it isn't that scaleable.

  • Talha #6 5 years ago

    Well I don't think it means much. Source is hardly the most advanced engine around the reason its games look so good is the unparalleled artwork put in by Valve. I doubt other devs will put in as much effort and care.

    Still it is great news in so far as it allows HL games and episodes to appear on X360 and PS3. As for which one will look better - I think that is a meaningless question right now.

    EDIT: To be fair it doesn't seem as if Valve themselves made any pretensions of competing with Unreal Engine 3. The comparisons are, as far as I can see, a result of the unfair subheading put in by EG.
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/06 @ 09:51

  • TwistidChimp #7 5 years ago

    I'm a big fan of Source actually. as for it not having bump or normal mapping, or high resolution textures.. er, i'd get a better graphics card if I were you, and then play Lost Coast :)

    To my mind, Source has still produced the most believable game world yet, that of Half Life 2, Alot of that believability was down to Valves artists and designers, but on the highest settings Source can produce some absolutley stunning results. And with the fixed power of the 360 to draw on, Valve is really going to go to town. Cant wait for Episode2.

  • groovychainsaw #8 5 years ago

    I think source looks much better than the doom3 or unreal engines (form what I've seen so far). The over use in the other 2 engines of bump mapping etc. leaves the worlds looking a bit 'greasy' and almost invariably too dark (although this may be a design decision...). The source engine has created the most naturalistic looking worlds so far (especially if you have a hefty PC, whether or not that scales to the 360 or not we shall see..).

  • JonFE #9 5 years ago

    "Valve is already using the Source Engine on Xbox 360, naturally, to develop Half-Life 2: Episode Two and accompanying titles Team Fortress 2 and Portal (Half-Life 2 and Half-Life 2: Episode One will also form part of the bundle)."

    Are you actually saying that there will be one package containing the whole (up to now) HL2 saga (HL2+Ep.One+Ep.Two) plus TF2 & Portal? It sounds too good (or too expensive) to be true! Is that confirmed?

  • kangarootoo #10 5 years ago

    I thought HL2 on XB looked better than Doom3 on XB, just for some reference.

    Thats not a concreete comparison though, as the use of an engine is not entirely defined by the engine itself. Someone mention the Unreal engine using too much bump mapping? That is entirely an art choice and nothing to do with the engine (unless the way it does bump mapping is actually what you don't like the look of).

  • kangarootoo #11 5 years ago

    @JonFE

    I believe that is true yes, that the bundle on 360 will contain everthing you listed.

  • Talha #12 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo and others: I agree with you guys about HL2 looking way better than most games out there, even while using an 'antiquated' engine. But I think it is more a credit to Valve's asthetic sense and effort, than anything else. Although of course the look Doom engine forces upon its games (think Doom 3, Quake 4, Prey) is a little off-putting. By the looks of it, Source should allow for far more variety in setting and tone.

  • coojam #13 5 years ago

    The benefit of the Source engine is that it works nicely on a variety of systems. That's not a concern with 360 as they're all the same. It's not really fair to compare the 3 year old Source engine to Unreal's brand-spanking new one.

  • JonFE #14 5 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    Thanks - that would actually be great :)

  • space_ace #15 5 years ago

    nice, but please fix the shadows...

  • Darren #16 5 years ago

    @TwistidChimp - I have a 512MB GeForce 7900 GT so I hardly think the Source engine's limitations are a result of me having to run the game on medium settings as I have everything maxed out. /wink

    The Loast Coast demo was very nice TECH DEMO but it still wasn't that stunning in my opinion bar the HDR lighting nor was Half-Life 2 Episode 1 for that matter. That's not to say that either looked poor; just that they both have a slightly dated look to me with poor bump-mapping, weak shadows and average textures when viewed up close. It's the art design that saves them though but I still think technically they aren't that awe-inspiring simply because Source isn't that great an engine in my humble view.

    Games like Perfect Dark Zero hint at what next-gen games should look like it terms of texture detail, shadows and effects (and ignoring the art design itself!) and only make Source look even more dated to me.

  • UncleLou #17 5 years ago

    It's hard to tell how capable the Source engine really is with Valve's stunning art direction, but I was surprised how excellently Episode 1 looked. Much better than Quake 4 or Prey.

    As for normal maps and that kind of stuff, it's all in there, yet used a lot more subtle than in D3, or Q4 etc.

    Although I doubt as well that it can keep up with the Unreal engine. The Gears of War developer walkthrough videos are nothing short of breath-taking, technically.

  • kangarootoo #18 5 years ago

    Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines was based on the source engine so that might be a useful comparison. The environments were't up to HL2 standards overall (nothing against the devs, Valve have huge resources) but SOME of the characters were stunning (plus it was a great game if you like RPGs).

  • #19 5 years ago

    All I know is this is all good.

    A solid engine, and proof that Valve are solidly commited to console gaming.

    HL2 + Ep1 + Ep2 + TF2 + Portal in one package is perhaps the most exciting "game" coming out for any platform. Can't wait to play through a 360 optimised HL2 build (hopefully running with extras not seen on the PC) myself.

  • Varsity #20 5 years ago

    To clear up any misunderstandings.

    It might not have the most incredible rendering tech out there (at least as far as we know: maybe it's been upgraded for the 360?), but that's only because Valve have put so much effort into the other areas. See above link.

    Also, has anyone noticed how Valve always mention RTS when talking about Source360?

    "hopefully running with extras not seen on the PC"

    Valve will backport any improvements they make if I know them.

    (Dammit EG, how many edits am I going to have to make?)
    Edited by 4 at 17/10/06 @ 14:08

  • Talha #21 5 years ago

    Wow, it seems as if I am not the only fan of Valve's superb art direction. Thing is, Doom and Unreal engines (all iterations) have always been technically quite advanced with the latest features. But they haven't had someone like Valve working on them.

    One other thing that strikes me is that Source can present a variety of environments, while Doom apparently specializes in metallic corridors, breathtaking as they may look. Or if you take FEAR, by the looks of it it has great character models and animation, but little else in the way of environments (just look at the outdoor sections of FEAR).

    Thing is, not everyone has the dedication, resources and time that Valve put in their game. In the end though, that is one thing that always wins out over raw pixel pushing and technical advancement.

  • Inflatable #22 5 years ago

    I also agree Source games look pretty good.. people that think Unreal and Doom engine games etc look better but be suckers for plastic fake looking games.. Half-Life 2 Episode 1 still looks beautifull when played on a high-end PC.. It's much harder to create a realistic looking world then creat a sci-fi one.. Also the use of physics etc is still unmatched in Source, which imho is also a important part of creating a next-gen feel.. And Source keeps getting updated with the lastest tech.. HL2:EP2 will therefor look better then EP1, you can count on that..

    I do think Unreal Engine 3.0 will look stunning aswell though.. But Source is still just almost as beautifull in a different way imho..