Doom 3 has awsome graphics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

General Forums Off-topic Chat
21

what?!?

first, doom3 isn’t a sequel, it’s a remake

secondly, how can someone think doom1 and doom2 were mediocre!!! it’s the source of every first persone shooter. One of the first that actually was in 3d. and hell (no pun intended), it was fun. lol I know it’s a matter of opinion…but doom 1 & 2 are like the best game ever created, because they simply revolutionized the word “game”.

Ramake, sequal…whatever. It had an amazing engine. The GAME was weak. Same with the original doom games. The gfx engine was second to none, but the game design was lacking in the worst way. Not that I didnt spend long nights blasting away demons. What I’m saying is, it wasn’t terribly clever as a GAME. AS A GAME! Good GFX. Bad Game.

And no, doom was NOT the source or every first person shooter. Wolf3d was ;). And it was the ENGINE that was the source of anything.

ID is absolutly wonderful at making engines. No doubt that they are unsurpassed. Valve owns them in making games more than words can say.

I beat HL2. Now THERES a game that lets you forget that its a game! I couldnt stop thinking ‘wow…what a boring game this is’ while playing doom. Not to say that i wasnt on edge from the annoying cheap scares, but the gameplay was dry as hell.

22

I can’t believe we are in a 3D artist forum chatting about the excellent graphics of doom3.

Shadows: Pitch black, razer sharp. Yea, right. IMO, UGLY

Modeling: OK, the bump mapping was nice, but couldn’t they have spared like, 30 more polys on the heads? It wouldn’t have hurt that much, and would make them human rather then coneheads. And pipes with 8 sides is SOO Quake 2. Turn off the shadows and bumpmapping and that what you get, quake 2 level graphics.

Materials: Plastic people…wheeee

Animation: Fairly good actually, I never had a “wow” moment with it, but it was overall smoothly done.

so there you have it, the Four main points from a graphics standpoint, and only one was done well.

23

Holy shit, DAYUM, that Elder Scrolls game looks awesome.

When’t the release date expected to be?

24

2006 AFAIK. Same time as Unreal3, which looks better still.

You’ll most likely need a GeForce 6800 to run it, or whatever ATI has that supports PS3.0

25

Not “game developers” ?! Honostly dude… do you even know ANYTHING about ID? They’ve been around for over a decade, and pretty much EVERY ONE of their games has been a hit, much like blizzard. Doom 1-3, Quake 1-3, Commander Keen (old platform) and a bunch of other games… John Carmack ring a bell?

Pooba

26

Listen i know doom 3 doesent look that good right now, but it ajusts to ur graphic card if you have a Geforce 6800Ultra or the Geforce FX Quadro 3000, doom 3 will look amazing… I know that half life 2 looks better in many ways… but im just saying doom 3 isent crap… It introduced bump mapping in games and many other aspects like Video textures .ect…

And all u people who say its crap well, no its no because doom 3 sold so many copiess!!

27

It introduced bump mapping in games and many other aspects like Video textures .ect…

It was released first, if thats what you mean. I wouldnt go so far as to say ID invented bumpmaps or anything like that.

And yes it sold many copies…do you know what hype is? Most of the people I know that bought the game LOVE ID but hated D3. They all love HL2 though. Hl2 LOOKS good, and PLAYS good. Its a good GAME. Not just a good ENGINE like D3.

BTW, I beat HL2, and there is no game that I have ever played like this one. Untill I started playing with dev codes and cheats, I could easily forget that I was playing a game. The modling, dynamics and animation was awesome. Doom3 was just a huge let down for me…

28

bumpmapping has been around since well…hmm…1999 2000 anyway. Bloodrayne 1 had it.

Normal Mapping, which is a hell of alot better far cry used

true dynamic shadowing, farcry had it…

the one, and ONLY thing that Doom3 did that hasn’t been done numerous times in the past is a unified lighting system. And you know what? It’s slow, a MASSIVE resource hog, and it looks pretty darned sad in the grand scheme of things.

Cryengine does it right, both static lightmaps AND dynamic shadowing.

29

hl2 pwns d3 more than words can express.

/me goes off to play the millions of mods for hl2

30

Look at this pic of the HL2 G-Man:

http://img67.exs.cx/img67/5943/k3ud1trainstation010.th.jpg

Medium model quality, medium texture quality. Just imagine what it is like with them on high… :o

31

…pwns…too…much…got to…look away…must not…play hl2…for 10 more hours…AH!

/me gives into my primal urges and plays hl2 for 3 days straight without food, water or going to the bathroom.

32

Just imagine what it is like with them on high…


http://gallery.mudpuddle.co.nz/albums/tginn/d1_trainstation_010002.jpg

To satisfy your curiosity

33

Im running half life 2 in the best it can go and its amazing graphics and good gameplay… But Doom 3 is also good too!

The only thing that sucks in the ending in half life 2!!!

If u havent got there well be ready!!

34

how come when comparing engines all i hear is that HL2 had better textures. is that saying that D3 engine isnt capable of realistic textures? Same with the physics, D3 has thier own Phys engine HL2 is using Havok. But does that mean that the D3 physics are not capable of doing what was done in HL2? Ok, so HL2 was a better game. We all know it and no one is denying it either. But to claim that one engine is better over the other because of the game itself is just plain ignorant.

The only true way to test whether one engine is more powerful than the other is to make a map that is the same for both engines. Makes sense right? but i be lazy so I’ll just pull up stuff other people have done.what idiom has done was take the HL2 textures and put them in the D3 engine

What I have discovered is, unrealistic looking and low resolution textures are due to settings and artistry, not the engine itself. Doom 3 can do all the shader effects that HL2 can, also with better quality results (based on the maximum settings each game is capable of, the HL2 engine might be able to render at higher settings through tweaking, I haven’t really looked into this) as HL2’s water and cubemaps are inherently pixelated. The main problem for Doom 3 doing HL2 type maps like the one I did is there being multiple lights shining on most surfaces. Despite this, at ultra quality and 4X FSAA, my computer (2Ghz Athlon XP, 9800 pro) ran most of the map at 20-30 fps. That is without optimization using such things as portals but it is also a map without any extra models and is quite small. I also noticed that I was about half the height I should be compared to the textures so the screenshots were taken when in noclip mode. A mod could probably easily change the height of the player camera.

The famous GravGun in HL2 is no longer only featured in HL2. Two D3 mods are featuring the GravGun in thier mod. Sure the Gameplay was better in HL2, and ran on the average machine but D3 is not where id Software makes their money. D3 was really meant to be a sort of tech demo. i read somewhere that HL2 was the final evolution of the older generation of graphics and D3 was the beginning of the next generation. In another year we should be able to run D3 bettter as it was designed to really work on a 256MB vid card and not what is currently affordable.

35

Won’t work.

36

how come when comparing engines all i hear is that HL2 had better textures.

Thats all you hear?

I just hear that D3 sucks while its engine owns (and is resource hungry) while HL2 pwns and isnt.

If we must ccompare textures, I think they look about the same.

37

doesnt anyone realy look at marathon in the good ole’ days… man that game was sweeet… top notch graphics, and it was a bungie creation … Before bungie was bought by microsoft and was a super mac game!.. man good times, good times…

oh yah, i feel that i like hl2 because of the briliance of the detail of the story line, and the detail of its maps. the greatness, the size, the physics, and everything practicly… I would like doom more if there were more lights involved, wider or more spaciouse areas. doom has great detail with its shading, almost like raytracing, but they wont show lighting enough to let you see its goodsnessness… and i hate being jumped on… lol

38

Please don’t bump threads that are off the first or second page without a really good reason.

This thread was lasted posted to in december.

Thanks and welcome to elysiun. :slight_smile:

39

well, since this thread has been bumped, and I own both games, I think I’ll pipe in my opinion.

Doom3, quite frankly, sucks…once you get past the initial “wow” factor and get a few levels in, the feeling of “Haven’t I been here before” kicks in, and it kicks in HARD. As mentioned before, the shadows are overly sharp, I had to crank up the brightness to see anything, and lets not mention that the main charater is so retarded that he is incapable of holding a pistol and a flashlight at the same time %|

For double handed weapons I could understand this, but for the pistol, there is no excuse.

Conclusion: For all the variety it brings, ID sofware might as well have just cloned the first level 20 times.

Half-Life 2 on the other hand, is definately the most outstanding game I have ever played… the graphics are top notch, the gameplay is varied, the physics are second to none, and most importantly, the characters in it make you feel an emotional connection towards them, which I have never truly experienced from a game before. The same goes for the storyline.

Half life 2 is so much superior to Doom3 that it isn’t funny.

40

well, since this thread has been bumped, and I own both games, I think I’ll pipe in my opinion. :slight_smile:

I’ve played through both games 3 times each so far, and even though a lot of people rat on Doom 3 for having traditional gameplay, I still think it’s a great game. Technically the game is good. Graphics, is of course without peer (the only thing that impresed me technically with HL2 was the water). But so many people forget to mention what else is good about the game. The audio is the best of any game that I have ever experienced. I haven’t played a game that was delivered so well. They did a fantastic job when it came to setting the mood.

I know the whole flashlight/pistol thing is annoying, but the game was designed to give you the strongest sense of fear and claustrophobia possible, and the fact that as soon as you need to defend yourself you loose your incandescent friend really added to that. The game wouldn’t have been the same if you could see everything all the time. It would have ruined that one thing they tried so hard to accomplish.

Half-Life on the other hand is still very good. And more enjoyable in a few ways that have already been pointed out. If I had to pick my favorite I would say HL2.

Many people just don’t understand that the sole purpose of ANY game is to give you an emotional response. If the game doesn’t give you an emotional response or if you don’t like the emotional response (like I had with Soldier of Fortune) then you won’t like the game and won’t play it. It’s as simple as that. That is the core of game design. Doom3 had a very different emotional experience than most games that I played, and it did it so well. The only other game that I felt that I couldn’t play for more than 2 hours straight because I was physically drained was DDR.

Half-Life 2 had a canvas of emotional responses throughout the game, which made it a very enjoyable and varied experience. But Doom3 picked one, and did a fabulous job. Anyone that says Ravenholm was scarier than anything in Doom 3 is full of it :).

And as for physics? The physics are not second to none. It’s nothing new. They didn’t develop the physics engine. It was a licenced pysics engine and has been used on numerous games before that I can’t even list them all off-hand. All they did was take a development tool and turned it into a weapon, which was a REALLY good idea and made the game a lot of fun.

The storyline for HL2 kind of pissed me off. The setting was good and the conflict worked, but I really hope they fill in the gaps between game 1 and 2. Half-Life had closure, but Half-Life 2 was open at both ends. I still don’t feel like I actually beat the game.

Anway, Half-Life 2 was very good. Doom 3 was also very good, and I want to get the expansion (btw, it fixes most of what you hated about the game).