Bump Mapping in BugBait=Wow.

[Apos]

I used to think valve was cool until they opened the floodgates vids and horrendously overhyped their game. One of the things I liked bout hl was that it came outta nowhere but its not like they are flaunting it cause its the sequel to the "best game of all time" it wasnt the sequal to anything.

You're a little loony I think. Half-Life didn't come out of nowhere: it was in and out of the press for years. They did lots of PR for it: WAY more than they have done for HL2. Just because you missed all of this doesn't mean that it never happened.

Whats gonna happen to source once fully dynamic lighting is standard in games?

Source is made to be constantly upgradable. When decide that they need to add a different lighting system, they will. But what they have now is a very nice combo of static and dynamic lighting that gives them a very very nice look without devoting half your computer to just the lighting. And they can scale this up and down to get better performance as needed. The way light and shadows fall on characters is nothing short of amazing, and aside from the minor glitches they said they'd try to fix (shadows casting through other objects), it more than keeps up with other games.

 

[crabcakes66]

Do people even realise that 80% of peoples computer cant even do all this shit anyway?

70% of people who play HL2 will probobly not have a DX9 gfx card.....

and doom3 is supposed to be even more intense on peoples systems....does anyone ever stop to think ...all of this shit in doom3 is usless if only a small percentage of people will ever see it........

 

[Guest]

HAHAHA!

Damn i stirred up a swarm of hl2 fanbois, look at em go!

I havnt replied in like 6 pages and this thread is still going strong. I must have said somehting that struck a nerve. Somehting that you didnt want to hear. The truth.

Doom3 engine looks better than source, and when Doom3 technology becomes standard the name source will only be spoken in remeberence of the time before games became more than what they are now.

When normal mapping becomes standard and models appear to be 1 million polies, gamers wont settle for painted on facial features, wrinkles in cloths, or even wrinkles in skin. The kind in hl2 where textures are painfully flat and boring.

When dynamic lighting becomes standard gamers wont settle for boring and unimaginative static lighting you find in infirior engines such as source.

When gamers stand and proclaim that the time of simple boxes that rely on highres textures to give it form are no longer acceptable, and that they wont settle for anything less than the form appearing to be actual geometry, as doom3 does, we will see the end of game worlds obviously made of boxes. Instead we will see game worlds that accuratly reflect the complexity of real life geometry.

Long live progression.

 

[crabcakes66]

Originally posted by Brassmonkey
HAHAHA!

Damn i stirred up a swarm of hl2 fanbois, look at em go!

I havnt replied in like 6 pages and this thread is still going strong. I must have said somehting that struck a nerve. Somehting that you didnt want to hear. The truth.

Doom3 engine looks better than source, and when Doom3 technology becomes standard the name source will only be spoken in remeberence of the time before games became more than what they are now.

When normal mapping becomes standard and models appear to be 1 million polies, gamers wont settle for painted on facial features, wrinkles in cloths, or even wrinkles in skin. The kind in hl2 where textures are painfully flat and boring.

When dynamic lighting becomes standard gamers wont settle for boring and unimaginative static lighting you find in infirior engines such as source.

When gamers stand and proclaim that the time of simple boxes that rely on highres textures to give it form are no longer acceptable, and that they wont settle for anything less than the form appearing to be actual geometry, as doom3 does, we will see the end of game worlds obviously made of boxes. Instead we will see game worlds that accuratly reflect the complexity of real life geometry.

Long live progression.

please show me any media where doom3 looks better...i havent seen any.....

or are you all talk?

 

[Guest]

stay tuned crabcakes.

I have shown the flaws in the source engine using pics of it, now ill show the supiriority of the doom3 engine using pics.

 

[crabcakes66]

All that tech progression may be great......but if it still looks like shit.....ill stick with boxes.

 

[crabcakes66]

please do

 

[Feath]

Originally posted by Brassmonkey
stay tuned crabcakes.

I have shown the flaws in the source engine using pics of it, now ill show the supiriority of the doom3 engine using pics.

Are you going to use really old pics that are no longer relevant to the engine.

Please do.

 

[crabcakes66]

1 more thing......we havent seen the finished prduct of either game...so isnt it a little early to say witch one is better?

 

[Styloid]

No Brassmonkey, you walked into a HL2 forum where people talk. They also post up news and emails about HL2 and other games so they can know a little bit about what they are talking about. Here are some quotes from emails that were posted for example:

"- Its been said that while HL2's lighting is static based, there will be
some dynamic lighting. Do dynamic lights cast dynamic shadows? Is this
something will only be able to be used in a few places (such as in the HL
engine, where dynamic lighting is was a pretty big system hit) or could we do things like in Splinter Cell, with having lots of light bulbs being shot out and whatnot? Would it be possible to have a swinging light ala DOOM III?

I'm not sure where people get the idea that HL-2 doesn't support dynamic lighting."

or

"@valve-gary: In dx8, you can put specular normal maps on all models, and you can put diffuse and specular normal maps on world geometry (including displacement maps).
@valve-gary: In dx9, you can additionally put diffuse normal maps on models."

Long live information.

 

[Feath]

Originally posted by Styloid
No Brassmonkey, you walked into a HL2 forum where people talk. They also post up news and emails about HL2 and other games so they can know a little bit about what they are talking about. Here are some quotes from emails that were posted for example:

"- Its been said that while HL2's lighting is static based, there will be
some dynamic lighting. Do dynamic lights cast dynamic shadows? Is this
something will only be able to be used in a few places (such as in the HL
engine, where dynamic lighting is was a pretty big system hit) or could we do things like in Splinter Cell, with having lots of light bulbs being shot out and whatnot? Would it be possible to have a swinging light ala DOOM III?

I'm not sure where people get the idea that HL-2 doesn't support dynamic lighting."

or

"@valve-gary: In dx8, you can put specular normal maps on all models, and you can put diffuse and specular normal maps on world geometry (including displacement maps).
@valve-gary: In dx9, you can additionally put diffuse normal maps on models."

Long live information.

Also, from the Half Life 2/Source Mod FAQ

Does Half-Life 2 support dynamic lighting?

Yes

 

[Guest]

It doesnt support it the way doom3 does. We are talking a unified lighting system where every object casts a shadow on every other object in a dynamic way, source doesnt even come close to this.

As for the pics, i just now got my host workign and its 4 am here so **** that. Ill be back tomarrow to continue. Stay tuned.

Goodnight all.

 

[Dagobert]

2 very clear reasons for Hl2's tech being different to Doom 3's

1. HL2 has to work on DX6 cards so Valve can sell more copies than id. HL2 will outsell D3 because it has a larger potential user-base. That is why HL2 outsold Q3.
2. HL2 has large open environments. I've not seen any large open environments in D3 and there is a reason for that. D3 uses shadow volumes to calculate shadows. They are very ram heavy. To get a decent hi-res shadow volume big enough to cover the whole of the beach level in the HL2 E3 demo you'd need about a gig of video ram. Hence the small environs in D3.

Carmack had the idea for the engine. They looked at what type of world that engine could handle and they built D3. Valve imagined a world, and built an engine that could run it.

 

[Dagobert]

2 very clear reasons for Hl2's tech being different to Doom 3's

1. HL2 has to work on DX6 cards so Valve can sell more copies than id. HL2 will outsell D3 because it has a larger potential user-base. That is on e of the reasons why HL outsold Q3. You ever complete one of those PC benchmarking surveys for Valve? There's a very good reason for them.
2. HL2 has large open environments. I've not seen any large open environments in D3 and there is a reason for that. D3 uses shadow volumes to calculate shadows. They are very ram heavy. To get a decent hi-res shadow volume big enough to cover the whole of the beach level in the HL2 E3 demo you'd need about a gig of video ram. Hence the small environs in D3.

Carmack had the idea for the engine. They looked at what type of world that engine could handle and they built D3. Valve imagined a world, and built an engine that could run it.

 

[Doobz]

Brassmonkey, you do realize that the character models in HL2 ARE normal mapped, don't you?

and you realize that almost every surface in the game is bump mapped, right?

another thing i gotta say, i keep hearing so much hype for the shadows and lighting

i played the alpha, seen the screenies, and for a lighting system that's supposed to be such a system hit, i find very obvious and distracting flaws

first of all, shadows in the game are RAZOR sharp, and that's just distracting, i believe this is the product of the ray trace shadowing technique they are using

2nd of all, it seems very often that object shadows completely and totaly mask whatever texture they happen to fall upon, very annoying

i don't think HL2 has either of these problems, seeing as it uses radiosity calculations for some of it's dynamic lighting, instead of the ray trace technique



know what the **** you're talking about before you go spouting off that HL2 has painted on facial expressions (yeah ****ing right) and lacks normal maps for it's characters



another effect i see no one has mentioned is the particle effect system. so far, from what i've seen, HL2's far surpasses Doom 3's

 

[Guest]

easy easy fanboys,

Doom3 better lighting: TRUE
I saw many doom3 media too, I even collect some of them as I collect hl2 media. The dynamic lighting is absolutly impressive.

Doom3 better graphics: MAYBE
Boxes or no boxes doesn't matter at all, it just need to archieve visually realistic. As a matter of fact that hl2 is the most impressive game showed in e3 (even more impressive than doom3, just go read stuff about e3 u will find out), hl2 is considered to have good enough graphics.

HL2 can rule over Doom3: 95% TRUE
Lighting is not only thing that the engine does. We are talking about action games here, we need motional physics. As we all know that hl2 have a fully interactive world, things react to a force according to their weight, frictions, momentum etc (Gabe said that a barrel inside a train can move forward when the train decelerate if there's not enough friction, ain't it cool?!!). At this point, source engine do a better job than doom3 in making the game motionally realistic.

What else make hl2 rule over doom3?
Many thing else, but i just want to point out one. Simply take a look at how many time hl community is greater than doom commnunity right now at this moment. This huge community is going to contribute to the success of hl2, by buying the game and making mods, etc etc...

Conclusion:
Despite Doom3 engine has more advance lighting, so far, Source engine is still the best engine for action fps games due to its more advance motional physics system which is exactly what we need to make hl2 rule over doom3. Motion, action is better than those damn stupid dynamic shadow; in natural selection, the world is damn dark where u don't even see any shadow, but the game is still fun to play and offer a horrific atmosphere.

I will sure buy hl2, and consider to buy doom3 later.

 

[Tamora]

Assmonkey: You do add in your calculations that the videos releaesd are almost a year old, right? Therefore whatever has been seen in the videos might have been improved throughout this year.

I will play both Doom 3 and Half-Life 2. They are two totally different games, and the developers on both sides has obviously given priority to different things concerning the engines. Nothing wrong with that. the only thing that's wrong in my opinion is that you post something about Doom 3 vs. Half-Life 2 in a topic that really don't has anything to do about it. By all means, start your own little thread in this forum where you can express your love for John Carmack and his engine...

 

[Tamora]

oh, btw, all people on this forum can't be wrong. You really must be brainwreck...

 

[Feath]

Originally posted by gamevoodoo
I will sure buy hl2, and consider to buy doom3 later.

Why just the one? Why not both? I think Brassmonkey is doing a bad thing. He's forcing us to choose between one or the other. Which I had no intention of doing anyway.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by Feath
Why just the one? Why not both? I think Brassmonkey is doing a bad thing. He's forcing us to choose between one or the other. Which I had no intention of doing anyway.

see respond in disc. with brassmonkey

 

[Lifthz]

I don't like the fact that from the Steam videos, it seems there is very little bumpmapping in general in Half-Life 2. However, perhaps this will change... we'll see.

 

[Xenome]

Brassmonkey, i think everyone must agree that the doom III graphics are beautifull and yes, look more good then halflife 2... BUT;

Halflife2 is superior in EVERY other aspect of a game.
Doom III is still applying the old gameplay: "shoot,shoot shoot".. .
That looks primitive right now, because of halflife2.
How can a game coming out this year, still have such a primitive gameplay, while halflife2 shows it can be so much better?

This shows that ID software have ONLY focused on the graphics, and not the gameplay aspects, wich are much more important.

I can understand that you are so much loving the graphics of doom III, and bragging about them: They are the only thing you can hang on to, because in every aspect doom III is much less then halflife2.
You can't even compare the two games: halflife2 is of a different level, a next gen game.
Valve software has long worked on the characters, the facial animation and stuff... and doom III can't even be compared to it.

Graphics?
Doom III > Halflife 2

Every other aspect of the game:
Halflife2 >>>>>> Doom III

I'm surprised you don't agree that doom III is kind of a "lower class/level" then halflife 2.. you got me lauging

 

[Guest]

this bugbait thread becomes so powerful, everyone here are like bugs and brassmonkey is the bait

 

[Guest]

Guys, just IGNORE the crone.

 

[Xenome]

Join forces to beat this ignorant DoomIII -kid

 

[figge]

Doom3:

Awsome lightning, Plastic Graphics, Horror Game, there is a story?, Gameplay = bang bang bang run button door run bang bang?

Half-life2:

Cartoonish Graphics, Action game, Seems to have a story and good gameplay

Pac-Man:
Great classic story, No cartoon or plastic, lot's of horror and action, great lightning, great gameplay

Guess we have awinner... PAC MAN! :cheers:

 

[el Chi]

Originally posted by figge
Doom3:

Awsome lightning, Plastic Graphics, Horror Game, there is a story?, Gameplay = bang bang bang run button door run bang bang?

Button? Nah, that's a tad too complex. D3 has no use button. Just think about that.

Half-life2:

Cartoonish Graphics, Action game, Seems to have a story and good gameplay

What's so cartoonish?

 

[el Chi]

Originally posted by figge
Doom3:

Awsome lightning, Plastic Graphics, Horror Game, there is a story?, Gameplay = bang bang bang run button door run bang bang?

Nah that's way too complex. D3 has no "use"button. Just think about that.

Half-life2:

Cartoonish Graphics, Action game, Seems to have a story and good gameplay

What's so cartoonish?

 

[Xenome]

To everybody bragging about that they want ULTIMATE GRAPHICS WITH NICE TEETH BLABLA BUT NO GAMEPLAY: I refer you to: http://www.halflife2source.com/hlss/imagepages/05-27-2003.html

 

[Axyon]

Another Doom3 vs. Half-Life 2 thread for me to close! Joy!

Guys, seriously, please don't feed the trolls.