Doom 3 Vs. Half-Life 2 redux....

[Milo]

Originally posted by OCybrManO
What's with the whole "You can't compare apples to oranges." saying?

Yes, I most definately can.

Oranges are usually more acidic.
Orange rinds taste worse than those of apples.
Apples don't spray juice everywhere when you cut them.
... and the list goes on.

You arse :cheers:

 

[MultiVaC]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
ROFL. Lets be honest now.

Surely you cant be serious. Hl2 looks like an average game. The polycount isnt super high, its average for todays games. The textures look good, until you get within 2 feet of them and then they turn all grainy. It looks passable, but nothing that should be praised. STALKER renders outdoor areas much more realistically than hl2 does. Thats the game that should be praised for graphics. And as for doom3 vs hl2 in the area of graphics, in the end it comes down to a matter of taste. But it is clear that doom3 has more detail and a far far supirior light model. If you deny these simple facts then you are a fool.

The weapons are rather boring and run-of-the-mill. Same old stuff, nothing new or exciting as far as design goes. the physgun is the only weapon that was worth a second look, but its only fun for a while.

The level design is very uninspiring.

The enemies are rather bland also. The combine soldiers have a decent design, but they arent very intimidating at all. The way their eyes are make them look sad, infact. The bugs are blatent rips from starship troopers. The strider is ok, even though it was ripped off aswell. The zombies look retarded, just as they did in hl1. Im sad to see they havnt changed at all.

Although the physics have been hyped a great deal, the truth is that this type of physics interaction will be the norm for todays games. DE:IW, Doom3, STALKER, all of these games will have physics systems on par with what hl2 will offer, if not better.

Now be reasonable here. Tell me a game that's out right now that's graphicaly on the same level as HL2. HL2 has great water effects, really believeable environments, cool shaders and detail that certainly rivals Doom 3. You say HL2's weapons are run-of-the-mill? Let's take a look at Doom 3's wonderful selection: Pistol (OMFG, genius!), machine gun (Wow, this game has a machine gun?), shotgun (really revolutionary), chaingun (pretty much a gattling gun), chainsaw (typical melee), fists ( ), rocket launcher (running out of comments here), BFG (typical iD :dozey: ) and a flashlight that you can hit stuff with. The only one that interests me is the soulcube. Now look at HL2's. Not the most creative selection, but it does have: Anti-grav gun, spore grenades, laser-guided RPG, Gauss Gun/Tau cannon and probably some I haven't seen yet. Oh, and yeah, HL2 has horrible level design, it certainly can't compete with Doom 3's fantastic HALLWAYS! The enemies are just fine IMO, better than skulls with jetpacks and upside-down heads with fingers. And the zombies look retarded, great. Zombies are SUPPOSED to look retarded, what do you expect, Ivy League zombies with British accents and tuxedos? The physics will be in lots of games, yes, but will they be implemented into the gameplay as well as they are in HL2?

 

[hype.db]

Originally posted by ElFuhrer
Oh, and yeah, HL2 has horrible level design, it certainly can't compete with Doom 3's fantastic HALLWAYS!

I don't know if the time of day was getting to me but I could not stop laughing at that statement

 

[Jeebus]

Originally posted by ElFuhrer
And the zombies look retarded, great. Zombies are SUPPOSED to look retarded, what do you expect, Ivy League zombies with British accents and tuxedos?

Morning old chap, care for a spot of tea to go with that dismembered limb?

 

[jonbob]

Watch the D3_E32003 movie, skip to 1:43 and see what iD have went and done - look familiar?

 

[Falcon(Nate)]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
The textures look good, until you get within 2 feet of them and then they turn all grainy.

How in the world do you know that? They certainly didn't show someone getting that close to the walls in the legal videos (none that looked grainy to me anyway). HL2 graphics look much better than "what's out now". The polygon counts aren't tremendously high, but they don't have to be. The polies are quite well used and most of the textures I've seen are bump/normal mapped VERY well. If the final version of the game looks like the DX9 Source video, then just about every surface will look 3-dimensional and won't have the 'blah' flat look. (And yes, the effects were turned up a bit high in that Source vid, but it also looked as if it had just rained... pretty neat if you ask me).

Doom3 looks great in its own right. The lighting is AMAZING. However, HL2 can have as many dynamic lights as you want (I don't know where the "only one" or "no dynamic lighting" mis-information has been coming from, and in the info from valve thread it's been confirmed that it's not limited to one just recently), just a framerate issue on how many you would want in a scene. If you wanted to make a creepy completely dynamically lit hallway like Doom3's, you probably could. Just for comparison, Vampire Bloodlines: The Masquerade has some pretty creepy looking locales using the Source engine (and also has cloth physics).

I find the NPCs, character models, buildings, props, etc. to be much more believable in HL2. Especially the faces. Most of the objects are bump and/or normal mapped very well from the footage I've seen. If half the creatures end up having as much detail as the antlion in the DX9 source vid...mmmm.

Doom3's monsters are scary. They're meant to be. It's a good thing. Some of them look almost plastic, but that's a personal preference and not really a fault of the engine.

As for storylines, Half-Life's is much more involved than the original Doom series, thanks to Marc Laidlaw. Doom3's story should be much better than the past 2 games because iD is actually bringing someone in to write it. Perhaps it will even be as involved as HL's. HL has a great backstory which we have only gotten a glimpse of so far, and it appears that much more of that story will be revealed in HL2. (The G-man, the Administrator, Mr. Freeman himself, Xen, how they're all related, etc)

Both will utilize at least 5.1 sound (Doom 3 is currently sitting at 6.1 I believe) which is great. I can't wait to be creeping in Doom3 and hear the exact location of a monster as it lands in the dark, spin and shoot just by sound alone. Same for HL2 and multiplayer. Imagine how much easier it will be to find that annoying camping sniper.

Both games will be amazing. I'm certainly going to buy both. And obviously my heart lies with HL2, but all of us fanboys should give D3 credit where it's due. It's not an either/or situation, so don't try to make it one. I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes... Just trying to be fair.

 

[Falcon(Nate)]

Just curious, EE, why are you so stuck on this "flat, grainy" HL2 texture thing? If you want to use the latest build from both games, it would only be fair to compare the type of textures/normal maps found in the DX9 Source Bink video to the latest Doom 3 footage, and not base everything solely on the E3 videos. I'm sure there has been texture work done since then. Several placeholders were used then (the blood coming from some of the aliens, for example).

As for the aliens looking goofy... Some people get very scared by horror movies, other people (like me) tend to think they're hilariously funny. You're not going to be able to scare everyone with your design. Personally, some of the skeleton-based models in Doom 3 make me want to laugh, and I tend to find the large, fat zombies to be a lot scarier. That's not any fault of iD's, they can't help that.

 

[Falcon(Nate)]

As for how else i would know, other than official videos, the answer to that is rather obvious.

Ah, I see. =) Just keep in mind that that build might be pretty old (missing or outdated textures and the like). Or at least we can always hope.

 

[Jeebus]

To me one of the major drawbacks of doom 3 is the limited multiplayer support. Since I tend to go through single player games fairly quickly I like the chance to go duke it out with other players online rather than programmed AI. Feel free to correct me but last I heard doom3 only supported 4 players in a multiplayer game. Coming from someone who typically joins those big 32 person servers for whatever game you can imagine, this is depressing news. I have a lot more hope for the doom 3 engine than I do for doom 3 itself but I'd rather wait till the games are released in the first place than to pass judgement ahead of time.

Half life 2 on the otherhand is pratically guarenteed to deliever considering the success of their previous multiplayer community. Also with Team fortress 2 coming out sometime in the future (we can only pray for 2004) A title I await almost more eagerly than Half life 2 itself the source engine shows it can better deliver the things that I look for in a game. I can only imagine with giddy glee the things valve has been cooking up in their offices that they wont even give out one little detail about it, no doubt a suprise that is sure to deliver.

 

[statix]

Elf dude has to be the biggest most biased hl2 fan boy on these forums. Remember elf boy, ID revolutionized the way fps is played today. SO dont bash on them. Try being more impartial less condescending and more subjective. Look at the different contexts and degree of appeal and impressions both games set. Stop trying to defend a game so vehemently, a game ripped off from everything ID stands for. Now i'd call u a crazy bimbo and a fanboy in denial if you think doom3 has no perpetuating appeal whatsoever. Stop trying to conform to the "objective" n00b hax0r l337 way of looking at things and screaming hl2 OWNS JOOO.

 

[Jeebus]

Really the only main problem I have with a default of 4 person multiplayer is the fact that I play almost exclusively team games online. Now I can't see the folks down at ID making a great team game if their design plan only calls for 4 person multiplayer. On the other hand however, I do frequently go to small lan parties every month or so (about 10-20 people) and its really hard to get a good team game everyone wants to play. This is simply because everyone always seems to want to play something different and getting 4 people to decide on one thing is a lot easier than convincing 32 people to decide on something.

Dont get me wrong either, I have jar of money currently squaring away money for all the next generation games coming out with half-life 2 and doom 3 as the front runners followed in a close second by stalker and far cry

 

[snoggle]

I don't mind the lack of focus on multiplayer in Doom 3. It gives them more time to work on the single player game. Besides, like any other game, the default multiplayer modes would just be tossed aside when the mods start popping up. Why spend so much time on multiplayer if the community will just out do you anyway?

 

[Jeebus]

Because the community takes too much time and im an impatient person! :bounce: I do need to get some sleep though so hopefully this thread wont be flaming wreckage by the time I wake up.

 

[jonbob]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
It is obvious that you are attempting to imply that id is ripping off another game, but for my sake, perhaps you would elaborate a bit more? I dont see it.

I'm not implying that at all (actually I much prefer the look of Doom3 over HL2), I was attempting to illustrate the good work Carmack has done on the Doom3 physics system. Notice how the objects are thrown about and affect each other when hit. But you have to admit, the effect that the manipulator in the H2 E3 demo looks a lot like what happened to that corpse at 1:43 into the Doom3 E3 demo...

They are both great games in their own right - and having never played the original I am greatly looking forward to the 'plot' in doom3, but I'm also eagerly awaiting HL2, DX2, and even Worms3D.

Lot's of good games coming out in the coming months, there's bound to be something for everyone.

In the end though, it's too early to say which is better - HL2 or D3 - they will both have their own charms when they eventually hit the shelves. Let's not start another UT vs. Q3-type debate.

 

[poseyjmac]

heres how i see it. even if doom3 surpasses hl2 in terms of gameplay. realistically it will only last a few weeks if that as a game i play. hl2+mods will be played by me for 4 years at least.

so then you could liken doom3 to a 5 second orgasm and hl2 to a nice long screw. but who knows, hl2s gameplay could surpass doom3, in this case hl2 would be a 4 year orgasm. great!

 

[Grimsrud]

After playing the leaked beta im more than convinced that the D3 engine is gonna set a new paradigm for computer gaming.

The HL2 engine is just the same old stuff with new shaders and the physics. It will be great... but D3 will crush HL2.

 

[Gamera]

Although Doom3 is really the first game with a complete real-time lighting model, there's no doubt for me that HL2 will have the better gameplay. D3 gameplay is the same old stuff, HL2 is not.

By Doom3's very nature you're restricted to small hallways for the most part. Stencil shadows, while nice are hard edged which detracts alot from realism giving the output a very plasitc feel, if you think that looks amazing enough to compensate for gameplay then more power to you. The modding potential for D3 is very limited where as HL2 is huge and more importantly designed to run on a much greater range of low end hardware.

Valve chose not to limit your gameplay in this manner, eventually a full lighting model will be acceptable in large outdoor scenes, but not right now. Shooting stuff in corridors will not move the current state state of the gaming paradigm along one bit, however tactical based action with group AI's and large modding potential will.

I want to play HL2 because I can use physics to solve problems and kill enemies using my imagination in any way I see fit. If it's just a baddie at the end of a small room, I shoot it, which I've done too many times before.

 

[mickey]

The concepts of ID and Valve, are different.

ID always build straight forward shooters on a state of the art engine.
DoomIII doesn't need a MP part. If u want to explore MP, buy quake.


Valve is building a platform with a single player game and the capebilities for a huge diverse online component.

 

[jonbob]

I think I'm looking forward to Doom3 licensing more than the game itself - everyone remember what Raven did with the Q3 engine, and what they are going to do with Q4?

 

[Sporky]

Aah the old 'x game Vs Y game' debate eh? They never get old.

It's a nice change not to see this one devolve into a slanging match though so what the hell, I'll dive in..

To clear up a few common misconceptions about D3 -

D3 multiplayer is only 4 people - Not true. The core game is designed AROUND 4 players. Changing the number of people in a base game is basically as simple as setting a .cfg, however much like Q3 for example (how many people fit on DM6 before it gets too insane? 6 at most right?) the maps are being designed to work best as a 2-4 player game and as a result out of the box D3 will play with 4 players. Personally I'm not too fussed because the gameplay is great and I have a fondness for intense 1v1 or 2v2 DM's. There will be people that doesn't suit, so be it, big 32 player games don't suit others.

There's no interaction with the environment. - False. The thing is the way the engine works is you don't need a specific use key. You just walk up to an object like a keypad or computer and IN GAME the screen becomes an object you can use, you get a little pointer with which to activate/change things. This allows for an extremely broad and seemlessly presented range of functionality.

D3 Can't do outside levels - Not true again. It does them pretty well actually, except you're likely to spend not very much time outside in the first place. This being a space station and all. Map sizes in D3 can be seriously enormous and although obvious issues like r_speeds etc obviously become an issue with a large open area (just like any game) you can still easily make something pretty huge. The opening cinematic in the E3 vid with the tram after all is all done in engine. Not big enough for you?

Modding potential is limited - Modding for D3 should be even easier than any previous id game (outside the technical challenge of producing high enough quality normalised textures/content). For starters the engine itself is fused with the map developers kit and can be built in real time, with real time control over lighting, level geometry, scripted events/animations, an extremely functional camera tool etc. All available inside the engine itself.

The physics don't play an integrated part of the game - Not true again. id have worked on making them a part of the experience, physics puzzles exist, enemies will attempt to use the environment against you and Tim Willits has talked about how they are using the physics to deal with some of the larger bosses. I can't see how that's offering any less than HL2 to be honest. How often do you think you'll be using physics to solve problems rather than your gun? Not the majority of the time I'm prepared to bet, physics add to the realism and immersion, not a lot more.



D3 targets high end hardware - Well yeah. but frankly if you're into gaming and you haven't updated enough to be past 1ghz 256mb and a TNT2 then 3 years have passed and it's time to think about upgrading. Also if you check out some of the benchmark previews of HL2 (I think it's the firing squad one specifically) they mention being CPU limited on a P4 2.8 in some of the demo levels!.

As for D3 gameplay sux I'm just going to reiterate that none of you have played D3, you've checked out an early alpha that was never meant to be played through, it's not likely to be enormously indicative of final gameplay.

Don't get me wrong I'm looking forward to HL2 as much as anyone here, I just think there's space in my life for both, and from what I've seen I have zero doubts D3 is going to be both the more technically advanced game graphically (Having seen the rather flat beta look of the HL2 stuff reaffirms that belief btw, although I'm prepared to wait till it's done before judging that) and will be a triple A class single and multiplayer game in its own right.

 

[mickey]

totally agree Sporky

Did ID-software ever dissappoint us with any release? No, not really.

RTCW, was fresh
quake3 was one of the first games to fully use a Geforce1 gfx card (t&l)
What i saw in the leaked doom3, was awsome. Things that even HL2 can learn from. But I also saw some(to many ) awsome things in HL2.

HL2 untill now is everything i was expecting it to be.

 

[Gamera]

Originally posted by Sporky
D3 Can't do outside levels - Not true again. It does them pretty well actually, except you're likely to spend not very much time outside in the first place. This being a space station and all. Map sizes in D3 can be seriously enormous and although obvious issues like r_speeds etc obviously become an issue with a large open area (just like any game) you can still easily make something pretty huge. The opening cinematic in the E3 vid with the tram after all is all done in engine. Not big enough for you?

The point is not the size of the level, but how much is visible at any given time. The tram scene is a very small, enclosed and low polygon area, note the lack of interconnecting portals, this is for a very good reason, try doing a large open city street complete with all the decals or sea floor like HL, the lighting will seriously struggle.

Modding potential is limited - Modding for D3 should be even easier than any previous id game (outside the technical challenge of producing high enough quality normalised textures/content). For starters the engine itself is fused with the map developers kit and can be built in real time, with real time control over lighting, level geometry, scripted events/animations, an extremely functional camera tool etc. All available inside the engine itself.

That does not effect potential, due to the nature of stencil shadows and portals, you'll be stuck for the most part in small, dark hallways. For thoes who know how portal engines and the stencil shadows algorithm work, we know the limitations already, don't have to play it.

Without much further work Raven will not be using the D3 engine for SOF3. Of course it is possible, but it will maintain the same hard-edged look no matter what.

I'm not biased in any way. I'll sure buy D3 and play it, but there's no way technologically it can offer the action experience of HL2 by it's very nature. D3 will be built mostly like a survival/horror game, if you like s/h rather than action then that's fine, but the people here want HL2 becuase of the action.

The physics don't play an integrated part of the game - Not true again. id have worked on making them a part of the experience, physics puzzles exist, enemies will attempt to use the environment against you and Tim Willits has talked about how they are using the physics to deal with some of the larger bosses. I can't see how that's offering any less than HL2 to be honest. How often do you think you'll be using physics to solve problems rather than your gun? Not the majority of the time I'm prepared to bet, physics add to the realism and immersion, not a lot more.

Small corridors offer less room. Plus you can only judge that one by playing, or seeing waht's in the videos.

D3 targets high end hardware - Well yeah. but frankly if you're into gaming and you haven't updated enough to be past 1ghz 256mb and a TNT2 then 3 years have passed and it's time to think about upgrading. Also if you check out some of the benchmark previews of HL2 (I think it's the firing squad one specifically) they mention being CPU limited on a P4 2.8 in some of the demo levels!.

That's at full detail, you won't want to be knocking any detail off on Doom3 because it's all integrated, got one, got to have the rest. HL2 will allow you to adjust the detail all the way down to run well on a minmum system.

As for D3 gameplay sux I'm just going to reiterate that none of you have played D3, you've checked out an early alpha that was never meant to be played through, it's not likely to be enormously indicative of final gameplay.

Never played HL2 either, but I've seen lot's of videos for both which along with technical knowlege of the engine is the basis for comparison. The D3 videos show nothing new gameply wise, which is why they're nothing to get excited about, if that changes for the full release then it's time to get excited, not before.

The idea that Doom3 is *much* more technically advanced is a myth, when you know how it all works. The reason HL's shadow mapping is not exteded at all the geometry is that they do not want you to be so limited in the game and the mods, not becuase Valve don't have the expertise to do it.

 

[mickey]

Originally posted by Gamera

The idea that Doom3 is *much* more technically advanced is a myth, when you know how it all works. The reason HL's shadow mapping is not exteded at all the geometry is that they do not want you to be so limited in the game and the mods, not becuase Valve don't have the expertise to do it.

i'll back that up

Doom3 uses 2 or 3 skins per model to optain shadows and light. I don't think this is very mod friendly.

 

[Sporky]

Originally posted by Gamera
The point is not the size of the level, *snip* .
For thoes who know how portal engines and the stencil shadows algorithm work, we know the limitations already, don't have to play it.

I'm aware of that thanks. I've been mapping for a number of years and I know how portals etc work. I'll simply say that D3 does huge open areas fine as long as you keep the lighting simple. As far as modding goes I think it's a question of what you want, it would be perfect for NS UT or variants for example, much like BF1942 it offers the mod community different things to HL2, nothing to be upset about. Nor is it as limiting as you suggest.

Small corridors offer less room. Plus you can only judge that one by playing, or seeing waht's in the videos.

Yesss. Not sure how the corridors effect things TBH. Aside from that I don't see much in the way of cool physics use in game in the HL2 videos either. A swinging beam? A crushing waste skip(On a roof)? A bit of ragdoll? We could see that some time ago.

I'm sure there will be other cool examples in game but the truth is if no one at valve had said 'lets to a techdemo to showcase it' no one would have noticed it much. Integrated physics just isn't that impressive to me.

That's at full detail, you won't want to be knocking any detail off on Doom3 because it's all integrated, got one, got to have the rest. HL2 will allow you to adjust the detail all the way down to run well on a minmum system.

That's just not true. :dozey: D3 is pretty scaleable. Hell the alpha was scaleable.

The D3 videos show nothing new gameply wise, which is why they're nothing to get excited about, if that changes for the full release then it's time to get excited, not before.

This is the sort of comparison I find bizarre, tell me exactly what you saw (in the gameplay) of HL2 that was new and revolutionary. What exactly was it? I saw nothing out of the normal for an FPS.

I'm not being funny but nothing in HL2's gameplay really leapt out at me to think 'this is revolutionary' or different from what id are doing in a different setting. So I want to know what exactly will make HL2's gameplay superior assuming we junk any comments about graphic capabilities and the physics of each engine.

 

[Gamera]

Yesss. Not sure how the corridors effect things TBH. Aside from that I don't see much in the way of cool physics use in game in the HL2 videos either. A swinging beam? A crushing waste skip(On a roof)? A bit of ragdoll? We could see that some time ago.

Were we watching the same videos? All of this could be seen some time ago, especially stencil shadows of D3, the principal is some 25 years old.

I'm sure there will be other cool examples in game but the truth is if no one at valve had said 'lets to a techdemo to showcase it' no one would have noticed it much. Integrated physics just isn't that impressive to me.

Um, physics (and AI) is the main selling point of HL2, Why? Because Physics changes gameplay, graphics make no difference what so ever. In the 3E leak of HL2 I improvised a bridge by welding barrels togeather, my own solution not intended by the designers, gameplay is changed forever.

I also construced a raft to float around on, a makeshift barrier and some traps of my own that did not already exist, like balancing heavy things over doors to crush whoever opened it.

Integrated physics is *far* more complex and difficult to achieve properly than any game graphics system yet created, which is why Havock did the bulk of it. And impressively ID made their own, unfortunately for a game that seems to rely on shocks rather than thought.

I don't want solutions put into a game for me, like they're doing with D3, I want to work them out for myself, that's the world of difference.

That's just not true. :dozey: D3 is pretty scaleable. Hell the alpha was scaleable.

Thereby defeating the entire point of all the fuss surrounding it, the point of D3 is the integrated lighting, if I switch off shadows there's no point. With shadows not on it will look terrible.

This is the sort of comparison I find bizarre, tell me exactly what you saw (in the gameplay) of HL2 that was new and revolutionary. What exactly was it? I saw nothing out of the normal for an FPS.

Like everybody else, I saw action gameplay setting all new standards. I saw an environment that gave me Deus Ex style freedom in an action game, to create solutions from my own imagination. A whole extra set of dimentions allowing me to think on my feet rather than mindlessly shooting hordes, just like HL1 make you think about the battles first time around with it's AI.

Exactly the same type of thing that separates Myamoto games like Zelda from the crowd, logical problem solving in an RPG vs the random chance games the Final Fantasy RPG. You're no longer doing mind numbing tasks, you're thinking.

What did you see in D3 other than the pretty eye candy exactly?

I'm not being funny but nothing in HL2's gameplay really leapt out at me to think 'this is revolutionary' or different from what id are doing in a different setting. So I want to know what exactly will make HL2's gameplay superior assuming we junk any comments about graphic capabilities and the physics of each engine. [/B]

Read above.

 

[KagePrototype]

D3 and HL2 both look like fun. I'll be getting both, neither attracts me more than the other.

 

[Gamera]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
LOL Gamera, your an idiot.

Doom3 will also have physics intigrated into gameplay in the form of traps, puzzles, using objects to your advatage, enemies using onjects to their advantage. The doom3 engine is not limited to corridors. The Doom3 engine does outdoor environments just fine. Doom3 will also have interesting AI that will think on its feet and make decisions on how to get at the player.

To say anything more than that would be pointless. I can prove these facts until my head turns blue, as i have done more than a few times in the past, and then another moron will crop up saying "HAHA! doom3 engine cant do anything else but hallways", "HAHA! doom3 doesnt have kewl physics like halflife2!", and the like. Im tired of debating the same thing over again to different people. whatever. im done here.

Read this over and over again until you understand.

I program games for a living, I know more about this than you and have proved it.

Seriously what's wrong with the people in this forum? What are you a 5 year old? If you can't back up what you've said *go away*

"LOL" is not an argumentation tool. I'm not going to flame you back because there's no point, especially to a whiny toddler. Logic isn't going to work and as I've answered thoes points already consider yourself reported.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

I think we all know that I am a hardcore dedicated HL2 and Valve fan.


BUT I KNOW A GOOD THING WHEN I SEE IT.

Go look at all the DOOM3 videos.

DOOM3 is gona kick some serious ass. There is no doubt in that. AT ALL. NONE. ok?

Noone knows exactly what it can do in comparison. Because no one has played final versions of either game. So just give it up. please?

 

[OCybrManO]

Originally posted by Gamera
Exactly the same type of thing that separates Myamoto games like Zelda from the crowd, logical problem solving in an RPG vs the random chance games the Final Fantasy RPG. You're no longer doing mind numbing tasks, you're thinking.

Shigeru Miyamoto is just a genius...

He was the first person inducted into the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences Hall of Fame (on a related note: John Carmack was the fourth).

Shigeru Miyamoto is one of the guys that even the big game developers look up to.
... and it means a lot when guys like Peter Molyneux and Sid Meier call you things like "without doubt the greatest games developer in the world".

My favorite quotes about him come from this article by gamespy:
"He's the king -- the Elvis, if you will -- of gaming."
"Shigeru Miyamoto is the one true game god, and you shall have no other gods but him."

 

[Gamera]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
LOL




Just because you program games doesnt mean your any smarter than the next guy. There are complete morons in every industry, even the presidential office has housed its share of idiots.

My information comes from id, i trust them more than some random coder i see on a forum. You may know more about coding games than me, but im not basing these facts on my own experience, but on the word of carmack and other id employees. And i would say that they know more about games than you.

Well, that "LOL" defeated me, I'm well and truly logicaly stumped. I'll admit it Doom3 ROX0RZ, it teh 1337.

Ohh, ohh, ID are telling me to buy their game, It must be good and that's a FACT. You aren't basing it on anything, just what people told you. My information comes from ID too, but I'm not a fanboy like you so I'm able to judge properly. I've read Masters Of Doom, I respect Carmack's work more than most people here, unlike you I'm not illogical about it and I addressed all your points already, it isn't my fault you didn't read them. D3 might be great too, as I've been explaining, what we've been seeing so far is no reason to get excited regardless of what D3 actually turns out like.

I'll save you time and pre-empt your reply with the huge "LOL" you're going to use to cover up your ignorant fanboyism.

LOL

Goodbye.

 

[Falcon(Nate)]

*Whips out a firehose*

Okay kids, timeout...go to your respective corners for a few minutes and cool off.

 

[another-user]

this was a good thread up until the last page or 2, im still sticking to my decision that hl2 and doom3 are both gods and will for ever change teh way games will be built.

 

[Gamera]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
No, im basing these facts on direct and specific quotes from Carmack and other id employes.

You must belive one of two things. The game is what they say it is, or they are blatenlty lying through their teeth on all of these accounts, the game is nothing like they say it will be, and you are just too smart to fall for it like all the ignorant fanboys.

That's better.

What facts are these exactly? I haven't seen Doom3 displaying vast detailed environments because they aren't suited to stencil shadows. When I see the physics integrated into the gameplay in exactly the way I mentioned, then and only then will I be excited about D3's gameplay. The D3 engine is certainally not suited to the sweeping vistas of HL2 regardless of how it ends up handling large, detailed arenas. It would have huge trouble displaying the level you see on the HL2-DX9 video, I know this because I've read the large amounts of technical information that's been published and even implemented some of it. So far it looks as if D3 will play out exactly as it's E3 trailer does.

I don't believe either of thoes two things, because I know how the game development process works. So far everything I've seen is the same as all other FPS's instead of sweeping through the streets with teams of AI's like in HL2, I've seen that and I'm excited about it.

Romero wasn't lying when he said Daikitana was going to be great, but was we all know it wasn't, he really thought it would turn out to be the best game ever. Nobody was lying when they said that D&D game (I forget the name) would have a scripting language that would allow you to do anything, they did, it just didn't work very well.

HL2 is similar to Deus Ex in the range of freedom it gives you, that's a very hard thing to achieve, it can be seen in the videos. That freedom can be promised all you like, I want to see it. Anybody can say they are the next Myamoto and they could really be, but it must be proven first.

D3 could be better and therefore give more freedom than HL2, but until I see it actually gives me that range of gameplay to allow me to solve problems of my own intuition, it's just not terribly exciting. This is from somebody who acknowleges Quake as the most important gaming technical achievement of all time, despite it's unremarkable SP mode.

 

[Kadayi]

Doom 3 looks like another ID Tech demo. Despite all the talk I think it will prove to be a shallow game beyond the basic premise (Plots never been IDs strong point lets face it), and I'd rather hold out for the future games that are going to utilise the engine.

 

[Hyped]

Originally posted by OCybrManO
Shigeru Miyamoto is just a genius...

Shigeru Miyamoto is my video game hero.

 

[MultiVaC]

Originally posted by EvilEwok
ElFuhrer, given that you have frequently displayed a vigorous partiality for the game you so adore, halflife2, it would perhaps be prudent to forgo any debates with you in this matter. However, i will give you my attention so long as you yourself keep a reasonable and openminded view on the subject at hand, not giving in to flames, rudeness, obstinateness, and refraining from posting messages with your usual condescending tone.

Fair enough. I'm sorry I was condescending to you, I am just annoyed at how you sign up at a HL2 forum just to bash the game at every opportunity, and also the fact that your signature is a blatant flame toward this entire community. My patience was pretty much worn away a long time ago by the troll parade of people like Doom3>HL2, and the slightly less extreme group of HL2 bashers such as Brassmonkey, SheepFactory and what I'm assuming was your old name: WickedEwok. Now; of course I'm getting Doom 3, and of course it will be a good game. So if you'll agree to keep your HL2 bashing to a reasonable minimum and refrain from comparing it to Doom 3 outside of this thread, I think we will have reached an agreement.

 

[voodoomachine]

Hmm

Doom3 or Hl2, now thats a hard one.

Considering i've played both, i must say that the physics used by doom3 are more like reality, HL2 physics need to be toned down a bit, i mean you can move things in HL2 that u shouldn't be able to, well with ease!!

As far as lighting goes, Doom3 has very nice lighting, I agree with ppl though, that when i shoot a light, i want it to go out. Makes the game more scary, considering if u have to use the torch with limited battiers

But i also found the shadows in HL2 to be excellent, Man i cannot live without shadows. Makes the game come to life. I do think the animation in both games rocks.

Either way i will be buying both games asap!!

 

[Styloid]

Ha! EvilEwok owned over and over by Gamera.... great stuff.

 

[Unnamed_Player]

Don't make me get the hose out you guys!

 

[statix]

Originally posted by Styloid
Ha! EvilEwok owned over and over by Gamera.... great stuff.

way to go fanboy although i strongly feel that whatever rational they gave probably went over your head