Graphics still top of the line?

brink's

brink's

Newbie
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
2,544
Reaction score
0
Lately on these forums and others (more others then this one) all I've been hearing about is how hl2s graphics are old and outdated and will never live up to doom3 and FEAR. I don't know if its because I'm biased or not, but I still think that hl2s graphics kick the crap out of pretty much every game coming out(especially FEAR) with the exception of unreal 3. I even think they look as good as stalker for the most part.

Anyway i know that HL2 will own not because of its graphics but because of its intense story etc.

I just wanted to know how u guys feel about this subject. Does anyone still think hl2s graphics are top of the line or am I the only one.

(plz don't flame)
 
:dozey: Of course Half Life 2 graphics are top of the line. I just don't think they match up against Doom III and FEAR, but I think the graphics CAN match up against STALKER. But Valve mentioned that they wanted to implement updates through steam, to keep Half Life 2 up to date on things, so eventually with new updates Half Life 2's graphics probably WILL look better than Doom III's and FEAR, might take awhile?
 
IMHO (naturally) HL2 graphics blow Doom 3 right out of the water, but that has more to do with what style I prefer.
The new videos of HL2 look stunning, especially the appartment bit, the shaders are very well used, it doesn't make the game look like an oversized GI Joe environment.

STALKER has better level geometry and higher res textures, but shader wise I haven't seen anything impressive. The water, from what I've seen, is flat out ugly.

FEAR looks pretty good, has great lighting and particle effects, but yes, it suffers from the Far Cry syndrome, nothing looks realistic or believable.
 
Having the engine is one thing, using it in a good way is another, ill be buying all these games cause there all cool, ima HL2 nut for reasons other than the graphics.

if HL2 != released
{
exec random_whine.cfg
}
 
HL2's graphics look like impressionist paintings instead of cartoons. I think they are superior to Doom3 in that regard. Doom3 may have real time lighting, but the lighting quality is actually pretty poor compared to HL2's full featured radiosity.
 
I know that I'm going to have a lot more fun playing HL2, and I probably wont even buy STALKER. But I do think its graphics are a lot more impressive than HL2, mostly I like the fact that it looks more realistic while all these other new engines look plastic (cept HL2)

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_41.jpg

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_22.jpg

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_44.jpg
 
HL2's visuals are in the top class, but maybe not top of THE class. Frankly I wouldnt deign to rank games like Doom3, STALKER, Far Cry and HL2 against each other because the artistic style and content is so different.
 
I'm getting tired of this graphics crap. YOU PLAY GAMES, NOT LOOK AT THEM!!!
 
I personally think Stalker, Doom 3 and Fear all look much, much better than HL2, graphics wise. Dont get me wrong, I'm looking forward to HL2 more than any of them (except maybe Doom 3) but I just think it doesnt have quite the same quality in graphics.
 
I think HL2's graphics are very good.

However, I think that the D3 engine is capable of a more realistic environment than source. (I'm just talking game engines here, not the art or style of the games.)
 
FEAR is an example of what you can do if you just have higher poly models and more shader effects and more real time lights: it's the natural progression of where Source will head by the time FEAR comes out.
 
Has *ANYONE* stopped to think they aren't using 100% the maximum polygons possible at stable framerate in half-life 2 game? Also, Half-life 2 engine can EQUALLY match doom III's shadowing effects. They just DONT use it in the game. We haven't seen it with the engine. It hasn't been demonstrated but it is there.
 
A.I. said:
I'm getting tired of this graphics crap. YOU PLAY GAMES, NOT LOOK AT THEM!!!
Click to expand...
Do you play with a blindfold on or something?
 
Raziaar said:
Has *ANYONE* stopped to think they aren't using 100% the maximum polygons possible at stable framerate in half-life 2 game? Also, Half-life 2 engine can EQUALLY match doom III's shadowing effects. They just DONT use it in the game. We haven't seen it with the engine. It hasn't been demonstrated but it is there.
Click to expand...

Of course they're not using maximum poly's. They're trying to get it to run on average systems. And no, Source cannot equally match D3's shadowing effects. Source is still based on static lightmaps for the most part, while D3 has a fully dynamic perpixel lighting system. They are not the same thing. I'm not saying that one necessarily looks better than the other, but it's just false to claim that HL2 has a unified real time lighting model.
 
LOL. Sorry. I just hate Doom III and FEAR. I'm biased :-P I dont think their graphics are spectacular at all though. Doom III is a myriad of shadow effects, and FEAR. Well lets just say we don't even have that much plastic in our landfils :-P
 
I'm sure that the source engine will continue to evolve through Steam updates, and make it prettier every year, though. Like how they added detail textures into HL1's engine, except Source is more dynamic and can go farther.
 
Source is still based on static lightmaps for the most part, while D3 has a fully dynamic lighting system. They are not the same thing. I'm not saying that one necessarily looks better than the other, but it's just false to claim that HL2 has a unified real time lighting model.
Click to expand...

ACtually you're wrong. There is a quote here from one of the valve guys that source can do fully dynamic lighting. They just don't utilize it in the game.
 
Raziaar said:
ACtually you're wrong. There is a quote here from one of the valve guys that source can do fully dynamic lighting. They just don't utilize it in the game.
Click to expand...

No, actually I'm quite sure that I'm not wrong. The dynamic lighting possible in source is not the same thing as D3's lighting system. They use a different technology.
 
There is no doubt in my mind, doom3 engine (from the videos ive seen) has much more detailed and intresting enviroments. Something that hasnt been done before.

Also the simply breathtaking animation in doom3 sp im sure will crush hl2. But like always we have to wait antill the final product is here, nobody knows what ID or valve are hiding...

On the realism note, you get a metal surface like allot of the doom3 enviroments and add some light sources, yes belive it or not things shine! every surface even wood reflects light. so please lay off the omg doom3 looks like plastic, imo hl2 looks more cartoonish than doom3.

Also remember the engines are made for diffrent jobs, so comparing them is very much what you prefer, but from a major leap in game gfx, doom3 wins for me. Gameplay we have yet to see.
 
Yep, I agree with your assessment, 2d-chris. But I'll of course buy both games for different reasons. And both look great in my opinion.
 
Valve's got the right idea, not everything is plastic and shines when a light is applied to them. Just look around you, most materials (clothe, untreated wood, concrete, paper) absorb light then reflect it. I think they're more conscious of that than most other developers who want to go over-board with their effects.
 
I hate to say it (I don't actually) but DOOM III will be a mediocre game. Of course you have nice lights, but HL2 can recreate a similar mood in lighting. Also, from all of the INGAME footage I have seen, HL2 seems like it will be a much more in-depth, captivating game than DOOM III. DOOM III is BOO! AAH IM SCARED! KILL THINGS! RUN! I just think with all the physics implementations, and very deep story, that HL2 will come out on top.
 
Yeah, but it's too bad EVERYTHING appears to have a uniform specularity in Doom 3, not just the metal. And, erm, what breathtaking animation in Doom 3? The few examples we've see are fairly mundane. Sorry, but I'm really hoping you are being sarcastic.
 
Half fun in your cramped rooms in DOom III. I'll be enjoying WIDE OPEN SPACES in half-life 2. Please, someone queue up the song wide open spaces for me please!
 
I think HL2 is up there in graphics but I think it is top when you are looking at ingame scenes and the movemnt of the object w/in HL2.
While I think Stalker looks great in screenshots and in some other scenes, I don't care for some of the ingame scenes I have seen recently. The Trees are great but the shrubs and animals move terribly. It's almost as if they have half of the animation created but the frames inbetween are missing, somewhat jerky animations.
You know what I think about games with "Plastic" models and maps...
 
I don't know if it was the video capturing or not, but DOOM3's character movement and animations seemed slow and choppy, not nearly the quality that we've seen in HL2. I'm sure part of it had to be the V-capturing 'cause there's no way any next-gen game could look that bad. But even still, DOOM3's shadows cover up the plastic look on all the objects; HL2 doesn't have to do that, it all looks real without coverup shadows. Who knows? I'll know what looks best on MY comp when I have played them both. I never liked speculatory comparisons anyway...
 
In the spirit of keeping properly informed, I just watched the F.E.A.R. trailer...

People are getting excited over this? Eww. Certainly not me. Not based on that, anyway. Two words: Lithtech yucky.
 
As far as I'm concerned HL2's graphics are just as good as Doom 3, Stalker and FEAR if not better. The only engine that could quality as better is UE3, however Source is capable of similar graphics. Valve simply doesn't want the game to run at 20 fps on a 6800 or X800. I wouldn't be surprised to see a high-def pack in the future though, like they did with HL1.
 
You got that right. The only thing I saw in that trailer that looked good were the sparks in that one room. But personally, I'd rather go outside and light a sparkler than wait till '05 for game that utilizes plastic toys for its character models. Plus, sparklers cost a lot less :p
 
Curator said:
The only engine that could quality as better is UE3, however Source is capable of similar graphics. Valve simply doesn't want the game to run at 20 fps on a 6800 or X800.
Click to expand...

Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaahahahahaha!!

You're kidding, right? It's foolish to assume Source is capable of close to UE3.
 
iamaelephant said:
Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaahahahahaha!!

You're kidding, right? It's foolish to assume Source is capable of close to UE3.
Click to expand...

It's also foolish to type "Hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaahahahahaha!!" to try and indicate that an idea is foolish.
 
Aphal said:
I know that I'm going to have a lot more fun playing HL2, and I probably wont even buy STALKER. But I do think its graphics are a lot more impressive than HL2, mostly I like the fact that it looks more realistic while all these other new engines look plastic (cept HL2)

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_41.jpg

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_22.jpg

http://www.stalker-game.com/download/gallery/screenshots/middle/sb_xray_44.jpg
Click to expand...

Look in that first picture.. the butt of the rifle goes into his chest..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
TechnoHippyChic
The Many Diversions of THC's Work Lunches
Replies
3
Views
2K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
E
New book on the design of Half-Life 1
Replies
2
Views
3K
Ennui
Ennui
Back
Top