Half life 2's Graphics.

[blahblahblah]

I know what you mean, but the Doom 3 engine is VERY good with lighting/shadows with low end systems and STILL looks good. The difference between medium and ultra is not very noticable IMO. I played Doom 3 on high the whole time though, my 9800p handled it quiet well It didnt use high res textures though, instead it just bump mapped low res textures. HL2 is going to be using very hi res textures AND bump mapping, it should turn out quiet nicely.

Don't be so sure of that. Computers are not powerful enough to have everything in a game. Valve may have high res textures, but they won't have bump mapping on them. It is all about trade offs.

Besides the point we haven't seen any binks where high res textures and bump mapping were used at the same time.

 

[TheHitman5]

Don't be so sure of that. Computers are not powerful enough to have everything in a game. Valve may have high res textures, but they won't have bump mapping on them. It is all about trade offs.

Besides the point we haven't seen any binks where high res textures and bump mapping were used at the same time.

Uh, bump mapping low res textures is a lot easier on a computer than super high res textures. Look at Doom 3! That game can run on almost ANY system and still look good. Halo 2 uses all bump mapping and its running on a 3 year old console and still looks great

 

[NeptuneUK]

Look at Doom 3! That game can run on almost ANY system

*cough* bull**** *cough*

 

[PatPwnt]

The graphics are fine in HL 2... It's good ENOUGH, its on PAR, thats all that matters. They are still amazing just like doom 3's and farcry's... btw farcry sucks. just had to say it.

 

[sublidieminal]

http://www.xylicon.com/spaniard/Facial Comparison.jpg

Just an example of why HL2 looks nicer... they focus on the right things.

Doom 3 = Clausterphobia

 

[TheHitman5]

http://www.xylicon.com/spaniard/Facial Comparison.jpg

Just an example of why HL2 looks nicer... they focus on the right things.

Doom 3 = Clausterphobia

Uh...whats wrong with Doom 3's models? I think they look amazing?

 

[MrWhite]

Both great games graphically but that's right, HL2 focuses on better things imo.

I've always thought HL2 looked more realistic and beautiful but DOOM3 had more character to their surroundings (lots of random, bump mapped things standing out in a really good looking way) however everything seems a bit too plastic to me in D3

 

[TheHitman5]

Both great games graphically but that's right, HL2 focuses on better things imo.

I've always thought HL2 looked more realistic and beautiful but DOOM3 had more character to their surroundings (lots of random, bump mapped things standing out in a really good looking way) however everything seems a bit too plastic to me in D3

I guess...I donno. From what i've seen, Far Cry is the most impressive ( graphicly ) I just wish there were good mods coming out with the crytek engine

 

[brink's]

Don't be so sure of that. Computers are not powerful enough to have everything in a game. Valve may have high res textures, but they won't have bump mapping on them. It is all about trade offs.

Besides the point we haven't seen any binks where high res textures and bump mapping were used at the same time.

HL2 has bump mapping right? It's in the HL2 benchmark.

 

[brink's]

Doom3 has the gameplay of yesterday. HL2(I assume) will have the gameplay of the future.

Thats quite funny, I didn't mean anything negative by that comment. I myself believe that HL2 has better grfx then DOOM3( except shadows) but I seem to be in the minority.


/EDIT: srry for the double post.

 

[poseyjmac]

HL2 has bump mapping right? It's in the HL2 benchmark.

im wondering too, i dont have the bench, but anyone know does it have bump mapping?

 

[Intel17]

Since no one cared about my new thread, ill post here...

I think that on a pure raw technology side, Doom 3 is the most advanced out of the 3, CryEngine may have an edge on Source, but they're close. However the engine is only 1/2 of the graphics equation. I believe the art, textures, high poly models etc. that HL2 and FarCry allow, due to less complex engines make them look great. Half Life 2 and CryEngine are the renderers of today becuase they are fairly advanced, and use excellent art assets. Doom3 is the engine of tomorrow and not today, because its super advanced, but they are constrained due to hardware. Once faster HW comes out, we'll see the potential of the doom3 tech.

So who agrees with me that Doom 3's engine is more advanced, but not necessarily the best looking?

 

[Arno]

http://www.xylicon.com/spaniard/Facial Comparison.jpg

Just an example of why HL2 looks nicer... they focus on the right things.

No definite winner here.
The face of G-Man shows more detail due to a higher resolution texture, but the Doom 3 faces show more depth due to the shadows.

 

[blahblahblah]

HL2 has bump mapping right? It's in the HL2 benchmark.

Yes, source does support bump mapping. However, we haven't seen much (if any) bump mapping in the Binks. That either leads me to believe that source is running in DX 7 or DX 8 mode. Or the HL2 graphics are a bit behind the times.

 

[sublidieminal]

No definite winner here.
The face of G-Man shows more detail due to a higher resolution texture, but the Doom 3 faces show more depth due to the shadows.

Since when is a face really defined by shadows? Shadows arent everything, half life 2 aims towards giving their characters more life. Try to imagine the G-Man on the Doom 3 engine... not a pretty picture.

It looks like doom engine characters have 20 bottles of clearasil in their medicine cabinets..

 

[Intel17]

No definite winner here.
The face of G-Man shows more detail due to a higher resolution texture, but the Doom 3 faces show more depth due to the shadows.

Shadows is an engine thing...textures arent.

Its good HL2's engine doesnt need to do all these complex lighting and shadowing calculations, because they can channel performance into higher poly models and great textures.
Valve was smart and made the tech viable for todays hardware.

I think John Carmack was too eager to release an engine ahead of its time..he overshot the mark and the art team was limited, due to the system requirements having to be reasonable.

 

[chimpmunk]

This thread gave me a new sig... Nice!

 

[lans]

Yes, source does support bump mapping. However, we haven't seen much (if any) bump mapping in the Binks. That either leads me to believe that source is running in DX 7 or DX 8 mode. Or the HL2 graphics are a bit behind the times.

It seems they've used it only in specific areas (like the prison cell in the bugbait video and the cliff face where Gordon meets the rollermines and combine soldiers).I'm assuming that they've given more importance to high-res textures than bump mapping, due to scalability issues.

 

[Arno]

Since when is a face really defined by shadows? Shadows arent everything, half life 2 aims towards giving their characters more life.

No, shadows aren't everything. But on those Doom 3 faces the shadows do enhance the feeling that those faces are truelly three dimensional. The face of G-Man looks a bit flat in comparison. More detailed, but flat.

 

[WaterMelon34]

Ehhh, i think that's a pretty stupid idea I played the beta and everytime i think of what it's like i start jumping around... i dunno maybe that's cuz im only 13.

It's not really the graphics anyways... the physics are UNBELIEVABLE or rather BELIEVABLE? whichever suits you best. Man, i dont need to look at the graphics of HL2 to faint, as soon as i buy it ill fall to the store floor and prolly wake up in a hospital. Imagine the multi-player madness to come...

 

[IamApple]

roxr :imu:

 

[PvtRyan]

No, shadows aren't everything. But on those Doom 3 faces the shadows do enhance the feeling that those faces are truelly three dimensional. The face of G-Man looks a bit flat in comparison. More detailed, but flat.

And those pretty shadows put a limit on:

- Map size
- Geometry complexity
- Character count
- Polygon count for characters
- Basically anything to downgrade triangle count.

So all in all, for just the shadows of Doom 3 caliber, you pretty much sacrifice everything else of HL2.

So who agrees with me that Doom 3's engine is more advanced, but not necessarily the best looking?

Yeah, I agree with that. Current hardware just can't handle a unified lighting model without making huge concessions.