Half-Life 2's physics (Havok) vs Doom III's (in-house)

spitcodfry

spitcodfry

Newbie
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
1,770
Reaction score
0
Perhaps we can not accurately compare the two at this point, seeing as both games aren't out yet, but we can always speculate. Most of us know that Half-Life 2's physics engine was NOT developed in-house, but uses a pre-existing one called Havok. Supposedly, Doom III touts its own physics engine that was developed by id Software. We've all seen Half-Life 2's physics engine in action, but hardly any of Doom III's (Unless of course there's a preview vid I haven't seen). Having played the leaked E3 beta, as I'm sure many of you have as well, I did not see much integration of a physics engine. Thats not to suggest that this alpha stage version is indicitive in any way of the final product. The two three physics items I noticed were the gasket popping off and clattering to the floor in a spinning penny type fashion, a severed foot rolling off a computer console when you bumped into it, and the swinging lamp in the bathroom (I know, this has been done in other games and probably ISN'T physics, but what the hell). I'm sure there were plenty others I was unaware of, so feel free to quote them here. So what do you think? Havok or id's physics engine?
 
Well....I didn't feel like reading that whole thing but here is my opinion....Half-Life 2 is going to have a great phyiscs engine and doom 3 in going to have a great graphics engine.There going to be both good games so there is no point of putting them head to head.I kinda feel like hijacking this thread. ;) Due to the fact that we have to many of these.
 
They just redid some of D3's physics. No one knows what they're like so it's pretty much useless to discuss right now.
 
Although I have no basis for my opinion, I think that Havok will win the day, simply because it's all they do. The Havok folks produce physics engines. Somehow I find security in their specialization. Hmm maybe someone else can articulate this better...If anyone shares my view :p
 
Originally posted by Tr0n
Well....I didn't feel like reading that whole thing but here is my opinion....Half-Life 2 is going to have a great phyiscs engine and doom 3 in going to have a great graphics engine.There going to be both good games so there is no point of putting them head to head.I kinda feel like hijacking this thread. ;) Due to the fact that we have to many of these.
Click to expand...

NO TR0N! WE MUST RESTRAIN OURSELVES!

okay, well.. from the E32003 gameplay vid, where the creature tore off the door... i think doom 3 will have a good physics engine, and so will half-life 2

I beleive Half-Life 2's will be more realistic as Doom III's will be more flashy (then again, the door could have been scripted)
 
man what r u smoking.. doom 3 doesnt stand a chance... the replay value for hl2.. is infinite.. u cant beat the story either.. sure doom3 will be kool but head to head with hl2.. man u are dissing my man gabe now..
 
In the alpha you could basically just push some boxes over and that was all the physics.

I tried shooting a pop can but it didn't even move (so much for doom's 3 physics)

Thats just the alpha so it will probably be better...
 
Bah.......Well who cares there both going to be good games.Case Closed.
 
Originally posted by illspirit44
man what r u smoking.. doom 3 doesnt stand a chance... the replay value for hl2.. is infinite.. u cant beat the story either.. sure doom3 will be kool but head to head with hl2.. man u are dissing my man gabe now..
Click to expand...

You're post here is useless spam becuase it contributes NOTHING useful to the conversation. I don't think you mentioned physics once.

Anyway, ontopic, I personlly admiore John Carmack greatly, and i'm sure he's programmed soemthing that will make us impressed. Not as impressed as when we first saw HL2/DX:IW (same physics, 'cept i htink DX2's is better; ION Storm spent a very long time tweaking havok for them) But we'll jsut have to wait and see.
 
FYI: The actual name of Half-Life 2's engine is SOURCE. Havok, an engine designed specifically with physics in mind, was liscensed and built upon. It is barely viewable as Havok now, since so much additions and changes have been made.


Anyway, I think HL2 will win, but I don't care. I will buy and play both THEN compare.
 
HL2 uses a heavily modifyed and enhanced version of Havok.
Doom III uses an inhouse developed physics engine, and since their game is not comming out for a WHILE, they have plenty of time to make it either just as good as HL2's or better. But HL2 is comming out in a few weeks so we would be used to great physics being in a game by the time Doom III is out, so we will be hoping and expecting improvements by the time Doom III is out. Just my 2 cent opinion.
 
Marauder: Havok is not a game engine unto its self. It's just the physics engine that Valve has intergrated into source. And at the same time, I assume they added their own touches too it and even helped Havok develop their tech. further.
 
well according to gabe if you have too many moving objects the cpu takes a big hit- according ID their physics system allows for a lot more moving objects. They used the example of having a really tall stack of boxes and they wiould all fall realistically on top of one another. They are saying its one of the most advanced physics systems ever designed. ID is smart people, i think a lot of people are underestimating them.
 
the "bashed down door" in hte D3 movie is not physics, it's an animation, at least the bashing part. Rigid-body physics models do not do deformation of surfaces in response to force, which is what you saw there. The doors falling over could have been physics. And the "knocked up grate" where the imp climcs out could well be physics. No reason for it not to be, really.
 
Originally posted by wormstrangler
Marauder: Havok is not a game engine unto its self. It's just the physics engine that Valve has intergrated into source. And at the same time, I assume they added their own touches too it and even helped Havok develop their tech. further.
Click to expand...
Um, That's what he said.
 
A friend of mine bought the book "masters of doom" which is all about carmack and the birth of id software.

Based on the content, it is safe to say that carmack is a genius.

Seriously, this man is so incredibly smart, it bothers me.

Anyway, don't overlook id- If anyone could program a state-of-the-art physics engine it would be carmack and the rest of the gang.
 
Originally posted by Apos
the "bashed down door" in hte D3 movie is not physics, it's an animation, at least the bashing part. Rigid-body physics models do not do deformation of surfaces in response to force, which is what you saw there. The doors falling over could have been physics. And the "knocked up grate" where the imp climcs out could well be physics. No reason for it not to be, really.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, my bad
 
I cant remember in what review I read, but from what i remember ID chose to make their own physics engine because they didnt think Havok was good/advanced enough for them.
 
Originally posted by MuffinMann
I cant remember in what review I read, but from what i remember ID chose to make their own physics engine because they didnt think Havok was good/advanced enough for them.
Click to expand...
'

George Broussard probably thought the same way too, when he switched engines for the nth time.
 
It's unfair to call Half-Life 2's physics system the Havok engine simply because Havok simply formed the base on which Source's physics engine was built. Valve didn't just plop Havok's code into the game, they've substantially modified it and extended it specifically for the Source engine.

That said, I think Source will provide a much better gameplay experience as Valve was intent on integrating physical interaction into the gameplay.

Carmack, on the other hand, simply cobbled together some simple box and ragdoll physics because he considered them to be pointless gimicks and didn't want to spend a lot of time on it.

Tellingly, after seeing the reaction to Half-Life 2, Carmack overhauled Doom III's physics engine, but it remains to be seen what kind of use id's level designers will make of it.

That said, I think Valve will do a much better job of integrating physics into the gameplay and thus Source's physics will seem superior.
 
Originally posted by kinggi
well according to gabe if you have too many moving objects the cpu takes a big hit- according ID their physics system allows for a lot more moving objects. They used the example of having a really tall stack of boxes and they wiould all fall realistically on top of one another. They are saying its one of the most advanced physics systems ever designed. ID is smart people, i think a lot of people are underestimating them.
Click to expand...

http://expeto.com/beta/PJ_chimni_101.htm

You need shockwave plugin to view this.
 
FatCombine: The way he said it sounded like Havok actually IS the engine. I just felt like sorting it out a bit more. :)
 
/me gets ever so closer to the flame/spam key....
 
Don't do it tr0n!

spitcodfry... that was fun... that box thing... almost as fun as the skeleton ragdoll flash at havok.com
 
Ok I won't flame/spam this place.So far it has been a logical and friendly discussion.But once everyone starts to pull out the flamethrowers.....
 
that was cool- when i said a lot i meant like 200-300, doom 3 is supposedly meant to handle more. But honestly we havent seen squat on it so i dont know.
 
Well... the source engine also optimizes doesnt it? Gabe was just talking in basic terms... because no matter what, all engines will lag with more stuff
 
gabe said you can build a house that collapses on itself while you destroy it from the inside in multiplayer. Now that sounds too cool...
 
Who gives a crap? Let's just wait till these awesome games come out and enjoy them for what they are individually instead of trying to determine which one is superior, especially when they're not even out yet. Hell, Doom III isn't coming out till next year.
 
Originally posted by kinggi
gabe said you can build a house that collapses on itself while you destroy it from the inside in multiplayer. Now that sounds too cool...
Click to expand...

Me thinks you'd need a fast CPU to handle all that.
 
Valve utilized havok, so they could put their talent on much more of the game... Instead of making a whole new physics engine. Could you guys imagine waiting 2 more years because valve wanted to make up their own?
 
doom 3 alpha had very few phyics implemented, however they did have that last fat zombie at the end of the 3rd level, the one walking down the tall stairs, be given physics. When he dies you can push him around, knock him about, or just watch him fall down stairs in a comedic way.

The physics seemed very good judging by what little there was, exept for the boxes though, they could fly all over the damn place when hit just right.

Well the alpha is well over a year old already so whatever information we have on the game based on the alpha is wayout of date.
 
Originally posted by Mountain Man
It's unfair to call Half-Life 2's physics system the Havok engine simply because Havok simply formed the base on which Source's physics engine was built. Valve didn't just plop Havok's code into the game, they've substantially modified it and extended it specifically for the Source engine.
Click to expand...

Press Release on Havok's Website. They created Havok 2 from all they learned working with Valve on source.

Press Release Archive
Havok physics for Half Life 2
14th May 2003, San Francisco - Havok physics is at the heart of the eagerly awaited Half Life 2 from Valve Software. Physics gameplay is considered one of the key new departures in the sequel and is an integral part of the game experience.

"Making a game with the complex physics interactions and physics gameplay of Half-Life(R) 2 is really hard - but it would have been impossible if we hadn't started with robust fundamental physics technology from Havok."

“Havok has been working with Valve for almost three years to deliver breakthrough physical gameplay. Havok 2, launched at GDC 2003 incorporates all that we have learned from working with each other,
particularly in the area of character control and ragdolls”, said Dr. Steven Collins CTO, Havok

Apart from character physics, Havok runs environmental dynamics allowing interactivity with most objects and where else could you put a crowbar in the works to stop a dynamically modeled machine? Stay tuned to the Havok website for updates on physics in Half Life 2 as we approach ship date.
 
^ and i think considering how damn good that alpha was for a year old, i cant imagine what cool stuff they got now.
 
Tons of PC games seem to be using the Havok engine for physics. So it must be pretty damn good. Not to say that Doom 3's won't be... but still I doubt it will be as good as something like havok since havok is built oustide of the game development then the company that buys the rights to use it changes it to what they need it for... but the basics are already there for them they don't have to spend the time to get it all working, more time can be spent on other things and such...

Anyways yeah... HL2, Deus Ex 2, Max Payne 2, MOH Pacific Assault... all using havok.
 
^that also means doom 3 can out do all those games if its custom engine is good enough- cause all those games are more similar to each other than they are doom .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
bbson john
Hi everyone. I am new to this forum!
Replies
11
Views
6K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
CombineAdvisor3
Source 2 expectations?
Replies
1
Views
3K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Early Half-Life 2 screenshots from Retro Gamer's article
Replies
1
Views
23K
Gerzowktz
Gerzowktz
Back
Top