true or false???

PingaDPalo · Oct 25, 2004

in mi opinion, I think that hl2 will demand less "power" to properly run in a pc than doom 3 and far cry...

thanks...

Neutrino · Oct 25, 2004

Just go read the minimum and recommended specs for both games. That should give you a very good indication.

Absinthe · Oct 25, 2004

.......k?

Hectic Glenn · Oct 25, 2004

In your opinion which i regard so highly

I assume you work for valve and know this for a fact, otherwise it must be a guess!!!? kthx

westie · Oct 25, 2004

yeah im hoping to run the game with 256mb ram he he

PingaDPalo · Oct 25, 2004

just need to know if the game was "almost ready" last year, then its requirements are lower than games released this year (e.g.. doom 3 and far cry)...

thanks...

iamaelephant · Oct 25, 2004

Well it doesn't look as good as Far Cry or Doom 3, so yeah the requirements are probably lower.

Absinthe · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Well it doesn't look as good as Far Cry or Doom 3, so yeah the requirements are probably lower.

I happen to like the look of HL2 far more than Far Cry or Doom 3.

Frank · Oct 25, 2004

So what was the minimum requirements for Doom III? I run it perfectly in 1280x1024 High Details...

Glo · Oct 25, 2004

Absinthe said:
I happen to like the look of HL2 far more than Far Cry or Doom 3.

me too
but personal taste does not have to do with polygon count and textures size

Alientank · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Well it doesn't look as good as Far Cry or Doom 3, so yeah the requirements are probably lower.

Doom 3 is brutal on the GPU, that's the main reason it bogs down systems, all the real time lighting and shadowing.

Beserker · Oct 25, 2004

Now that was smart.

iamaelephant · Oct 25, 2004

Absinthe said:
I happen to like the look of HL2 far more than Far Cry or Doom 3.

Like it all you want, Doom 3 and Far Cry are much more graphically intensive.

For the record, I like the look of HL2 better than Doom 3, but it doesn't take a genius to tell that Doom 3 is technologically more advanced than HL2. Far Cry looks better than both of them :afro:

GorgeousOrifice · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Like it all you want, Doom 3 and Far Cry are much more graphically intensive.

For the record, I like the look of HL2 better than Doom 3, but it doesn't take a genius to tell that Doom 3 is technologically more advanced than HL2. Far Cry looks better than both of them :afro:

I have a small project for you:

As soon as the SDK comes out, try building a level the size of HL2's coastline in Doom 3. Then put a couple hundred antlions, combine, and whatever else you want in there. See how it runs. Then tell me Doom 3 is more advanced.

While you're at it, find a good explanation for Far Cry's ugly, pixelated textures and its obvious model clipping errors. And, for good measure, wait one year and compare the number of Source mods to the number of Far Cry mods.

You really should try talking out of your mouth sometime. You'll find that you say a lot less stupid things.

rkef · Oct 25, 2004

It reminds me of audiophiles, who spend $100K on equipment, to get that extra 5-10% in clarity/range, but have terrible taste in music anyway

.

iamaelephant · Oct 25, 2004

First of all, mods have nothing to do with anything. I'm talking about the engine, not the comunity. Doom 3 is quite capable of wide open areas, as shall be seen in Quake 4. Far Cry's textures are not "ugly" and "pixelated," but quite simply on today's hardware it is not possible to have the huge, dense, stunning outdoor environments that Far Cry has, and still keep the textures razor sharp. In fact, one of the Cons in the PCG review on HL2 was that the outdoor textures are low res. That's just the way things are at the moment. It you look at Far Cry's indoor levels, it's fairly obvious that the textures are in fact extremely sharp and it has some absolutely exellent texture effects, such as bump mapping (okay, I'm no graphics whizz, that's all I really know).

skipper · Oct 25, 2004

HL2 going to be loads better then FarCry and DoomIII. Just my opinion

"welcome to the Forums Mr PingaDPalo"

f|uke · Oct 25, 2004

HL2 has the best water. Doom 3 doesnt even have water! HL2 has higher res textures, and the best models and animation. Doom 3 has the lighting, FarCry has the lush environs. So graphically, they all have their strong points and weaknesses. But HL2 still looks best, and clearly has the most advanced engine.

PingaDPalo · Oct 25, 2004

why do we have to star flaming each other???

doom 3 and far cry have positive and negative aspects...I am pretty sure that hl2 will beat both of them in game play and it will revolutionize the gaming industry, but I think that it is fact that it could lack in the graphics department...

for me, painkiller was an splendid game (just shoot and run) with beautiful graphics...

thanks...

Alientank · Oct 25, 2004

It's all opinion, Doom 3 engine is all about lighting and shadowing, HL2 is all about large outdoor areas, which I think farcry did a good job of as well. If id wanted they could have made an engine for games like HL2, however they weren't trying to do that with Doom 3 so the engine isn't tailored that way. Don't even think for a second that id doesn't have the talent of Valve at all. id can do all the things Valve has the ability to do, and then some. They are games trying to do completely different things, and before anyone says that Doom 3 can't do water or vehicles...WRONG. It's already been mentioned they can do it, also Doom 3 engine has heat haze which we don't know if HL2 will have. If you think for a second that the Source engine can do those outdoor levels with the lighting detail of the Doom 3 engine, you're kidding yourself. They're doing completely different things, apples to oranges.

$niffy · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Like it all you want, Doom 3 and Far Cry are much more graphically intensive.

For the record, I like the look of HL2 better than Doom 3, but it doesn't take a genius to tell that Doom 3 is technologically more advanced than HL2. Far Cry looks better than both of them :afro:

Its like comparing an apple to an orange. One is designed for small, inclosed areas and one is designed for open areas. SOO different

Seriously think before ya post mate

Viperx14 · Oct 25, 2004

I don't see how they will do Q4 (large outdoor war scenes) without toning down the graphics at least some, or some aspects of it. Unless they just count on pcs being a hundred times more powerful by the time of release.

Absinthe · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Like it all you want, Doom 3 and Far Cry are much more graphically intensive.

For the record, I like the look of HL2 better than Doom 3, but it doesn't take a genius to tell that Doom 3 is technologically more advanced than HL2. Far Cry looks better than both of them :afro:

Well, you said it doesn't look as good as Doom 3 or Far Cry. That's what I disagreed with. There's no doubt in my mind that the other games have technologically superior engines. But you can have a great engine and still have crap graphics.

I'm really just bitching around with semantics though.

Steelwind · Oct 25, 2004

True. If for no other reason because HL2 supports the use of older versions of directx. You don't need much power to run a game in directx 7.0. Although the game won't look like a modern day engine, just slightly better than the original HL engine.

lans · Oct 25, 2004

iamaelephant said:
Like it all you want, Doom 3 and Far Cry are much more graphically intensive.

For the record, I like the look of HL2 better than Doom 3, but it doesn't take a genius to tell that Doom 3 is technologically more advanced than HL2. Far Cry looks better than both of them :afro:

I agree with you.

The gritty style of HL2 is good, but saying source is technically better than doom 3's engine is wrong.

Ryjalon5k · Oct 25, 2004

PingaDPalo said:
in mi opinion, I think that hl2 will demand less "power" to properly run in a pc than doom 3 and far cry...

thanks...

I HOPE SO... OR IM GONNA CRY!!!

Yombi · Oct 25, 2004

lans said:
I agree with you.

The gritty style of HL2 is good, but saying source is technically better than doom 3's engine is wrong.

he has said doom 3 is more advanced than hl2. not the other way.

blahblahblah · Oct 25, 2004

GorgeousOrifice said:
I have a small project for you:

As soon as the SDK comes out, try building a level the size of HL2's coastline in Doom 3. Then put a couple hundred antlions, combine, and whatever else you want in there. See how it runs. Then tell me Doom 3 is more advanced.

While you're at it, find a good explanation for Far Cry's ugly, pixelated textures and its obvious model clipping errors. And, for good measure, wait one year and compare the number of Source mods to the number of Far Cry mods.

You really should try talking out of your mouth sometime. You'll find that you say a lot less stupid things.

Likewise, make a level in HL2 that has full dynamic shadows and loads of dynamic lighting. Remember, the shadows must be allowed to have multiple shadows as well. None of this one dynamic shadow per level crap or lightmap garbage.

Don't forget to bump and normal map everything as well. And then do your experiment as you listed above.

Absinthe · Oct 25, 2004

Oh yay, now we have another Doom 3 vs. Half-Life 2 topic forming. Please, let's persist in this stupid bullshit for a few more hours, shall we?

PvtRyan · Oct 25, 2004

Glo said:
me too
but personal taste does not have to do with polygon count and textures size

Funnily enough, HL2 takes the lead in both of those areas.

I'd be surprised if character models in Doom 3 and Far Cry reach 3000 tri's, HL2 goes up to 7000.

The largest texture in Doom 3 is 512x512, while all main characters in HL2 use a 1024x1024 map for just the head.

lans · Oct 25, 2004

GorgeousOrifice said:
While you're at it, find a good explanation for Far Cry's ugly, pixelated textures and its obvious model clipping errors.

If you haven't been following - HL2 also has clipping errors (PC Gamer review, antlion's leg going through cabinet) and ugly pixelated textures

[the ground in these screenshots:]

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_2389830.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_2389820.html

lans · Oct 25, 2004

PvtRyan said:
Funnily enough, HL2 takes the lead in both of those areas.

I'd be surprised if character models in Doom 3 and Far Cry reach 3000 tri's, HL2 goes up to 7000.

The largest texture in Doom 3 is 512x512, while all main characters in HL2 use a 1024x1024 map for just the head.

Unfortunately - that's about where all HL2's charcaters detail is: the head.

Their body geometry doesn't compete with the highly detailed bodies in Far cry and doom 3.

JFry · Oct 25, 2004

Anyways.. I think hl2 will be more demanding on your processor (all the physics and AI add up), but it prolly won't be more demanding on your graphics card than doom3. Maybe a little more than Farcry, haven't played enough to know.

iamaelephant · Oct 25, 2004

I think HL2 will run better than Far Cry. Far Cry also had the advanced AI and physics calculations to do, as well as an intelligent and agressive LOD system and some pretty fancy lighting (similar to that of HL2). Far Cry has a much more demanding graphics engine.

Rebel X · Oct 25, 2004

HL2, Doom3 and Farcry all have amazing engines with their own pro's and con's, but if you think about it, Stalker prolly has the best engine overall. Thats not to say that all of the other engines aren't as good and can't rise to each others level of graphical detail and the like, and they all excell in the areas that the developer of the game thought was essential to the game/gameplay. Furthermore I think it's retarded to say this engine is better than the other engine, simply because they are all different games based around different events, with different locations, enemies, feel, etc. thus the need for different engines to power them.

And on a sidenote, as different as all 4 games are from each other, they all bare similarities to one another in terms of monsters, weapons and other such things (see the halo ''copying'' hl2 thread).

DigitalAssassin · Oct 26, 2004

Rebel X said:
HL2, Doom3 and Farcry all have amazing engines with their own pro's and con's, but if you think about it, Stalker prolly has the best engine overall.

Now we're back to comparing vaporware to vaporware... two games that haven't been released. Wait a few months, THEN start up these threads again.

true or false???

PingaDPalo

Guest

Tank

The Freeman

Site Director

Newbie

PingaDPalo

Guest

Newbie

The Freeman

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

PingaDPalo

Guest

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

The Freeman

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

The Freeman

Party Escort Bot

Newbie

Newbie

Tank

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads