nexx Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 (edited) Who says the Doom3 engine is only good for dark hallways ;) The 'Doom 3 Can Do It Too" project was started over at doom3world.org after the engine came under a lot of criticism when Valve released Half Life 2 and the Source engine. The Doom3 community was dedicated to show that the Doom3 engine can not only handle detailed outdoor environments, but much more. This video (running time 4:40) is an early test of their map. Set in a central city square with the sun and moon orbiting through the sky at high speed to show day and night sequences with shadows moving across buildings in realtime. Enjoy. Download: http://www.pcgamemods.com/9397/ Source: http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8055 Edited December 31, 2004 by nexx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keldyn Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 The lighting and shadow effects are fairly impressive. It will be interesting to see this again when it is properly textured. The environment does look fairly simplistic at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbob Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Looks interesting, but it seems like it was kinda choppy and it wasn't too detailed either. Oh and, they didn't get rid of the flashlight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fkid Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 I always knew that this was possible (and possibly more). I commend the guys doing this and I hope all the Valve (Source Engine) fan boys who hated Doom 3 can now shut their mouths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbob Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yes but, the Source engine is WAY more scalable and screams on just about any system with the right settings. I can't say the same about the Doom3 engine. Lowering the settings to get it to play on my machine took away from what I expected. My system isn't bad either, I could play HL2 fine with settings maxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquid Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yes but, the Source engine is WAY more scalable and screams on just about any system with the right settings. I can't say the same about the Doom3 engine. Lowering the settings to get it to play on my machine took away from what I expected. My system isn't bad either, I could play HL2 fine with settings maxed. 585202199[/snapback] Source is also more capable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amarok Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 To be honest, and I'm not a fanboy, I dislike HL2 and D3 equally, I was more impressed with Doom 3. So I'm not really surprised by this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 My views are summarised in 2 sentenses. The Doom 3 is mostly a visual engine. The Source engine is mostly a game engine. About the video, its very very laggy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srizo Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 My views are summarised in 2 sentenses.The Doom 3 is mostly a visual engine. The Source engine is mostly a game engine. About the video, its very very laggy. 585202237[/snapback] no. Its the other way around! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 no. Its the other way around! 585202259[/snapback] Really. I don't see a lot of vehicles, multiplayer, physics-oriented gameplay, friendly AI, scripted sequences, character animation, display of different environments in Doom 3 :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeyondGodlike Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 the source engine still beats doom3's frankly, given the choice between them, source should win it runs good on lower specs, doom3's is only for the VERY high end, the small amount of people who have the x800's and 6800's i never saw such a nice smooth game as hl2, not to mention its probably much more capable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2687 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yeah...they over did it on the Doom3 engine. Nobody can run it at a decent rate :p (cue all you rich bums to come in saying how you have 6800 ultra OC SLIs ;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalN. Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 hell, HL2 runs fine DX 8.1 all high settings on a radeon 9000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argote Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 tahts because the DOOM3 engine utilizes the same features on all videocardswhile the Source engine relies on cutting out features The video is extremelly impressive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Favvi Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 i bought doom 3 not impressed, runs crappy on my system played hl2 demo, runs awesome.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 personally my computer ran the doom 3 engine more stable than the half-life 2 i enjoyed half-life 2 over doom 3 although. with no doubt in any way do i disagree that the doom 3 engine cant do as much as the source engine. they both got their pro's and con's. however when it comes to custom mods and games and maps. the source engine is a lot easier. if you join a server in doom 3 and do not have the map, you gotta download it off of a website. if you dont have it in the source engine, it will automatically download the content off of the server. if this guy released a doom 3 map for online play this wouldn't work out the greatest seeing as many people may be too lazy to check it out. seeing as they got to find the site the map is hosted on. few other things like the water effects and the death positions that the source have. i believe half-life 2 in some ways can look very blocky, and not as visually appealing as doom 3. doom 3's textures were amazing in many ways. most textures were not overused. However the lighting was and im sure many people can agree with me. and posted as above. many times in the source engine i laged out, and the loading times were a little more than what i waited for in doom 3. doom 3 was a load and play game (for me at least). EDIT: umm.. many people didn't get smooth in Doom III? confusing im running a pentium 4 2.4 gigahert. 512 megabytes of ram. and ATI Radeon 9800 pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conna Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 doom 3 is just too dark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted December 31, 2004 MVC Share Posted December 31, 2004 In my opnion, the video seemed to run quite slow, it didn't have the number of details that an outdoor HL2 map has and I garantee it would never run on either of my computers (where as HL2 runs perfect). So there seems to be little here that will make "all the Valve (Source Engine) fan boys" shut their mouths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Speaking about the video, that outdoor map looks a lot like Half Life 2's train-station exit. Which ran, much smoother. :D Many people say how Doom 3's lighting is way better than Source's. Of course, it uses dynamic lights. Source can do dynamic lights too, if they turn off all pre-rendered lights and apply dynamic lighting to everywhere, I'm sure you can get the same day/night time cycle along with the lagyness as well :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiffy0517 Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Yeah...they over did it on the Doom3 engine. Nobody can run it at a decent rate :p (cue all you rich bums to come in saying how you have 6800 ultra OC SLIs ;) ) 585202276[/snapback] please i spent 1030 total on my rig not counting keyboard/mouse/monitor and i run doom 3 just fine at high detail 1024*768. as you can see i have a good pc but i am certainly not rich. athlon64 3200+ 250 (when new) msi k8t neo fisr2 150 (when new) radeon 9800pro 256 @ xt 275 (when new) 512mb kingston/ 512 corsair 140 total 40 gig WD caviar 60 (when new) mad dog cd-rw 52x24x52x 45 case 50 psu 60 i Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbob Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 tahts because the DOOM3 engine utilizes the same features on all videocardswhile the Source engine relies on cutting out featuresThe video is extremelly impressive 585202303[/snapback] The Source engine doesn't "rely" on cutting out features to make it run faster. The video was not impressive, it ran slowly and was very sparsely detailed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasondefaoite Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Notice the shadows ... shadows from the buildings move in time with the orbit of the moon/sun. Shadows from people walking around didnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 Notice the shadows ... shadows from the buildings move in time with the orbit of the moon/sun. Shadows from people walking around didnt. 585202508[/snapback] Conspiracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbob Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 If they did that, then it probably wouldn't run at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InternalStorm Posted December 31, 2004 Share Posted December 31, 2004 If they did that, then it probably wouldn't run at all. Hahahahahaha :p This is so funny :) anyways... ya, Source definately better. Remember in the beginning of the Doom 3 game, where you went in the elevator and briefly outdoors on Mars? You could see plainly it looked very bad... Doom 3 is a game where there are crappy textures plastered with shiny bump mapping and lighting, and then called a game. How COULD you make good outdoor environments with that philosophy? Source on the other hand is much more versatile... in all respects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts