"Doom3 can do it too"

[Hills420]

That looked like pure crap to me,. i'm sorry, it just didn't do it for me.

585203836[/snapback]

same here... I wasn't impressed. Kinda boring actually

[ggareis]

I have no problems running either games on my system and I have a 9600XT also. I also liked the graphics/detail better in D3. However I enjoy the gameplay better in Source. If we could get a mixture of the 2 it would be the perfect game/engine IMO. :)

I personally dont care what these guys do or do not prove.

At the end of the day all I gave a damn about was that even on a 9600XT doom3 still ran like crap, whereas half life2 runs smooth in a high resolution and detailed graphics.  Thats all I care about and I think thats the way it is for most people.

585208415[/snapback]

[nexx]

.. However I enjoy the gameplay better in Source...

585208795[/snapback]

Pretty much sums up the thread :no:

[ANova]

R9800Pro here and I am all for D3 simply because it's 'id Software' as everything they have done previously is ahead of its time, as someone already mentioned. Give it a year or two and you will see softshadows (more or less implemented in D3 already), HDR and other things that again are already more or less inside the engine, just need to be polished for the upcoming hardware... it's all just matter of hardware. The same was with Quake3 and all other id engines.

To me it seems that those who bash D3, simply don't have the system to run it on. And again, D3 wasn't designed to run on all todays hardware.

Source engine has good things as well. However, after having seen Bloodlines, I somehow dislike the engine. Maybe it needs time as well, but I have a feeling that Source isn't that "easy" as D3 or any other id engine. VALVe concetrates on the gameplay, id Software on the engine. And they are both good at what they do... that's all.

585208575[/snapback]

Yeah, because those are great reasons. :rolleyes:

Valve could add 100% dynamic lighting, shadows, displacement mapping and two times the detailed textures, in fact, they are! Ever hear of a project called the "ATI maps?" If not, look it up.

[vincent]

HUSH FAnboys. there both good, simple as that. Lets see you make your own.

[notuptome2004]

they have all of that stuff dynamic lights and sutch it is called High Dynamic Range lighting and they have full displacement mapping you just need an offiical DX9 hardware ATI 9800 pro or anythign down to 9500 Nvidia GeForce 6 series card 6600 or above. in order to use these features. emulation patches wont do justyice

[parhamreza]

I've got two things I'd just like to echo for all those who just watched the video, skipped to page 8 and proceeded to post.

PLEASE READ:

1. Textures can be CHANGED. The high quality textures Valve used in HL2 do not make Source a better engine

2. The Video runs slowly because the video is encoded at 15 Frame rates per second, thereofore it runs at 15 fps. Stop complaining

[kennyout]

Okay i have to add my share of things:

DOOM 3:

DOOM 3 sucked at geometry....their geometry of things: BUMP MAPPING!!!....you turn off bump mapping and see how detailed the models really are?....they have shapes, but nothing to go ooooh over...(in fact monsters seem to look scarier, specifically the Sipder Queen Bitch, especially if you play it on a Voodoo 3 i belevie)

they did not include Parallax Mapping!....WTFH? :wacko: ....makes the game look ten times better, some people modded this quite fast i might add(i hear there is very little drop in speed of frame rate too) : http://doom3.filefront.com/file/Parallax_M...g_Mod_v10;29475

D3, textures sucked ass....really, if you have a high quaility engine, you need to have good textures, the only time they looked good: Hell, you know why?...HELL is easy to do: Dirt and ****ing Fire/Lava....

Half-Life 2:

Have you noticed the Special Effects in HL2?....the glass/water/Electric thingys/smoke/fire/heat/ect.../ and the weird glowing things that you saw maybe twice in the Citideal? let alone, my Death bringers: The War of the World's Walker Canon Reality Bending thing, my god, so beautiful yet so deadlly... :alien: ---by the way, Glass and Heat seemed to be the only two things Doom 3 was able to do, and...i don't think i saw water anywhere, let alone swimming would have been a nice addition/monsters....wow they really did not change their formula/thoughts from D1-D3 level designs did they? :whistle:

Textures....could have been better for some things: granted they looked much more realistic to be for Earth things, let alone some artist people took time to make them fit so they would look shaded correctlly in areas, I did not like when you could see the city at the end, looked cheapish, they could have bump mapped that to at least make it look 3-d, instead of lights/flat

On the Citidel complaints: it looked that way for a reason, its a technology thing, and its coughing up dirt/ect through its, so dirty metal, let alone it's size, i don't think its ment to be maintained forever, let alone its there to do its purpose, help strip earth of resources/kill things, it will probablly be left behind, or re-melted/whatnot by the Combine (I could see them leaving things on dead worlds after they loose their usefulness, I imagine they are as wasteful as humans for things after they go old) ;)

Ravenholm/whatever its called: Why its there: to show you basically what has happened to Towns/ect not protected by the Nightwatch and to take up Freemans time, and you know what?....those Leapers/whatnot are scarier and those Headhumpers too...., and it was there in the beta that leaked somewhere, also speaking of missing things: what happened to that Ship level?....and those ships here and there=too small, they should have been physically larger, bad scaling :rolleyes:

Unlike Doom3, it could fit multiple enemies on the screen at the same time, in larger numbers :yes: , which makes it much more scarier than Doom 3 (have you noticed, at most there are like 5-6 monsters in Doom3 at max?--without modding?)---this is ignoring the spiders thing, which even then im not sure on numbers. :wacko:

Facial Expression Technology/work they did, my god, they look like people!!, yet you look at Doom 3 what do they do?...they move their mouth big enough to the point of where you can see the texturing/modeling of the mouth ends, and everyone has the same mouth. :pinch:

The only time Doom 3 that you were in some vehical= the tram (I was hoping it would get jumped by something, or there would be a long ride/rail gun type level.... :crazy: ), this is another thing that HL2, kicks ass for, but will probablly be put down by some Mods sometime for the D3 engine or Q4.

All for now i can think of...

[Ayepecks]

Still looks like ass, if you ask me.

[parhamreza]

Kennyout, I think you are confusing ENGINE with game. The Source engine was used brilliantly by Valve and it showed off a lot of times to the player. The D3 engine was not used well at all in Doom 3.

Which is why I'm reserving my verdict for when some other games are released with these engines.

[SaLiVa]

Kennyout, I think you are confusing ENGINE with game. The Source engine was used brilliantly by Valve and it showed off a lot of times to the player. The D3 engine was not used well at all in Doom 3.

Which is why I'm reserving my verdict for when some other games are released with these engines.

585210209[/snapback]

But those games would probably have the engine "Heavily" modded to smooth out the rough edges of the game engines. I saw no Water in Doom 3 except for some taps. The lava looked quite nice, though nothing I havent seen done before. It seems ID doesnt like water much, Quake III Arena and all of their games seem to be lacking in them. Though, at least it suits most of their stories. Just one set back, thats all. Shouldnt complain so much.

Also water at the MAX in Half Life 2 can really slow down your gaming experience, it slowed my FPS to 30 to 40 range so its not all lovely there.

[Hoopla]

To all you HL2 fanboys who think that HL2 looks better than Doom3:

I rest my case.

[notuptome2004]

crap images they are not to detialed

[InternalStorm]

Dude... we've seen Doom 3 screenshots before and you beeped up the page with those big screens...

HL2 looks much better outdooors, and looks "much more realistic" than Doom 3. Doom 3, there is nothing that is really realistic. Have you ever been in a research lab on Mars? Infiltrated by evil creatures? No...

In HL2 however, they are trying to depict a real, LIVE city. With real buildings, real people, and realistic environments. They have the real world to base that on, and can use photo realistic textures. In Doom 3 you can't do that because there is no such thing as a dark research lab on Mars. So, how can you say that Doom 3 looks better than HL2? They are totally different games... I could post up a bunch of HL2 screenies too, but whats the point we've seen them a million times and they look awesome.

[SaLiVa]

Too bad I've seen them all before... The hype is gone, let it go... It would've been incredible looking 2 years ago, but now it looks sadistic. Mostly due to the fact that I'd seen too many walls of the same texture all over Mars. What would've been a better screenshot is one outside on the Mars surface, now that does the engine some justice, it has dust particles :blink:

On the other hand, Half Life 2 is more versatile, thats the thing. Every game engine is called upon by the name of the game that first used it, and it gives the overall first impression to developers everywhere. Doom 3's game was bland with the same monotonous textures with very little use of imagination. The NPC's were like rocks too. The boo factor worn out after passing a quarter of the game. And the flashlight sucked hardcore! Half Life 2 still has a crap flashlight but alot better since you can actually use it while still holding a gun. It has a good story line, has natural movements from all the NPC's, it has lip synching technology and has water! Which would you go for?

[neowin_hipster]

I guess the moral of the story is that as long as its metalic, Doom III can do it. :p

That's probably why everything else looks so suckass.

Source put a lot of effort into making "materials". Textures are just part of it, there's a hell of a lot of shading going on behind the scenes to bring surfaces to life.

[InternalStorm]

I guess the moral of the story is that as long as its metalic, Doom III can do it. :p

That's probably why everything else looks so suckass.

585211937[/snapback]

Nicely put... and Go Canucks Go! (when they can...)

[Vice]

you know most video capture applications (like FRAPS) when recording make the frames go REALLY low, and you get choppy video.. plus FRAPS (for 1) outputs like 60seconds of video to a 560MB file. so they really must have compressed it.

The Video is nothing like it would be in person so dont pass judgement on that one video.

And sure Doom3 can do it too, but who cares? :unsure:

[[SST]SLAYER]

i have a radeon 8500,

585208159[/snapback]

I personally dont care what these guys do or do not prove.

At the end of the day all I gave a damn about was that even on a 9600XT doom3 still ran like crap, whereas half life2 runs smooth in a high resolution and detailed graphics.  Thats all I care about and I think thats the way it is for most people.

585208415[/snapback]

It's always the people with lower end cards who complain the loudest about how bad DOOM III looks and how good Source is :p

I think we shouldn't be comparing "quality" from one engine to another. Because quality depends on settings and to my knowledge, it all comes down to how much you want to pay for your equipment. Thus the quality for both games can be "perfect 10/10" is someone had the money to build a dooper machine.

Features on the otherhand cannot be added by plugging in some Geforce 6s.

585208547[/snapback]

:yes:

[kingbob]

:shifty:

[Hoopla]

Doom 3 fanboys and or peaple  just think d3 can do better take a better  look here at sources  features agian all post it

http://www.valvesoftware.com/sourcelicense...inefeatures.htm

585207006[/snapback]

There you go noob, learn something:

http://www.doomworld.com/lordflathead/zaldron.html

[kingbob]

One more...

I want to see D3 do THAT.

[TheDreamX]

It's always the people with lower end cards who complain the loudest about how bad DOOM III looks and how good Source is    :p

:yes:

585213103[/snapback]

Actually, I have an ATI Radeon 8500 and I still think Doom 3 looks better. I have to have the settings on "low" for both games. While HL2 on low looks like an upgraded Half-life, Doom 3 still looks amazing but has crappy textures.

[Nocstar]

Dont get me wrong, doom3 looks great one of the best looking games out today if not the best, but it looks all, well.....Video game like.

Source has the potential to look more realistic,

I think doom3 wants to look like Final fantasy movie, And source can do more realistic things.

I watched the video and the lighting was pretty intense as always.. But im sorry to say the outdoor enviroment looks like crap.. it does, it really does... the detail is there but it still looks dark... i can't really explain it. It just doesn't look right :)

Plus don't forget that both engines can get upgrades.

I mean look what all the recent games on the quake 3 engine have done? amazing difference call of duty and starwars games in my mind took advantage of it. and did different things with it. Imagine a totally tweaked out doom3 engine or a further developed Source engine. What i see is happy times for gamers ahead... Quake 4, half life 3, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Maybe more farcry goodness? We will be wasting cash on new video cards in a years time, if your not doing so already.

[TheDreamX]

Now that you mention it, Farcry looks a helluva lot better than both D3 and Source. The Crytek engine is AMAZING.

SyntheticDarkness: I do agree with you on the D3 = video game and Source = realism theory. However, as for the outdoor scene in the video, I beleive the only thing missing is detail. You say that the detail is there, but just dark. I don't see the amazing grass or the imperfect streets as you would see from the Source engine. I do, however, see a very nice looking lighting system. This to me says that D3 can, in fact, do outdoors (as good or better than Source) if details like debris, grass, trees and other objects were added to the D3 engine.

The reason D3 does not excel in outdoor aspects is because Doom is supposed to be an indoor, dark and spooky game. Half-life, on the other hand, is an entirely different story. Alright, I think I'm done rambling.