|
#1
[
]
|
||||
|
||||

|
#4
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
The models are not low-poly...
*pulls a geek* What they do is model the characters with such high detail, including things like various bumps in armour, skin, etc., and then they reduce the models to very low detail...but they use a certain technology that fleshes them out again, making them seem very detailed, but in fact they are quite low detail, according to your computer. It's the lighting effects that really make the game so spectacular looking, though. Personally, I think Half-Life 2 will completely own Doom III when it comes to gameplay, as well as graphics. Though the lighting isn't quite as advanced, almost everything is bump-mapped, characters are insanely detailed, and realistic physics are used on every single object in the game. |

| Sponsored Links |
|
#5
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
I never did like Doom. what is the point of the game anyway *been so long I forgot*
__________________
![]() My banner.. I think its cool Visit My Sig Shop!!! MOAs House Of Sigs Im a proud member of the Farore clan!!! ![]() Super Visor at the Inn |

|
#7
[
]
|
||
|
||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
Well, actually the models are a little low on polygons. You can tell just by looking at one of the hands of a monster. It's blocky. I'm not saying the models look terrible, but after seeing the models on most 3D fighting games (ie. Dead or Alive 3, Soul Calibur 2), I can't help but notice. Yes, I realize there's only 2 chars on the screen at any given time, but it's still hard to overlook.
I remember when Unreal Tourney and Quake 3 first came out. They were state of the art, nothing could touch their level of detail. |

|
#8
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
DOOM is an FPS game, while DoA3 is a fighting game. You don't see realistic physics in DoA, do you? What about lighting and shadows? Bump mapping? Detail textures (not to be confused with detailed textures)? The characters are moving so fast you honestly won't be able to notice "blocky fingers".
|

| Sponsored Links |
|
#10
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
I don't see what you mean when you say physics and collision system. Sounds like the same thing to me?
Anyways, Half-Life 2 may not have quite as advanced lighting, but it does have bump-mapping, detail textures, realistic physics (arguably better than DOOM III's, considering everything in the envionment can be interacted with), vastly superior AI, and gameplay, not to mention the fact that the engine can do realistic outdoor environments, something that DOOM III can't do. An AI example (download the 600 MB video to see this): There are these huge "strider" creatures who are 50 feet tall, have 3 long, bony legs, and have a large plasma cannon and a chaingun. In the video, the strider smashes through a building, steps over rubble (realistically regaining its balance after doing so), and finds itself cut off by a bridge. It tries to use the chaingun to destroy the bridge, but when that fails, it resorts to its huge plasma cannon. It partially destroys the bridge, sending debris (including actual pieces of the building that have broken off) flying outwards. The bridge remains, so it crounches down, and awkwardly walks underneath, before impaling a scientist on its front leg, and kicking his limp body off. Note that all that is occurring in real time, completely unscripted. |

| Sponsored Links |
|
#11
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
I have to agree, Half Life 2 looks as if it is going to be the better game.
There's no point in me repeating what SearanoX said, he hit the nail right on the head. I can’t remember how many times I've watched the HL2 video (must be going into treble figures), and I've also watched the Doom3 video quite a few times. While Doom3 looks as if it will be a great game, HL2 looks as if it could revolutionize the FPS genre.
__________________
whats puzzling you, is the nature of my game |

|
#12
[
]
|
||
|
||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
Quote:
As for lighting and shadows, yes there is basically nothing impressive done with this. But I'm pretty much talking about the models themselves, and the action is never too fast to notice how impressive they look. |

| Sponsored Links |
|
#13
[
]
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
Low-polygon models? I don't know, the hands look pretty good to me. While the hands are perhaps the weakest aspects of most models in the game, the models are by no means low-polygon. As in most games, the hands are simply a matter of compromise. Why expend countless rendering cycles on complex hands when they could be spent rendering aspects that people actually see when they're moving?
I'm certainly hyped about Doom 3, although I'm a little more excited about Half Life 2. Heck, I'm even excited about the continuation of the series' paper-thin plot, heh. Regretably, I'll have to spend about $300 in upgrade expenses to run either of them. ![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
dobs.org E3 News Feed |

|
#14
[
]
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Doom 3 & 2 & 1
I'm not just talking about ragdolls, I'm talking about...everything. Both Half-Life 2 and DOOM III use the Havok 2 physics plug-in, which allows for realistic physics of not just character models (eg. ragdolls), but everything in the environment. For instance, you use the Manipulator gun to pick up an enemy (I don't think you can do this normally, but just for argument's sake), and you drag him around, smashing him into, say, a bunch of crates. The crates get knocked around realistically (with ragdolls, of course), playing sounds that sound like wood. Shoot a bunch of boards standing up, and they'll fragment and collapse where you shoot them exactly like wood...would.
|

| Sponsored Links |
![]() |
| Tags |
| doom |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|