|
|
| Page 2 of 3 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 17:34 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mutantius wrote: | Megahoover like your avatar 
Is there a bigger pic of it? |
Thanks,,, your avatar is not to lame either...
No, I had this avatar on some old cd that I was going through, with lots of pictures...
The one I had before, with the wanking guy, was a little childish,,, 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:03 Post subject: |
|
|
I think it looks absolutely awesome. You have to see it moving to really appreciate it, the animations and special effects are mindblowing.
Also you can jump up in the air and dropkick someone off a balcony, how cool is that.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:07 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, effects are really nice, the sparks look almost realistic;)
The chopper scene looks fun.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:07 Post subject: |
|
|
no one have said that it looks like shit, ofcourse it looks great but not in any way that much better (if any) than doom3 or farcry and that is a fact.
thats what this thread was all about, a compare between doom3 and this, not if this game looks good.......................
and like i said, what good is a great looking game if most people will get shitty framerates?
thats the beauty of doom3, the game will look awesome even on really shitty systems and still run good.
a good engine is not just looks, its also how it runs (a smooth running game) which many seem to forget.
and to be totally honest, i doubt anyone else than carmack and team id can make a game that plays so good even on a shitty system while still looking awesome.
animal im not in any way stupid, i atleast look at the techical aspects of the engines and not by how it looks. 
it would make my day if this game turns out to run like crap on most of your systems 
Last edited by pallebrun on Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:20; edited 3 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| pallebrun wrote: | no one have said that it looks like shit, ofcourse it looks great but not in any way that much better (if any) than doom3 or farcry and that is a fact.
thats what this thread was all about, a compare between doom3 and this, not if this game looks good.......................
and like i said, what good is a great looking game if most people will get shitty framerates?
thats the beauty of doom3, the game will look awesome even on really shitty systems and still run good.
a good engine is not just looks, its gameplay (a smooth running game) too which many seem to forget.
animal im not in any way stupid, i atleast look at the techical aspects of the engines and not by how it looks.
it would make my day if this game turns out to run like crap on most of your systems |
Of course if you put everything up to full it won't run very well, but the thing is almost all engines are scalable and monolith definitely know what they're doing. It has already shown more gameplay variation the doom 3 just from the videos, I expect great things from the game, it has lots of new ideas.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
Last edited by AnimalMother on Wed, 18th Aug 2004 21:53; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:22 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | pallebrun wrote: | no one have said that it looks like shit, ofcourse it looks great but not in any way that much better (if any) than doom3 or farcry and that is a fact.
thats what this thread was all about, a compare between doom3 and this, not if this game looks good.......................
and like i said, what good is a great looking game if most people will get shitty framerates?
thats the beauty of doom3, the game will look awesome even on really shitty systems and still run good.
a good engine is not just looks, its gameplay (a smooth running game) too which many seem to forget.
animal im not in any way stupid, i atleast look at the techical aspects of the engines and not by how it looks.
it would make my day if this game turns out to run like crap on most of your systems |
What, you mean like the way doom 3 runs like crap on your system? Although i'm sure you'll deny that like you did with farcry.
Of course if you put everything up to full it won't run very well, but the thing is almost all engines are scalable and monolith definitely know what they're doing. It has already shown more gameplay variation the doom 3 just from the videos, I expect great things from the game, it has lots of new ideas. |
animal dont post bullshit.
doom3 runns great for me, 800x600 medium detail without a hitch (i have to turn it down to low at a few places).
i dont lie and say it runs at 1024x768 and high detail......
calling people liers are just lame and extremely childish animal.
i dont lie so stop that crap animal. 
edit: i corrected it JumpyJim, i agree it was easy to misstake what i meant 
although gameplay for me is more how the game runs because if the game runs choppy the gameplay will suffer.
but hey now its abit more clear
Last edited by pallebrun on Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:29; edited 4 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mutantius
VIP Member
Posts: 18594
Location: In Elektro looking for beans
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 18:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Well sometimes it have... Like if your game lag constantly...
"Why don't you zip it, Zipfero?" - fraich3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 20:38 Post subject: |
|
|
What was so special with Doom3 part from it's high system specs? The AI is still dumb as drift wood, the story is paper back thin, and shooting into dark rooms got rather boring past Alpha Lab.
The engine might be great, even though it lacks any form of destructable/interactive environment, and will prolly sell more licenses then game packages. ID seems to be sticking to making good engines for others to fill with beautiful content.
F.E.A.R is about one year off and they made what seems to be working in-game videos that looks as good as, if not better, then Doom3... Something is telling me they had the engine finished about the same time ID was going gold, but for reasons some of you will never know are trying to fill their product with some story.
By the way, HL2 will prolly make a few fanboys take their lifes in disapointment. Those who survive the shame will be playing F.E.A.R in 12 months time.
Flame away!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 22:07 Post subject: |
|
|
Nothing was special, people seem to think that Doom 3 is unbeatable, and are very surprised when they see games with better graphics, as if the entire industry is going to come to a stand-still just because Doom 3 is released.
Games are going to continue to look better and better every day, just because one game looks great today doesnt mean it will hold much weight in 6 months.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 22:17 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 18th Aug 2004 22:26 Post subject: |
|
|
let me remind everyone in this thread, the thread subject was not if fear looks good (anyone can see it does) it was which engine he thinks will be the best.
almost everyone went offtopic and started talking about wether fear looks good or not.
and how he or anyone can make such statements (saying that fear will own the doom3 engine) based on a few screens is way beyond me.
the game might run like crap for all we know.
you guys shuld wait untill the game is out and then compare it to the doom3 engine, not before.
not everything is about graphics when it comes to engines.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 00:30 Post subject: |
|
|
Project IGI was pretty good, at least the first one anyway.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 00:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Project IGI was a great game, it was hard but fucking fuuuuuun.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 00:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Project IGI sucked balls...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 01:03 Post subject: |
|
|
| Kilko wrote: | | Project IGI sucked balls... |
...BIG time!!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 02:00 Post subject: |
|
|
all I see is empty walls while Doom3 environment was very detailed.
and that game isn't even out yet.
how can you even compare?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 02:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Monolith stands for quality in my book! (As if you cared  )
Just look at their previous games: Blood 1/2, Shogo, NOLF 1/2, Contract Jack, AvP 2, Tron 2.0
As far as Im conserned those are a few of the best FPS games ever made. Always fresh game play, design and story. Sure the Quake and Unreal engines where technically more competent when Lithtech 1 was brought onto the game scene. Quake with it's speed and Unreal with it's texture size for outdoor environments. Lithech on the other hand was easy to program, originally being developed for Microsoft as part of the DirectX package (You can bet they got the inside track on DirectX API there).
Today we have a new Lithech engine called Jupiter (3.x) that matches both id Software and Epic's latest creations when it comes to poly count, texture size and shadowing (as you can see from the E3 vids and screenshots) while still retaining much of that old "ease of use" that helps you focus on content.
I think the "Doom 3" engine (built on Quake 3) is great, but I fear its a rushed job in order to get D3 out. | id Software programmer Jim Dosé wrote: | The engine is being completely rewritten, just piece-by-piece. Currently, the renderer, shader system, and game code are completely new. The cgame and network code have been removed. The animation system is currently being written from the ground up. The sound system and UI are still in place, but will be rewritten by Graeme and Robert when they are finished with the mission pack. At some point along the way, John will probably write a new network system.
|
As you can see there is nothing about improving the AI, giving us drivable vehicles or material deconstruction in there. One of the areas I thought both id Software and Epic would focus on in their next line of engines, as they are lacking somewhat in current games. Where HL2 (Built on Valve's Source engine (Own or licensed?)) stands in all this I honnestly dont know since HL was a Quake game and if they are to stand out from Doom 3 they need to have built their own from scratch. I dunno if Valve has either the time nor the knowledge to do that, but it might explain the long wait. But my guess is that they have been thinkering with the old Quake engine, sure looks like it from what I have seen.
One thing is clear though, with engines like Doom 3, Valve Source, Jupiter, CryTec, Unreal 3, Battlefield 2, they need to excel in order to get your money. So far I would say Doom 3 are on the plate with two strikes and the bases are loaded with just too little of the "new" stuff in the package. HL 2 is likely to follow, due to technical difficulties and poor management. F.E.A.R, Unreal 3 and Battlefield 2 are my best bet for the next year.
NEXT BATTER!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 04:45 Post subject: |
|
|
FEAR graphics, surpass Doom 3 graphics by a mile, it was obvious from some of the pictures and the video clips.
Windows XP SP2
Asus A7N8X Deluxe 2.0
Athlon XP2500 @ 2.4GHz (overclocked)
1GB Corsair XMS DDR400 (overclocked)
Radeon 9700 Pro (overclocked)
2x60GB Maxtor 7200/8MB
TDK CD/RW 52x32x52
TDK DVD Burner 8X/8X
10MBit Cable
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 19th Aug 2004 04:59 Post subject: |
|
|
fear sucks, wolf3d is still the king of graphics.
unreal3 might have a chanse on the title but i highly doubt it will surpass such a piece of art as wolf3d is.
but we will see.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 2 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
