EEK, all I do is see you rant and flame. So I'm with Doc on this one. (No offense)
Back on topic.... After seeing MANY doom3 SS's, HL2 doesn't look nearly as good as it use to. Like I said in my other post, I don't really care about HL2 anymore because of Valve's constant lies...
*hats off to DOOM3*
/edit : It would be interesting to see someone make a HL1 mod with the models of HL2 and compare pictures. I'm sure they would be pretty similar if they used the "glow effect" or whatever...But then again, I could be completely wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin-EEK+Aug 5 2004, 02:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ Aug 5 2004, 02:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> First of all, look at the scenery, especially in the strider shot.
ITS MADE OF CUBES.
Seriously, look at it. I barely see any curved architecture, any detail, anything at all to make it more immersive. It looks like it was built on the HL1 engine. Doom3 has some of the most spectacular level design I've ever seen, with a very attentive approach to 'pointless detail', which consists of pipes, wires, hanging out, sparks, panels torn off, etc. One of the greatest parts of doom 3 is when the corridor collapses and you see all the wiring and crap that was behind the walls buried in the martian soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Although you edited your post, so I had to edit mine after the fact, I'll respond to this anyways...
OMG the scenery IS cubes. The city designers TOTALLY sould have made sphere buildings and wavy roads, that would be SO much more realistic. ::Lesson one:: It is easy to make unussual geometry when you are mapping a futuristic structure, such as a space base. Any NS mapper knows that. As much as we like to belive otherwize, city structuers consist primarily of cubes, and thus must be mapped accordingly.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for the Antlions, why are they radioactive-urine-yellow? Could you GET a more repulsive color scheme? Ever see an Imp in Doom 3 up close? (If you haven't had a chance to yet, there's a big part in the game where you will) The tones, the bump mapping, the colors of it all look natural. These antlions look like the bugs out of Starship Troopers, and might I add, that is NOT a good thing (You really want your overhyped game to look like one of the worst movies of all time?)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> ::Lesson two:: I am niether an interior designer, nor a sylist. I could care less the color in which a creature is textured. IRL animals can be all different colors, I never hear anyone complaining that poison arrow frogs are ugly, or that blue birds should really be a different shade. ::Lesson three:: In what world are upside down heads with spider legs preferable to starship trooper bugs... and your statement that Starship Troopers was one of the worst movies ever made is just false... You must be thinking of Starship Troopers 2
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Look at the textures on the antlions themselves. Notice that it's plain and flat in a lot of places. Most obvious on the foreleg claws, the texture is one shade and smeared around like a child's fingerpainting. The teeth and the orange parts are the same. The shadows on the leg itself are banded and very unprofessional looking (In the 'Doom 3 Released' thread, someone in there has a picture they took - the shadows on the guys hand have very obvious 'bands' of darkness, caused by bad graphics rendering). And look at where they're fighting. Planetside had more convincing landscaping then that. [/qoute] Last time I picked up a grasshopper it was textured almost entirely green. WTH, one shade texturing? God is so nub!
[qoute]As for the magnum, looks like the magun in Firearms TBH. The only shot I thought 'Neat' on was the sun lighting on the last one.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Meh, it doesn't look so bad... If the lightng is external and not texture based (the way HL1 is) flat colored texturing like that will look just as good as any other gun in any other game.
coilAmateur pirate. Professional monkey. All pance.Join Date: 2002-04-12Member: 424Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
But it's not a beetle... it's an alien. Maybe they do have a mucus-y substance coating their exoskeletons.
Also, the first time I saw the roof I thought to myself "that's a bit overdone." But then I stopped and thought about it... and realized I've definitely seen some sheet metal reflect the sun, and at the right and you really just can't look directly at it, it's so bright. I think they got it spot-on in that case. It will be a case-by-case basis for these things, I think - "did they get that one?" "Yep." "Not that one though." "Nope." But I haven't seen any yet that I disagreed with.
coilAmateur pirate. Professional monkey. All pance.Join Date: 2002-04-12Member: 424Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
Chill, everybody, please. There's a lot of kindling laying around this thread. Try not to start a fire. Just keep it cool -- remember that everyone's entitled to his own opinion. Nobody's forcing you to agree.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-EEK+Aug 5 2004, 02:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ Aug 5 2004, 02:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> First of all, look at the scenery, especially in the strider shot.
ITS MADE OF CUBES.
Seriously, look at it. I barely see any curved architecture, any detail, anything at all to make it more immersive. It looks like it was built on the HL1 engine. Doom3 has some of the most spectacular level design I've ever seen, with a very attentive approach to 'pointless detail', which consists of pipes, wires, hanging out, sparks, panels torn off, etc. One of the greatest parts of doom 3 is when the corridor collapses and you see all the wiring and crap that was behind the walls buried in the martian soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Although you edited your post, so I had to edit mine after the fact, I'll respond to this anyways...
OMG the scenery IS cubes. The city designers TOTALLY sould have made sphere buildings and wavy roads, that would be SO much more realistic. ::Lesson one:: It is easy to make unussual geometry when you are mapping a futuristic structure, such as a space base. Any NS mapper knows that. As much as we like to belive otherwize, city structuers consist primarily of cubes, and thus must be mapped accordingly. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Go to a city. Please.
I understand what you mean about cubes - Yes, modern architecture is largely right angles, but I mean the buildings themselves. There's really no graphical complexity to them. Big. Blocky. Square. Buildings. Go to San Francisco. Chicago. Buildings aren't all blocky and square.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for the Antlions, why are they radioactive-urine-yellow? Could you GET a more repulsive color scheme? Ever see an Imp in Doom 3 up close? (If you haven't had a chance to yet, there's a big part in the game where you will) The tones, the bump mapping, the colors of it all look natural. These antlions look like the bugs out of Starship Troopers, and might I add, that is NOT a good thing (You really want your overhyped game to look like one of the worst movies of all time?)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> ::Lesson two:: I am niether an interior designer, nor a sylist. I could care less the color in which a creature is textured. IRL animals can be all different colors, I never hear anyone complaining that poison arrow frogs are ugly, or that blue birds should really be a different shade. ::Lesson three:: In what world are upside down heads with spider legs preferable to starship trooper bugs... and your statement that Starship Troopers was one of the worst movies ever made is just false... You must be thinking of Starship Troopers 2 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> In the same line with Coil's post, just because they're aliens doesn't mean it's justification for being downright bad looking. Is it plausible? I suppose, yes. But I think it's cheap. Saying 'It's an alien!' for graphical oddities and general ugliness is about as lame as saying 'Nanites' to reasons why silly crap in NS exists. It's not a very good excuse that holds any water.
What do you find more convincing? The Drones from Aliens or the Antlions from HL2? Personally I find the Drones a lot more convincing as an alien species - they're appealing to look at, they have physiological features that can make sense, I think they're just better designed as an alien.
As for the spiders with upside down heads, you have to remember that they came out of HELL - they're nightmare creatures, not a being that evolved on a world that required putrid color schemes and a mucus coating. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-EEK+Aug 5 2004, 02:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ Aug 5 2004, 02:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Go to a city. Please.
I understand what you mean about cubes - Yes, modern architecture is largely right angles, but I mean the buildings themselves. There's really no graphical complexity to them. Big. Blocky. Square. Buildings. Go to San Francisco. Chicago. Buildings aren't all blocky and square.
<img src='http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/chicago/buildings/tower.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'll agree with you here, they've made a fair bit of the world objects with texture details rather than modeling the details, which I will agree takes some of the class away from the game. Fact remains though, as far as I am concerned, as long as the engine is capable of rendering the details (which they show in many area's that it is) this game will pwnanate, expecially for mods, which is the real reason I am excited about this game to begin with...
<!--QuoteBegin-EEK+Aug 5 2004, 03:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ Aug 5 2004, 03:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I understand what you mean about cubes - Yes, modern architecture is largely right angles, but I mean the buildings themselves. There's really no graphical complexity to them. Big. Blocky. Square. Buildings. Go to San Francisco. Chicago. Buildings aren't all blocky and square.
<img src='http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/chicago/buildings/tower.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We see 4 buildings in the shot from ground level in some off-downtown setting. The picture you posts shows countless buildings from the air featuring a downtown metropolis. These two settings don't compare. Cheap apartment buildings are almost always square, that explains the two on the left in the screenie. The long building in the back is another standard city design. Finally, the roman building on the right can be anything from a monument to a library. Also, you have some smoke stacks in the background, which are rounded, so not every structure is a cube.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--QuoteBegin-coil+Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (coil @ Aug 5 2004, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But it's not a beetle... it's an alien. Maybe they do have a mucus-y substance coating their exoskeletons.
Also, the first time I saw the roof I thought to myself "that's a bit overdone." But then I stopped and thought about it... and realized I've definitely seen some sheet metal reflect the sun, and at the right and you really just can't look directly at it, it's so bright. I think they got it spot-on in that case. It will be a case-by-case basis for these things, I think - "did they get that one?" "Yep." "Not that one though." "Nope." But I haven't seen any yet that I disagreed with. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I was under the impression when I watched that video that everything had just been rained on, and it was completely convincing.
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean.
In the first one, the windows are painted on the buildings. The balconies jut out and look utterly awful. In the background you have 1... 2... 3... <b>4</b> buildings that are literally CUBES WITH A TEXTURE.
The second one shows a complex, good looking building - the alien combine - next to a square building with painted on detail.
That's just inexcusable.
The point of that picture, Transmission, was showing that buildings don't have painted-on windows, they are 3 dimensional objects that have depth, and many are an art form of their own. They have detail. The Hancock Tower has visible depth - The same building in HL2 would be the general shape with a big 'hancock tower' texture pasted on. The water tower. The field museum. Even the Best Buy near my house has better architectural design then your average HL2 building.
Like I said, if you bothered to read, modern architecture depends a lot on right angles. You will see blocky buildings. But the buildings in HL2 just look like downright CRAP. I can't see an additional 8 triangles per window just to at least RECESS them a bit being a huge performance hit, since apparently the models themselves are already such high-poly.
I was too busy looking at the explosion in the first one. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Testament+Aug 5 2004, 03:06 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Testament @ Aug 5 2004, 03:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I was too busy looking at the explosion in the first one. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think that pretty much sums up the way the developers were thinking... They sacrificed less knowticable graphic qualities to save time and create focus on elements in the game they want you to look at. This game will be hailed for its gameplay and moddability if it is hailed for anything. I was never under the impression that HL2 graphics will be better than DOOM 3's, Just that they would be good enough, and supported enough, that mod makers can do pretty much whatever they want with sourse. That and get the job done as I play through the game <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Those pictures still bug me because of the over-sharpening. Whoever designed the website needs to get his mouse away from the "Filter" tab in Photoshop, hehe.
I have noticed that the longer I wait for Half-Life 2 to be released, the less I seem to care. Not only am I having trouble being impressed by the graphics, but the game itself doesn't seem to be breaking boundaries. I'm sure I'll be impressed once Half-Life 2 is released, but until then, I'm not biting my nails in anticipation.
your right swiftspear take half life 1 for example the singleplayer game was graphicly pretty bad but for its time good just how half life 2 is and the mods for it showed the engines true potential as mods for hl2 will if you look at that vampire game on the source engine you notice everything is nicely detailed this maybe just because valve is full of lazy bums i dunno <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Those pictures still bug me because of the over-sharpening. Whoever designed the website needs to get his mouse away from the "Filter" tab in Photoshop, hehe.
I have noticed that the longer I wait for Half-Life 2 to be released, the less I seem to care. Not only am I having trouble being impressed by the graphics, but the game itself doesn't seem to be breaking boundaries. I'm sure I'll be impressed once Half-Life 2 is released, but until then, I'm not biting my nails in anticipation. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Exactly what I've been getting at. It just lost a lot of steam (no pun intended) after the delay, and then it got buried by two titles it was supposed to have originally beat to store shelves.
<!--QuoteBegin-Chrono+Aug 5 2004, 03:18 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Chrono @ Aug 5 2004, 03:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> your right swiftspear take half life 1 for example the singleplayer game was graphicly pretty bad but for its time good just how half life 2 is and the mods for it showed the engines true potential as mods for hl2 will if you look at that vampire game on the source engine you notice everything is nicely detailed this maybe just because valve is full of lazy bums i dunno <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Can someone translate this please?
coilAmateur pirate. Professional monkey. All pance.Join Date: 2002-04-12Member: 424Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
edited August 2004
Translation:
As mods like NS have shown the HL engine to be capable of far more than the original game actually offered; so will HL2 mods unlock the true potential of the Source engine. For example, there's a very impressive looking Vampire: The Masquerade game coming out shortly after HL2 that uses Source.
Wait a minute. Valve putting out an engine/tech demo and calling it a game, while id releases an immensely immersive single-player gaming experience?
Doom 3 was all coding, and textures, everything is very low polly. While hl2 is expected to run hipolly models and landscape. Doom3 had intense inviroment that pulled you into the game. HL2 we dont know yet. All Im saying is that doom3 and HL2 both have good points, but HL2 isnt out yet so it is hard to tell.
Unfortunate thing is that people are saying HL2 = win for mods just because it has valve's name on it. I think people are sorely underestimating the potential of doom 3 mods. As I understand it, there's a System Shock mod in the works for it, and there already are some minimods for it out.
Personally I think POTENTIAL-wise, Doom 3 would be better for mods - after all, the technology it features is made for 512 mb cards, and as such, will have much more staying power. However, for mods themselves, I think most are going with HL2 for no other reason then it is HL2.
Overall, I would say, from two empty slates, that Doom3 is the better modding engine.
1) It features double what HL2's multiplayer limits are.
2) It has the potential to beat HL2 graphically in every way: There is nothing on HL2 that can't be done on doom 3. High poly models and fruity-colored aliens in both are simply design decisions.
3) Being an id game, like Coil said, Doom 3 <b>IS</b> a tech demo. However, their tech demo is probably one of the best single player games I've ever played. id makes their games to sell the engine, not the game. I think they have a winner here. This combination of factors, and the fact that it is at the core a highly moddable engine (Quake 3), spells mod success for Doom 3 to me.
I can only think of two ways HL2 would 'beat' Doom - It plays on lower end machines, which after tweaking Doom 3 I'm getting near constant 60 FPS (up from 20), and it could have better single-player gameplay.
Valve has a really wierd way of doing things (to say the least). They decide to make HL2, and therfore, they decide to make a whole new revolutionary game engine to dump on the market. So in the end of the day, they have a reasonable good (hopefully) game, and a nice new engine that probably sucked up the vast majority of the companies time in it's production...
<!--QuoteBegin-Hobojoe+Aug 5 2004, 03:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hobojoe @ Aug 5 2004, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it will come down to if doom3's netcode is any good. if so it might just have hl2 beat on all counts, except maybe mod portability <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo-->. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unfortunately no one knows since Doom 3's built in multiplayer is kinda lame anyway <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
It is on the quake 3 engine, and id said it can be designed for 64 players, so I'm pretty confident in the multiplayer stability. In the end it comes down to the mod.
EDIT: And besides - people still play 64 player BF1942 even though that is without a doubt the most abysmal netcode I've ever seen XD
<!--QuoteBegin-EEK+Aug 5 2004, 12:12 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EEK @ Aug 5 2004, 12:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NEW HL2 SHOTS IN! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> YOU ARE MY NEW GOD
Comments
Back on topic.... After seeing MANY doom3 SS's, HL2 doesn't look nearly as good as it use to. Like I said in my other post, I don't really care about HL2 anymore because of Valve's constant lies...
*hats off to DOOM3*
/edit : It would be interesting to see someone make a HL1 mod with the models of HL2 and compare pictures. I'm sure they would be pretty similar if they used the "glow effect" or whatever...But then again, I could be completely wrong.
ITS MADE OF CUBES.
Seriously, look at it. I barely see any curved architecture, any detail, anything at all to make it more immersive. It looks like it was built on the HL1 engine. Doom3 has some of the most spectacular level design I've ever seen, with a very attentive approach to 'pointless detail', which consists of pipes, wires, hanging out, sparks, panels torn off, etc. One of the greatest parts of doom 3 is when the corridor collapses and you see all the wiring and crap that was behind the walls buried in the martian soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Although you edited your post, so I had to edit mine after the fact, I'll respond to this anyways...
OMG the scenery IS cubes. The city designers TOTALLY sould have made sphere buildings and wavy roads, that would be SO much more realistic.
::Lesson one:: It is easy to make unussual geometry when you are mapping a futuristic structure, such as a space base. Any NS mapper knows that. As much as we like to belive otherwize, city structuers consist primarily of cubes, and thus must be mapped accordingly.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for the Antlions, why are they radioactive-urine-yellow? Could you GET a more repulsive color scheme? Ever see an Imp in Doom 3 up close? (If you haven't had a chance to yet, there's a big part in the game where you will) The tones, the bump mapping, the colors of it all look natural. These antlions look like the bugs out of Starship Troopers, and might I add, that is NOT a good thing (You really want your overhyped game to look like one of the worst movies of all time?)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
::Lesson two:: I am niether an interior designer, nor a sylist. I could care less the color in which a creature is textured. IRL animals can be all different colors, I never hear anyone complaining that poison arrow frogs are ugly, or that blue birds should really be a different shade.
::Lesson three:: In what world are upside down heads with spider legs preferable to starship trooper bugs... and your statement that Starship Troopers was one of the worst movies ever made is just false... You must be thinking of Starship Troopers 2
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Look at the textures on the antlions themselves. Notice that it's plain and flat in a lot of places. Most obvious on the foreleg claws, the texture is one shade and smeared around like a child's fingerpainting. The teeth and the orange parts are the same. The shadows on the leg itself are banded and very unprofessional looking (In the 'Doom 3 Released' thread, someone in there has a picture they took - the shadows on the guys hand have very obvious 'bands' of darkness, caused by bad graphics rendering). And look at where they're fighting. Planetside had more convincing landscaping then that. [/qoute]
Last time I picked up a grasshopper it was textured almost entirely green. WTH, one shade texturing? God is so nub!
[qoute]As for the magnum, looks like the magun in Firearms TBH. The only shot I thought 'Neat' on was the sun lighting on the last one.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Meh, it doesn't look so bad... If the lightng is external and not texture based (the way HL1 is) flat colored texturing like that will look just as good as any other gun in any other game.
[edit] I can't spell quote <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Also, the first time I saw the roof I thought to myself "that's a bit overdone." But then I stopped and thought about it... and realized I've definitely seen some sheet metal reflect the sun, and at the right and you really just can't look directly at it, it's so bright. I think they got it spot-on in that case. It will be a case-by-case basis for these things, I think - "did they get that one?" "Yep." "Not that one though." "Nope." But I haven't seen any yet that I disagreed with.
I, however, will force you to play nice. (:
ITS MADE OF CUBES.
Seriously, look at it. I barely see any curved architecture, any detail, anything at all to make it more immersive. It looks like it was built on the HL1 engine. Doom3 has some of the most spectacular level design I've ever seen, with a very attentive approach to 'pointless detail', which consists of pipes, wires, hanging out, sparks, panels torn off, etc. One of the greatest parts of doom 3 is when the corridor collapses and you see all the wiring and crap that was behind the walls buried in the martian soil. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Although you edited your post, so I had to edit mine after the fact, I'll respond to this anyways...
OMG the scenery IS cubes. The city designers TOTALLY sould have made sphere buildings and wavy roads, that would be SO much more realistic.
::Lesson one:: It is easy to make unussual geometry when you are mapping a futuristic structure, such as a space base. Any NS mapper knows that. As much as we like to belive otherwize, city structuers consist primarily of cubes, and thus must be mapped accordingly. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Go to a city. Please.
I understand what you mean about cubes - Yes, modern architecture is largely right angles, but I mean the buildings themselves. There's really no graphical complexity to them. Big. Blocky. Square. Buildings. Go to San Francisco. Chicago. Buildings aren't all blocky and square.
<img src='http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/chicago/buildings/tower.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
::Lesson two:: I am niether an interior designer, nor a sylist. I could care less the color in which a creature is textured. IRL animals can be all different colors, I never hear anyone complaining that poison arrow frogs are ugly, or that blue birds should really be a different shade.
::Lesson three:: In what world are upside down heads with spider legs preferable to starship trooper bugs... and your statement that Starship Troopers was one of the worst movies ever made is just false... You must be thinking of Starship Troopers 2 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In the same line with Coil's post, just because they're aliens doesn't mean it's justification for being downright bad looking. Is it plausible? I suppose, yes. But I think it's cheap. Saying 'It's an alien!' for graphical oddities and general ugliness is about as lame as saying 'Nanites' to reasons why silly crap in NS exists. It's not a very good excuse that holds any water.
What do you find more convincing? The Drones from Aliens or the Antlions from HL2? Personally I find the Drones a lot more convincing as an alien species - they're appealing to look at, they have physiological features that can make sense, I think they're just better designed as an alien.
As for the spiders with upside down heads, you have to remember that they came out of HELL - they're nightmare creatures, not a being that evolved on a world that required putrid color schemes and a mucus coating. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I understand what you mean about cubes - Yes, modern architecture is largely right angles, but I mean the buildings themselves. There's really no graphical complexity to them. Big. Blocky. Square. Buildings. Go to San Francisco. Chicago. Buildings aren't all blocky and square.
<img src='http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/chicago/buildings/tower.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll agree with you here, they've made a fair bit of the world objects with texture details rather than modeling the details, which I will agree takes some of the class away from the game. Fact remains though, as far as I am concerned, as long as the engine is capable of rendering the details (which they show in many area's that it is) this game will pwnanate, expecially for mods, which is the real reason I am excited about this game to begin with...
<img src='http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/chicago/buildings/tower.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
We see 4 buildings in the shot from ground level in some off-downtown setting. The picture you posts shows countless buildings from the air featuring a downtown metropolis. These two settings don't compare. Cheap apartment buildings are almost always square, that explains the two on the left in the screenie. The long building in the back is another standard city design. Finally, the roman building on the right can be anything from a monument to a library. Also, you have some smoke stacks in the background, which are rounded, so not every structure is a cube.
Also, the first time I saw the roof I thought to myself "that's a bit overdone." But then I stopped and thought about it... and realized I've definitely seen some sheet metal reflect the sun, and at the right and you really just can't look directly at it, it's so bright. I think they got it spot-on in that case. It will be a case-by-case basis for these things, I think - "did they get that one?" "Yep." "Not that one though." "Nope." But I haven't seen any yet that I disagreed with. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was under the impression when I watched that video that everything had just been rained on, and it was completely convincing.
Is this better?
<a href='http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_screen.UrbanRenewal.gif' target='_blank'>http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_...rbanRenewal.gif</a>
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean.
In the first one, the windows are painted on the buildings. The balconies jut out and look utterly awful. In the background you have 1... 2... 3... <b>4</b> buildings that are literally CUBES WITH A TEXTURE.
The second one shows a complex, good looking building - the alien combine - next to a square building with painted on detail.
That's just inexcusable.
The point of that picture, Transmission, was showing that buildings don't have painted-on windows, they are 3 dimensional objects that have depth, and many are an art form of their own. They have detail. The Hancock Tower has visible depth - The same building in HL2 would be the general shape with a big 'hancock tower' texture pasted on. The water tower. The field museum. Even the Best Buy near my house has better architectural design then your average HL2 building.
Like I said, if you bothered to read, modern architecture depends a lot on right angles. You will see blocky buildings. But the buildings in HL2 just look like downright CRAP. I can't see an additional 8 triangles per window just to at least RECESS them a bit being a huge performance hit, since apparently the models themselves are already such high-poly.
I think that pretty much sums up the way the developers were thinking... They sacrificed less knowticable graphic qualities to save time and create focus on elements in the game they want you to look at. This game will be hailed for its gameplay and moddability if it is hailed for anything. I was never under the impression that HL2 graphics will be better than DOOM 3's, Just that they would be good enough, and supported enough, that mod makers can do pretty much whatever they want with sourse. That and get the job done as I play through the game <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Is this better?
<a href='http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_screen.UrbanRenewal.gif' target='_blank'>http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_...rbanRenewal.gif</a>
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those pictures still bug me because of the over-sharpening. Whoever designed the website needs to get his mouse away from the "Filter" tab in Photoshop, hehe.
I have noticed that the longer I wait for Half-Life 2 to be released, the less I seem to care. Not only am I having trouble being impressed by the graphics, but the game itself doesn't seem to be breaking boundaries. I'm sure I'll be impressed once Half-Life 2 is released, but until then, I'm not biting my nails in anticipation.
Is this better?
<a href='http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_screen.UrbanRenewal.gif' target='_blank'>http://half-life2.com/img/screenshots/hl2_...rbanRenewal.gif</a>
Here's a great shot that shows exactly what I mean. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those pictures still bug me because of the over-sharpening. Whoever designed the website needs to get his mouse away from the "Filter" tab in Photoshop, hehe.
I have noticed that the longer I wait for Half-Life 2 to be released, the less I seem to care. Not only am I having trouble being impressed by the graphics, but the game itself doesn't seem to be breaking boundaries. I'm sure I'll be impressed once Half-Life 2 is released, but until then, I'm not biting my nails in anticipation. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly what I've been getting at. It just lost a lot of steam (no pun intended) after the delay, and then it got buried by two titles it was supposed to have originally beat to store shelves.
Can someone translate this please?
As mods like NS have shown the HL engine to be capable of far more than the original game actually offered; so will HL2 mods unlock the true potential of the Source engine. For example, there's a very impressive looking Vampire: The Masquerade game coming out shortly after HL2 that uses Source.
Wait a minute. Valve putting out an engine/tech demo and calling it a game, while id releases an immensely immersive single-player gaming experience?
WHAT THE HELL?
i for one am not getting hl2 for its single player id rather have it for its mod potential
but i did by doom3 for its singleplayer i wasnt thinking to myself ooo im gonna get doom3 and go play deathmatch online!
Personally I think POTENTIAL-wise, Doom 3 would be better for mods - after all, the technology it features is made for 512 mb cards, and as such, will have much more staying power. However, for mods themselves, I think most are going with HL2 for no other reason then it is HL2.
Overall, I would say, from two empty slates, that Doom3 is the better modding engine.
1) It features double what HL2's multiplayer limits are.
2) It has the potential to beat HL2 graphically in every way: There is nothing on HL2 that can't be done on doom 3. High poly models and fruity-colored aliens in both are simply design decisions.
3) Being an id game, like Coil said, Doom 3 <b>IS</b> a tech demo. However, their tech demo is probably one of the best single player games I've ever played. id makes their games to sell the engine, not the game. I think they have a winner here. This combination of factors, and the fact that it is at the core a highly moddable engine (Quake 3), spells mod success for Doom 3 to me.
I can only think of two ways HL2 would 'beat' Doom - It plays on lower end machines, which after tweaking Doom 3 I'm getting near constant 60 FPS (up from 20), and it could have better single-player gameplay.
Unfortunately no one knows since Doom 3's built in multiplayer is kinda lame anyway <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
It is on the quake 3 engine, and id said it can be designed for 64 players, so I'm pretty confident in the multiplayer stability. In the end it comes down to the mod.
EDIT: And besides - people still play 64 player BF1942 even though that is without a doubt the most abysmal netcode I've ever seen XD
YOU ARE MY NEW GOD