<!--QuoteBegin-TommyVercetti+Aug 8 2004, 03:30 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TommyVercetti @ Aug 8 2004, 03:30 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The understated artistic beauty of Half-Life 2 is invisible to me. I want realism, and that generally means power. I didn't think Doom 3 was too shiny, except for a few of the weapon models the environments look just right. I mean, isn't brushed metal supposed to be shiny? And they did a really good job making the hell-creep look wet and sticky. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Plastic-esque metal and hellish environs Doom 3 excels at, but I prefer HL2's art style and "less is more" philosophy. Simple as that. Plus I want to map entire city scapes and lush, verdant outdoor scenery. With Doom 3, it's Total Recall/Event Horizon or bust.
<!--QuoteBegin-BloodySloth+Aug 8 2004, 03:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BloodySloth @ Aug 8 2004, 03:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Lush outdoor scenery? Have you seen hl2's outdoor scenery? If you want to map outdoor areas use FarCry. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah I have, and guess what? It's lush. If I wanted a jungle in the vein of Predator, I'd go for Far Cry. But then again the engine feels non-solid and I'm not touching CryEdit with a barge pole.
Seriously, the "HL2 looks poor" bandwagon is pathetic. Truth is, HL2 looks fantastic, you're just mugging yourselves.
Tequila: accept it, Half-Life 2's outdoor scenery cannot match that of Far Cry and STALKER. I mean, people are even saying it's going to be a great game and you're still on the defense.
lush: Having or characterized by luxuriant vegetation.
The outdoor scenery in half life 2 is barren. Very barren. That may be a design descision, but considering the "ok, just pretend this looks like grass" job they did in those screenshots, I think it may be an engine limitation.
<!--QuoteBegin-TommyVercetti+Aug 8 2004, 03:55 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TommyVercetti @ Aug 8 2004, 03:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Tequila: accept it, Half-Life 2's outdoor scenery cannot match that of Far Cry and STALKER. I mean, people are even saying it's going to be a great game and you're still on the defense. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Of course it can't, the comparison has always been HL2 and Doom 3 in my mind. If I had to pick a game on the merits of outdoor antics, it would be STALKER, for horror it would be Doom 3 and for Predator/Die Hard style action it would be Far Cry. I can only hope that HL2 delivers on the promise of being the best all-round game since the original HL.
EDIT: And Sloth, don't be pedantic. Here in the North East of England, "lush" is a local idiom meaning generally attractive and pleasing to the eye. Context is <i>everything</i>.
<!--QuoteBegin-TommyVercetti+Aug 7 2004, 09:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TommyVercetti @ Aug 7 2004, 09:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The understated artistic beauty of Half-Life 2 is invisible to me. I want realism, and that generally means power. I didn't think Doom 3 was too shiny, except for a few of the weapon models the environments look just right. I mean, isn't brushed metal supposed to be shiny? And they did a really good job making the hell-creep look wet and sticky. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Unreal Tournament 2004 was shiny, DOOM 3 was NOT shiny. The only decent reflections in the majority of the game come out of the mirror. You can't get a good flashlite shine to come off the metal walls if you try to. DOOM 3 wasted its lighting potential, it only really uses it gorgous shadow's to good use. If the models look plasticy, its because of poor or unrealistic texturing, not bad lighting or a lacking engine.
DOOM 3 is a great game, it really gets your heart beating, and does exactly what it set out to do, freak the crap out of the player with gameplay shrouded in gorgous and beliveable shadow's and darkness. HL2 is a totally different artform, its big, its open, and it gives you things that are just fun to look at. I can't really say that HL2 will be better than DOOM 3, but I can say that if it plays as fun as it looks in the video's, I am not at all worried about it.
Stalker does alot of things that HL2 won't do, and I can only hope the best for this game... But I personally think its still to early to throw my hand down for the little I have seen, the graphics won't dissapoint, that much I'm sure of, but the story and gameplay has yet to hit me with anything that really hooks me in.
I don't think it's even right to compare STALKER to any FPS, much in the same way System Shock 2 and Deus Ex exist in their own special little hybrid-genre world.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
From what I've seen in the hl2 tech demo videos:
<b>Half-life2:</b> - Can create very large enironments - The physics system is going to outclass any other game - Realistic fire - Realistic water - Realistic reflections and glass types - Realistic lighting - Models can be made of water, fire and other forms which they can use for the world
Now I can't be sure of all this since ... THE GAME HASNT BEEN RELEASED YET!!! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
One more thing since all the other assumtions are just that, assumtions. All of the discusion and accusations which have been made are based on screenshots and techdemo videos. The game is not yet released so no one is able to tell what happened the last year to the engine and its capabilities <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Aug 7 2004, 09:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Aug 7 2004, 09:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Doom 3 didn't take much advantage of physics. I mean sure ragdolls but I was hoping for boxes flying everywhere during combat and you have to litterally sprint into a desk with a laptop ontop just to MOVE THE LAPTOP..
I HATE YOU MARS GRAVITY <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them. Not to mention beating the cacoons with the flashlight until they overload and freeze solid. Even the hanging shark in the farcry demo could take a good beating without acting glitchy. DOOM 3's physics won't be its claim to fame, that's one thing for sure.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Aug 7 2004, 10:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Aug 7 2004, 10:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Aug 7 2004, 09:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Aug 7 2004, 09:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Doom 3 didn't take much advantage of physics. I mean sure ragdolls but I was hoping for boxes flying everywhere during combat and you have to litterally sprint into a desk with a laptop ontop just to MOVE THE LAPTOP..
I HATE YOU MARS GRAVITY <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them. Not to mention beating the cacoons with the flashlight until they overload and freeze solid. Even the hanging shark in the farcry demo could take a good beating without acting glitchy. DOOM 3's physics won't be its claim to fame, that's one thing for sure. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> My personal favorite is shooting an imp with a pistol then having it hit the floor, then a split second later fly at 10000000000mph through the air.
<!--QuoteBegin-Flint Paper+Aug 7 2004, 04:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Flint Paper @ Aug 7 2004, 04:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> People are saying the Half Life 2 graphics are worse than Doom 3's?
Whatever next! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Bit strange, being it's off of a dynamic-ish signature but:
KungFuSquirrelBasher of MuttonsJoin Date: 2002-01-26Member: 103Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
<!--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-->The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So? Who cares if the hanging shark didn't, it's a much simpler object! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> I've seen characters in Far Cry and UT2K4 (well, corpses) do the exact same things. Physics engines are not perfect. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Hell, even Havok is made by a group of people who just tweak it until it looks right, their own words. Still looks great, but hardly accurate, and hardly bug-free.
If what you say is true, I must have a blessed version of Doom 3, for I have only seen one such abberation, when I shot an imp in the foot and it flew back into a wall.
I’ve always been impressed by the combination of what HL2 has to offer. Just look at the features:
<b>Technology</b> Great graphics, impressive AI, realistic facial animation and physics engine. <b>Originality</b> The art direction/design, story and setting are unique and fresh. <b>Range of Gameplay</b> Such as the creative use of physics, npc interaction, vehicles, both small interior and expansive out door environments.
So taking that into account, why do people then get so uptight over positive comments towards the game? Granted, some are guilty of over-hyping, but surely that’s better than a load of negativity and cynicism, right?
Also why do people feel the need to set up camp by one particular game and compare it against all others? I might be singing HL2’s praises right now but I also love Farcry, cant wait for Doom3 (out next friday for euros!), and am extremely intrigued by Stalker. It doesn’t bother me which is “da best”.
Come on, there just computer games, your allowed to love them all at once! You don’t need to pledge allegiance to a single title like you would a sports team or political party
If you MUST pick a 'best' game, then at least talk about how <i>fun</i> it is, rather that boring technical details.
Two things I know for a fact HL2 will have over the current doom3:
- The AI in doom 3 sucks. Horribly, in fact HL 1's AI currently beats Doom 3's. Not only is it easy as hell to exploit the AI in doom 3, but the squad movement between soliders... is just awful. Ranks among the worst AI I've ever seen in a game. Like goombas from Super Mario World dumb. Except, goombas were designed that way, whereas in doom 3 the goombas are carefully hidden behind wall panels that magically rise when you step on a pack of armor.
:|
Next,
- The physics in doom 3 suck. I realized how poor they were right at the start of the game, straight out of the dropship. There were 2 boxes near the stardock.
I thought you know, that since my guy was about 150 pounds heavier than both boxes combined, I could push both of the boxes at once... but no. They didn't budge, because in doom 3 you can only push one object at a time. Not only is it lame, but pathetic. They could have at the very least applied a weight class to the movable objects in this game...
<!--QuoteBegin-KungFuSquirrel+Aug 7 2004, 11:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (KungFuSquirrel @ Aug 7 2004, 11:58 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-->The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So? Who cares if the hanging shark didn't, it's a much simpler object! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> I've seen characters in Far Cry and UT2K4 (well, corpses) do the exact same things. Physics engines are not perfect. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Hell, even Havok is made by a group of people who just tweak it until it looks right, their own words. Still looks great, but hardly accurate, and hardly bug-free. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'll clarify my remark to say that I don't really care that DOOM 3's physics aren't godly, I'm just pointing out that the game isn't perfect in every way, as some would seem to think for the purpous of comparing to HL2. I also wanted to say that I wasn't really impressed with farcry's physics either... The few objects that weren't static seemed increadibly heavy, and I was able to create hundreds of unnatural corpsefalls, expecially with the body piling system. The farcry ragdoll system does a good job of not letting limbs bend unnaturally, but it keeps the skelital and muscular systems far too rigid. Sadly enough, the game physics that have impressed me the most to date have been the ragdoll and vehicle physics of the UT2004 engine. I can only hope that halflife compares apropiate to how good it looks like the physics are in the tech demo's for the game.
[edit] I'm way to tired to be spelling and grammering right now <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo--> [edit2] bah, ignore the plethora of spelling errors I am reading in my post for the moment, I will fix them tomorow, after not working for 10 1/2 hours...
The physics in HL2 have to be especially good because a large portion of the gameplay is based on physical interactions (puzzles using physics, manipulator gun). This is why Valve invested so much time into getting it perfect.
You can forgive Farcry and Doom3 for having inferior physic engines, because its much less relevant to gameplay. Pushing boxes in those games is just a distraction, it doesnt make sense to spend loads of dev time on it.
Similarly, you can forgive HL2 for not having per-pixel lighting or expansive jungles - it doesnt require them.
<!--QuoteBegin-UKchaos+Aug 8 2004, 01:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (UKchaos @ Aug 8 2004, 01:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The physics in HL2 have to be especially good because a large portion of the gameplay is based on physical interactions (puzzles using physics, manipulator gun). This is why Valve invested so much time into getting it perfect.
You can forgive Farcry and Doom3 for having inferior physic engines, because its much less relevant to gameplay. Pushing boxes in those games is just a distraction, it doesnt make sense to spend loads of dev time on it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Interestingly enough, I have found a couple box pushing puzzles in DOOM 3... and the boxes push in a fairly physically acurate way anyways... The errors only occur on the more complicated objects, like ragdolls, and cacooned corpses (which have joints and thus must phsically react on more than just thier surface strike imput)
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
Well, except for cacoons its fine for me. The coolest thing I saw once though was actually involving the vaporization- I stood below a Imp, fired a good shot into him with the shotty. He flew back, and as he was flying back his 20 feet, he vaporized midair. He didn't even hit the ground- coolest thing I've seen thus far <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
STALKER graphics r teh sux. The only thing they have over hl2 is the grass, which serious sam 2 could do too, and to some extent the lighting(I have yet to see a hl2 shot of a lamp behind a fan casting shadows realistically. Maybe it can, but I haven't seen it yet).
<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Aug 8 2004, 11:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Aug 8 2004, 11:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> STALKER graphics r teh sux. The only thing they have over hl2 is the grass, which serious sam 2 could do too, and to some extent the lighting(I have yet to see a hl2 shot of a lamp behind a fan casting shadows realistically. Maybe it can, but I haven't seen it yet). <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It can do dynamic lights, but not dynamic shadows. However it can do overlays like Unreal 2003/2004 so the shadows can be mimiced.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Aug 8 2004, 02:49 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Aug 8 2004, 02:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> - The physics in doom 3 suck. I realized how poor they were right at the start of the game, straight out of the dropship. There were 2 boxes near the stardock.
I thought you know, that since my guy was about 150 pounds heavier than both boxes combined, I could push both of the boxes at once... but no. They didn't budge, because in doom 3 you can only push one object at a time. Not only is it lame, but pathetic. They could have at the very least applied a weight class to the movable objects in this game... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, here's a "What if..." scenario for you.
What if you are in charge of cargo for Mars City Alpha. You have to unload it from the ships, load it to the ships, and distribute it to the rest of the base. Now remember, you've got stuff landing and taking off and mechanics and people transferring running around. You've got the boxes of cargo that are, for whatever reason, waiting to be loaded into a ship or moved off into the rest of the base. Now, you're out of space. You have to stick them on the platform people are always walking around on. These are very SENSITIVE crates. They contain PRECIOUS LIFE SOURCE or something similar and very important. You butt is FIRED if you drop one of those crates into the depths of Mars. Now, seeing as humanity has managed to <b>colonize the Martian surface</b>, do you think it is possible that they have the technology to secure two small crates to the ground so stupid marines who just transferred from Earth can't push them around? Yeah, I thought so.
Actually I thought the human models in Doom 3 are awesome. Lip synching is pretty bad but other then that I have no problem with them. Like the rest of the game, it has to be seen in motion.
Comments
Plastic-esque metal and hellish environs Doom 3 excels at, but I prefer HL2's art style and "less is more" philosophy. Simple as that. Plus I want to map entire city scapes and lush, verdant outdoor scenery. With Doom 3, it's Total Recall/Event Horizon or bust.
Yeah I have, and guess what? It's lush. If I wanted a jungle in the vein of Predator, I'd go for Far Cry. But then again the engine feels non-solid and I'm not touching CryEdit with a barge pole.
Seriously, the "HL2 looks poor" bandwagon is pathetic. Truth is, HL2 looks fantastic, you're just mugging yourselves.
The outdoor scenery in half life 2 is barren. Very barren. That may be a design descision, but considering the "ok, just pretend this looks like grass" job they did in those screenshots, I think it may be an engine limitation.
Of course it can't, the comparison has always been HL2 and Doom 3 in my mind. If I had to pick a game on the merits of outdoor antics, it would be STALKER, for horror it would be Doom 3 and for Predator/Die Hard style action it would be Far Cry. I can only hope that HL2 delivers on the promise of being the best all-round game since the original HL.
EDIT: And Sloth, don't be pedantic. Here in the North East of England, "lush" is a local idiom meaning generally attractive and pleasing to the eye. Context is <i>everything</i>.
Unreal Tournament 2004 was shiny, DOOM 3 was NOT shiny. The only decent reflections in the majority of the game come out of the mirror. You can't get a good flashlite shine to come off the metal walls if you try to. DOOM 3 wasted its lighting potential, it only really uses it gorgous shadow's to good use. If the models look plasticy, its because of poor or unrealistic texturing, not bad lighting or a lacking engine.
DOOM 3 is a great game, it really gets your heart beating, and does exactly what it set out to do, freak the crap out of the player with gameplay shrouded in gorgous and beliveable shadow's and darkness. HL2 is a totally different artform, its big, its open, and it gives you things that are just fun to look at. I can't really say that HL2 will be better than DOOM 3, but I can say that if it plays as fun as it looks in the video's, I am not at all worried about it.
Stalker does alot of things that HL2 won't do, and I can only hope the best for this game... But I personally think its still to early to throw my hand down for the little I have seen, the graphics won't dissapoint, that much I'm sure of, but the story and gameplay has yet to hit me with anything that really hooks me in.
[edit] Im a grate speler.
<b>Half-life2:</b>
- Can create very large enironments
- The physics system is going to outclass any other game
- Realistic fire
- Realistic water
- Realistic reflections and glass types
- Realistic lighting
- Models can be made of water, fire and other forms which they can use for the world
Now I can't be sure of all this since ... THE GAME HASNT BEEN RELEASED YET!!! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
One more thing since all the other assumtions are just that, assumtions. All of the discusion and accusations which have been made are based on screenshots and techdemo videos. The game is not yet released so no one is able to tell what happened the last year to the engine and its capabilities <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
/me slaps valve *you all know why*
I HATE YOU MARS GRAVITY <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them. Not to mention beating the cacoons with the flashlight until they overload and freeze solid. Even the hanging shark in the farcry demo could take a good beating without acting glitchy. DOOM 3's physics won't be its claim to fame, that's one thing for sure.
I HATE YOU MARS GRAVITY <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The ragdolls in doom 3 are terrible too, the way the corpses frictionate with the floor is crap. I have had corpses suck in an arch position balancing on one arm, with thier wrist folded up the wrong way under them. Not to mention beating the cacoons with the flashlight until they overload and freeze solid. Even the hanging shark in the farcry demo could take a good beating without acting glitchy. DOOM 3's physics won't be its claim to fame, that's one thing for sure. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
My personal favorite is shooting an imp with a pistol then having it hit the floor, then a split second later fly at 10000000000mph through the air.
Whatever next! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bit strange, being it's off of a dynamic-ish signature but:
Woot, Eddie Izzard.
So? Who cares if the hanging shark didn't, it's a much simpler object! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> I've seen characters in Far Cry and UT2K4 (well, corpses) do the exact same things. Physics engines are not perfect. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Hell, even Havok is made by a group of people who just tweak it until it looks right, their own words. Still looks great, but hardly accurate, and hardly bug-free.
20 feet away.
<b>Technology</b>
Great graphics, impressive AI, realistic facial animation and physics engine.
<b>Originality</b>
The art direction/design, story and setting are unique and fresh.
<b>Range of Gameplay</b>
Such as the creative use of physics, npc interaction, vehicles, both small interior and expansive out door environments.
So taking that into account, why do people then get so uptight over positive comments towards the game? Granted, some are guilty of over-hyping, but surely that’s better than a load of negativity and cynicism, right?
Also why do people feel the need to set up camp by one particular game and compare it against all others? I might be singing HL2’s praises right now but I also love Farcry, cant wait for Doom3 (out next friday for euros!), and am extremely intrigued by Stalker. It doesn’t bother me which is “da best”.
Come on, there just computer games, your allowed to love them all at once! You don’t need to pledge allegiance to a single title like you would a sports team or political party
If you MUST pick a 'best' game, then at least talk about how <i>fun</i> it is, rather that boring technical details.
- The AI in doom 3 sucks. Horribly, in fact HL 1's AI currently beats Doom 3's. Not only is it easy as hell to exploit the AI in doom 3, but the squad movement between soliders... is just awful. Ranks among the worst AI I've ever seen in a game. Like goombas from Super Mario World dumb. Except, goombas were designed that way, whereas in doom 3 the goombas are carefully hidden behind wall panels that magically rise when you step on a pack of armor.
:|
Next,
- The physics in doom 3 suck. I realized how poor they were right at the start of the game, straight out of the dropship. There were 2 boxes near the stardock.
I tried to push them.
<!--c1--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>CODE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='CODE'><!--ec1-->Box1-Box2-Me<!--c2--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--ec2-->
I thought you know, that since my guy was about 150 pounds heavier than both boxes combined, I could push both of the boxes at once... but no. They didn't budge, because in doom 3 you can only push one object at a time. Not only is it lame, but pathetic. They could have at the very least applied a weight class to the movable objects in this game...
So? Who cares if the hanging shark didn't, it's a much simpler object! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> I've seen characters in Far Cry and UT2K4 (well, corpses) do the exact same things. Physics engines are not perfect. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Hell, even Havok is made by a group of people who just tweak it until it looks right, their own words. Still looks great, but hardly accurate, and hardly bug-free. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll clarify my remark to say that I don't really care that DOOM 3's physics aren't godly, I'm just pointing out that the game isn't perfect in every way, as some would seem to think for the purpous of comparing to HL2. I also wanted to say that I wasn't really impressed with farcry's physics either... The few objects that weren't static seemed increadibly heavy, and I was able to create hundreds of unnatural corpsefalls, expecially with the body piling system. The farcry ragdoll system does a good job of not letting limbs bend unnaturally, but it keeps the skelital and muscular systems far too rigid. Sadly enough, the game physics that have impressed me the most to date have been the ragdoll and vehicle physics of the UT2004 engine. I can only hope that halflife compares apropiate to how good it looks like the physics are in the tech demo's for the game.
[edit] I'm way to tired to be spelling and grammering right now <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
[edit2] bah, ignore the plethora of spelling errors I am reading in my post for the moment, I will fix them tomorow, after not working for 10 1/2 hours...
You can forgive Farcry and Doom3 for having inferior physic engines, because its much less relevant to gameplay. Pushing boxes in those games is just a distraction, it doesnt make sense to spend loads of dev time on it.
Similarly, you can forgive HL2 for not having per-pixel lighting or expansive jungles - it doesnt require them.
You can forgive Farcry and Doom3 for having inferior physic engines, because its much less relevant to gameplay. Pushing boxes in those games is just a distraction, it doesnt make sense to spend loads of dev time on it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interestingly enough, I have found a couple box pushing puzzles in DOOM 3... and the boxes push in a fairly physically acurate way anyways... The errors only occur on the more complicated objects, like ragdolls, and cacooned corpses (which have joints and thus must phsically react on more than just thier surface strike imput)
It can do dynamic lights, but not dynamic shadows. However it can do overlays like Unreal 2003/2004 so the shadows can be mimiced.
I tried to push them.
<!--c1--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>CODE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='CODE'><!--ec1-->Box1-Box2-Me<!--c2--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--ec2-->
I thought you know, that since my guy was about 150 pounds heavier than both boxes combined, I could push both of the boxes at once... but no. They didn't budge, because in doom 3 you can only push one object at a time. Not only is it lame, but pathetic. They could have at the very least applied a weight class to the movable objects in this game... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, here's a "What if..." scenario for you.
What if you are in charge of cargo for Mars City Alpha. You have to unload it from the ships, load it to the ships, and distribute it to the rest of the base. Now remember, you've got stuff landing and taking off and mechanics and people transferring running around. You've got the boxes of cargo that are, for whatever reason, waiting to be loaded into a ship or moved off into the rest of the base. Now, you're out of space. You have to stick them on the platform people are always walking around on. These are very SENSITIVE crates. They contain PRECIOUS LIFE SOURCE or something similar and very important. You butt is FIRED if you drop one of those crates into the depths of Mars. Now, seeing as humanity has managed to <b>colonize the Martian surface</b>, do you think it is possible that they have the technology to secure two small crates to the ground so stupid marines who just transferred from Earth can't push them around? Yeah, I thought so.
Crap. Shut up.
So please dont complain and bash doom 3.