<!--QuoteBegin-Cereal KillR+Jan 19 2005, 09:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cereal KillR @ Jan 19 2005, 09:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I play for games, not engines. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> YES, but the NS team will be using an ENGINE, and create a GAME with it.
<!--QuoteBegin-Travis Dane+Jan 19 2005, 02:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Travis Dane @ Jan 19 2005, 02:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Maybe if I reduce my post to:
HL2 just looks ****.
They'll understand frames per second is NOT everything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No it doesn't. HL2 looks excellent compared to D3. Prove me wrong.
Oh wait, you can't - I'm posting my opinion with no evidence or proof to back it up. With no evidence, you can't argue a point.
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
edited January 2005
Personally, I'd much prefer to have a sleek engine that can push buttery graphics, rather than something the size of a Mack truck lugging around plasticine critters, designed specifically for one GPU line out of spite.
That is to say, I'd rather have it show up on HL2, myself.
I can't help but find it funny that those supporting the Doom3 engine can only paste the beautiful PR screenshots from iD, and then throw in an HL2 shot of the most barren portion of the game. But I guess that's all that a neophyte spin doctor can try for, in his defense.
Short version. Source can run on a wider array of hardware, deliver superior results to D3, and has an installed userbase that the other engines that *might* be considered can't beat. As for those complaining that it'd be a retail game... think about it. You have a kickass engine right here, that you've already done a port to, so you know how it works. You understand it. You've worked with it. And now... a small segment of the forumites want you to drop all of that and switch to their pet engine, because they bought an overpriced card and are trying to convince themselves that it was really worth it.
I'd say it'd be doubtful, but then... what do I know.
<!--QuoteBegin-Gecko God Of Dooom+Jan 19 2005, 04:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Gecko God Of Dooom @ Jan 19 2005, 04:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> ill post some picks and screenshots when I get home, from both games. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'll do the same. I've already got a few from HL2, and I'm D/Ling the demo for D3.
Lets see Doom3 doesn't use hit boxes it uses per poly hit detection! That straight away with no efforts from the mod teams fixes a MAJOR problem that has been plaguing NS since the day it was released.
It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..
It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.
The audio positioning is much better.
The compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.
It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.
Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--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-->Lets see Doom3 doesn't use hit boxes it uses per poly hit detection! That straight away with no efforts from the mod teams fixes a MAJOR problem that has been plaguing NS since the day it was released. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is also a problem HL2 will fix.
<!--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-->It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Never seen Alyx, have you? She's very curvy. Take that into comparison with the spikes all D3 characters have as the top of their heads, and HL2 wins.
<!--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-->It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No it can't. HL2 handles much higher polygon counts than D3 can; D3 relies on bumpmaps.
<!--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 audio positioning is much better.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'd like to see (or hear) proof of that.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm no mapper, so no comment.
<!--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-->It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uhh... all the D3 maps are just as cramped and take way longer to load.
<!--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--> Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah - the HL2 textures don't look bland like the D3 ones do.
<!--QuoteBegin-DragonMech+Jan 19 2005, 06:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DragonMech @ Jan 19 2005, 06:07 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-->Lets see Doom3 doesn't use hit boxes it uses per poly hit detection! That straight away with no efforts from the mod teams fixes a MAJOR problem that has been plaguing NS since the day it was released. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is also a problem HL2 will fix.
<!--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-->It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Never seen Alyx, have you? She's very curvy. Take that into comparison with the spikes all D3 characters have as the top of their heads, and HL2 wins.
<!--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-->It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No it can't. HL2 handles much higher polygon counts than D3 can; D3 relies on bumpmaps.
<!--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 audio positioning is much better.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'd like to see (or hear) proof of that.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm no mapper, so no comment.
<!--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-->It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uhh... all the D3 maps are just as cramped and take way longer to load.
<!--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--> Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah - the HL2 textures don't look bland like the D3 ones do. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Doom3 supports patch surfaces which are parametricly defined this allows for real curved surfaces this is not designed to be used for characters its for walls, pipes etc
Go create a test map i can assure you D3 can push more polygons <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Audio position is more subjective but on my home system (5.1 system) Doom3 was miles ahead.
Please have a look at the links i provided which show you maps similar to the size of BF1942 maps.. The levels in D3 are cramped by design choice not engine limitation.
Regardless of what we crap on about here the Game team is going look at every comercially aviable engine anaylise each one test them then come to a conculusion on which one to use. No one drops big $$ on anything without testing all the options.
You need to seperate design/art direction from the technology..
<!--QuoteBegin-kabab+Jan 19 2005, 05:21 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kabab @ Jan 19 2005, 05:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Doom3 supports patch surfaces which are parametricly defined this allows for real curved surfaces this is not designed to be used for characters its for walls, pipes etc <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So, it can make curves, but not on a character? HL2 can do both.
<!--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-->Go create a test map i can assure you D3 can push more polygons <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Then why did the developers use such low poly models for the characters?
And why would I make a map? A character would provide me more of an area to place polygons on.
<!--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-->Audio position is more subjective but on my home system (5.1 system) Doom3 was miles ahead.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Ok, that's your opinion. I've played the demo before and the sounds in HL2 were more accurately placed. It doesn't make either of us right - you need some subjective data if you want to convince someone.
<!--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-->Please have a look at the links i provided which show you maps similar to the size of BF1942 maps.. The levels in D3 are cramped by design choice not engine limitation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->And those maps have nothing resembling real architecture - sure they may be big, but they are very plain. If there was as much detail as is found in a standard D3/HL2 map, I'd be willing to bet that they wouldn't run well.
<!--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-->You need to seperate design/art direction from the technology..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I am. All I see is massive limits on an engine that relies overmuch on bumpmapping to achieve any details.
Please use google and read about the difference polygon surface and a nurbs surface.
Have you looked at the buildings etc in HL2?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> They have super super low poly counts just excellent texturing to cover it up. The game looks barren in alot of places its not consistantly detailed.
Please have a look at the link i provided it has a full city with lots of detail in day light to <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Source is a better choice for a remake of NS. I'd really prefer doom 3 if all I cared about was graphics but it will be much easier to port to hl2. I don't believe it will run well on either engine with my current hardware and most other peoples' frankly. It When it comes out maybe it will hopefully be a different story.
Just rmemeber that it will prob take anywhere to 6months to a Year after they start working on it with eather engine. and after that regular NS would still be supported by steam probrably. After NS:S or NS:D3 or NS:CryTech is made, it would prob be a year till HL:NS starts to realy die off. Since most people will have upgraded thier computer in the next 1½years from now
<!--QuoteBegin-kabab+Jan 20 2005, 12:39 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kabab @ Jan 20 2005, 12:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Have you looked at the buildings etc in HL2?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> They have super super low poly counts just excellent texturing to cover it up. The game looks barren in alot of places its not consistantly detailed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And here was I thinking HL2's textures were REALLY low-res <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
As for as I know HL2 still uses the age-old hitboxes for it's hit-detection, all be it smaller boxes for higher accuracy. However I can't help but laugh at the registration in CS:S, but then again that might just be the HL2 netcode.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is just off the top of my head, but Doom3 uses raw .map files without any pre-compiled data (with the exception of some lightmaps possibly). This in turn allows the mapper to view how their map looks like on-the-spot without having to wait for any processing at all (If I was mapping for Doom3, this would absolutely be a heavens-gift). This feature is implanted in the standard Doom3 editor afaik.
D3 doesn't use lightmaps at all, the time consuming part of compiling the a level on previous engine was creating the lightmaps, quiet similar to rendering with Global Illumination in any regular 3D program.
Seeing as ALL the lighting in D3 is dynamic requiring no precomputed lighting information what you see in the map editor is what you get a nice little bonus of a unified lighting system <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-kabab+Jan 20 2005, 12:55 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kabab @ Jan 20 2005, 12:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->D3 doesn't use lightmaps at all, the time consuming part of compiling the a level on previous engine was creating the lightmaps, quiet similar to rendering with Global Illumination in any regular 3D program.
Seeing as ALL the lighting in D3 is dynamic requiring no precomputed lighting information what you see in the map editor is what you get a nice little bonus of a unified lighting system <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I really do have to disagree here <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
I have seen a lot of instances where soft shadows were present, seeing as Doom3 doesn't deploy such technology as of yet, plus those soft shadow casting lights were in a fixed position casting fixed shadows, I'm affraid to conclude a little bit of lightmaps were infact used.
To give you an example, the medical scanning when you just arrive at mars. The vent above you is casting a soft shadow on the floor, I believe that is a lightmap.
Don't quote me on this though, I'm just guessing here. Maybe John just used his magic to create at least some soft dynamic shadows we aren't told of <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
[EDIT]
If I might be right, these lightmaps could prove to be the solution to the everlasting complaints of FPS issues with Doom3. Just increase the lightmap usage in NS:D3 and put in dynamic lightning in crucial locations.
<!--QuoteBegin-DragonMech+Jan 17 2005, 07:10 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DragonMech @ Jan 17 2005, 07:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I can run D3 on 800x600, no AA, no AF, meduim detail settings, and get 45-60 FPS <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> unpack the pk4 files with winrar then remove them from the base directory, I guarentee you will get much better performance.
The way thoes shadows are achieved is by using textures on the lights <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
If you have doom3 crank up the level editor and create a room then place a point light in the middle, under the attributes for the light you can select different textures to use on the light some of them are amazing!
No lightmaps <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The doom three engine is not the correct engine for NS for a number of reasons. The ones that seem most important are.
Player base, NS is a HL mod, not a Q3 mod. Levels, doom3: takes less time to compile, who gives a sh*t, compile times are the last thing you base your decisions on, becuase THEY DONT MATTER, what matters is what you can spend more gpu and cpu power on. For doom3 its ALL LIGHTING, in source, you can use so many more shaders and physics "things" because you dont waste valuable cycles on lighting that MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR GAMEPLAY. Level size, um, ever heard of RAM, aka random access memory, used for storing entire levels at a time. Who cares if MY engine can make maps bigger than YOURS, it doesnt matter, becuse BOTH CAN MAKE MAPS THE SAME SIZE, ie not the size of NYC, because THEY WOULD SUCK. No one wants to play an NS map that is as big as the given engine can handle because it would run horribly, and have about zero detial. End result: it doesnt matter which one is bigger or better (golly that sounds like a 10 year old doesnt it) because NS will be primarily indoor and have lots of models, and personally, the IO system (among other things) in source is ready made, so that means less work. If you want to see another NS mod, youd better hope to be seeing it on source, becuase otherwise the wait and the amount of useless work would be tremendous.
Doom3, while nice in some respects, has been forced to do things which it *can* do, however, thats all it can do, because as soon as you add GAMEPLAY, it dies. Doom3's "amazing" "potential" only comes from lots and lots hackjobs that honestly, arent worth doing when you can use Source and already have them there.
(Unified lighting: who cares, really, its a nice idea, but it makes no differnce for gameplay, and is really, once again, a waste of good resources that could be used to improve gameplay instead of sell and engine)
Just my thoughts, having dealt with both Doom3 and HL2.
EDIT:
Oh and on a more practicle matter, most of the people who actually contribute to NS in terms of maps, say Source, and dont think twice, because they dont have to, its logical, rational, and correct.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hyperion+Jan 20 2005, 01:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hyperion @ Jan 20 2005, 01:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->source, you can use so many more shaders and <b>physics "things"</b> because you dont waste valuable cycles on lighting <b>that MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR GAMEPLAY</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Haha, spot the oxymoron.
<!--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-->because you dont waste valuable cycles on lighting that MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR GAMEPLAY.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The lights are on, you can spot and shoot the skulk. The lights are off, you can't spot the skulk, but he can spot you with parasite. Do you notice the lightning's impact on the game? I believe that's what you call 'difference in the gameplay'.
Not really going to comment on the rest of your post as it seems to be an obvious flamebait.
<!--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 way thoes shadows are achieved is by using textures on the lights
If you have doom3 crank up the level editor and create a room then place a point light in the middle, under the attributes for the light you can select different textures to use on the light some of them are amazing!
No lightmaps <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Doom3 has lights!?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->?? GOOD GOD! HOLD THE PHONE THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<!--QuoteBegin-kabab+Jan 19 2005, 05:39 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kabab @ Jan 19 2005, 05:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Please have a look at the link i provided it has a full city with lots of detail in day light to <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Lots of detail? Are you blind? The pictures in the link you provided are all gray colored walls with little texturing or detail at all. NS looks better, for god's sake. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Anyway, I have the comparison screenshots ready. I've taken the HL2 ones from the first few chapters of the game; I've take the D3 ones from the demo. I haven't 'tweaked' the settings for each game beyond what is available in the in-game options. For lack of a better term, the games are stock. I've tested settings in the game, and these shots were taken at settings that give me roughly 60 FPS.
And now to lighten up the mood of this thread, I present a screenshot of atmosphere in D3: <img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/doomatmosphere.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Now before people go on to say I'm just a rabid fanboy of HL2 and that's the only reason I'm supporting it: it's not. I am a fanboy, but my experiences with both games does tend to side me to HL2. Not to say that D3 is a bad game; it's lighting engine is fantastic for example. I just honestly think the HL2 game/engine is better.
[EDIT] I've added another shot that shows faces - I realized I didn't have any (human) face-shots in the HL2 category.
<!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> *Where is he*
<!--emo&::skulk::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/skulk.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='skulk.gif' /><!--endemo--> *jesus its dark in here*
source has the best net code out as far as bandwidth goes. however, the hitboxes are apparently in bad shape and lag behind.
doom3 does not handle multiplay as well. i haven't played it but i do know that it is less effecient with bandwidth.
oblivion does not have net code, none at all. many of us elder scrolls players would like to see at least LAN play but that won't be coming with oblivion
ns is a hl mod and will probably stay that way. source is simply the best for the type of gameplay ns is and unless they can't afford the liscense to sell units it will be source based. i think that if they could work out a deal the best idea would be to make ns2 a hl mod and sell it off of steam.
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Oh, and just a minor point. Doom3 does NOT use NURBS patches. It uses polygons with normal/bumpmaps. It only uses NURBS <b>splines</b> for some motion pathing.
Again. None of the models in Doom3 are native NURBS models. They may have ORIGINALLY been NURBS, but those NURBS were converted into polys with a normalmap. Video cards today aren't set up to handle the patch method efficiently, though it can provide an infinite degree of curve detail. Also, it's a pain in the posterior to keep patches from seam-deforming, and still maintain hard edges.
This essentially means that stuff will fly through the air following graceful curves in Doom3, when a spline path is used. Nothing more.
And as for 'small maps', I wouldn't count a square kilometer, with 1/32" collision detection 'small'. Especially after wandering around in the super-folded D3 maps, and still running into 'loading... please wait' segments every two minutes. To give some perspective, it would take over fifteen minutes simply to walk from one end to the other of a max-size HL2 map, with the default runspeed. Significantly less if you're in an *ahem* <i>vehicle</i>, unless the scale has been bumped up to around 32x, making for a full INCH worth of collision detection, but giving you 32 square kilometers to map within. Meaning you can walk 45 1/4 kilometers diagonally, taking up over 11 1/2 hours. If anyone was interested enough in actually mapping something that gignormous.
And please. Don't judge HL2's moddability by CS:S. It's a bad port, and is only there to appease the slack-jawed masses of CS zombies.
they were talking more about nurbs.curbs or what not. I belive nurbs could be used for modles, but I have no idea. I know they used low poly count modles for alot of doom, to make it beable to run on less qualified systems
As a mapper, having looked over that tutorial, I dont want to have anything to do with that, even if it means "tedious" adjustments (that is if you cant do math in your head). I personally thing that halls like that look bad, too much curve if you ask me, besides, what do you think smothing groups are for in HL2?
Again, Doom3 is one big showcase of an engine, and really features like this make about zero differnce on which engine you use (except that your mapper do like them, and then your decision is made of you).
EDIT: Also, thats just Doom3s syle of mapping, it will be translated into somehting different by the compiler, which gives the mapper less control, which is bad.
<!--QuoteBegin-Gecko God Of Dooom+Jan 19 2005, 07:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Gecko God Of Dooom @ Jan 19 2005, 07:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Wow Dragon Mech, Doom3 looks so horrid on your comp. no wonder you hate it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't hate it, by any means - I just think the game runs very poorly considering my hardware. It has nice points (ie: sextacular lighting effects) but I don't think I should need 5 mods and a dozen tweaks to get it to look and run good. HL2 was jawdrop.gif right out of the box.
Comments
YES, but the NS team will be using an ENGINE, and create a GAME with it.
HL2 just looks ****.
They'll understand frames per second is NOT everything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No it doesn't. HL2 looks excellent compared to D3. Prove me wrong.
Oh wait, you can't - I'm posting my opinion with no evidence or proof to back it up. With no evidence, you can't argue a point.
That is to say, I'd rather have it show up on HL2, myself.
I can't help but find it funny that those supporting the Doom3 engine can only paste the beautiful PR screenshots from iD, and then throw in an HL2 shot of the most barren portion of the game. But I guess that's all that a neophyte spin doctor can try for, in his defense.
Short version. Source can run on a wider array of hardware, deliver superior results to D3, and has an installed userbase that the other engines that *might* be considered can't beat.
As for those complaining that it'd be a retail game... think about it. You have a kickass engine right here, that you've already done a port to, so you know how it works. You understand it. You've worked with it. And now... a small segment of the forumites want you to drop all of that and switch to their pet engine, because they bought an overpriced card and are trying to convince themselves that it was really worth it.
I'd say it'd be doubtful, but then... what do I know.
I'll do the same. I've already got a few from HL2, and I'm D/Ling the demo for D3.
It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..
It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.
The audio positioning is much better.
The compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.
It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.
Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is also a problem HL2 will fix.
<!--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-->It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Never seen Alyx, have you? She's very curvy. Take that into comparison with the spikes all D3 characters have as the top of their heads, and HL2 wins.
<!--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-->It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No it can't. HL2 handles much higher polygon counts than D3 can; D3 relies on bumpmaps.
<!--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 audio positioning is much better.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'd like to see (or hear) proof of that.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm no mapper, so no comment.
<!--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-->It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uhh... all the D3 maps are just as cramped and take way longer to load.
<!--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-->
Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah - the HL2 textures don't look bland like the D3 ones do.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->That is also a problem HL2 will fix.
<!--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-->It can actually draw curved surfaces i dunno about you guys but to me thats a big deal..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Never seen Alyx, have you? She's very curvy. Take that into comparison with the spikes all D3 characters have as the top of their heads, and HL2 wins.
<!--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-->It can push a lot more polygons then HL2.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->No it can't. HL2 handles much higher polygon counts than D3 can; D3 relies on bumpmaps.
<!--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 audio positioning is much better.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'd like to see (or hear) proof of that.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I'm no mapper, so no comment.
<!--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-->It can handle much much larger maps then HL2, the maps in hl2 are really quiet small just open them in a map editor its also evident in game with loading screens every 5min.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Uhh... all the D3 maps are just as cramped and take way longer to load.
<!--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-->
Have a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8338</a>
Also take a look at this <a href='http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=7510&highlight=halflife2+textures' target='_blank'>http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic...flife2+textures</a> Halflife2 textures in doom3 you can instantly see which one is better <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah - the HL2 textures don't look bland like the D3 ones do. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Doom3 supports patch surfaces which are parametricly defined this allows for real curved surfaces this is not designed to be used for characters its for walls, pipes etc
Go create a test map i can assure you D3 can push more polygons <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Audio position is more subjective but on my home system (5.1 system) Doom3 was miles ahead.
Please have a look at the links i provided which show you maps similar to the size of BF1942 maps.. The levels in D3 are cramped by design choice not engine limitation.
Regardless of what we crap on about here the Game team is going look at every comercially aviable engine anaylise each one test them then come to a conculusion on which one to use. No one drops big $$ on anything without testing all the options.
You need to seperate design/art direction from the technology..
So, it can make curves, but not on a character? HL2 can do both.
<!--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-->Go create a test map i can assure you D3 can push more polygons <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Then why did the developers use such low poly models for the characters?
And why would I make a map? A character would provide me more of an area to place polygons on.
<!--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-->Audio position is more subjective but on my home system (5.1 system) Doom3 was miles ahead.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Ok, that's your opinion. I've played the demo before and the sounds in HL2 were more accurately placed. It doesn't make either of us right - you need some subjective data if you want to convince someone.
<!--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-->Please have a look at the links i provided which show you maps similar to the size of BF1942 maps.. The levels in D3 are cramped by design choice not engine limitation.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->And those maps have nothing resembling real architecture - sure they may be big, but they are very plain. If there was as much detail as is found in a standard D3/HL2 map, I'd be willing to bet that they wouldn't run well.
<!--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-->You need to seperate design/art direction from the technology..<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I am. All I see is massive limits on an engine that relies overmuch on bumpmapping to achieve any details.
Please use google and read about the difference polygon surface and a nurbs surface.
Have you looked at the buildings etc in HL2?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> They have super super low poly counts just excellent texturing to cover it up. The game looks barren in alot of places its not consistantly detailed.
Please have a look at the link i provided it has a full city with lots of detail in day light to <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And here was I thinking HL2's textures were REALLY low-res <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
As for as I know HL2 still uses the age-old hitboxes for it's hit-detection, all be it smaller boxes for higher accuracy. However I can't help but laugh at the registration in CS:S, but then again that might just be the HL2 netcode.
<!--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 compiling time for maps in D3 is 10min tops even the largest most complex maps.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is just off the top of my head, but Doom3 uses raw .map files without any pre-compiled data (with the exception of some lightmaps possibly). This in turn allows the mapper to view how their map looks like on-the-spot without having to wait for any processing at all (If I was mapping for Doom3, this would absolutely be a heavens-gift). This feature is implanted in the standard Doom3 editor afaik.
Seeing as ALL the lighting in D3 is dynamic requiring no precomputed lighting information what you see in the map editor is what you get a nice little bonus of a unified lighting system <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Seeing as ALL the lighting in D3 is dynamic requiring no precomputed lighting information what you see in the map editor is what you get a nice little bonus of a unified lighting system <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really do have to disagree here <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
I have seen a lot of instances where soft shadows were present, seeing as Doom3 doesn't deploy such technology as of yet, plus those soft shadow casting lights were in a fixed position casting fixed shadows, I'm affraid to conclude a little bit of lightmaps were infact used.
To give you an example, the medical scanning when you just arrive at mars. The vent above you is casting a soft shadow on the floor, I believe that is a lightmap.
Don't quote me on this though, I'm just guessing here. Maybe John just used his magic to create at least some soft dynamic shadows we aren't told of <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
[EDIT]
If I might be right, these lightmaps could prove to be the solution to the everlasting complaints of FPS issues with Doom3. Just increase the lightmap usage in NS:D3 and put in dynamic lightning in crucial locations.
unpack the pk4 files with winrar then remove them from the base directory, I guarentee you will get much better performance.
If you have doom3 crank up the level editor and create a room then place a point light in the middle, under the attributes for the light you can select different textures to use on the light some of them are amazing!
No lightmaps <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Player base, NS is a HL mod, not a Q3 mod.
Levels, doom3: takes less time to compile, who gives a sh*t, compile times are the last thing you base your decisions on, becuase THEY DONT MATTER, what matters is what you can spend more gpu and cpu power on. For doom3 its ALL LIGHTING, in source, you can use so many more shaders and physics "things" because you dont waste valuable cycles on lighting that MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR GAMEPLAY. Level size, um, ever heard of RAM, aka random access memory, used for storing entire levels at a time. Who cares if MY engine can make maps bigger than YOURS, it doesnt matter, becuse BOTH CAN MAKE MAPS THE SAME SIZE, ie not the size of NYC, because THEY WOULD SUCK. No one wants to play an NS map that is as big as the given engine can handle because it would run horribly, and have about zero detial. End result: it doesnt matter which one is bigger or better (golly that sounds like a 10 year old doesnt it) because NS will be primarily indoor and have lots of models, and personally, the IO system (among other things) in source is ready made, so that means less work. If you want to see another NS mod, youd better hope to be seeing it on source, becuase otherwise the wait and the amount of useless work would be tremendous.
Doom3, while nice in some respects, has been forced to do things which it *can* do, however, thats all it can do, because as soon as you add GAMEPLAY, it dies. Doom3's "amazing" "potential" only comes from lots and lots hackjobs that honestly, arent worth doing when you can use Source and already have them there.
(Unified lighting: who cares, really, its a nice idea, but it makes no differnce for gameplay, and is really, once again, a waste of good resources that could be used to improve gameplay instead of sell and engine)
Just my thoughts, having dealt with both Doom3 and HL2.
EDIT:
Oh and on a more practicle matter, most of the people who actually contribute to NS in terms of maps, say Source, and dont think twice, because they dont have to, its logical, rational, and correct.
Haha, spot the oxymoron.
<!--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-->because you dont waste valuable cycles on lighting that MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR GAMEPLAY.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The lights are on, you can spot and shoot the skulk. The lights are off, you can't spot the skulk, but he can spot you with parasite. Do you notice the lightning's impact on the game? I believe that's what you call 'difference in the gameplay'.
Not really going to comment on the rest of your post as it seems to be an obvious flamebait.
<!--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 way thoes shadows are achieved is by using textures on the lights
If you have doom3 crank up the level editor and create a room then place a point light in the middle, under the attributes for the light you can select different textures to use on the light some of them are amazing!
No lightmaps <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank you for this enlightment, I'll look it up.
Lots of detail? Are you blind? The pictures in the link you provided are all gray colored walls with little texturing or detail at all. NS looks better, for god's sake. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Anyway, I have the comparison screenshots ready. I've taken the HL2 ones from the first few chapters of the game; I've take the D3 ones from the demo. I haven't 'tweaked' the settings for each game beyond what is available in the in-game options. For lack of a better term, the games are stock. I've tested settings in the game, and these shots were taken at settings that give me roughly 60 FPS.
First, HL2:
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_canals_010231.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_canals_060657.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_canals_110705.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_eli_011025.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_eli_011108.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d1_eli_021560.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d2_coast_080212.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d2_coast_100869.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d2_coast_120126.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d2_prison_020632.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/d2_prison_050248.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
And now, D3:
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00080.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00106.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00129.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00132.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00144.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00149.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/shot00159.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
And now to lighten up the mood of this thread, I present a screenshot of atmosphere in D3:
<img src='http://xs12.xs.to/pics/05034/doomatmosphere.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Now before people go on to say I'm just a rabid fanboy of HL2 and that's the only reason I'm supporting it: it's not. I am a fanboy, but my experiences with both games does tend to side me to HL2. Not to say that D3 is a bad game; it's lighting engine is fantastic for example. I just honestly think the HL2 game/engine is better.
[EDIT] I've added another shot that shows faces - I realized I didn't have any (human) face-shots in the HL2 category.
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> *Where is he*
<!--emo&::skulk::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/skulk.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='skulk.gif' /><!--endemo--> *jesus its dark in here*
doom3 does not handle multiplay as well. i haven't played it but i do know that it is less effecient with bandwidth.
oblivion does not have net code, none at all. many of us elder scrolls players would like to see at least LAN play but that won't be coming with oblivion
ns is a hl mod and will probably stay that way. source is simply the best for the type of gameplay ns is and unless they can't afford the liscense to sell units it will be source based. i think that if they could work out a deal the best idea would be to make ns2 a hl mod and sell it off of steam.
Again. None of the models in Doom3 are native NURBS models. They may have ORIGINALLY been NURBS, but those NURBS were converted into polys with a normalmap. Video cards today aren't set up to handle the patch method efficiently, though it can provide an infinite degree of curve detail.
Also, it's a pain in the posterior to keep patches from seam-deforming, and still maintain hard edges.
This essentially means that stuff will fly through the air following graceful curves in Doom3, when a spline path is used. Nothing more.
And as for 'small maps', I wouldn't count a square kilometer, with 1/32" collision detection 'small'. Especially after wandering around in the super-folded D3 maps, and still running into 'loading... please wait' segments every two minutes.
To give some perspective, it would take over fifteen minutes simply to walk from one end to the other of a max-size HL2 map, with the default runspeed. Significantly less if you're in an *ahem* <i>vehicle</i>, unless the scale has been bumped up to around 32x, making for a full INCH worth of collision detection, but giving you 32 square kilometers to map within. Meaning you can walk 45 1/4 kilometers diagonally, taking up over 11 1/2 hours. If anyone was interested enough in actually mapping something that gignormous.
And please. Don't judge HL2's moddability by CS:S. It's a bad port, and is only there to appease the slack-jawed masses of CS zombies.
I don't know how its handled at render time though..
Again, Doom3 is one big showcase of an engine, and really features like this make about zero differnce on which engine you use (except that your mapper do like them, and then your decision is made of you).
EDIT: Also, thats just Doom3s syle of mapping, it will be translated into somehting different by the compiler, which gives the mapper less control, which is bad.
I don't hate it, by any means - I just think the game runs very poorly considering my hardware. It has nice points (ie: sextacular lighting effects) but I don't think I should need 5 mods and a dozen tweaks to get it to look and run good. HL2 was jawdrop.gif right out of the box.