Half-Life 2/Doom 3 Tech Comparison ...
- Thread starter bandit55
- Start date
The_Spaniard
New member
I enjoy both games plenty, as a matter of fact I just recently made a Doom 3 wallpaper that can be found
http://www.whutdufuk.com/downloads/The_Spaniard/Doom_3_Wallpaper_by_TheSpaniard.jpg
or
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/10430205/
http://www.whutdufuk.com/downloads/The_Spaniard/Doom_3_Wallpaper_by_TheSpaniard.jpg
or
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/10430205/
The_Spaniard said:
Yes, I saw that part. My points are in this thread and I think everything is reduced to a personal opinion and it's subjective of course.
Your opinion is also subjective, you like his points and you think their are some of the best, there are people that don't think that way.
Nevermind said:why do we have to take sides ... ???
Cant we just enjoy both engines ... ???
if i have a apple thats good but if i have a apple and an orange thats
even better
CheersNevermind
I've enjoyed doom 3 technology... now (when it's released) I'll enjoy HL2 technology, I'm one of those guys
The_Spaniard
New member
Well Monrad if you did read further then you would have noticed that many of his points were absolutely wrong in the factual sense, making it a moot point to quote it proclaiming “OWNED”. Opinion takes back seat to facts, many of which were wrong in his post.
polkiousness
New member
Yes, having an Apple and an "orange" is indeed th way to goNevermind said:why do we have to take sides ... ???
Cant we just enjoy both engines ... ???
if i have a apple thats good but if i have a apple and an orange thats
even better
Cheers
Taking sides in a PC game debate is retarded. There's just no reason.
Dizoja86 said:
here ...
albeit those are custom textures.. they are very high quality and will look detailed even at 1 inch further from them. some have said Doom3 support up to 2k quality textures
there are some valid points in the Hl2 vs/ D3 tech comparisons..
but averall most of it is incorrect..
Lighting...
---------------
Doom3 kick really hard Hl2 source engine here.. there is no comparisons here.. the major disadvantage (IQ wise) of Halflife2 is precisely -> its lighting/shadowing engine.
http://www.planetunreal.com/phalanx/tut's/tutorial_vertex.htm
its not that is bad it have it benefits (very cheap in performance ) ,but that for a modern game that is suppose to last 5 years it will quickly be dated in 1 or 2 years. Hl2 lighting is similar to the lighting in old technology directx7 era games like UNreal and QUake3 /COD /RTCW .. heck even quake2 support some of it. (vertex lighting) the only thing that helps Hl2 to look better at times than old school games like quake3 /Unreal games is that it also support high quality pre-recorded static Raytraced lightmaps .. (just like quake3
) but Hl2 use much higher quality textures and much higher poly counts (just like UT2k4) which is very important. plus static bumpmapping lightning .which looks better than old school game ,but not on par with realtime _insertfeaturehere.....etc.. that its supported across everything in Doom3.the comparisons are real time per pixel lighting(Doom3) vs. per vertex lighting/lightmaps. (Hl2)here the score should be ..
Doom3 -> 9
Hl2 -> 5
Shadows...
---------------
Doom3 use realtime stencil shadows/bumpmaping/normalmapping everywhere.. that while are not revolutionary as Unreal3 softshadows.. they are very very good for many situations specially indoors levels. Hl2 shadows? it use very low quality dynamic shadows in the characters that already 99% of the people that complains about Hl2 graphics comes because of that.
Doom3 -> 7
Hl2 -> 1
Textures
-------------------
there is really nothing here to compare.. unless you want to compare which artist are better IDsoftware or VAlve. because same quality textures can be used in both games. Hl2 can use D3 textures and D3 can use Hl2 textures.. every texture used in those games are merely artistic design , that were done for those games. D3 use at times low quality textures only for performance reasons. since its push more the GPU than anyother game with its lighting/shadowing.
Character animation..
------------------------
there are many praises here about Hl2 in this department.
and here is the second biggest disadvantage i find in Hl2.. the facial animation in Hl2 looks pretty , but.. its useless for the game.. doesnt add anything.. its only used for scripted videos (cut scenes) where the girl talks. and thats it. the real character animation that counts is the one of the entire body.. how player runs ,move ,jump ,die..etc.. last time i saw in videos Hl2 animations are ragdollish.. even robotic movements you will see in them.. no comaprison with DOOm3 that use real MOCAP(real time motion capture people movement) data for its characters.
albeit the more impressive lifelike animations are only used for cutscenes of the marine guy. you can easily notice this in cutscenes in the end . but averall game animations are excelent.. Doom3 -> 9
Hl2 ->5
character modeling..
-----------------------
Hl2 have very very low poly characters. even lower than Doom3.. its poor lighting/specularity helps to hide the lower polycounts. the city videos have characters similar in quality to the ones you see in the 5 years old counterstrike . people will be surprised about this when they get a chance to play the real game. most of the praise here comes because of misinformation and the nice concept art (no real game shots) that Valve release at times of their characters and because of some nice looking cutscenes. i have never seen a real in game screenshot of Gordon freeman in the game. i bet VAlve have not released a single one.. i was able to see GFreeman in real time gameplay in the Sept30 release candidate
in the third person view and while it doesnt have textures ,the polygons where there and to my surprise its a very very low polygon count character. counterstike style ,with a rectangle for head. not diferent that the latest screenshots released by Valve of some of the friendly fighters. Doom3 -> 8
Hl2 ->4
AI...
-----------------------
here Valve claims revolutionary AI .. even thought most of what people says have seen is heavily scrpted events. if you want a really revolutionary AI.. S.T.A.L.K.E.R is the game to see since it will have true non linear enviroment and you each character in the game will react diferently accordingly to the way you look or behave or the weapons you carry. nice eh?
DOOM3 -> 2 ( slighly better than farcry AI )
Hl2 -> ? need to wait for the game..
Physics..
---------------
Here Hl2 looks that will have the edge.. Doom3 physics need more work for what i have seen.. albeit they are perpolygon hit detection while HaVok engine use merely Hitboxes. but clearly Hl2 depends heavily on them and its part of the gameplay. contrary to Doom3.
here the score should be..
Doom3 -> 7 (not bad but could be much better)
Havok -> 9.2 (no per polygon colission)
Outdoors
------------
Hl2 here clearly wins .. diferent games .. but Doom3 engine can also do outdoors.. same way RTCW/MOH/COD games could do it in the quake3 engine. althought i will pick FArcry or STalker any day for the outdoors over Hl2 ..specially STALKER with its realtime day/night cycles and beautiful skies.
Doom3 -> no real big outdoors yet to compare..
Hl2 -> 9
variety of pixelshader volumetric effects
..like water/fire/smoke effects etc..
-------------------
Hl2 -> 8
Doom3 -> 6
Gameplay
------------------
Hl2 will also win here ,thanks to the heavy iteractivity of the physics engine. Doom3 gameplay is mostly old school with few moments of interactivity with machines or enviroments.
Hl2 -> 9
Doom3 -> 6
in summary Hl2 is more robust in gameplay and pixel shader effects and Doom3 in graphics and character animations. both are good games in their way.. Hl2 introduce gameplay to a new level thanks to its Robust physics engine ,and Doom3 push graphics to a new level with oldschool gameplay . i dont think anyone could go wrong buying anyone .. after all the MOD Community will expand the capabilities of each game to new levels.
Last edited:
SteamedRice
New member
wow i just went to that link you showed with the custom high res doom 3 textures in use, holy crap thats crisp.
forgot to add nice comparison but all these do nothing when both games are/will be good
forgot to add nice comparison but all these do nothing when both games are/will be good
ToxicFool
New member
The only problem with those custom textures... is how the guy made the level. I think he made 1 light entity and made its radius bigger then the map. Making it way too bright. Doom's engine is made to have a bunch of smaller lights for lighting the levels. Giant ones, like that, white wash everything they touch.
The_Spaniard
New member
Ok Doom3kid time to make some points.
First off you have the gall to cite a leak from 2k3 with tons of placeholder content, much of which is from HL1 as a source of your facts? For that right there you loose much credibility but I will continue anyway. Also using custom textures as an example of how Doom 3 HAS good textures makes absolutely no sense.
Textures
Yes it does come down to which company had better texture artists and when keeping in mind that this is a comparison of the tech and its implementation a completely reasonable comparison.
Doom 3 sacrifices texture quality for lighting and shadowing capabilities. That was their priority and that is why in the area of textures HL2 is better.
Animation
You fail to realize that there is constant character interaction meaning you will be looking plenty of people dead in the face, so fantastic facial animation is ANYTHING but useless.
And as far as character animation goes lets just talk to a play tester shall we? “Model animation is actually really good, not exactly OMFG ITS A REAL PERSON but some of the best out there”. *Second play tester* “Movement was not blocky and choppy but flowing and realistic“. But then again we don’t need to talk to a play tester when you can just play Counter-Strike Source and see some of the animation for yourself.
Modeling
Have you seen a single recent Bink video? If not I recommend watching them all. How can people be confused about models from concept art? They are completely different things and it makes no sense. What do you mean no in game shots? Valve has released plenty of video and pictures of the game being played.
The reason you never see any shots of Gordon, not now or in the first is because your playing as him! You never see his character in the game, it is an FPS where you are him and there aren’t any cut scenes showing him so there won’t be any unless you put in a third person cheat or take a picture of the DM model when it is released.
You dare use the 2k3 leak as a source of facts and info? There is no point when everything is WIP and unfinished. You looked at a placeholder un-textured model and use that as proof of your claim which is just terrible. Lets once again go to the play testers for comment on the current models. “The models are realistic and full, no detail was spared”.
AI
Scripted events showing the range of possible AI reactions made specifically for public exhibition. But don’t take my word for it, lets ask a different play tester what he thinks of the AI. “The AI is rich and reacts realistically to situations presented”.
Stalker eh, you mentioning another game because there is nothing to talk about for D3? D3’s AI is nothing much to talk about. There are a couple of creatures that occasionally get behind cover or step out of the way but to be frank that was impressive in Quake 2, not now. But as I stated in the article D3’s AI serves the game just fine despite the occasional hiccup.
As far as saying D3 has better AI than Farcry, look at my last few sentences. In FC once you were spotted the characters rushed and fell back, called and radioed for reinforcements, flanked you, and just hunted you down with high efficiency. I did not once see any of the cool AI tricks that the characters in Farcry used in D3.
Thanks for replying but before saying an article is mostly incorrect do a bit more research yourself and get some credible sources.
First off you have the gall to cite a leak from 2k3 with tons of placeholder content, much of which is from HL1 as a source of your facts? For that right there you loose much credibility but I will continue anyway. Also using custom textures as an example of how Doom 3 HAS good textures makes absolutely no sense.
Textures
Yes it does come down to which company had better texture artists and when keeping in mind that this is a comparison of the tech and its implementation a completely reasonable comparison.
Doom 3 sacrifices texture quality for lighting and shadowing capabilities. That was their priority and that is why in the area of textures HL2 is better.
Animation
You fail to realize that there is constant character interaction meaning you will be looking plenty of people dead in the face, so fantastic facial animation is ANYTHING but useless.
And as far as character animation goes lets just talk to a play tester shall we? “Model animation is actually really good, not exactly OMFG ITS A REAL PERSON but some of the best out there”. *Second play tester* “Movement was not blocky and choppy but flowing and realistic“. But then again we don’t need to talk to a play tester when you can just play Counter-Strike Source and see some of the animation for yourself.
Modeling
Have you seen a single recent Bink video? If not I recommend watching them all. How can people be confused about models from concept art? They are completely different things and it makes no sense. What do you mean no in game shots? Valve has released plenty of video and pictures of the game being played.
The reason you never see any shots of Gordon, not now or in the first is because your playing as him! You never see his character in the game, it is an FPS where you are him and there aren’t any cut scenes showing him so there won’t be any unless you put in a third person cheat or take a picture of the DM model when it is released.
You dare use the 2k3 leak as a source of facts and info? There is no point when everything is WIP and unfinished. You looked at a placeholder un-textured model and use that as proof of your claim which is just terrible. Lets once again go to the play testers for comment on the current models. “The models are realistic and full, no detail was spared”.
AI
Scripted events showing the range of possible AI reactions made specifically for public exhibition. But don’t take my word for it, lets ask a different play tester what he thinks of the AI. “The AI is rich and reacts realistically to situations presented”.
Stalker eh, you mentioning another game because there is nothing to talk about for D3? D3’s AI is nothing much to talk about. There are a couple of creatures that occasionally get behind cover or step out of the way but to be frank that was impressive in Quake 2, not now. But as I stated in the article D3’s AI serves the game just fine despite the occasional hiccup.
As far as saying D3 has better AI than Farcry, look at my last few sentences. In FC once you were spotted the characters rushed and fell back, called and radioed for reinforcements, flanked you, and just hunted you down with high efficiency. I did not once see any of the cool AI tricks that the characters in Farcry used in D3.
Thanks for replying but before saying an article is mostly incorrect do a bit more research yourself and get some credible sources.
The_Spaniard
New member
Despite your sarcasm, yes it is credible. At least as credible as other up and coming news sites and with a hell of a lot better connections.
Kickus_assius
New member
Why in the name of god did you two bring this thread back to life.