Half-Life 2/Doom 3 Tech Comparison

[Burnt Powder]

Can be found at WhUtDuFuK.com.

 

[SexyMF]

Interesting but odd given from what the forums say - its not released yet.

To me HL2 will assuridly have greater depth in many ways than the overhyped Doom3. I'm worried that games built on the D3 engine are going to suck badly because the engine is too demanding. Couple this with unoptimised coding (from 3rd party developers) and it gets worse.

Real game engines require physics, AI and graphics. D3 rates 1/3.

HL2 will rule. Counterstrike is testiment to the engine - played by millions. Accessible by millions.

 

[Burnt Powder]

I think that D3 is very nice looking and even though I had the game since it came out, I bet I have only played it for about a hour. I just cannot get into it even though it runs perfect on my system.

I really enjoyed HL and have the HL2 Collectors Edition pre-ordered. I will definatly play through the single player of HL2 and HL (on Source Engine) again but my main reason for getting it, and you can prolly tell by the bottom of my sig, is for the multiplayer and more so, CS:S.

 

[MuFu]

Wow, that's one of the worst "technical" articles I've ever read. Seems like it was written by a gamer with no/very little knowledge of 3D graphics.

Now when it comes to raw tech Doom 3 beats out Half-Life 2 with it’s extensive use of real mapping and dynamic lighting.

Doom 3 uses dynamic shadows and self-shadowing for film quality lighting where as Half-Life 2 only uses soft shadows.

Doom 3 may be the way that games will be made in the future...

MuFu.