Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Sep 16 2004, 03:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Sep 16 2004, 03:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NS is all about contrast in lighting, as you can see in that pic, there's... what? two different light colors?
Wait until HL2 is out (and we mappers can work with it) and don't judge it just with CS: Source... after all, the community has been able to do impressive things with this engine, we'll see what happens with the 'next' one <!--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--> So true, since I also have downloaded the stresstest map where you can walk arround. I must say it already looks incredibily awesome in the stresstest demo where you can't walk arround, but in this version: the water, the rotating 'glass' things (and its effect on the background when looking trough it), the reflections, and the bump mapping of everything when using a flashlight on it are teh sex...
I think it looks so much better then doom3 singleplayer. Still I'm not sure about the true potential of the doom3 engine, since apart from the ugly harch shadows and the plastic look of it all. I hope for the doom3 engine its further development in the mod scene that this was just a poor use of textures, bump mapping and low poly models.
<b>In short:</b> Counterstrike: source doesn't do the hl2 engine justice, in fact it actually insults the hl2 engine if you ask me. Sure it looks nicer then cs (which is<span style='color:red'>'nt</span> a hard thing to do) and you get a chance to play arround with its physics system, but the engine can do so much more, I think the same goes for doom3 <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<span style='color:red'>The red is the edit which needed editing</span>
Soul_RiderMod BeanJoin Date: 2004-06-19Member: 29388Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited September 2004
The trouble is, without knowing what engine NS2 is going to run on, and whether there will be a HL2 port, you just don't know where you stand. I mean, it's always possible that NS2 will run on the Doom 3 engine, no-one knows for sure, and then if you wanted to map for NS, you'd need to learn new skills.
[edit]As regards CS:Source, i agree totally, it's a waste of the source engine, and if that's all CS is gonna bring to the table, then it won't be long before it loses it's status as the biggest online game.[/edit]
Its not very hard to port mapping skills, i managed to produce that room in the doom3 editor after about 8 hours of tutorials and test maps. But im a unique case probably because ive mapped on around half a dozen platforms now, going as far back as duke nukem 3d and doom2. So ive probably got more experience with learning new engines than most. I would imagine most of you guys have only mapped for hammer/wc and possibly one other engine.
You should give the doom3 editor a shot if youve bought the game already and feel ripped off. Its by far the most mapper friendly editor ive seen. You can preview maps precisely, all the changes occur in real-time in the 3d view. You can dynamically pre-render the lighting, sounds, animations, everything right in the editor, it means you compile far less frequently. AND!!!! it compiles faster than anything ive seen. That room i showed you compiles in around half a second. From inside the editor, you can compile and load the map in around 4 seconds from start to finish. Compared to the HL equivalent which is like 3-4 minutes of loading screens and compiling progress percentages.
Also playing with the dynamic lights and the bump-mapping is surprisingly fun, i spent awhile just moving lights around my map and watchingly with glee how all the surfaces reacted to the light, ive never seen anything like it.
HL2 is probably still a better platform for NS2 (if it exists?) because of all the mod tools, the multiplayer options and the more broad design ability. But graphically the doom3 engine was made perfectly for NS2. The biggest problem with the doom3 engine is its difficulty in rendering large open areas (with brushes especially.) All those areas need to be modelled. But since NS was designed for claustrophobic small spaces this wouldnt present a problem. Overall HL2 still wins even though it loses outright to graphics, and this is from the guy who needs to clean his pants every time he renders the lights in his map.
yeah, I think the doom3 engine is actually more suited to NS than is the HL2 engine. NS won't use the full potential of Source because there are no drastically open areas, vehicles aren't used, etc. Doom3 is able to put a lot more detail in small areas because it's designed to render small areas.
<!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Sep 16 2004, 09:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Sep 16 2004, 09:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> yeah, I think the doom3 engine is actually more suited to NS than is the HL2 engine. NS won't use the full potential of Source because there are no drastically open areas, vehicles aren't used, etc. Doom3 is able to put a lot more detail in small areas because it's designed to render small areas. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats only because of the lack of support the HL Engine gives for such things as vehicles, big open areas and outside areas. So Source potentially has the more potential <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I played with DoomEdit for five seconds then I was like... OK, screw it and haven't messed with it since. I hope NS2 is for HL2 and not some other engine, it's taken me years to become fluent in VHE lol.
<!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Sep 16 2004, 08:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Sep 16 2004, 08:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NS is all about contrast in lighting, as you can see in that pic, there's... what? two different light colors? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> because the lack of colored lighting is an engine fault and not a design choice when making that room <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Doom3 had just as much diverse lighting as NS does now, if not more.
<!--QuoteBegin-BloodySloth+Sep 16 2004, 04:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BloodySloth @ Sep 16 2004, 04:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Doom3 had just as much diverse lighting as NS does now, if not more. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> More, there are some really cool projected light filters. You can make point and projection lights that are shaped like designs. Like if you wanted to project a huge logo in light on a wall you could. You can also animate it in all sorts of ways. You could literally make a movie theater in that engine. And the light would react dynamically if you stepped in front of it. im of the opinion that light is the future of engines. Doom3 uses fewer map polygons than NS maps do, but you could never tell because of the lighting effects.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited September 2004
hl loses on graphics? hmm not sure about that since if I compare the stresstest map with anything I've seen in the entire singleplayer game from doom3 it looks better and also performs very well.
But the actual true potential of these two engines will be shown once the mod comunity really gets in gear on development. And since that hasnt happened yet I'm not sure. I do hope that the unrealistic looking shadows in doom3 will be fixed though <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I actually dont mind learning a new engine, its always interesting to go where no mappers have gone before <span style='color:grey'>*weak startrek wannabe quote, I know*</span>
<!--QuoteBegin-BloodySloth+Sep 16 2004, 11:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BloodySloth @ Sep 16 2004, 11:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Sep 16 2004, 08:59 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Sep 16 2004, 08:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NS is all about contrast in lighting, as you can see in that pic, there's... what? two different light colors? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> because the lack of colored lighting is an engine fault and not a design choice when making that room <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Doom3 had just as much diverse lighting as NS does now, if not more. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I was talking about how all the lights in D3 are dynamic, and therefore, you can't have the number of lights we have in NS maps right now (I know sava in D3 would make your CPU explode <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->)
Edit: Wait, wait, Doom 3 diverse lighting? <b>hahahahahahahahahahahah</b>, ok, whatever.
although I am partially guilty of it myself, one thing I hate is when people are always "lol hl2 >>>>>> d3 its so obvious duh" when HL2 hasn't even COME OUT yet.
you're basing this on shakycam videos from E3 where the bluriness of the camera makes the image on the screen look different... unless you played the leaked HL2, in which case you probably arent morally qualified to offer any opinion anyway.
in the end, the two engines are probably identical or interchangable with each other when it comes to rendering what NS will demand. NS doesn't look anything like its original game's (HL) engine, so why should it look identical to either Doom3 or HL2, which are both much more customizable than HL? You could make doom3 look like HL2, and you could make HL2 look like doom3, just with different textures and models. There are some fine details that exist there but when it comes down to it, there will be no noticeable difference.
<!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Sep 16 2004, 09:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Sep 16 2004, 09:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> although I am partially guilty of it myself, one thing I hate is when people are always "lol hl2 >>>>>> d3 its so obvious duh" when HL2 hasn't even COME OUT yet.
you're basing this on shakycam videos from E3 where the bluriness of the camera makes the image on the screen look different... unless you played the leaked HL2, in which case you probably arent morally qualified to offer any opinion anyway.
in the end, the two engines are probably identical or interchangable with each other when it comes to rendering what NS will demand. NS doesn't look anything like its original game's (HL) engine, so why should it look identical to either Doom3 or HL2, which are both much more customizable than HL? You could make doom3 look like HL2, and you could make HL2 look like doom3, just with different textures and models. There are some fine details that exist there but when it comes down to it, there will be no noticeable difference. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I guess I'm not morally qualified then.
hoho juarez. (I didnt really have anything compelling to say about the leaked alpha, so I stuck that in. still though, don't you only get to see a single town or something? and the E3 videos I saw didn't show the interior architectural complexity that doom3 has.)
<!--QuoteBegin-Windelkron+Sep 16 2004, 10:23 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Windelkron @ Sep 16 2004, 10:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> hoho juarez. (I didnt really have anything compelling to say about the leaked alpha, so I stuck that in. still though, don't you only get to see a single town or something? and the E3 videos I saw didn't show the interior architectural complexity that doom3 has.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Half-Life 2 cuts alot of corners to make things look more detailed than they are.
Want to know something? I think NS2 the way you guys want it to be will never happen. By that i mean a free and downloadable mod with amazing new features and gubbins on a seperate engine will not happen and if it does it'll not be for a <b>LONG </b>time.
We can't even get regular updates on HL1 let alone remaking all content for a seperate engine, think of how long that would take. The only way i think we willl ever see a free NS mod on a seperate engine is if the HL > HL2 port is very easy and even then it'd just be regular NS but on a different engine, i doubt we'd see inclusion of vehicles or new lifeform etc etc.
NS2 will happen as a commerical product in a few years time when we've all moved on and forgotten about it.
We're not discussing that, just the engine that it's best for NS.
Anyways, you can't make D3 look like HL2, because real-time lighting doesn't look as good (and natural) as the precompiled one, it's a fact, I don't need HL2 to prove it.
Sigh, the debate of whether precompiled lighting looks better than realtime dynamic lighting is entirely based on personal tastes, hl2 lighting will certainly looking more realistic, but is that important to a future version of ns? One big problem of the d3 engine is when you get 20 players altogether on one server all using flashlights, the framerate just goes to crap (isn't that the main reason multiplayer was limited to 4 players? cpu limitation?)
Guys, x engine isn't better than y engine. It's what you do with it. Everyone (besides a select few) here is just looking at a game and saying "Hey! That looks like NS! That would be the perfect engine!" That's a stupid thing to do. Engine's are designed as a platform for the game creators to go mad with.
Sure, HL: Sauce may not look like NS, but it may be a better engine because of a number of reasons, but one main one being low hardware requirements in comparison to the likes of Doom 3.
In short, stop just looking at screenshots and thinking "JESUS CHRIST! THAT ENGINE IS PERFECT BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE x GAME! MY COLON EXPLODED!" Try and sit back, take a deep breath, and let people whose opinions matter (The dev team) make the choices because nothing, and i mean nothing, you do will force them to make their minds up.
Wooo, 4 player NS2... Go D3 engine! What makes you even think the devs would consider working on Doom 3 when there will be something abviously far more familiar for them to work with out there. I don't know if HL2 is going to look as plastic as Doom 3. I don't know which engine is better. But think logically and this topic is moot.
Doom 3 could have half of NS2's code already packaged with the SDK, but the chances are slim it would ever happen.
By the way, who ever created the idea of NS2. Did Flayra say he was going to make it?
Yes Flayra gave that "NS is the battle, NS2 will be the war" quote a while back on the UWE website and it drove everyone crazy.
But anyway I'd much prefer NS on HL2 because of the lower system requirements, and not having to learn a new mapping program. Makes things a whole lot easier in the end.
esuna, can I just assume that you'll let me use some quotes from your posts in my sig? <!--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-->
darkati, sorry about the morally qualified thing, i apologize.
Wasn't the SoF 1-engine based on the same engine as Half-Life - the Quake 2-engine, that is? Kind of unnecessary to reprogram NS to a gameengine which is almost the same as the old one <!--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-Mr.Ben+Sep 17 2004, 03:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mr.Ben @ Sep 17 2004, 03:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The only way i think we willl ever see a free NS mod on a seperate engine is if the HL > HL2 port is very easy and even then it'd just be regular NS but on a different engine, i doubt we'd see inclusion of vehicles or new lifeform etc etc. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> although valve seems to a an unoganized bunch of freetime programmers, I do belive an important statement.
(taken from <a href='http://collective.valve-erc.com/index.php?faq=source_mod_faq' target='_blank'>http://collective.valve-erc.com</a>) Will it be possible to port content from Half-Life 1 to Half-Life 2?
We’ve made this as painless as we could.
We learned a lot through our experiences with TFC, Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, and so on. This engine is much more mod’able than Half-Life 1 was, and the tool set has been improved a lot. We’ll also be releasing a bunch of material to help mod teams get their existing work up and running on the new engine.
The new Hammer will load Half-Life 1 levels (.RMF or .MAP source files only). You will need to retexture, and you’ll probably need to redo most of the entities, but this is a major jumpstart compared to starting from scratch.
Models will need a little touching up in QC files and also need to be recompiled in order to work in the HL2 engine. Again, you must have the original source data in order to do this. We will release all of our in-house tools for 3DSMax, XSI and Maya with the SDK.
Almost all parts of the HL2 SDK will be a little bit familiar to those who have worked with the HL1 SDK. Of course, there are a lot of new features, options, and systemic changes to explore, but overall the modding experience for HL2 is very similar to HL1.
Will the HL2 SDK include tools to help convert HL1 content to HL2?
Yes, the HL2 SDK will include several tools for this; for example, taking a WAD file and converting its contents to the new material format. Details and tips about converting HL1 code and content to HL2 will also be included.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Windelkron, I came to this conclusion while comparing the stresstest map vs the entire singleplayer campaign from doom3. Nothing from what I've seen in doom3 was able to be on the same level as that stresstest map.
And if you've read my other posts you see that i'm still not certain about doom3 since I hope it was the art/level designers their fault to make the doom3 engine look like this.
So I think I have a valid reason to say that hl2 > doom3 from what I've seen produced thusfar. I also think that the doom3 engine can do more then it has shown just like half-life1 vs natural-selection, the only problem is that doom3 depends on raw processing power for its realtime lighting/shadows. The true potential of both engines will be shown when the mod community get going and the 3dcards get faster. But at the moment, from what I've seen, hl2 looks better then doom3
i think if ns was put on the D3 engine it would not look as good as if it was on source. D3 has a very fake/glossy look on every thing ( but doom3 is very nice in all) BUT souce woud make NS look REAL [ take a pitcure of hl2 and show it to some one who is not a gamer and tell them its a live action movie and see what they say .....i bet they wont know it is was a game. Do the same thing with D3 pic and i bet it would not work] NS on D3 engine = ok. Ns on source = "GODLIEK!!!!"
Comments
Wait until HL2 is out (and we mappers can work with it) and don't judge it just with CS: Source... after all, the community has been able to do impressive things with this engine, we'll see what happens with the 'next' one <!--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-->
So true, since I also have downloaded the stresstest map where you can walk arround. I must say it already looks incredibily awesome in the stresstest demo where you can't walk arround, but in this version: the water, the rotating 'glass' things (and its effect on the background when looking trough it), the reflections, and the bump mapping of everything when using a flashlight on it are teh sex...
I think it looks so much better then doom3 singleplayer. Still I'm not sure about the true potential of the doom3 engine, since apart from the ugly harch shadows and the plastic look of it all. I hope for the doom3 engine its further development in the mod scene that this was just a poor use of textures, bump mapping and low poly models.
<b>In short:</b>
Counterstrike: source doesn't do the hl2 engine justice, in fact it actually insults the hl2 engine if you ask me. Sure it looks nicer then cs (which is<span style='color:red'>'nt</span> a hard thing to do) and you get a chance to play arround with its physics system, but the engine can do so much more, I think the same goes for doom3 <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<span style='color:red'>The red is the edit which needed editing</span>
[edit]As regards CS:Source, i agree totally, it's a waste of the source engine, and if that's all CS is gonna bring to the table, then it won't be long before it loses it's status as the biggest online game.[/edit]
You should give the doom3 editor a shot if youve bought the game already and feel ripped off. Its by far the most mapper friendly editor ive seen. You can preview maps precisely, all the changes occur in real-time in the 3d view. You can dynamically pre-render the lighting, sounds, animations, everything right in the editor, it means you compile far less frequently. AND!!!! it compiles faster than anything ive seen. That room i showed you compiles in around half a second. From inside the editor, you can compile and load the map in around 4 seconds from start to finish. Compared to the HL equivalent which is like 3-4 minutes of loading screens and compiling progress percentages.
Also playing with the dynamic lights and the bump-mapping is surprisingly fun, i spent awhile just moving lights around my map and watchingly with glee how all the surfaces reacted to the light, ive never seen anything like it.
HL2 is probably still a better platform for NS2 (if it exists?) because of all the mod tools, the multiplayer options and the more broad design ability. But graphically the doom3 engine was made perfectly for NS2. The biggest problem with the doom3 engine is its difficulty in rendering large open areas (with brushes especially.) All those areas need to be modelled. But since NS was designed for claustrophobic small spaces this wouldnt present a problem. Overall HL2 still wins even though it loses outright to graphics, and this is from the guy who needs to clean his pants every time he renders the lights in his map.
Thats only because of the lack of support the HL Engine gives for such things as vehicles, big open areas and outside areas. So Source potentially has the more potential <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
~ DarkATi
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
because the lack of colored lighting is an engine fault and not a design choice when making that room <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Doom3 had just as much diverse lighting as NS does now, if not more.
More, there are some really cool projected light filters. You can make point and projection lights that are shaped like designs. Like if you wanted to project a huge logo in light on a wall you could. You can also animate it in all sorts of ways. You could literally make a movie theater in that engine. And the light would react dynamically if you stepped in front of it. im of the opinion that light is the future of engines. Doom3 uses fewer map polygons than NS maps do, but you could never tell because of the lighting effects.
But the actual true potential of these two engines will be shown once the mod comunity really gets in gear on development. And since that hasnt happened yet I'm not sure. I do hope that the unrealistic looking shadows in doom3 will be fixed though <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I actually dont mind learning a new engine, its always interesting to go where no mappers have gone before <span style='color:grey'>*weak startrek wannabe quote, I know*</span>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
because the lack of colored lighting is an engine fault and not a design choice when making that room <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Doom3 had just as much diverse lighting as NS does now, if not more. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was talking about how all the lights in D3 are dynamic, and therefore, you can't have the number of lights we have in NS maps right now (I know sava in D3 would make your CPU explode <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->)
Edit: Wait, wait, Doom 3 diverse lighting? <b>hahahahahahahahahahahah</b>, ok, whatever.
you're basing this on shakycam videos from E3 where the bluriness of the camera makes the image on the screen look different... unless you played the leaked HL2, in which case you probably arent morally qualified to offer any opinion anyway.
in the end, the two engines are probably identical or interchangable with each other when it comes to rendering what NS will demand. NS doesn't look anything like its original game's (HL) engine, so why should it look identical to either Doom3 or HL2, which are both much more customizable than HL? You could make doom3 look like HL2, and you could make HL2 look like doom3, just with different textures and models. There are some fine details that exist there but when it comes down to it, there will be no noticeable difference.
you're basing this on shakycam videos from E3 where the bluriness of the camera makes the image on the screen look different... unless you played the leaked HL2, in which case you probably arent morally qualified to offer any opinion anyway.
in the end, the two engines are probably identical or interchangable with each other when it comes to rendering what NS will demand. NS doesn't look anything like its original game's (HL) engine, so why should it look identical to either Doom3 or HL2, which are both much more customizable than HL? You could make doom3 look like HL2, and you could make HL2 look like doom3, just with different textures and models. There are some fine details that exist there but when it comes down to it, there will be no noticeable difference. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess I'm not morally qualified then.
HL2 is better.
~ DarkATi
(I didnt really have anything compelling to say about the leaked alpha, so I stuck that in. still though, don't you only get to see a single town or something? and the E3 videos I saw didn't show the interior architectural complexity that doom3 has.)
(I didnt really have anything compelling to say about the leaked alpha, so I stuck that in. still though, don't you only get to see a single town or something? and the E3 videos I saw didn't show the interior architectural complexity that doom3 has.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Half-Life 2 cuts alot of corners to make things look more detailed than they are.
But, still, I'm not morally qualified...
~ DarkATi
We can't even get regular updates on HL1 let alone remaking all content for a seperate engine, think of how long that would take. The only way i think we willl ever see a free NS mod on a seperate engine is if the HL > HL2 port is very easy and even then it'd just be regular NS but on a different engine, i doubt we'd see inclusion of vehicles or new lifeform etc etc.
NS2 will happen as a commerical product in a few years time when we've all moved on and forgotten about it.
Anyways, you can't make D3 look like HL2, because real-time lighting doesn't look as good (and natural) as the precompiled one, it's a fact, I don't need HL2 to prove it.
Guys, x engine isn't better than y engine. It's what you do with it. Everyone (besides a select few) here is just looking at a game and saying "Hey! That looks like NS! That would be the perfect engine!" That's a stupid thing to do. Engine's are designed as a platform for the game creators to go mad with.
Sure, HL: Sauce may not look like NS, but it may be a better engine because of a number of reasons, but one main one being low hardware requirements in comparison to the likes of Doom 3.
In short, stop just looking at screenshots and thinking "JESUS CHRIST! THAT ENGINE IS PERFECT BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE x GAME! MY COLON EXPLODED!" Try and sit back, take a deep breath, and let people whose opinions matter (The dev team) make the choices because nothing, and i mean nothing, you do will force them to make their minds up.
Doom 3 could have half of NS2's code already packaged with the SDK, but the chances are slim it would ever happen.
By the way, who ever created the idea of NS2. Did Flayra say he was going to make it?
But anyway I'd much prefer NS on HL2 because of the lower system requirements, and not having to learn a new mapping program. Makes things a whole lot easier in the end.
<!--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-->
darkati, sorry about the morally qualified thing, i apologize.
Wasn't the SoF 1-engine based on the same engine as Half-Life - the Quake 2-engine, that is? Kind of unnecessary to reprogram NS to a gameengine which is almost the same as the old one <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
although valve seems to a an unoganized bunch of freetime programmers, I do belive an important statement.
(taken from <a href='http://collective.valve-erc.com/index.php?faq=source_mod_faq' target='_blank'>http://collective.valve-erc.com</a>)
Will it be possible to port content from Half-Life 1 to Half-Life 2?
We’ve made this as painless as we could.
We learned a lot through our experiences with TFC, Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, and so on. This engine is much more mod’able than Half-Life 1 was, and the tool set has been improved a lot. We’ll also be releasing a bunch of material to help mod teams get their existing work up and running on the new engine.
The new Hammer will load Half-Life 1 levels (.RMF or .MAP source files only). You will need to retexture, and you’ll probably need to redo most of the entities, but this is a major jumpstart compared to starting from scratch.
Models will need a little touching up in QC files and also need to be recompiled in order to work in the HL2 engine. Again, you must have the original source data in order to do this. We will release all of our in-house tools for 3DSMax, XSI and Maya with the SDK.
Almost all parts of the HL2 SDK will be a little bit familiar to those who have worked with the HL1 SDK. Of course, there are a lot of new features, options, and systemic changes to explore, but overall the modding experience for HL2 is very similar to HL1.
Will the HL2 SDK include tools to help convert HL1 content to HL2?
Yes, the HL2 SDK will include several tools for this; for example, taking a WAD file and converting its contents to the new material format. Details and tips about converting HL1 code and content to HL2 will also be included.
And if you've read my other posts you see that i'm still not certain about doom3 since I hope it was the art/level designers their fault to make the doom3 engine look like this.
So I think I have a valid reason to say that hl2 > doom3 from what I've seen produced thusfar. I also think that the doom3 engine can do more then it has shown just like half-life1 vs natural-selection, the only problem is that doom3 depends on raw processing power for its realtime lighting/shadows. The true potential of both engines will be shown when the mod community get going and the 3dcards get faster. But at the moment, from what I've seen, hl2 looks better then doom3