Hl2 Engine May Be Better Than We All Thought
<div class="IPBDescription">better even than Doom3 engine?!</div> when i saw screenshots of HL2 i thought they were lying about the engine's ability to use normal maps, and the fact that HL2 is playable at 1024x768 while Doom3 is only playable at 640x480 further supported that opinion, but i just recently watched a video where they demonstrated normal maps working on a wall in HL2 and they said some models use normal maps also and now i believe that while HL2's graphics are not really sophisticated, the HL2 engine may be very sophisticated. in other words i believe Valve opted to minimize the use of sophisticated pixel shader effects in HL2 to make the game playable on current hardware unlike Doom3 where basically every pixel on the screen has the normal mapping effect on it. that means down the line that mod makers can use those sophisticated rendering effects in HL2 when hardware is more powerful and then people will think it's a new engine.
so now it seems that HL2 can do normal maps and diffuse maps. now i just need to find out if it can do specular maps and gloss maps and then it will basically be the final engine. Doom3 can do everything except gloss maps which means that it cannot be the final engine.
btw after watching the HL2 video i think i know the way that you can get any ridiculously high poly model with millions of triangles to work in games. at some point when i get the nerve i'm going to have a go at adding the algorithm to my program, but i can foresee that it could take hours for the program to convert those models to game useable form. btw i heard there's already a free program that can do this.
so now it seems that HL2 can do normal maps and diffuse maps. now i just need to find out if it can do specular maps and gloss maps and then it will basically be the final engine. Doom3 can do everything except gloss maps which means that it cannot be the final engine.
btw after watching the HL2 video i think i know the way that you can get any ridiculously high poly model with millions of triangles to work in games. at some point when i get the nerve i'm going to have a go at adding the algorithm to my program, but i can foresee that it could take hours for the program to convert those models to game useable form. btw i heard there's already a free program that can do this.
Comments
You mean gameplay of the mods of the game...
I mean, who plays HLDM?! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Honestly, HL2's graphics strike me as looking like HL + better lighting + spinkee models.
We can already slap high res textures into the game, so honestly the quality of maps aren't THAT much higher than they can be currently... The physics is nice, but as a marine I don't really want to get close enough to skulks to whack it with an SG.
Never heard of Ag then?
edit: Ohh yeah... I'm an HL fanboy so I'll say HL engine will own dooms 3 engine any day.
yes Doom3 has a physics engine that was made in house while HL2 physics was made by some outside company that did the physics for the new Unreals also i think. but from the videos of Doom3 it looks to me like there is something wrong with Doom3's physics engine.
Valve also has a good history of being helpful to mod makers more than any other company.
also i'm a bit worried there is something seriously wrong with Id software. i heard John Carmack had an argument about whether there should be crouching in Doom3. John didn't want crouching and he didn't want a "use" key either. he lost the argument for crouching but won the argument about a "use" key. although he lost the argument just the fact that he wanted those things out of the game makes me think he doesn't know jack about designing games and he's only a good engine coder. this is another reason why i think HL2 will win the game war.
however one thing that worries me about Valve is that they have backstabbed us by releasing superior versions of their games on game consoles when everyone knows that consoles are not technically superior to PCs so that means that the only reason for this could be some pay-off situation for exclusivity. so i think Valve are too open-legged and care too much about money and don't care if they anger their fans. i don't think Id Software would betray their fans like that.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have no doubt that it will be easy to add specular maps since HL2 seems to have a general shader system which allows you to write custom vertex and pixel shaders. Gloss maps would also be easy to implement provided you only care about support on the latest graphics cards (Radeon 9700, GeForce FX and Matrox Parhelia).
One key difference between the graphics engines you seem to be leaving out is that DOOM 3 uses a fully dynamic lighting model with accurate shadows while HL2 seems to be using HL1 style light maps and other hacks.
Max
Maybe he thought the 'use' key was to much like HL and didn't want it in. Remember He is the creator of it. He designed it. He wants to put what he thinks will be best for the game in the game. If having a use key will make it better he would know. You on the other hand don't know much about what HE wants...
ID have already stated that they are remaking the original classic with new technology. Retelling the original story of Doom, but now with the technology to make it seem real. I'm scared to play this game just from the screenshots! Doom 3 will be all about the single player experiance, thrilling, frightening and entertaining a player with the kind of gameplay you don't get often in multiplayer environments. So what if multiplayer isn't a big feature? It's not be designed for that. ID have the Quake series for multiplayer commitments, so I have no problem with them deciding to do a single player focused game. If you don't like that then no-ones forcing you to play it.
Glossy maps (if you look at the blood on the zombies and the eye's of the G man)
Opacity maps ( that proffesor guy's glasses)
bumb maps ( it is mentioned some where in the E3 demo movie)
and defuse maps
Well that would depend on what you HAVE.
Apparently HL2 will run (but there is a difference between "will run" and "is playable") on an 800mhz, with a graphics card that supports DirectX 7.
Which is handy, as I have a 1.5ghz, and a graphics card that supports DX8. Ironically it is the latest graphics card to NOT support DX9 <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo--> Which makes some of the newer games unplayable for meh.
And as for you:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->after looking at the videos I can confedntly say that HL2 supports:
Glossy maps (if you look at the blood on the zombies and the eye's of the G man)
Opacity maps ( that proffesor guy's glasses)
bumb maps ( it is mentioned some where in the E3 demo movie)
and defuse maps <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
WTH are you talking about??? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Glossy maps (if you look at the blood on the zombies and the eye's of the G man)
Opacity maps ( that proffesor guy's glasses)
bumb maps ( it is mentioned some where in the E3 demo movie)
and defuse maps <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
just because you see a wet looking specular effect on the eyeballs and blood it doesn't mean they use gloss maps. the blood on the zombie could be done by just having specular on the blood only and the gloss at a certain fixed amount for the whole mesh. same for the eyeballs, they could just be using a general fixed gloss amount for the whole eyeball mesh. i want texture maps for the glossiness; not just glossiness that is assigned to a whole triangle or mesh.
and it's bump and diffuse. not bomb and defuse or whatever <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Doom3's always been reported to have realistic physics.
My take on this subject:
Doom3's engine is designed for Doom3. Half-life 2's engine is designed for HL2. While HL2's engine may be more versitile, Doom3's engine is probably more suited to the gameplay style and atmosphere iD are trying to achieve.
I may be slightly biased because I personally love all of iDs games except Quake 3, and I have high hopes for Doom3. But I'm also anxiously awaiting HL2.
You've played Doom and Quake, right? Two fantastic games, neither of which require ducking. And neither of them feel odd in the slightest because they simply <i>don't need it</i>. Why should Doom3 be any different?
<a href='http://www.filefront.com/r.b/page__file_info/_filepath__/gamershell/movie/wall.zip/_output.html' target='_blank'>http://www.filefront.com/r.b/page__file_in...ip/_output.html</a>
Marvel at the wall made of 1 polygon, that looks like it was made from 20,000.
in Doom3 there is a section of a multiplayer map which is reminiscent of the droid factory from the Star Wars movie where they had to avoid robot arms and other machinery that was trying to build droids along a conveyer belt by jumping over and ducking under all the moving machinery. kind of lame to get rid of the crouch button then don't you think.
You've played Doom and Quake, right? Two fantastic games, neither of which require ducking. And neither of them feel odd in the slightest because they simply <i>don't need it</i>. Why should Doom3 be any different? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you are very right. The discussion of whether engine 1 or 2 is more sophisticated or whatever, seems a bit like idle hair splitting by fanboys without better things to do and not much of a substantial debate. Which is why Im gladly participating fanboy that I be <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ive learned that gameplay is king. Good gameplay and bad graphics is preferable to the other way around. But if both are great, thats the best. However, we forget style. Merkaba is right, indeed. The style of the game is also very much dictating the graphics. I am slanted towards HL2 due to it's setting and interesting story. Ive long stopped being a supporter of iD games. Since Doom 2 Ive not bought any of their games, I just dont enjoy them very much. But they arent unsophisticated engine wise, or ugly at all.
<a href='http://www.filefront.com/r.b/page__file_info/_filepath__/gamershell/movie/wall.zip/_output.html' target='_blank'>http://www.filefront.com/r.b/page__file_in...ip/_output.html</a>
Marvel at the wall made of 1 polygon, that looks like it was made from 20,000. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
yah that's the video. normal maps are the future and they are an amazing thing. i heard Doom3 models were made from millions of triangles but in the game that are only a couple of thousand but the normal maps applied to them make them almost indistinguishable from the super-high poly models. for example the pinky in Doom3 is just over only 1700 triangles.
I simply cannot wait. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->