User,
I guess svck is a relative term. I was trying to point out that neither game is great in a historical sense and each has some limitations... pretty severe limitations.
The cry engine is pretty bad rendering indoor environments and there was far too much indoor action in the second half. And in the outdoor action the maps were almost too big. The vision of the enemies, not their ai were what mad the gameplay really annoying toward the end. The enemies sniping was unreal. I remeber distinctly many times crawling through thick brush and totaly under cover still getting sniped by the enemies that are over the horizon (1000s of yards away). I couldn't see them but they were killing me. Sooo annoying.
The gun boat map was cool but was the only map in the later stages that I really liked. IMO, the game got worse, and more annoying, not better. All the cool things were done in the first half, the second half was just repition without any of the action driving the plot at all. The game could have ended much sooner but it kept dragin on and on and on. In the end the levels got way too big. I think its probably easier for the developer to make it all really big. It deffinately felt rushed to me.
The whole point of the game was to escape form one little island. It turns out its a whole island continent with diverse ecosystems, underground labratories, legions of mercenaries and mutant apes??? If they wanted to make the game longer they should have let you get off the island and then go to another location for the ending.
I guess that my take is that Farcry was a mediocre job of making a game that was pretty cool in theory. Doom3 was an amazingly well done and qulaity job of making a game that is really wacked and poor in concept.
There are only 5-10 or so games that I have palyed that are really really good, none in the last 2 years btw. Halflife (including CS (and now CS Source Beta)), Halo (for xbox), AOK (and AOC), Starcraft, Planescape Torment, the original X-Com, and Freespace (1&2)... Almost every other game I have played has had something wrong with it.
I guess svck is a relative term. I was trying to point out that neither game is great in a historical sense and each has some limitations... pretty severe limitations.
The cry engine is pretty bad rendering indoor environments and there was far too much indoor action in the second half. And in the outdoor action the maps were almost too big. The vision of the enemies, not their ai were what mad the gameplay really annoying toward the end. The enemies sniping was unreal. I remeber distinctly many times crawling through thick brush and totaly under cover still getting sniped by the enemies that are over the horizon (1000s of yards away). I couldn't see them but they were killing me. Sooo annoying.
The gun boat map was cool but was the only map in the later stages that I really liked. IMO, the game got worse, and more annoying, not better. All the cool things were done in the first half, the second half was just repition without any of the action driving the plot at all. The game could have ended much sooner but it kept dragin on and on and on. In the end the levels got way too big. I think its probably easier for the developer to make it all really big. It deffinately felt rushed to me.
The whole point of the game was to escape form one little island. It turns out its a whole island continent with diverse ecosystems, underground labratories, legions of mercenaries and mutant apes??? If they wanted to make the game longer they should have let you get off the island and then go to another location for the ending.
I guess that my take is that Farcry was a mediocre job of making a game that was pretty cool in theory. Doom3 was an amazingly well done and qulaity job of making a game that is really wacked and poor in concept.
There are only 5-10 or so games that I have palyed that are really really good, none in the last 2 years btw. Halflife (including CS (and now CS Source Beta)), Halo (for xbox), AOK (and AOC), Starcraft, Planescape Torment, the original X-Com, and Freespace (1&2)... Almost every other game I have played has had something wrong with it.
Modeps
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 17,254
- 44
- 91
Your inclusion of Halo as one of your 'really really good' games basically takes your opinion, in my eyes, and throws it out the window. Halo was 1/2 a game. My statement may have come due to the fact I just dont play many multiplayer FPS's and only focus on single player, but any game that has rooms copied and pasted one right after the other, then forces you to turn around and do it again, is not a great game. Halo was fun up until you got to the copy and paste levels, then it just got irritatingly repetitive. It was rushed out the door by Microsoft to make sure it hit their launch of the Xbox. Bungie had to take their PC development, and switch gears to the Xbox.
Now that being said, I'm really looking forward to Halo 2 because they have had the time to make it really really good
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
- May 9, 2004
- 8,443
- 124
- 106
If have to choose the better game, I will take Far Cry. Doom 3 is too boring and overhyped.
Hopefully HL2 doesn't come out as a half-assed game.
Hopefully HL2 doesn't come out as a half-assed game.
doom3 is too dark is likely the most idiotic complaint i have ever repetitively seen for a game.
ANY gamer above the level of "first pc game" should know r_gamma if they want it brighter, and anyway the game is supposed to be very dark. you DID read all those PDA's going on about power outages, or have watched a horror film before, right?
"omg its dark i cant see well over there might be a monster im scared this game sux!11"
ANY gamer above the level of "first pc game" should know r_gamma if they want it brighter, and anyway the game is supposed to be very dark. you DID read all those PDA's going on about power outages, or have watched a horror film before, right?
"omg its dark i cant see well over there might be a monster im scared this game sux!11"
Far Cry was way better. The wide open areas with lots of cover and hiding places added a lot of strategy to the game, and the gameplay was generally much more varied. Doom 3 was just wait for monsters to spawn, shoot them while trying to avoid their shots, and repeat.
As for the visuals, if i'm going to give a game extra points for graphics, it better not look exactly the same 95% of the way through. Far Cry's environments consistently wowed me throughout the game. Doom 3 looked amazing for the first couple levels, and then everything started looking the same. Just corridor after corridor with the same grey/black metal walls.
I think Doom 3's graphics were mostly impressive on a technical level (realistic shadows/lighting). Most Far Cry environments would look a lot cooler in real life than Doom 3 environments. Also, I think the lack of ambient lighting made Doom artificially dark, to the point of looking fake. For example, light a lamp with a solid lampshade in real life, and it will light up an entire room (because of reflections off walls/ air molecules). In Doom 3, it will only light the areas that aren't blocked by the lamp shade. This is easy to fix with ambient lighting, which games have been doing for years, but Doom 3 designers chose not to do this, probably to show off the shadows, which you wouldn't notice so much if the game weren't so dark in spite off all the bright lights.
As for the visuals, if i'm going to give a game extra points for graphics, it better not look exactly the same 95% of the way through. Far Cry's environments consistently wowed me throughout the game. Doom 3 looked amazing for the first couple levels, and then everything started looking the same. Just corridor after corridor with the same grey/black metal walls.
I think Doom 3's graphics were mostly impressive on a technical level (realistic shadows/lighting). Most Far Cry environments would look a lot cooler in real life than Doom 3 environments. Also, I think the lack of ambient lighting made Doom artificially dark, to the point of looking fake. For example, light a lamp with a solid lampshade in real life, and it will light up an entire room (because of reflections off walls/ air molecules). In Doom 3, it will only light the areas that aren't blocked by the lamp shade. This is easy to fix with ambient lighting, which games have been doing for years, but Doom 3 designers chose not to do this, probably to show off the shadows, which you wouldn't notice so much if the game weren't so dark in spite off all the bright lights.
Rottie
Diamond Member
- Feb 10, 2002
- 4,795
- 2
- 81
I bought Doom3 and it gave me some creeps and FarCry has great grpahic engine however both have lack of caption which we as deaf people could understand spoke language which is similair with Splinter Cell have helped me understand what Michael Fisher is saying.
Originally posted by: prometheusxls
Both actually svck imo.
Farcry is a game of two halves (sort of like halo). After the demo I was psyched and ready to fall in love with the game. The outdoor levels were amazing with great game play, pretty graphics, good enemy AI and a real challenge. The game was fun. Then the Trigens came along. And the trigens are one of the stupidest enemy concepts I have ever seen. They really tore down what was up to that point a very good game. More indoor levels a devolving story ... the whole second half of the game svcks and it all culminates in a crescendo of crap with one of the worst endings I have seen in a game. Graphics 90%, Sound 90%, Game Play 80%, Story 40%, Value / Quality: 80%, Overall maybe 70%...
As for Doom3 it has perhaps the highest production values of any title I have ever played. The graphics, voice acting, sound and interface a second to none. There are some aesthetic criticisms about the level of darkness and the bulbous character models... but those aren't really pertinent to a review. The biggest short coming is game play and its a whopper. The game has all the archaic game play features of the original: excessive linearity, no multi player, and monotonous spawning monsters. In many respects the new one is even worse than the original in the game play category. The reason the game is so massively vid card limited is not because of spectacular graphics but because of AI, there is none... The spawn factor is not to be under estimated as it precludes any stealth, sniping, or evasion tactics. Its all brute force with doom3. But ironically there is little challenge, heavy weapons aren't needed since most enemies are easily dispatched with a shotgun. The game gets really boring after a few hours and is actually too long (20 hours). I definitely felt my self zoning out while playing. Even the bosses are easily dealt with. Its way too monotonous. The ease of play moots the thrill of expanding your arsenal with plasma and bfg weapons that I felt in the original. There is almost nothing neat and interesting to look forward to and no real emotional payoffs for the player. I would criticize the story, but I never noticed any story or narrative throughout the game. It something similar to Diablo. There are no NPC: just you and enemies, you are killing them because they are trying to kill you. Neither of you have an agenda. Ratings: Graphics: 95%, Sound 100%, Game play: 50%, Story: NA, Value/quality: 100%, Over all: 70%.
Edited for spelling
neva played d3, but so true with far cry. trigens ruined the game and i hated it. i found it funner dealing with mercs, and indoor levels are fine...so long as they aren't all that exists (hahah i had to like indoor because its hard on my videocard to do too much outdoor
)but on the farcry you preach the truth. second 1/2 was b.s. and i never finished the game b/c i couldn't stand it
ok if you know anything about anything doom3 outweighs farcry. doom3 is a good overall game. But its strength does not rely on its repetitive single or only 4 person multiplayer. If you know anything about anything, then you have used the doom3 editor. It is very easy to navigate, and you can create outstanding maps and mods. You can get rid of that 4 person only multiplayer, sinply by making a mod for it. The editor is awesome. that is why doom3 rocks my socks
Far Cry was all about the atmosphere. I really felt like I was outside, in areas that felt like they were lifelike. Doom 3 had atmosphere, but I couldn't relate to it (after all, how many of us have really been to Mars). Far Cry gets my vote.
Fern
Elite Member
- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 174
- 106
Yeah, I hear ya man! At night when the wifey and kid were a sleep, I'd fire up Far Cry and go hang out on the beach. I kept a save from the fort level where I had killed all the badies. I'd go back and ride around on the boats, watch the parrots, target practice on fish etc. I use to live in Miami and was down in Keys almost every weekend. Now I live in the mountains. I kinda miss the outdoors/beach/diving/boating thing. The environment/gfx in FC is done sooo well is just a pleasure to look at.
Fern
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter