First HL2 Engine CS benchmarks are in....

[PrayForDeath]

Is it me or Half-Life 2 looks WAY better than Doom III in those shots in FiringSquad article? Look at the textures, the incredible shader effects, bump-mapping. The lighting is good, but I guess Doom III's lighting looks better.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Anyone?

 

[gururu]

Originally posted by: PrayForDeath
Anyone?

I agree! I agree! but many think there will be less eye candy in the wide outdoor levels with enemies. I think otherwise...

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: PrayForDeath
Is it me or Half-Life 2 looks WAY better than Doom III in those shots in FiringSquad article? Look at the textures, the incredible shader effects, bump-mapping. The lighting is good, but I guess Doom III's lighting looks better.

yeah I agree, I think dx9 is more advance then the D3 engine (opengl)

 

[WicKeD]

Originally posted by: PrayForDeath
Is it me or Half-Life 2 looks WAY better than Doom III in those shots in FiringSquad article? Look at the textures, the incredible shader effects, bump-mapping. The lighting is good, but I guess Doom III's lighting looks better.

* It looks good, but Doom 3 looks better. The facial expressions/shots are very good, but that is the only thing impressing me about HL2. No doubt it is going to be a killer online game, so the online enjoyment will go to HL2, but the fun factor of single player goes to D3.


* This is just my opinion and may vary from yours.

 

[Childs]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: PrayForDeath
Is it me or Half-Life 2 looks WAY better than Doom III in those shots in FiringSquad article? Look at the textures, the incredible shader effects, bump-mapping. The lighting is good, but I guess Doom III's lighting looks better.

yeah I agree, I think dx9 is more advance then the D3 engine (opengl)

I'm sure you could render something in Maya that would look lifelike. Point is, a screenshot doesn't mean anything. It has to be in the game and the framerates have to be playable. If CS:S is any indication of the textures, then its nothing special.

 

[PsharkJF]

People want/need higher FPS in HL2 than they need in doom 3.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: PsharkJF
People want/need higher FPS in HL2 than they need in doom 3.

Is that so.....

 

[BeTomXXX]

Originally posted by: Tabb
That benchmark sucks my left nut, lets wait for xbitlabs, hardocp or At for a real benchmark...

You forgot anandtech, how could you.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Originally posted by: BeTomXXX

Originally posted by: Tabb
That benchmark sucks my left nut, lets wait for xbitlabs, hardocp or At for a real benchmark...

You forgot anandtech, how could you.

And what do you think "At" stands for?

 

[PrayForDeath]

As for Doom III and HL2, it's not an OpenGL vs DX9 thing, I agree Doom III has highly detailed facial expressions and awsome lighting and shading techiniques, but that's it! I mean, if you compare it to let's say FarCry, you'll find out that FarCry's textures look far more detailed, I really wonder why they didn't implement highly detailed textures in Doom III, the textures look really poor in most of the places, maybe they took advantage of the darkness and shinyness of objects in the game and thought nobody would notice low texture details, here are some pics that describe what I mean, you can never find such texture bluriness in FarCry:
1
2
3

These are just examples.
I am not attacking Doom III here, I love this game and the graphics are nice, but it really annoyes me how ID didn't put detailed textures in a 2004 title that was supposed to revolutionize first-person shooter games on PC.
By the way, I am running Doom III on 1024x768 Ultra Quality 2xAA. And I wasn't zooming on those pics.