Doom and HalfLife are Crying

[TXBrain]

I think Doom3 and HalfLife2 have tears in their beers after the release of FarCry. There is no way Doom will have a better story line and both need to throw in a lot of DX9 graphics to please everyone. The crowd is already angry at the long delays. I think these games will come and go within a month or two and people will be shouting for more.

[PointlesS]

right...even though everyone's just been saying that far cry is just to hold you over till these two come out...if anything far cry has come and gone within a matter of months...

who said people were angry about the delays? doom 3 was always "when it's done" and while the delay of hl2 sucks it still doesn't take away from the game...it's the sequel to one of the best selling and probably most spectacular game ever made...with cs comming to the source engine and the already released xsi softimage mod kit...hl2 and probably doom 3 will be here for a long time...

[soupnazi]

Originally posted by TXBrain
I think Doom3 and HalfLife2 have tears in their beers after the release of FarCry. There is no way Doom will have a better story line

Ummm...Farcry's storyline is quite lacking.:)

[njdevs95]

I didn't even get farcry the demo was less than impressive to me so I figured why waste the money.

[Duo]

Originally posted by soupnazi
Ummm...Farcry's storyline is quite lacking.:)

Yea most people I have talked to have said the storyline wasn't any good.

Duo

[Ryder]

No,the storyline isn't that great but still a fun game.

[Terry]

Who's crying now? ;)

[Terry]

Originally posted by TXBrain
There is no way Doom will have a better story line

They (iD) hired sci-fi writers.
And like everyone else said, FarCry's story was so-so.

Originally posted by TXBrain
and both need to throw in a lot of DX9 graphics to please everyone.


I doubt it. I, for one, certainly don't need the DX9 features to enjoy HL2. Heck, my card doesn't even have full dx8. :o


Originally posted by TXBrain
The crowd is already angry at the long delays. I think these games will come and go within a month or two and people will be shouting for more.

Wanna bet Doom 3 and HL2 will last more than 2 months?
Even if the game themselves won't last that long, the Doom 3 engine and Source engine will be used for years to come.
I can't think of anyone who's going to buy the Crytech engine... maybe if it is reeeeally cheap.

[Kamakazie]

Farcry had an awful storyline.

[PikachuMan]

"White Chicks" > Far Cry in terms of story-line.

Suck it down.?

[zackbass]

FarCry had a story? Hmmm, must have missed it. At least it didn't interfere with the amazing gameplay and awesome graphics.

[Terry]

Originally posted by zackbass
FarCry had a story? Hmmm, must have missed it. At least it didn't interfere with the amazing gameplay and awesome graphics.

How can something that doesn't exist interfere?
One of the greatq mysteries of the universe.

[San7a]

This thread is retarded. lol

[zackbass]

Originally posted by Terry
I can't think of anyone who's going to buy the Crytech engine... maybe if it is reeeeally cheap.

I can't think of anyone that would want to buy an excellent game engine and maybe sign the entire development team.

Except for maybe, uuh, EA.

http://investor.ea.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=88189&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=595827&highlight=

[TXBrain]

As far as the angry mob goes, just search these threads by title and you will find almost everyone wondering WHEN the games will be coming out. When? When? When? I ask you When?
The original HalfLife was totally awsome but now it looks like a cartoon. The standards have been raised and I will be expecting a lot. The story line in FarCry isn't much but the graphics are far superior to any other game so far.
I'll be back later, I gotta go rent White Chicks

[Terry]

Hold on, are you saying FarCry looks better than Doom3?, or you are saying this cuz Doom 3 is not out yet and no game compares to FarCry yet?

PCGAMER did mention that Doom 3 looks much better than FarCry

[PointlesS]

WHEN the games will be coming out. When? When? When? I ask you When?
augest 3rd for doom 3 and from the looks of it...hl2 can't be too far away with the 16 bugs to go news...other games such as stalker is due out later this year

The original HalfLife was totally awsome but now it looks like a cartoon.
of course it looks terrible...it's a 6 year old game...though to this day it's the most played game by far

The story line in FarCry isn't much but the graphics are far superior to any other game so far.
if graphics = staying power then aquanox would be the most popular game ever

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally posted by TXBrain
As far as the angry mob goes, just search these threads by title and you will find almost everyone wondering WHEN the games will be coming out. When? When? When? I ask you When?
The original HalfLife was totally awsome but now it looks like a cartoon. The standards have been raised and I will be expecting a lot. The story line in FarCry isn't much but the graphics are far superior to any other game so far.
I'll be back later, I gotta go rent White Chicks

That's some pretty backwards logic right there.

One of your main reasons why Far Cry is so good (and better than DOOM 3 and Half Life 2) is because the graphics are so good.
Yet both DOOM 3 and HL 2 will have substantially better graphics by all accounts.

I can also guarantee you at least HL2's story will be infinetly better than Far Cry's, mainly because to this day, even the original Half Life's story is far better than Far Cry.

Far Cry was a great game. I've played through it twice now and have thouroughly enjoyed it.
The story sucks. I don't see how you can argue that, but whatever. That's not the fun of the game. Far Cry was just damn fun because of it's beautiful, open enviornments, lush graphics, and solid FPS gameplay that didn't try and reinvent the wheel.

But I think it's safe to say that both DOOM 3 and Half Life 2 will probably outperform it in most repsects. As they should, really, afer all this time, hype, and money has been poured into them.

[Hadsus]

Originally posted by TXBrain
I think Doom3 and HalfLife2 have tears in their beers after the release of FarCry. There is no way Doom will have a better story line and both need to throw in a lot of DX9 graphics to please everyone. The crowd is already angry at the long delays. I think these games will come and go within a month or two and people will be shouting for more.

You haven't seen the Doom movies (mentioned in another thread), have you? FC is a generic FPS with pretty graphics. Doom is a successor to the mother of all FPSs and it's graphics will be second to none. And it will be scary as h*ll.

[Terry]

Originally posted by PointlesS

The story line in FarCry isn't much but the graphics are far superior to any other game so far.
if graphics = staying power then aquanox would be the most popular game ever

Hahaha, no way, 3DMarks would be the most popular game!

[Ignition2004]

Originally posted by Terry
Hahaha, no way, 3DMarks would be the most popular game!

accoridng to Tbird.

[Slirp]

Wow, I hope this game lives up to your expectations. If Doom 3 sucks it sounds like there might be some people in these forums throwing themselves off roof tops.

I for one love FarCry, the plot isn't the most spectacular in the world, but it was pretty cool. I also wouldn't be to sure about people not wanting to lease the Crytech engine either.

[Fig]

Originally posted by TXBrain
I think Doom3 and HalfLife2 have tears in their beers after the release of FarCry. There is no way Doom will have a better story line and both need to throw in a lot of DX9 graphics to please everyone. The crowd is already angry at the long delays. I think these games will come and go within a month or two and people will be shouting for more.


What??? (www.vfr.figgahtech.com/ThisPicMakesMoreSenseThanYou.jpg)

[TXBrain]

Well, now that I've heated up the water, let me stir the pot a little more.
First, No I have not seen any of the movie trailers for either game, only screen shots...Thats all, for over a year now and still waiting for the game.
I fully expect the graphics will be better than any of the previous versions and yes a better story too but as far as FPS'S go FarCry is the one they will have to beat. This year has been pretty dead so far except for the one day it took to beat Call of Duty. Also I'm not saying FarCry is in any way better than these two games (when they come out) I'm saying I will be expecting a lot out of them. If you look back over the last six years since the release of HalfLife there have been some good games and a few great games but FarCry has raised the the level of the graphics and AI like no other (yet) in a while.

[soupnazi]

I agree with your last post TXbrain. It makes more sense/logic than the other ones. I have a feeling that you won't be disappointed by Doom 3.:)

[kpxgq]

taking out graphics.. farcry was one of the most mediocre games i have ever played IMHO

[Fig]

Originally posted by kpxgq
taking out graphics.. farcry was one of the most mediocre games i have ever played IMHO


Agreed...I grew tired of it after getting about half way through.

I don't give a flyin fart about graphics...Gameplay and environment are where it's at baby! BAM! :)

EDIT: For piss poor grammar.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally posted by Fig
Agreed...I grew tired of it after getting about half way through.

I don't give a flyin fart about graphics...Gameplay and environment are where it's at baby! BAM! :)

EDIT: For piss poor grammar.

The funny thing about the Far Cry arguement is that I kinda disagree with both sides.
Those who think far Cry is one of the greatest FPS games ever, or at least of the past several years.
And those who think it's boring, reptitive, mediocre crap.

Far Cry didn't revolutionize anything (except for maybe graphics), but it didn't do anything wrong either. Some people seem to rag on it because it wasn't revolutionary and didn't try and reinvent the wheel. I don't think that's fair unless you are looking for a completley new experience, or are judging it against the best games of all time.
Far Cry is a solid, solid shooter with excellent FPS gameplay, interesting additions like vehicles and huge enviorments, and fantastic graphics. Just because it doesn't become the next Half Life, doesn't mean it's not a very good, solid game.
I guess thats one of the drawbacks to such an overcrowded genre now. FPS are so common and so overdone, that if a shooter doesn't bring something really new or interesting to the table, it's going to be poorly received.

[PointlesS]

far cry was unique in a way where you had massive open environments that hasn't really been experienced in a single player game before...

[Sc0rp10n]

i know this may not be a popular post, but if we're talking about solid fun FPS's, try painkiller. i know, there's no story (not much anyway). but this game is just plain fun. it doesn't take a hoss of a machine to run it and if you have a rig built for doom3, you can crank up painkiller to high res, high AA/AF, turn on the 5.1 and just have a blast. i got stuck on an early boss (the necrogiant) and quit playing the game. i recently got back into it and i am absolutely LOVING this game. i can't wait for the expansion pack. and it's really holding me over for the next week.

one thing i'd recommend however is that you play it with the strategy that you will play doom3 - only at night and in the dark. the first level and then asylum...just plain creepy. i actually got scared playing asylum and was thinking to myself "if doom3 can take this feeling and build upon it, i'm in for a truly amazing experience."

pick it up and try it out. i promise you won't be disappointed.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by Terry
PCGAMER did mention that Doom 3 looks much better than FarCry

Um, no it didn't. It said Doom3 looks SLIGHTLY better than FarCry and then detailed dust specs floating on the Mars surface as the reasoning.

That said, where Doom3 does beat FarCry is in optimization. FarCry took machines to their knees to deliver on the amazing graphics.

My question is with physics. The graphics on FarCry were only part of the story, the awsome physics engine was a huge part of the experience.

While I know that HL2 has great physics, nothing has been said of Doom3 in that regard. Will it live up to FarCry in the evironment department?

We'll find out soon.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by kpxgq
taking out graphics.. farcry was one of the most mediocre games i have ever played IMHO

Well maybe if you turn the resolution down to 320X200 in 16 bit and hook up a game pad it would deliver the experience you seek?

[PointlesS]

the physics engine is custom built by id themselves to fit the game...things like rolling barrels...shooting boxes around...and of course ragdoll deaths will all be in the game...even in multiplayer there will be objects that can be moved around and such...

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by PointlesS
the physics engine is custom built by id themselves to fit the game...

As long as I can hit a light and have it react realistically, shoot a rope and have things fall down, stuff like that, I'll be happy.

:)

[zackbass]

From what I've read, Carmack himself is a real physics whiz. I doubt he would have let a screwy physics engine see light of day.

[Fig]

Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff
The funny thing about the Far Cry arguement is that I kinda disagree with both sides.
Those who think far Cry is one of the greatest FPS games ever, or at least of the past several years.
And those who think it's boring, reptitive, mediocre crap.

Far Cry didn't revolutionize anything (except for maybe graphics), but it didn't do anything wrong either. Some people seem to rag on it because it wasn't revolutionary and didn't try and reinvent the wheel. I don't think that's fair unless you are looking for a completley new experience, or are judging it against the best games of all time.
Far Cry is a solid, solid shooter with excellent FPS gameplay, interesting additions like vehicles and huge enviorments, and fantastic graphics. Just because it doesn't become the next Half Life, doesn't mean it's not a very good, solid game.
I guess thats one of the drawbacks to such an overcrowded genre now. FPS are so common and so overdone, that if a shooter doesn't bring something really new or interesting to the table, it's going to be poorly received.

How can you argue an opinion? Say what you will, my opinion still stands. You think it's a very good, solid game...I disagree. So what.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally posted by Fig
How can you argue an opinion? Say what you will, my opinion still stands. You think it's a very good, solid game...I disagree. So what.

Um, thats kinda what a discussion is. You state your opinion, explain it, and others either agree or disagree, and say why. I disagreed, and said why. I didn't say your opinion was wrong or that mine was right, just stating the difference and why I felt differently.

That usually how conversations work.:cool: ;)

[kpxgq]

Originally posted by Spaceman Spiff
Um, thats kinda what a discussion is. You state your opinion, explain it, and others either agree or disagree, and say why. I disagreed, and said why. I didn't say your opinion was wrong or that mine was right, just stating the difference and why I felt differently.

That usually how conversations work.:cool: ;)



lol... so true... thats why i always try to put "IMO" or "IMHO" in all my posts..

without opinions and arguments, sharky-forums would be dead.... even Tbird brings alot of life into these forums

[Spaceman Spiff]

Originally posted by kpxgq
... even Tbird brings alot of life into these forums

Well, lets not get carried away now...:D ;)

:p

[TXBrain]

I agree with you PointlesS on the size of the environment in FarCry. You can talk to 10 people and they may have beat a level 10 different ways. Getting around the islands by boat, buggy or walking will present different challenges. This is unique as opposed to the majority of past games where you have to fight your way down a hall, road or cave.
Also I'm glad to see a game that challanges some of the top powerhouse computers. There are still a lot of games that require 800Mhz processors (min) or better where FarCry recommends 2Ghz or above. These more demanding games will in turn keep the wizards who make these machines work harder to make faster, more powerfull chips to meet the needs of us gamers. I can hear the whining now...Now I need to buy a new video card...Wha Wha Wha. Buy the card, stop the whining and don't look back because it will be on sale next week.
People who only use MSWord and check email do NOT need 4Ghz, we do.

[Low Roller]

I loved Far Cry, but the storyline was a big steamy pile. Far Cry has great graphics, but my current PC(1800XP, Ti4200) lacked the horsepower to reveal the eye candy.

I'll now how HL2, D3, and FC stack up after I played them. I'm not drawing any conclusions till then.

[asmox]

There are still a lot of games that require 800Mhz processors (min) or better where FarCry recommends 2Ghz or above.

minimum requirements on games are more like minimum requirements to not kill yourself from the agony of playing a slideshow. the actual minimum requirements to achieve a somewhat playable experience are generally far above what's printed on the box.

also, the farcry engine isn't exactly aMAZING in terms of scalable performance.. so saying it's great because it has higher system requirements is silly. the d3 engine will put cryengine to shame, imho.. and will still manage to look better AND run better on slower systems that would otherwise struggle with farcry. if you aren't quite sure, this is NOT a good thing for farcry.

hl2 has yet to be seen, but i'm expecting similar engine performance from valve.

[ishak540m]

Originally posted by Geforce255

My question is with physics. The graphics on FarCry were only part of the story, the awsome physics engine was a huge part of the experience.

While I know that HL2 has great physics, nothing has been said of Doom3 in that regard. Will it live up to FarCry in the evironment department?

We'll find out soon.

Far Cry's physics were far too cartoony for my taste. Even the Doom3 Pre Alpha build had better physics IMHO.

[PCJ]

I'm enjoying farcry's physics. Today, I was on a hill, 3 guys were coming from below, and theres an explosive barrel next to me. I pushed it down, and shot it when it was next to them. Call it cartoony, I call it damn fun.
I would say that FarCry, Doom 3 and hl2 are 3 completely different, and incomparable games. FarCry is the simple, fun shooter with huge outdoor environments, doom3 is the claustrophobic horror movie kind of game, and hl2 is... well, half-life. Massive suspense, best story of the 3, and hopefully good gameplay.

[Terry]

Realism with physics: HL2 > Doom3 > Farcry
Developers have to realize that normal physics numbers can't be punched in into a simulation and behave realistically.
If you do some research, you'll find that simulations require some tweaks in physics to mimick real life.
The rule of thumb is you have to make everything faster.

I believe Airplane simulation trainings for pilots are 1.5x real life, but that's the speed that resembles real the best.

Farcry... I don't know, when I was hitting that shark in the demo it was just not swinging right. Granted I have not hit a shark on a string in real life ;)

[taggart6]

I've neer played Farcray, Painkiller...well bascially any FPS for the last 2 years...I'm not a big fan of them and tend to get bored of them after a few mins.


however I plan to get Doom3 and mostly because the interviews I've seen and developer diary's I've read express how much time and effort ID has worked to making Doom3 one hell of a fun and freaky ride.

Graphics come and go and in 2 years people will be calling the quailty of D3 ad HL2 crap...however a game with a solid story and great gameplay can last decades...

long live Gunstar Heroes!!!

[TXBrain]

Well, now that Doom3 is out and I have read most of the reviews, I don't know if I should buy the game now or wait until it goes on sale.:confused:

[Kamakazie]

At the very least, wait for the demo.

[knuckles644]

Franz:
"Va, look at vis, Hanz, poor little girly men Half Life 2 and Doom 3 are crying! Cry, cry vu girly men! Go crying to your mother! Hahaha!"

Hanz:
"Voolish girly men. Ve vill show them vow to PUMP UP! Pay attention, vu pansies! Vahahaha!"

:)

[TXBrain]

"Va, look at vis, Hanz, poor little girly men Half Life 2 and Doom 3 are crying! Cry, cry vu girly men! Go crying to your mother! Hahaha!"

LOLOLOL , now that's funny, I don't care who you are, ,that's funny

[knuckles644]

Your sarcasm cuts to the bone. Ow!

EDIT: For some reason the thread title made me think of Hanz and Franz (SNL). Dunno why.

[TXBrain]

No pain intended knuckles, I genuinely thought that was funny :D
I was there, I remember Hanz and Franz.

[Phanstern]

May the flee's of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the next lame d3 thread starter;)

[knuckles644]

Heh, hard to tell when someone is being sarcastic on the net. But, since you started the thread, I thought it probable you took offense, although none was intended:D

Sorry, man:)

[EverlastingGod]

Originally posted by zackbass
From what I've read, Carmack himself is a real physics whiz. I doubt he would have let a screwy physics engine see light of day.
You think so? He's only building a freakin' spaceship. :D

[KaoTiK]

Originally posted by Phanstern
May the flee's of a thousand camels infest the armpits of the next lame d3 thread starter;)

LMAO, that's very original. Thinking upon that, wow... what a curse. ;)

[asmox]

LMAO, that's very original.

naw.. that's from some movie, can't remember which though.

[TXBrain]

I know this is an old thread but now that iv'e bought it and finished it (D3) I still think the folks at ID had tears in their beer when FarCry was released. I liked all the graphics and active motions that set up the atmosphere in Doom and as for it being a shoot'em-up game it's every bit one of the best, but over all I still liked FarCry a little better just for the variety of ways to accomplish the mission, AI and the outdoor scenery. May be it's just me and I'm tired of running down hallways and getting my butt handed to me.
These game producers spend millions of dollars in production costs, setting up servers and advertising before the game is released and eventhough they knew FarCry was being produced I bet they did not expect it to be that big a game.
I doubt I will dig this thread up when HL2 shows up but who knows, I bet there will be snow on the ground by then.

Game on

[TXBrain]

Oh, one more thing, disregard the signature at the bottom of this page, thats the email computer.

[Transfurzz]

Farcry :) ,my mom could run it better than my rig. Doom 3 and Hl2 are the obvious winners, as I said before all this imagery is nothing but BS. It isn't even well optimised and is easily acheived by Doom 3 and HL2. Its a engineering disaster which some of us actually USED as a gauge of performance.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by EverlastingGod
You think so? He's only building a freakin' spaceship. :D

Now that it's out and been played, we all know the physics engine was crap in Doom 3.

Not sure I want to ride in Carmacks rocket....

[zackbass]

Originally posted by Geforce255
Now that it's out and been played, we all know the physics engine was crap in Doom 3.


My best guess is that it's not so much a bad physics engine as the fact that not once was there a part of the game where it was used. The lack of showing off the physics engine went along with the lack of interactivity. More the fault of bad level designers than bad engine programmers.

[soupnazi]

Agreed. The physics in Doom3 were hardly showcased in the gameplay unlike Max Payne 2/Farcry.

[EverlastingGod]

Originally posted by zackbass
My best guess is that it's not so much a bad physics engine as the fact that not once was there a part of the game where it was used. The lack of showing off the physics engine went along with the lack of interactivity. More the fault of bad level designers than bad engine programmers.

Yeah, the physics are quite good... Just not many items to show them off on.

[ishak540m]

Originally posted by EverlastingGod
Yeah, the physics are quite good... Just not many items to show them off on.

I found the physics to be a hell of a lot more true-to-life than any of the previous games. I can't stand overtly exaggerated physics in games these days.

[Damian]

Doom3 physics weren't bad. I think maybe Far Cry's were a bit better but I'm waiting, patiently for HL2. I think those are going to be the best we've ever seen.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by zackbass
The lack of showing off the physics engine went along with the lack of interactivity. More the fault of bad level designers than bad engine programmers.

That's a valid observation. The engine may well still shine, once decent game developers get ahold of it.

[rimmerchant]

Originally posted by soupnazi
Agreed. The physics in Doom3 were hardly showcased in the gameplay unlike Max Payne 2/Farcry.

wait a minute, I never played much of max payn3 2 (about 20 minutes)

Far cry I didn't really notice "showcase" use of physics.
but I do remember knocking barrels and rolling it over enemies.

[ishak540m]

Originally posted by Geforce255
That's a valid observation. The engine may well still shine, once decent game developers get ahold of it.


Id's not a decent developer?

[PointlesS]

the only thing is how do you implement physics items into a level...sure you can do the old barell rolls onto people but that gets kinda old after awhile...setting up a complex system of physics items that could be cool in gunfights is sorta hard to do and it can take awhile to get the effects you want...it would've been cool for more interactivity in doom 3 levels but in the end as the developer...it comes down to the amount if time you want to spend on such a thing vs how it would affect the gameplay...

[TXBrain]

The only physics I recall in Doom was seeing a zombie fly across the room when I would shoot a toxic waste barrel. Even when I punched a body it would just barely budge and then disolve. I thought Postal2 had better physics, at least there I could kick some guys a$$ down the stairs and watch him roll around with arms and legs flailing about.
In FarCry every scene with water was a great example of applying phyics. Shooting off the boat, running the boat aground, driving the buggy into the water, not to mention driving up and down hills. And how about the hang gliding experience? Up, down, left right. Let me think, in Doom I could go forward down the hallway, backward and even turn left or right.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by ishak540m
Id's not a decent developer?

Quake III, now Doom 3?

Nope, id is a graphics engine developer, incapible of producing a decent game.

For fun, go shoot a light in Doom 3, notice how it, well how it does absolutely nothing at all? Try it on just about anything else in the game to get the same results.

You don't have "levels" you have "sets" like a poorly done "B" movie. You don't have an environment, you have "props."

Maybe the engine can't do anything except render character models, or maybe id just didn't bother.

After Quake 3 where id threw out a tech demo, I'm betting it's the second case.

[PointlesS]

I really loved quake 3...the dm was extremely fast paced and doom 3 just really scared the **** out of me and to me that's what really made it fun...I guess if you weren't really scared then it felt repetitive and boring...but for me I really enjoyed the game...

but flushing a tiolet...answering a phone...opening a cabinet...etc...as a developer you ask if those features are really worth the time of implementing and how much it'll add to the game...woo I can flush a tiolet...big deal...you'll spend 5 seconds on it and move on but it might take a few hours to implement...try to shoot out a light in any other game besides splinter cell and it'll do nothing as well...and for the record some lights can be shot out...in the edge 2 mp map a few can be shot out...

[TXBrain]

Yeah, I don't care if the toilets flush or not but it was kind of humorous in Splinter Cell when I grabbed the limo driver as he was taking a leak in the parking garage.

The complex graphics in doom were good but most of them were just high detail on a flat wall. I also go tired of looking at people with stop sign heads. Couldn't they have rounded out their heads a little more? I don't mind octagonal wheels on a jeep parked off to the side but when your face to face with a stop sign with lips it's annoying.

[AutomaticErik]

Comparing FarCry to Doom3 is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. There is no comparison. D3 takes the cake.

[soupnazi]

I wouldn't go that far. I like Farcry's gameplay better. (since it's tactical but that's just my preference)

[Harbinger]

It's obviously all a matter or opinion. Personally I got about a third of the way through doom and found it so repetitive that I don't feel like playing it anymore. Honestly, I find Rome: Total War or Red Orchestra much more engrossing.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by PointlesS
I really loved quake 3...the dm was extremely fast paced and doom 3 just really scared the **** out of me and to me that's what really made it fun...I guess if you weren't really scared then it felt repetitive and boring...but for me I really enjoyed the game...

I don't find the concept of games frightening, but I'm an old geezer. Doom3 at times wowed me, but lacked any psychological buy-in.

but flushing a tiolet...answering a phone...opening a cabinet...etc...as a developer you ask if those features are really worth the time of implementing and how much it'll add to the game...woo I can flush a tiolet...big deal...

It's all a matter of immersion. A game environment which reacts in a plausable manner aids in suspension of disbelief, drawing the player into the game world.

Like I say, Doom3 was so poorly done that at no time was there any question that this was just a video game with props on rails.

It's not a flushing toilet, but a tree that can be felld to bridge a gap, a light that can be shot to conceal yourself, a chair that can be moved to reach a high spot, a window that breaks like real glass to get through, etc.

Immersive, realistic environments.

Max Payne 2 and Far Cry pulled it off, Doom3 didn't even come close to the mark.

[Geforce255]

>>Comparing FarCry to Doom3 is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. There is no comparison. D3 takes the cake.<<

More like comparing a running Yugo to a picture of a Ferrari in a magazine. D3 looked pretty in the character models, but it was only a picture with no substance behind it.

[AutomaticErik]

You can't honestly tell me that FarCry, HL, or any other FPS isn't just as repetitive.

Kill minions.
Do an objective.
Kill a boss.
Repeat.

[Harbinger]

Originally posted by AutomaticErik
You can't honestly tell me that FarCry, HL, or any other FPS isn't just as repetitive.

Kill minions.
Do an objective.
Kill a boss.
Repeat.

You have to be kidding me.

Did you play Deus Ex? There was *gasp* a plot! An interesting one! You got to interact, you could use different tactics on different enemies, you had to use cover and maneuver. Same with half life. In doom the enemies just run at you. In HL the three man squads would work together, two of them would supress you with mg fire while the third tossed a nade. You had to think to avoid traps. You never knew what to expect. Doom 3 you get hallway after hallway and while yes, it will scare the crap out of you, it just gets repetitive.

The main things that seperate games like HL, Deus Ex, and Far Cry are that they have plots, at least something resembling AI, interaction, and most importantly, variety.

I mean, can you play Max Payne and then Doom 3 and even remotely claim that there gameplay are on the same level!? (Ignore the fact that it's third person...)

[AutomaticErik]

Honestly, I've never played Deus Ex so I don't know about that. I have, however, played FarCry and HL and honestly can't say anything, aside from graphics, are different. Go into a room, kill, do it again. Of course, maybe thats what separates Doom3 people from others. I hated HL and FarCry but love Doom3. It seems like most either like one or the other.

[EverlastingGod]

Originally posted by Harbinger
You have to be kidding me.

Did you play Deus Ex? There was *gasp* a plot! An interesting one! You got to interact, you could use different tactics on different enemies, you had to use cover and maneuver. Same with half life. In doom the enemies just run at you. In HL the three man squads would work together, two of them would supress you with mg fire while the third tossed a nade. You had to think to avoid traps. You never knew what to expect. Doom 3 you get hallway after hallway and while yes, it will scare the crap out of you, it just gets repetitive.

The main things that seperate games like HL, Deus Ex, and Far Cry are that they have plots, at least something resembling AI, interaction, and most importantly, variety.

I mean, can you play Max Payne and then Doom 3 and even remotely claim that there gameplay are on the same level!? (Ignore the fact that it's third person...)

Most games are still hit switch here, hit another there, go here, go there, retrieve whatever, etc. Dress the switches and keys up anyway you like... Oh yeah, you're shooting things along the way. And you duck and take cover in most games.

Now, Deus Ex added something to the genre. (Modifiable character, and your mods affecting your path, etc). Story was great.

IMO, what Half-Life added was nicer scripted sequences. Perhaps the enemies were programmed to act like a squad, but in reality it didn't seem like they did anything special. Say the AI was bad, what would it do? The enemies would keep shooting (imagine this as suppression fire), and perhaps another enemy throws a grenade. Story was basically that of Doom 1.

Max Payne... Still the same thing. Hell, Max Payne 2 you had so much bullet time (use your bullet time, kill enemies while in bullet time to regain bullet time), it was too easy. Also, linear. Story was good.

Have not played Far Cry, so no comments on that, does look nice though. (I do think people hype up water too much though.)

Physics, they all have their quirks. Max Payne 2, I had a shotgun balance straight up on the nose of the barrel. Doom 3, almost the same thing. HL2, obviously, isn't out, but uses the same physics as Max Payne 2, so I expect some occasional wierdness. Ex. Coast gameplay, (the latest video I think) at the end when the giant magnet is dropped straight down and slams into the enemy, he bounces up?!? (Come to think of it, the enemy soldiers are dumb as rocks in the video also, but wait, one does throw a grenade, must have used the latest cutting edge AI techniques for that).

[EverlastingGod]

Originally posted by Geforce255
I don't find the concept of games frightening, but I'm an old geezer. Doom3 at times wowed me, but lacked any psychological buy-in.

[B]

It's all a matter of immersion. A game environment which reacts in a plausable manner aids in suspension of disbelief, drawing the player into the game world.

Like I say, Doom3 was so poorly done that at no time was there any question that this was just a video game with props on rails.

It's not a flushing toilet, but a tree that can be felld to bridge a gap, a light that can be shot to conceal yourself, a chair that can be moved to reach a high spot, a window that breaks like real glass to get through, etc.

Immersive, realistic environments.

Max Payne 2 and Far Cry pulled it off, Doom3 didn't even come close to the mark.

Can shoot some lights in Doom and move objects to stand on. You jump through at least one window, in a "realistic" manner.

Max Payne 2 seriously immersive?!? A fair amount of destructible items (more than Doom 3 for sure), but it does not drag you into the world.

Also, the graphics of Doom 3, in particular, the lighting, go a long way for "immersive, realistic environments", you underrate this aspect. Look at the shadowing in HL2 vids, it just looks wrong in places... Again, the coast vid (latest), when you pick up the trailer with the magnet, the shadow is simply a circle added to a rectangle, the part where the magnet is over the trailer, is darker.

[Harbinger]

Originally posted by EverlastingGod
Also, the graphics of Doom 3, in particular, the lighting, go a long way for "immersive, realistic environments", you underrate this aspect. Look at the shadowing in HL2 vids, it just looks wrong in places... Again, the coast vid (latest), when you pick up the trailer with the magnet, the shadow is simply a circle added to a rectangle, the part where the magnet is over the trailer, is darker.

Different purposes for the shadowing and graphics in general. HL2 is more about urban combat or fighting in very open areas. Doom is all about the claustraphobic (sp?) effect. I will grant you that Doom's graphics are more impressive than HL2 in my opinion, but they serve very different gameplay styles.

The bottom line with my argument is that I look for something innovative and creative in a game nowadays. Max Payne (the original, ignore MP2, it was a mediocore version of the first) had bullet time and the graphic novel (which I LOVE), Half Life had innovative scripting, Deus Ex had some RPG elements, etc. Doom's innovative graphics still wow me, but the gameplay is Doom all over again (that's not a terrible thing, but I've been there and done that) just like Quake 3 was Quake with better graphics.

[Zvi]

Originally posted by Geforce255
It's all a matter of immersion. A game environment which reacts in a plausable manner aids in suspension of disbelief, drawing the player into the game world.
And IMHO D3 did that much better than FC or MP2. In terms of suspension, immersion and such. When was far cry as creepy or as suspense as D3 is on most of the levels?

Like I say, Doom3 was so poorly done that at no time was there any question that this was just a video game with props on rails.
Out of curiosity, which part of D3 was so bad that made you write the above?

It's not a flushing toilet, but a tree that can be felld to bridge a gap
I don't remember being able to fell the tree in Far Cry. And in D3 pardon, no trees on Mars due to env.

a light that can be shot to conceal yourself
And you could do that in FC?

a chair that can be moved to reach a high spot, a window that breaks like real glass to get through, etc.
In D3 you could move boxes around to get to high spot. So, if U can move charis in FC that makes is so much better?

Immersive, realistic environments.
Well, outdoor envs. in Doom3 are rather surrealistic, because it's Mars and because it's future. Unlike FC where you have earth :) But indoors. Weren't graphics were much better in D3?

Max Payne 2 and Far Cry pulled it off, Doom3 didn't even come close to the mark.
Speaking of realism, if you played FC on "realistic" level that was soo "realistic"... Every other monster can take direct hits to the head from grenade launcher. If the rolling barrels are all that's needed to be "realistic" then FC wins of course.

[Geforce255]

Originally posted by AutomaticErik
You can't honestly tell me that FarCry, HL, or any other FPS isn't just as repetitive.

Kill minions.
Do an objective.
Kill a boss.
Repeat.

Repetitive isn't the issue at hand. I was speaking of environment.

Though FarCry is less repetitive since you can hang-glide, drive vehicles, boats, etc.

[Geforce255]

And IMHO D3 did that much better than FC or MP2. In terms of suspension, immersion and such. When was far cry as creepy or as suspense as D3 is on most of the levels?

We all have our opinions.

FarCry wasn't "creepy," it wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be fun, where everything acted the way it's supposed to.

Out of curiosity, which part of D3 was so bad that made you write the above?

Most of it. From the first girter that falls when you walk past the trigger to the way the Cacodemos fly on their strings.

I don't remember being able to fell the tree in Far Cry. And in D3 pardon, no trees on Mars due to env.

The point was that nothing in the environment reacts in D3. It's a very nice looking painted backdrop, but a backdrop nonetheless.

And you could do that in FC?

Absolutely, in fact to survive the patrol boats at night shooting out the spotlights was vital.

Also Splinter Cell did this.

Weren't graphics were much better in D3?

Not really.

The human character models were better, but the indoor environments were about the same in both games. Both did a good job with bump-maps and specular lighting.

As for large outdoors areas, FarCry does it well, and we'll have to wait for other developers to see what the D3 engine can do.

Speaking of realism, if you played FC on "realistic" level that was soo "realistic"...

Like D3 on "Nighmare?"

And again, that isn't the type of realism I was speaking of.

FryCry moved a lot closer to a fully interactive and destructable environment. D3 was a huge step back.

[Timelessblur]

In doom I find the AI rather umm stupid and simplicly coded. For most of the monster I have seen so far in it.

The monsters are not free romaming as they are in far cry

The monsters script simplest. It is head to player. thow fireballs (or another project tiles) get closer to to slashing distances. I hate ot say it but the AI in the game is really really lame and stupied. The Fry cry AI got on my nevers and required thinking to figureo ut how to deal with them. Doom it just take the art of shooting down.


Far cry Physic enginee was really good. From what I heard HL2 uses the same enginee so it going to be really pretty good. The Doom3 physics has more glitchs in it and odd things happen in it but it not bad.

My guess is Doom was a huge display for iD new graphic enginee which they are going to make a killing off of

[TXBrain]

Well I'm replaying some of the best parts of Doom3 and again I find myself in Hell looking for snow to start falling. I know when it turns cold it will only mean one thing...HL2 will soon be in the stores. Will I be stuck here past November?
I think I'd rather be on a tropical island with beautiful scenery, exploring caves or taking a cool dip in the ocean. Maybe even taking a boat out for the afternoon and check out the other islands. I'm sure there would be far more intelligent people to meet if I were to stroll in any direction.
Maybe I'll just take a subway and visit my Deus Ex's back in the city.

[LordVampyre]

dont hold your breath for HL2 coming out... the lawyers and courts are being called in... its lawsuit time.

[cookie]

Oh well I'll wait for Stalker, Fear, Quake IV, and Pariah.:cool: IN the mean time I have never played Deus Ex, System Shock 2, or Quake II.:eek:

[Zvi]

Originally posted by Geforce255

FarCry wasn't "creepy," it wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be fun, where everything acted the way it's supposed to.
Well, Doom 3 obviously was meant to be creepy and for most of us achieved the goal more than well.

Out of curiosity, which part of D3 was so bad that made you write the above?

Most of it. From the first girter that falls when you walk past the trigger to the way the Cacodemos fly on their strings.
? I mean, what was so horrible the way cacos fly, too unrealistic compared to something U know?
As for the triggers. Granted that most of the demons were able to teleport to any place at will, it would be kindda logical to have some sort of trigger in the game, otherwise how would you code that at all? It'd be much worse if demons were guarding rooms in pairs or squads like mercs in FC :) After all, those are demons and you're asking for more realism.
So, what would be your idea of trigger replacements? Random demons at random places? Or persistent demons with rooms and patrolling routes assigned? Something else?

The point was that nothing in the environment reacts in D3. It's a very nice looking painted backdrop, but a backdrop nonetheless.
Well, env. is a backdrop in FC, and indoor env is less pretty compared to D3. I don't argue that FC has little bit more interaction, but rolling barrels don't add that much to gameplay quality.


Absolutely, in fact to survive the patrol boats at night shooting out the spotlights was vital.
Isn't that ironic :) Shooting lights in Doom 3 where so many ppl complain about it being so dark.

Well, to be fair - you can shoot lights in FC in few more places, but it's not a "common" feature throughout the game. Majority of the fixed lights indoors are not shootable or destructible, and so is D3. Some of the lights in FC are shootable, but again, after being shot the light just spins around instead of actually being destructed which is not realistic at all.
For the record, I played FC on realistic w/o shooting boat lights, as usual I would use the boat after dispatching the driver and gunner.

Speaking of realism, if you played FC on "realistic" level that was soo "realistic"...

Like D3 on "Nighmare?"
:) Nightmare doesn't imply much of a realism to begin with, and D3 because of its plot isn't too realistic, simply because U have to assme few things will work certain way.

FryCry moved a lot closer to a fully interactive and destructable environment. D3 was a huge step back.
I might've missed something in FC, but except few lights there was no "huge" or significant step forward. Barrels explode in D3 as well. U can't destroy boxes in FC either, most of the lights are not destructible either. What was really new was huge maps and very nicely done outdoor envs. But I don't see how that was "fully interactive and destructible". U couldn't chop a tree or anything like that...

[Harbinger]

Originally posted by Zvi
[b]FryCry moved a lot closer to a fully interactive and destructable environment. D3 was a huge step back.
I might've missed something in FC, but except few lights there was no "huge" or significant step forward. Barrels explode in D3 as well. U can't destroy boxes in FC either, most of the lights are not destructible either. What was really new was huge maps and very nicely done outdoor envs. But I don't see how that was "fully interactive and destructible". U couldn't chop a tree or anything like that...

I gotta agree, I don't think either game felt all that interactive. It was nice to see the rag doll physics and the rolling barrells and such in FC, but there weren't that many things that blew up or went flying. It's not like you could knock down walls or anything, there were just a few spots where you could see the physics engine in action and it would look cool. I think Doom3 did even less of this, as there weren't all that many things to send flying, just occasionally. Of course, it's a little easier to pull the interaction off when you have vehicles (I think UT2k4 pulls that off extremely well). Just my 2 cents.

[TXBrain]

If we are judging the game on being interactive and physics then I still think FarCry is the winner. They threw in a driving experience in the buggy that was more fun than most cheap driving sims, A few 1 or 2 minute flight simulations in the hang gliders that were decent. Boating and swimming environments that were different than other games. Doom3 had a few lights and barrels. Not even close.
If we are judging it on suspence of who will be handing your A$$ to you around the next corner, I would have to say D3 wins.
I'll have to wait until HalfLife2005 come out before I can judge it.

[taggart6]

Originally posted by TXBrain
If we are judging the game on being interactive and physics then I still think FarCry is the winner. They threw in a driving experience in the buggy that was more fun than most cheap driving sims, A few 1 or 2 minute flight simulations in the hang gliders that were decent. Boating and swimming environments that were different than other games. Doom3 had a few lights and barrels. Not even close.
If we are judging it on suspence of who will be handing your A$$ to you around the next corner, I would have to say D3 wins.
I'll have to wait until HalfLife2005 come out before I can judge it.


I dunno...from the HL2 video's, being able to pick up letters off the side of building and throw then at a 3 story tall monster or squash a unit of bad guys with a garbage car seems to be pretty interactive to me. Not to mention the ablity to destroy the buildings around you and use teh rubble as a weapon.

[PointlesS]

the problem with all these "interactive" and physics items laying around the levels is when something seems weird or wrong then it kinda takes away from game and for me sorta distracts from the experience...like for example when a head gets stuck in the ceiling and the body's just dangling there...or when a chair gets stuck on some railing...then some things just look weird...like a trash can being knocked back from a direct shot from a rocket launcher when really it should explode into a bunch of peices...

physics items are not foolproof...when you have dynamic objects that are able to work on their own outside of the developers hands then bad things can happen...if a critical objective depends on a certain physics item then it takes a bit of work to make sure there's no possible way to make it impossible to complete the objective...