dont hold your breath for HL2 coming out... the lawyers and courts are being called in... its lawsuit time.
Printable View
dont hold your breath for HL2 coming out... the lawyers and courts are being called in... its lawsuit time.
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:
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.Quote:
Originally posted by Geforce255
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...
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.Quote:
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...
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$$ to you around the next corner, I would have to say D3 wins.
I'll have to wait until HalfLife2005 come out before I can judge it.
Quote:
Originally posted by TXBrain
If we are judging the game on being interactive and physics then I still think FarCry is the winner. They threw in a driving experience in the buggy that was more fun than most cheap driving sims, A few 1 or 2 minute flight simulations in the hang gliders that were decent. Boating and swimming environments that were different than other games. Doom3 had a few lights and barrels. Not even close.
If we are judging it on suspence of who will be handing your A$$ 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.
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...