Polu(ne)ozbiljno predjenje HL2 i D3 endzina
- Začetnik teme filipenko
- Datum pokretanja
- Učlanjen(a)
- 08.08.2004
- Poruke
- 1,980
- Poena
- 350
hmmm:
"Overall Tech and Preformance
Overall HL2 beats out D3 hands down. Doom 3 may be the wave of the future but many of it’s aspects are poorly implemented as with it’s characters and very taxing requirements. With higher polygon counts and better detail texturing D3 characters would have looked stunning. HL2 takes existing technology and polishes it to a brilliant shine. HL2 can render highly detailed outdoor areas where as if D3 tried it would explode. HL2 runs smooth as butter with my 2 year old computer getting 70+FPS with the HL2 benchmark while D3 stutters regularly, so in terms of performance HL2 runs laps around the hugely demanding D3. A fantastic netcode that can support up to 64 players with a consistent low ping where D3 comes with 4 player MP out of the box."
+
http://www.xylicon.com/spaniard/Facial%20Comparison.jpg
nemam vishe komentara
"Overall Tech and Preformance
Overall HL2 beats out D3 hands down. Doom 3 may be the wave of the future but many of it’s aspects are poorly implemented as with it’s characters and very taxing requirements. With higher polygon counts and better detail texturing D3 characters would have looked stunning. HL2 takes existing technology and polishes it to a brilliant shine. HL2 can render highly detailed outdoor areas where as if D3 tried it would explode. HL2 runs smooth as butter with my 2 year old computer getting 70+FPS with the HL2 benchmark while D3 stutters regularly, so in terms of performance HL2 runs laps around the hugely demanding D3. A fantastic netcode that can support up to 64 players with a consistent low ping where D3 comes with 4 player MP out of the box."
+
http://www.xylicon.com/spaniard/Facial%20Comparison.jpg
nemam vishe komentara
G!!!
Čuven
- Učlanjen(a)
- 30.06.2000
- Poruke
- 5,672
- Poena
- 780
Moja oprema
- Laptop
- HP Spectre x360
- Mobilni telefon
- s24u
- Steam
- mocnijogurt
- Pristup internetu
- Kablovski internet
- Mobilni internet
kako samraju vishe s tim.. kako god bilo opet imam osecaj i kad izadje sledeca igra sa d3 engineom i kad nagruvaju veci broj poligona i detaljnije texture da ce oduvati sve zivo al ce biti zahtevnije... pa ce onda to isto biti i sa hl2 engineom i tako u krug.. vishe smaraju sa tim jer se cela PC gaming industrija sada marginalizovala na to ko ce bolji engine da napravi.. pfuj...
- Učlanjen(a)
- 10.01.2001
- Poruke
- 12,148
- Poena
- 1,019
Poenta je u tome da D3 ne podnosi tolike teksture... A i sam je zahtevan (ovakav kakav je) - 9800 XT ce lepo da tera HL2 sa 8x Aniso i high (mozda ne highest). Da li 5950 Ultra (karta iz te klase) moze da tera Doom III u high sa 8x aniso ??? Po meni - ne moze!
Mare
Čuven
- Učlanjen(a)
- 01.02.2002
- Poruke
- 6,080
- Poena
- 865
Evo jedno ozbiljno poredjenje:
1.) Doom 3 uses Per-Pixel lighting, which is much superior to Vertex and precomputed lightmaps.
Lighting-Doom 3 > Source
2.) Doom 3 uses real time shadows almost everywhere. Half Life 2 uses dynamic, precomputed shadows for characters, and every character only gets 1 shadow. Everything else in the world is static precomputed shadows.
Shadows- Doom3> Source
3.) Character comparison? Well, if you took a 6K polygon model from Doom3 and compared it to what Source does with 6K polys, Doom3 would win. It's not the engine that doesnt allow higher polygon counts, but limitations on todays hardware. So it's really a hardware limitation rather than what the ENGINE can or cant do.
With that said, Half Life 2 THE GAME has better characters than doom3. But the Doom3 engine can do as good or better, given the same polygon counts as HL2, and there is no hard coded polygon count limit.
Characters, pound for pound- Doom3 Engine > Source
Characters in their respective games- HL2 > Doom3
4.) Animation
Thats not an engine thing, but how the designers impliment it. Not a topic for discussion
5.) AI. Again, nothing to do with the renderer.
6) Raw Tech
Doom 3 smokes Half Life 2, and every other game coming out in the near future. It uses Normal/Specular/Diffuse/color map on every surface, has a Cg interface for shaders (although the Cg path isnt used in doom3, but the ENGINE supports it). It's shadowing is much more advanced than anything coming soon and same with its lighting.
7.) Conclusion
Doom 3's ENGINE is more advanced by a mile, but due to hardware limitations, it cant display the kind of quality it is capable of. Half Life 2 may look better, but Doom 3's tech is much more advanced, period.
Now, Doom3 may have come out too early, because there will be retards like the ***** who wrote the article who dare say an engine which is for all intents and purposes UT2004 with some nice shaders is better than A completely new rendering style. The difference between HL2/CryEngine and Doom3 is like Duke 3d to Quake. Yes Duke 3d looked better to many, but Quake was a significant jump forward.
And i'm betting many of you wont even believe me either *sigh*
1.) Doom 3 uses Per-Pixel lighting, which is much superior to Vertex and precomputed lightmaps.
Lighting-Doom 3 > Source
2.) Doom 3 uses real time shadows almost everywhere. Half Life 2 uses dynamic, precomputed shadows for characters, and every character only gets 1 shadow. Everything else in the world is static precomputed shadows.
Shadows- Doom3> Source
3.) Character comparison? Well, if you took a 6K polygon model from Doom3 and compared it to what Source does with 6K polys, Doom3 would win. It's not the engine that doesnt allow higher polygon counts, but limitations on todays hardware. So it's really a hardware limitation rather than what the ENGINE can or cant do.
With that said, Half Life 2 THE GAME has better characters than doom3. But the Doom3 engine can do as good or better, given the same polygon counts as HL2, and there is no hard coded polygon count limit.
Characters, pound for pound- Doom3 Engine > Source
Characters in their respective games- HL2 > Doom3
4.) Animation
Thats not an engine thing, but how the designers impliment it. Not a topic for discussion
5.) AI. Again, nothing to do with the renderer.
6) Raw Tech
Doom 3 smokes Half Life 2, and every other game coming out in the near future. It uses Normal/Specular/Diffuse/color map on every surface, has a Cg interface for shaders (although the Cg path isnt used in doom3, but the ENGINE supports it). It's shadowing is much more advanced than anything coming soon and same with its lighting.
7.) Conclusion
Doom 3's ENGINE is more advanced by a mile, but due to hardware limitations, it cant display the kind of quality it is capable of. Half Life 2 may look better, but Doom 3's tech is much more advanced, period.
Now, Doom3 may have come out too early, because there will be retards like the ***** who wrote the article who dare say an engine which is for all intents and purposes UT2004 with some nice shaders is better than A completely new rendering style. The difference between HL2/CryEngine and Doom3 is like Duke 3d to Quake. Yes Duke 3d looked better to many, but Quake was a significant jump forward.
And i'm betting many of you wont even believe me either *sigh*
- Učlanjen(a)
- 10.01.2001
- Poruke
- 12,148
- Poena
- 1,019
Ala se ovaj nalupao - nije valjda da verujes u to, Mare. Pa jasno je da je Doom III u mnogim aspektima zastareo engine. Sve senke radi CPU, veci poly count ne podnosi pa se oslanja na normal mape - ja bih rekao da je u pitanju nabudzeni Q3, a da su dizajneri odradili MNOGO dobar posao, tj. da je sam art dobar. Videcete vec kad izadje HL2, a ja ipak mislim da ni sam HL2 nece biti mnogo bolji od Crytek enginea...
- Učlanjen(a)
- 08.08.2004
- Poruke
- 1,980
- Poena
- 350
Muzzy, hardware limitations je jedna od najvaznijih stvari - nije mi vazno da li ce za 5 godina da budu gotivne igrice sa doom3 engine-om, vazno mi je kako ce sada da izgledaju doom3 i hl2... Doom3 engine smo videli, nije losh, ali nije ni toliko mocan kao shto se prichalo iz nekoliko razloga (zahtevnost izmedju ostalog), sada je red da pogledamo i taj Source engine pa da kazemo sta bolje izgleda.
Mare
Čuven
- Učlanjen(a)
- 01.02.2002
- Poruke
- 6,080
- Poena
- 865
Napisao ga je jedan clan B3D foruma, u temi o istom onom textu iz prvog posta ovde... moj utisak je malo drugaciji ali HL2 nisam video jos sem na slikama (nisam igrao Alfa ver. niti skidao filmove) tako da ostaje da prvo vidim uzivo kakav je HL2.
Iskreno moj utisak o D3 je toplo/hladno recimo dok sam sa winRAR-om setao kroz pk4 fajlove iznenadio sam se da maltene nema texture preko 512*512 dok je cak i stari q3 imao textue bar 1024*512 (koliko se secam).
Iako se to mozda ne primecuje mnogo zbog tamne atmnosfere ipak se primeti.
Drugo ovi kao da nisu culi za difuzno svetlo, soft shadows, itd. (potpun mrak u cosku sobe koja je osvetljna sa par neonki???), svaka senka je skroz crna i ostrih ivica, gde to ima (sem u igrama)... dosta je to jos uvek nerealno...
Ipak najlosije od svega su uradjeni modeli monstruma i totalno kvare atmnosferu, jednostavno premali nivo detalja, sta reci samo za zadnjeg bosa pa bar tu su mogli malo da se potrude a ne da razvuku texturu od 256*256 preko onlike kreature.
Videcemo kad dodje HL2 pa da uporedimo, daleko od toga da je D3 postavio neke previsoke standarde (tu i tamo je cak i podbacio), ali je svakako ukupno gledano pomerio granicu, jer iako Doom ima dosta gluposti u drugim igrama ih ima jos mnogo vise, a i skoro ne pamtim kad sam u neku igru ulazio i 20 dana posle instalacije.
BTW kao sto rece onaj lik svi porede D3 i HL2 igru protiv igre a trebalo bi da pricamo o engine-u.
Iskreno moj utisak o D3 je toplo/hladno recimo dok sam sa winRAR-om setao kroz pk4 fajlove iznenadio sam se da maltene nema texture preko 512*512 dok je cak i stari q3 imao textue bar 1024*512 (koliko se secam).
Iako se to mozda ne primecuje mnogo zbog tamne atmnosfere ipak se primeti.
Drugo ovi kao da nisu culi za difuzno svetlo, soft shadows, itd. (potpun mrak u cosku sobe koja je osvetljna sa par neonki???), svaka senka je skroz crna i ostrih ivica, gde to ima (sem u igrama)... dosta je to jos uvek nerealno...
Ipak najlosije od svega su uradjeni modeli monstruma i totalno kvare atmnosferu, jednostavno premali nivo detalja, sta reci samo za zadnjeg bosa pa bar tu su mogli malo da se potrude a ne da razvuku texturu od 256*256 preko onlike kreature.
Videcemo kad dodje HL2 pa da uporedimo, daleko od toga da je D3 postavio neke previsoke standarde (tu i tamo je cak i podbacio), ali je svakako ukupno gledano pomerio granicu, jer iako Doom ima dosta gluposti u drugim igrama ih ima jos mnogo vise, a i skoro ne pamtim kad sam u neku igru ulazio i 20 dana posle instalacije.
BTW kao sto rece onaj lik svi porede D3 i HL2 igru protiv igre a trebalo bi da pricamo o engine-u.
Poslednja izmena:
Thunderdome
Čuven
- Učlanjen(a)
- 26.09.2003
- Poruke
- 822
- Poena
- 619
(ne)ozbiljno stanje stvari
polux
Čuven
- Učlanjen(a)
- 27.10.2003
- Poruke
- 186
- Poena
- 619
Problem je u tome sto je to HL2 benchmark,i testira mnoge efekte iz HL2 kojih uopste nema u CS sourceu.Izgleda da je engine neverovatno optimizovan i ispeglan da kakve god da budu dzidzabidze o kojima pricac mislim da ce biti igriva bar na mojoj konfiguraciji ako je to kakva utjeha
Ljudi optimizacija ja to tako gledam. sta ako je doom3 sofisticiraniji i brzi . (imas komp nemas struje ), moze ovo moze ono ali nema hardvera (imas komp-al nemas struju) kad dodje njegovo vreme po piscu sta onda bice drugih igara. Cilj je valjda sto vecem broju vlasnika racunara omoguciti da se igraju a ne samo silikon gafiku.
