[an error occurred while processing this directive]
New 3D Technology and its impact on Doom3 - http://www.doomworld.com Forums


Original message

Arch-Angel



dai_san57@hotmail.com
202.139.227.210

"New 3D Technology and its impact on Doom3" , posted Sun 27 May 18:16user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


Doom3 has been on the table for awhile but so have some other "killer" technologies and judging by the "guessed-a-mated" system requirements seem to have super inovative code.
On such thing is the geometry technology in

http://www.3dactionplanet.com/features/firstlooks/redfaction2/

And the extra tasty experience engine

http://www.3dactionplanet.com/features/firstlooks/experience/

The above two have been on the table longer than doom3 and i feel it would be a shame to ignore advances like these. Basically i want doom3 to be a hell of a lot different from Q3Arena. The above two features are the sort of things i am talking about.

I swear! The BFG went off all by itself!!

 


Replies:

Dima



alexsok@netvision.net.il
77090113
212.143.56.81

"Re(1):New 3D Technology and its impact on Doo" , posted Mon 28 May 09:43:user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


I must say, you have no idea of what you are talking about!

1) Red Faction engine uses all the classic techniques that are used in all the games currently on the market (lightmaps, gourad shading, etc...).
The only thing that is cool about it is the Geo-Mod technology which allows for the first time destructable geometry without scripted events (some are needed of course, not to ruin the gameplay).
Besides that, the characters are low in polygons and still have this circle that supposed to be their shadow.
And several sites also reported that the Red Faction demo displayed on E3 2001 looked good but worser than the Q3A engined games (MOH: AA, SOF 2: DH, JN 2: JO).

2) I remember getting an early experience engine demo together with my GeForce DDR and honestly, I wasn't impressed!
Yeah, it had some nice graphics but so did Q3A.
Then, I've seen the screenshots of the upgraded version of the engine running on the GeForce 2 GTS and once again, I wasn't impressed!
It again had nice graphics but even as a tech demo, it still looked worser than Q3A engine.
Besides some new GeForce family features, it still uses lightmaps, gourad shading, etc...
Both of these engines are basically worser than Q3A engine and offer almost nothing new to the evolving genre.

On the other hand, Doom will be the best game ever released on any system and people will remember it for long years to come!
The engine will be the best engine ever made and the gameplay will be nothing less than increduble!

The whole team at id knows that their reputation depends on this title and they will never screw it up!

So there you go, my answer :-)

"We've been doing hacks and tricks for years but now we'll be able to do things we've been wanting to do for a long time" Carmack said. "For instance every light has its own highlight and every surface casts a shadow like in the real world". "Everything can behave the same now and we can apply effects for every pixel."

[this message was edited by Dima on Mon 28 May 13:19]

 

 

Arch-Angel



dai_san57@hotmail.com
202.139.226.20

"Re(2):New 3D Technology and its impact on Doo" , posted Mon 28 May 20:00user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


I will avoid the word "worser" but that aside to get to my point. The last post went on to crap about all the features of red faction. Might i point out i only mentioned the "geo" technology - not the shadows not the faces ect. Might i point out my article wasnt about doom3's light sourcing... infact my article wasnt about doom3 at all... what i wanted to know was if people felt the geometry engine of red faction and the whole outdoor thing of the "experence" engine was the sort of technology that should be included in doom3. Just because another company is doing it doesnt make the concept crap. Just because demos run crap on your computer doesnt make the "concept" crap. So i again ask - do people think things like the geometry/outdoor experience engine concepts should play a part in doom3? thats all... and please dont insult me then use the word "worser"...

I swear! The BFG went off all by itself!!

 

 

Dima



alexsok@netvision.net.il
77090113
212.143.56.216

"Re(3):New 3D Technology and its impact on Doo" , posted Tue 29 May 01:16user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


Yeah, they should!
Sorry I didn't understand your question in the first place.

"We've been doing hacks and tricks for years but now we'll be able to do things we've been wanting to do for a long time" Carmack said. "For instance every light has its own highlight and every surface casts a shadow like in the real world". "Everything can behave the same now and we can apply effects for every pixel."

 

Zaldron
Le Ventilateur



avengerz66@hotmail.com
18477495
200.45.46.118

"Re(1):New 3D Technology and its impact on Doo" , posted Sun 27 May 20:40user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


First than all, let's get this straight : id software is a game developer company.

Carmack and the rest of the programming crew does NOT have as focus "Let's make the best damn engine EVER", but a much, much wiser approach "Let's make the engine we NEED for DooM 3".

Coding every single possible feature would kill the engine. It's a matter of time & performance.

About features like that. They're in those games because and ONLY because the game designs required that. If DooM 3 needs advanced particle systems, so be it. If DooM 3 needs state-of-the-art scripting system, so be it, etc...

Don't expect this engine to beat all the others in every possible way, that's why the rest of the companies have programmers, you know? To code the stuff they need over the licensed tech.

__________________________ _ _ _
"There are three kinds of death in this world. There's heart death there's brain death and there's being off the network."

 

amanichen



amanichen@yahoo.com
24.4.252.24

"Re(1):New 3D Technology and its impact on Doo" , posted Sun 27 May 19:44user profileedit/delete messagepost reply


In short:

I wouldn't expect that the Doom 3 engine would be lacking any of the goodies included in FPS's to date.

The detailed explanation:

The environmental interaction and realistic particle/fluid physics mentioned in the article, seem fucking simple compared to the labor involved in producing lighting (Doom 3 movie) that rivals the reality that we live in.

The Doom 3 tech demo seems a bit more advanced than the Red Faction 2 engine: the RF seems to still be using lightmaps--Yuck!

It also looks to me like it is missing some bumpmapping, which could really spruce up those horrible low polycount models in the screenshots.

________________________________________
Occupation:
...dumb guy with big axe.
___________
Maybe you can help me -- I STAB PEOPLE!