Jim Rainer
Member

Posts: 291
Registered: 09-07 |
Fusion said:
I'm guessing your game looked more like the one on the right? http://www.stageselect.com/images/a...rectcompare.jpg
If your system can't even properly handle doom3 today, can you stop making comparisons to, I'll say it, a graphically inferior game like halo2.
Doom3 won a ton of awards for best graphics when it was released. Honestly, even if I was a Halo2 fan I wouldn't even try to make that comparison; it's clear that Microsoft is no John Carmack. I remember Microsoft only making a few good titles.. oh wait.. that was their office suite nevermind.
Remember, this is 'DOOM'world, not 'HALO2'world.
Uh, no. Mine looked like the image on the left. It's not the lighting effects I'm downrating, it's the model quality. Low poly-count objects. Halo 2 is inferior in lighting and bump-mapping due to it being a console game, but in all my years of playing it, I have yet to see a spherical object in Halo 2 represented by a octagonal object. Also, Microsoft didn't make Halo. Bungie did, Microsoft just published it.
Also, just because this is Doomworld doesn't mean everyone is going to go "fuk u doom 3s grafix r teh bestest! all other 2004 era gamez sux in teh grafix".
In additon, I already stated I'm on a budget computer from shitmart. I don't know how you managed to miss that. Oh wait, that's right, you were too busy being a Carmack fanboy and pretending Microsoft made halo 2.
|