interactivity

Wobbo said:

actually John CArmack said rather speificaly that there would be NO WATER in Doom3, however he did mention a bunch of really cool water shaders.

Listen to tthe QuakeCon 2002 speech

He never said there would be no water in Doom III.

Boxes in the alpha are interactive.

Instead of "atmosphere", I should've said, "the more important aspects of the game". That's what I was trying to get across, I was just giving an example^. The most important aspects would, of course, include atmposphere, cool weapons, and like you said dsm, lots of action.

I'm not at all against interactivity. I just mean that I'd rather they made sure the game kicked ass without it, then they could add some of this stuff in, if only just to show off what the engine can do.

The_Aeromaster said:

I'm not at all against interactivity. I just mean that I'd rather they made sure the game kicked ass without it, then they could add some of this stuff in, if only just to show off what the engine can do.

I agree wholeheartedly - just had to make sure that there would be no misunderstanding of my views which are that interactivity is actually part of the important aspects that made Doom Doom :-)

wasted said:

Boxes in the alpha are interactive.

Only the small ones that lie on shelves. All the bigger boxes seem like they can't be moved.

I dont really care about water in doom 3, but i do want sludge and radioactive/toxic waste and like maybe mutated fucked up things come out of it and if you fall in it or your in a radioactive environment you get radiation poisening. Im hopeing they atleast have a meter for reading radiation levels I'll find that add's to the feel alot in games.

12ga. said:

I dont really care about water in doom 3, but i do want sludge and radioactive/toxic waste and like maybe mutated fucked up things come out of it and if you fall in it or your in a radioactive environment you get radiation poisening. Im hopeing they atleast have a meter for reading radiation levels I'll find that add's to the feel alot in games.

Heh, I just got reminded of an idea I got years ago: The return of the Radiation suit, but more realistic this time. The rad suit is not for surviving toxic waste, but for entering areas with a high level of radiation: these areas are extremely dangerous otherwise as the air itself is highly damaging (that'll be a little more realistic imo).

To try and make it on-topic, I have a feeling that adding rooms with strong radiation would add to the game and maybe provide new sorts of environmental interactivity (sealing off these rooms, or maybe bring down the level of radiation to affect the level).

dsm said:

To try and make it on-topic, I have a feeling that adding rooms with strong radiation would add to the game and maybe provide new sorts of environmental interactivity (sealing off these rooms, or maybe bring down the level of radiation to affect the level).

Sounds good to me, and right up dooms alley :-).

Like the way your'e thinking DSM. I just hope if they do that,then it had better be as good as half life's radiation ideas.

Fredrik said:

Only the small ones that lie on shelves. All the bigger boxes seem like they can't be moved.

It is so.

Totally agreed with dsm bout the rad and water!

On topic: what about pipes and steam? In Alpha when Zombe shooting at you some of the pipes got damaged and steam comes out!!! What about blowing pipes and using the steam as th edamaging factor to enemy?

iD has stated that Doom 3 won't have destructive environments. I don't remember anything about there being no water in Doom 3 though...

Sanjay

Fredrik said:

Only the small ones that lie on shelves. All the bigger boxes seem like they can't be moved.

Actually, I have to correct this. In the alpha, you can't move large objects or enemies. Except for in one room, the one where an imp kicks a table over and one of the fat guys is seen tumbling down the stairs when shot. In this single room, all kinds of objects can be moved around, including large boxes and dead bodies. So that's most likely the way it'll be.

Never draw conclusions from alpha material ;)

StarFyre said:

iD has stated that Doom 3 won't have destructive environments. I don't remember anything about there being no water in Doom 3 though...

Sanjay

Yes, but that doesn't exclude the fact that there might be areas scripted to be destroyed (in fact, we know that that will be the case in Doom 3), so you might still see situations where you can shoot something to make rubble come crashing down on the enemy or stuff like that.

I saw a Half Life 2 video where the player shot at some rubble, making it come crashing down on some enemies - I have grounds to believe that this was all scripted (the area being deformable).

On topic: what about pipes and steam? In Alpha when Zombe shooting at you some of the pipes got damaged and steam comes out!!! What about blowing pipes and using the steam as th edamaging factor to enemy?

Great idea - that could actually be fun.

Actually, I have to correct this. In the alpha, you can't move large objects or enemies. Except for in one room, the one where an imp kicks a table over and one of the fat guys is seen tumbling down the stairs when shot. In this single room, all kinds of objects can be moved around, including large boxes and dead bodies. So that's most likely the way it'll be.

Yeah well that'd most likely be scripted.

Yeah well that'd most likely be scripted.

Moving stuff around scripted? No. It seems that they can enable stuff like that on a per-object basis, and they probably chose to disable it in other areas of the alpha for some reason. Performance or stability, perhaps.

Fredrik said:

Moving stuff around scripted? No. It seems that they can enable stuff like that on a per-object basis, and they probably chose to disable it in other areas of the alpha for some reason. Performance or stability, perhaps.

Well, that was kinda what I meant.
Arrhh, just bear with me that I don't know crap about coding ok?

What I meant was that it was probably something where the mapper can apply a script/code to a given object to make it movable in certain situations.

I meant to point out that it's not like it's a general option to all objects that look movable to actually BE movable in the engine - only those that the level designer chose to make movable.

dsm said:

I meant to point out that it's not like it's a general option to all objects that look movable to actually BE movable in the engine - only those that the level designer chose to make movable.

Yes. And IMO that just makes sense. If it was possible to kick around every crate and barrel, trying to move around fluently would become annoying.

Fredrik said:

Yes. And IMO that just makes sense. If it was possible to kick around every crate and barrel, trying to move around fluently would become annoying.

You got a point there - it may also be good for performance as you pointed out.

Good points, I agree that while I'm runnin from the cyberdemon when I first see it I don't wanna be knockin over barrels and stuff so that when I come back through there I'm blocked.

Course I could just jump em.

I want to kick zombie heads all over the place and play pinball with an imp's testicle.

Yeah, me too. Although it doesn't look like there is gibs or even limb severance in D3 from the movies and alpha. Cheap bastards. I hope that the new imp has a proper asshole like the old one, or impsex is gonna die out upon the release of D3.

dsm said:

What I meant was that it was probably something where the mapper can apply a script/code to a given object to make it movable in certain situations.

I meant to point out that it's not like it's a general option to all objects that look movable to actually BE movable in the engine - only those that the level designer chose to make movable.

This is basically how mapping works on almost all the modern game engines. The whole level geometry is composed out of blocks in all shapes and sizes. If you want a block to be something else then just solid level geometry, you have to give it special properties.

Mappers will know what I mean when I say that all non-moveable objects are part of a single "worldspawn" entity and the moveable objects are special entities. No doubt this will be the case in HL2 as well.

"Mappers will know what I mean when I say that all non-moveable objects are part of a single "worldspawn" entity and the moveable objects are special entities. No doubt this will be the case in HL2 as well."


Exactly. But H-L2 is quite advanced physics-wise, in that by the sound of things you can take any bit of level geometry, mark it as a physics object, and the mass will automatically be determined from the volume and material. Leaps ahead of Doom3's method, where you must manually specify the mass, and you cannot take just any part of level geometry and make it a physics object (as far as I can tell, only models can be physics objects in D3).

Yeah, me too. Although it doesn't look like there is gibs or even limb severance in D3 from the movies and alpha. Cheap bastards.

Yes it LOOKS like there won't be, but a couple of the guys here have looked into the code of the Doom 3 alpha and determined that at least the weaker monsters will be gibbable. As for limb severance: Fuck it! I don't wanna cut the enemies to pieces, I wanna see them "fly" to the ground in cool ways depending on the way I shoot them.

I hope that the new imp has a proper asshole like the old one, or impsex is gonna die out upon the release of D3.

We can always hope [:Evil smile:]

ToXiCFLUFF said:

Leaps ahead of Doom3's method, where you must manually specify the mass, and you cannot take just any part of level geometry and make it a physics object (as far as I can tell, only models can be physics objects in D3).

And how can you know for certain that it is/will be like that? The Alpha?
You can't judge the final product on an Alpha, so unless you have iD's word on this, I'm not gonna regard you as a reliable source.

Arno said:

Mappers will know what I mean when I say that all non-moveable objects are part of a single "worldspawn" entity and the moveable objects are special entities. No doubt this will be the case in HL2 as well.

heh. Except in the Serious Engine (Serious Sam), where you have several Worldspawn entities, known as WorldBases.

This is completely irrelevant. Oh well.

Like dsm said, you're not going to know until the game is actually released. In that regard, some of these clowns who are making maps based on the alpha's code are dumbasses, because the code is not going to be the same.

ToXiCFLUFF said:

Exactly. But H-L2 is quite advanced physics-wise, in that by the sound of things you can take any bit of level geometry, mark it as a physics object, and the mass will automatically be determined from the volume and material. Leaps ahead of Doom3's method, where you must manually specify the mass, and you cannot take just any part of level geometry and make it a physics object (as far as I can tell, only models can be physics objects in D3).

Like DSM said, the Doom3 engine might have changed a bit since the alpha. You might be right that in the alpha all physics objects are models. I hope that in the mean time Id has added the option of turning level geometry into physical objects. I'm thinking about collapsable floors and ceilings. It would be a lot of work to make every individual part of a destructable floor a seperate model.

I don't know alot about this shit, but I can safely say that would be a helluva long process if you were going to build any kind of interesting or twisted map. In light of this, I doubt that's how the engine works in the final version.

The_Aeromaster said:

I don't know alot about this shit, but I can safely say that would be a helluva long process if you were going to build any kind of interesting or twisted map. In light of this, I doubt that's how the engine works in the final version.

You're forgetting that the Alpha most likely didn't have all the engine's features in it, plus the Alpha engine did contain some really neat features that just hadn't been used that much.

Y'know, stuff like certain walls that could be made destructible, objects that could be moved around and body parts that could be blown to and fro.

All it takes is some other maps where the iD mappers have used the engine features a bit better and you suddenly have a higher level of interactivity.

I dont know about others, but for me, if Doom 3 doesnt have a tonne of interactivity but follows similar to what Doom and Doom 2 has in the way of lifts, crushers, triggers etc along with its in your face battle with monsters then im happy because thats what I call fun.

I think to much interactivity can ruin a game. I played through Doom and Doom 2 numerous times but I didnt play HL all the way through because I couldnt be bothered. While some of the interaction was good I just found it to eventually become annoying and got tired of listening to a scientist/dying scientist crap on about what has to be done.

Even taking a look at Quake, it just had your basic lift, trap, trigger, door etc and the "bring it on" style of game play which was very enjoyable so I dont think you really need a lot of intereactivity but a nice balance is fine.

ToXiCFLUFF said:

Exactly. But H-L2 is quite advanced physics-wise, in that by the sound of things you can take any bit of level geometry, mark it as a physics object, and the mass will automatically be determined from the volume and material. Leaps ahead of Doom3's method, where you must manually specify the mass, and you cannot take just any part of level geometry and make it a physics object (as far as I can tell, only models can be physics objects in D3).

wtf are you talking about? You can take whatever part of the level geometry and make it a physics object. I've done so plenty of times with the alpha and I REALLY doubt that will change.