Vs.

In your opinion, witch of the following are the better looking of the two and why?

1) Doom Vs. Duke Nukem 3D

2) GL Quake Vs. Quake II

3) Unreal Vs. Half-Life

shoot.

Ct_red_pants said:

Quake Vs. Quake II

doom owns and always will.

Linguica said:
[implied]that's a dumb question[/implied]

Uhh Why? (I'll never learn otherwise).

Ct_red_pants said:

Uhh Why? (I'll never learn otherwise).

Quake is brown and low-poly. Quake 2 is colorful and has more detail.

1) Probably Duke Nukem 3D, though I much prefer Doom as a game (obviously)

I'll skip question 2.

3) Unreal, though I slightly prefer Half-Life as a game.

Ultraviolet said:
Quake is brown and low-poly. Quake 2 is colorful and has more detail.

Well I know quite a few people who argue that quake 1 makes better use of it's limited technology. But fine...

If GL Quake counts, then it's arguably as good looking as Quake II.

Quake II = Orange

Fredrik said:
If GL Quake counts, then it's arguably as good looking as Quake II.

that's a better Idea...

zarcyb said:

Quake II = Orange

Orange = better than brown.

Ct_red_pants said:

In your opinion, witch of the following are the better looking of the two and why?

1) Doom Vs. Duke Nukem 3D

Close competition, but I'd have to say Doom because Duke was full of cheesy B-movie looking stuff and ugly whores.

2) Your mother Vs. Quake II

No.

3) Unreal Vs. Half-Life

I never played Unreal.

Doom
-level and monster design is more interesting. More atmosphere.

Gl Quake
-I hate Q2. The monsters are cartoonish. Even non-gl quake was more believable in settings and monster design. It does lack the lighting effects, but both used lightmaps, so the loss of neon pink doesn't hurt GL:Q1 I'll take the 666 shades of brown and gray. And I agree, it takes more advantage of its limited resources.

Unreal
-The lighting and settings were more dramatic. HL was a lot more bland.

Draconio said:

I never played Unreal.

Here's a little taste of what you missed.

Ct_red_pants said:

In your opinion, witch of the following are the better looking of the two and why?

1) Doom Vs. Duke Nukem 3D

2) GL Quake Vs. Quake II

3) Unreal Vs. Half-Life

shoot.

1 doom
2 quake2
3 unreal

Ct_red_pants said:

1) Doom Vs. Duke Nukem 3D

2) GL Quake Vs. Quake II

3) Unreal Vs. Half-Life

Doom
Quake II
I'm not sure about the last two, as I've never played either one. From what I've seen however, Unreal looks as though it's the prettier game.

Duke Nukem 3d

Quake 2

Half-Life

This post vs. hell.. place bets

Linguica said:

<marquee><img src=http://www.doomworld.com/phptest/moron.jpg width=200 height=300></marquee>

EDIT: Damn! Marquee doesn't work for me.

1) Doom Vs. Duke Nukem 3D

Doom best. Better palette. Artwork looks better drawn, less cheap cartoony, the whole game looks and feels more solid and "ballsy" than Duke which, despite having many technical advantages, simply doesn't have that vital spark that makes Doom Doom. Duke feels cheap, throw away and gimicky, much of which is due to the look of the game.


2) GL Quake Vs. Quake II

Quake has a lot to offer, and with a spiffy engine (GL Quake or one of its clones) is a good looking scary game with hods of atmosphere, but it is still Waaaay too brown, has low poly count monsters and doesn't feel as much of a real place IMO. Whereas Quake 2 has a better range of colours, has real feeling places, whilst remaining believably alien, and provides a good looking, intentionally unpleasant, environment to play through.

3) Unreal Vs. Half-Life

Tough call. If you'd asked Unreal Tourney V's Half life, I may have swung towards UT. As it is, I still remember that "real" feeling that Half Life gave me when I played it. It put me in that damaged and corrupted Black Mesa base and the effect was pretty close to total. Unreal has a good looking engine, some very pretty levels and enemies. HL may have been "unreal" in a literal sense, but it put you in the game and provided something you could grasp onto and go with as opposed to assaulting your senses with "what an amazing fantasy world we have created" backed up with little substance.

I can't really vote on this one..since the only one of those games I've ever played was DOOM..so I can't really vote lol but anyway...DOOM rocks!!!!

doom.
quake 1. it's just more visually appealing to me, aside from being my preferred game of the two anyway.
unreal.

1) DOOM. Duke3D is neat and amusing, but DOOM looks better than any other FPS I've seen, so, what can I say?

2) GL Quake (or plain Quake, for that matter.) Quake 2's mechy theme is rather bland compared to Quake's gothic obscurity.

3) Unreal. I'm not even sure I like Unreal much, and I'm not too familiar with it, but its (very) strange sci-fi like appearance has some kind of charm even if it isn't my kind of thing. Half-life is "proper" for what it aims to be, which is fine, but this gives it rather boring aesthetics overall.

1. Doom vs. Duke 3d
Hmm, I'll say Doom, though I admit that Duke3d is more detailed. But while Duke is more detailed, it's also very cartoony looking (and the blood looks like ketchup), Doom's graphics had a more real feel to them.

2. Gl Quake Vs. Quake 2
Ermm, are we talking Gl Quake Vs Quake 2 in Software mode or what? ;-P

Seriously, I'll say Quake 2 (in OpenGL mode that is) - hate Quake's "everything-is-brown" graphics. Quake 2's more orangey looks is much more pleasing to look at and even at that, Quake 2 is nowhere as orange as Quake 1 is brown - I mean, the human soldiers wear proper green combat suits as does some of the Strogg, some of the Strogg wear black armour, skin colour is bright brown and there are lots of grey textures.
In comparison, almost everything in Quake 1 is brown: The soldiers are brown, the monsters are brown (with a few exceptions such as the Shambler), the walls are brown - even the green colour seems brown. There are a few weapons and textures that look dark blue though.

3. Unreal Vs. Half Life
Unreal hands down. The light effects were superb and the environments really looked sexy.

Now, bear in mind that so far, I've only discussed the graphical side of these games. As for gameplay, Doom wins over Duke, Quake 2 over Quake and Half life by far over Unreal. Don't feel like discussing why right about now.

1) Doom vs. Duke Nukem 3D - Hmmmm, this is a tough choice for me since both are my favourite FPS's for the PC. In the long run, I guess Doom would win. I like Doom's Hell atomsphere over Duke's Alien atmosphere. Whenever making my own Duke Nukem 3D maps, I often use somewhat Doom-ish sprites, wall textures and I leave lots of corpses and blood all over some rooms too. :) My liking of Doom more also probably comes from the fun I have playing co-op with it. I've never played a DN3D co-op before (except for in Duke Nukem 64).

2)QuakeGL vs. Quake 2 - I don't really have a supported oppinion on this, I've never played with QuakeGL. I choose Quake 2, which I had a lot of fun in, in Single Player before my saves were erased when I downloaded the MP patch.

3)Unreal vs. Half-Life - FFS, easily Unreal, since I hate HL.

1) Doom, pretty much because Duke3d is so damn cartoony looking compared to Doom.

2) Probably Quake 2.

3) Half Life for sure. Unreal was just, well, too colourful, IMO.

Heh, my only beef with Unreal as far as looks are concerned was with the gibs and blood.
Those always struck me as....erm...."unsatisfying".

1. They're both good in their own way.
2. They're both good in their own way.
3. They're both good in their own way.

1) A tricky one for me. I find doom (excluding ports etc) to have more interesting level design whilst Duke nukem 3d has more advanced level design\engine. Also the sprites are more detailed in duke3d. My vote goes to doom but it's kinda out of personal taste.
2) Quake 2 without a doubt.
3) I'd say Unreal. To me it looks more immersive.

Ok, I'll play along:

Doom
Quake
Half-Life

All of the other choices, at first, had more of a 'wow' impact when I first played them. Graphics wise I mean, other-wise they diddn't do much for me. Quake 2 sp got about as exciting as the chewed up gum under my desk after the first three levels.