Respect for id running low

[Navanax]

the whole point of realistic games is to be eh....realistic? yeh i think i got that right... rainbow six is a realistic game meaning you do things as if they were real...that includes dying from 1 well aimed shot, and fighting enemies that arent actually stupid. you call hl2's ai super advanced. but i never found the combine able to pin me down and/or aim for my head. OR choose and target specific key team members.

AI being 'super advanced' doesn't have ANYTHING to do with aiming skills, it means they can 'think' for themselves.

And I don't get it when people say the gfx in D3 are better than HL2's. I didn't see a news report about masses of people getting headaches from the realistic visuals of D3, did anyone else?

 

[Eon]

I never new headaches from a game(woo for fixing typo o/) signified good things. :x

But I loved Doom 3, I had alot of fun with it actually. Mainly because I loved the old Doom games and this was just a remake with better graphics and not a thick plot at all.


Half Life 2, I've only played bits and pieces of it at friends' houses. The game really is nice, I just like the feel of the game of being a fugitive type person.

I'm still waiting for HL2 to go down in price a little bit, I'm in no rush to get it at all.

Doom3 just added more to keep up with the others, probably won't help them at all, so no big deal if no one really cares for it.

 

[Navanax]

I never new headaches from a gaem signified good things. :x

I didn't say it was a good thing, just that it looked SO realistic that people have headaches from the game

 

[-JLN-]

They probably ought to have their heads checked if HL2 is giving them headaches. It looks nice, don't get me wrong, but it's nothing particularly special graphics wise in my opinion. It has beautiful art direction, but it has cheap shadow problems, and lower res textures than I hoped for, especially when comparing them to Painkiller that was released months earlier. On the other hand, Doom 3 didn't have such good art direction, but I was astounded at how good such mundane places could look, though that had very low res textures, it was party disguised by the lighting.

 

[Jesus]

painkiller > all

im halfway through the "fight out of hell" expansion.. gotta love the new sub machine gun-flame thrower

 

[[SAS]Orion]

yes i have the expansion too - some parts were quite hard!

 

[Smith|]

I didn't say it was a good thing, just that it looked SO realistic that people have headaches from the game

People were getting headaches because the field of view was only 75 degrees.

 

[Hitokiri]

1. i wasnt saying that was how all fps storys are, tis just how most "save the world" stories are.

2. hl2 is by no means abstract. its a very plain, and very boring story, but then again i read a lot of books over 500 pages, so my idea of a good story might be different to yours.

3. the gameplay WASNT innovative. name 1 thing you could do that you couldnt in any other game...oh yeh, the grav gun.... correct me if im wrong, but in a lot of other games which involve feats of strength and/or magic, you could do much the same thing, just without the word "gun".

4. the game took me 7 hours to beat. which is fast by most peoples standards, and even faster by mine.

5. any game that takes 6 years to develope should have more defining features than "zomg we have fractual water", which, in fact, is a capability in doom 3, just no ones implimented it. cos theres no point, your on a friggin rock!

6. the whole point of realistic games is to be eh....realistic? yeh i think i got that right... rainbow six is a realistic game meaning you do things as if they were real...that includes dying from 1 well aimed shot, and fighting enemies that arent actually stupid. you call hl2's ai super advanced. but i never found the combine able to pin me down and/or aim for my head. OR choose and target specific key team members.

1.) You said "you can't make an original fps anymore" and then listed some plot scenario that I can only assume meant the plot for every fps. Why would you be talking about anything else in this thread? Not even HL2 or Doom 3 fell into that synopsis of yours anyway.

2.) The majority of gamers disagree with your view of the plot, simple as that. Agree to disagree? But hey, congratulations on reading long books, the medal will arrive in a few weeks.

3.) Having a near fully-interactive environment with realistic object physics, in which utilizing that environment (a la the grav gun) is important, is innovative. In most other games of the genre it's all about shooting, shooting, getting the bigger gun, shooting some more, maybe some platform jumping, whatever. HL2 was at least a little bit different from the average mold.

4.) Not the longest game, I agree. Then again it's difficult to make a very long fps without getting immensely repetitive (like in Halo), especially one where you're stuck in one guy's head the entire time. And was I even talking about this?

5.) 4 years on the engine, 2 years on the game. I expected more too, but either way I'm pretty sure the engine developed more than the water.

6.) "you call hl2's ai superadvanced." Nope. Not once. In fact, I don't really think HL2 had any kind of AI above "average." You seem to be great at reading books, why not read my post.

HL2 is supposed to have realistic and convincing physics, not realistic and convincing play (like Rainbow 6); it was never advertised as being strictly adherent to the laws of reality. You have an anti-matter gun. You wear a power suit. You fight ZOMBIES. There's an alien invasion. What the hell do you expect? If everything was completely realistic, you'd just sneak around the level half the time trying not to get shot. This is HL, not Rainbow Six. Rainbow Six games are supposed to be as-accurate-as-possible simulations of modern combat, which in itself is fun, but useless when delivering a story of any kind of epic proportion, because when everything is as realistic as possible, amazing actions become impossible. HL is meant to be epic, and thus, (LIKE MOST VIDEO GAMES) common rules like how many bullets you can take are bent.

 

[Ravendust]

As a point about taking damage, remember Gordon is wearing the hazard suit, which is built to survive resonance cascades. He was right by the machine when the cascade happened and survived without a scratch, while the two scientists in the entrance airlock, and the three in the observation room were killed. We know that Kliener made adjustments to the suit in HL2 (Sprint anyone?) and that Gordon would be using it in combat, so he probably made it more resistant to bullets and other attacks too.

 

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

I'm sure my commentary has been long awaited in this thread. But it's not to say what you all may be expecting. And it is this:

Chronicles of Rid**** Director's Cut was better than either of these games could have ever hoped to be, and easily bests any other game mentioned in this thread, if you ask me.

EDIT: Although of all the games mentioned so far...HL2 was the only one that took me two days to install and the better part of two weeks to get working tolerably.

On the subject of FPS originality, and the original post of this thread: Half-Life 2's supposed development cycle beginning was WAY BACK right after they released half-life 1. Do you think they got the ideas for, say, bump mapping or environment mapping, from their own brilliance? The guys who did Rid**** get my vote for the true inheritors of the technological mantle of gaming. They and Blizzard are seeming to me to be the two best game designers from a technological standpoint.

I mean...the Rid**** team got done in 1/4 the time things that both the Doom 3 and HL2 engines could not perfectly accomplish. There's physics, true dynamic lighting and shading, and full environment bump maps...as well as hand-to-hand combat, vehicles, a really nice storyline and top notch voice-acting. It needed no patches and no tweaking, its menu options were vastly more detailed than either of the other games' menus were. The gameplay was fascinating and the use of DirectX 9 features was both masterful and non-"gimmicky."

Now, I'm pretty sure that Doom looks slightly better in terms of it's visual quality, and Half-Life 2 uses the physics to better effect, but the fact is...this Doom 3 expansion to me, sounds like a great thing, because it's going to have the best of both worlds. Either way, it goes without saying that I'm buying it. And after the performance nightmares I experienced with Valve, I definitely WILL NOT be buying any Half-Life 2 expansion packs.

 

[owa]

I'm sure my commentary has been long awaited in this thread. But it's not to say what you all may be expecting. And it is this:

Chronicles of Rid**** Director's Cut was better than either of these games could have ever hoped to be, and easily bests any other game mentioned in this thread, if you ask me.

EDIT: Although of all the games mentioned so far...HL2 was the only one that took me two days to install and the better part of two weeks to get working tolerably.

On the subject of FPS originality, and the original post of this thread: Half-Life 2's supposed development cycle beginning was WAY BACK right after they released half-life 1. Do you think they got the ideas for, say, bump mapping or environment mapping, from their own brilliance? The guys who did Rid**** get my vote for the true inheritors of the technological mantle of gaming. They and Blizzard are seeming to me to be the two best game designers from a technological standpoint.

I mean...the Rid**** team got done in 1/4 the time things that both the Doom 3 and HL2 engines could not perfectly accomplish. There's physics, true dynamic lighting and shading, and full environment bump maps...as well as hand-to-hand combat, vehicles, a really nice storyline and top notch voice-acting. It needed no patches and no tweaking, its menu options were vastly more detailed than either of the other games' menus were. The gameplay was fascinating and the use of DirectX 9 features was both masterful and non-"gimmicky."

Now, I'm pretty sure that Doom looks slightly better in terms of it's visual quality, and Half-Life 2 uses the physics to better effect, but the fact is...this Doom 3 expansion to me, sounds like a great thing, because it's going to have the best of both worlds. Either way, it goes without saying that I'm buying it. And after the performance nightmares I experienced with Valve, I definitely WILL NOT be buying any Half-Life 2 expansion packs.

Why can't you just keep the topic about how Doom 3 is ripping off HL2 and The Matrix in order to get sales, rather then try to throw in knocks about HL2, and trying to intimidate people. Chronicles of rid**** really isn't relevant to this thread.

Anyways, Doom 3 is just grasping for things here. They say they left it out of the original, and are now implamenting it, but their must have been reasons for it not being implemented. They say it is really good afterall. So why leave it out of the original product?

They are just being cheap and corny, but peopel will buy it. I won't, I need to respect the games I play. A game can be great, but unless the game has my respect (IE: Tried something innovating, isn't a complete rip, isn't corny... etc) then I don't put much thought into it. ALL HAIL DOOM1.

 

[SaiyanPrideXIX]

Knocks? Intimidate people? Dude, did you even read what I wrote at all?

 

[Hibiki]

now now i dont think we need to start personal arguments

keep the topic to the doom patch and not if rid**** was an awesome game or if hl2 sucked

 

[owa]

Knocks? Intimidate people? Dude, did you even read what I wrote at all?

Yes, I did. And you just kept trying to make HL2 seem like a pile of crap, which would also intimidate the LARGE number of HL2 fans on this board.

Doom 3's new expansion is gonna suck. Pretty simple, not many people can rip thigns off so blantly and do REALLY well.