Games: What games are you currently playing? [OT!]

[One Classy Bloke]

Half-Life 2 is probably the best looking PC game at the moment, possibly over all systems in fact. You still need a high end PC to run it, but even on the lowest settings, it looks amazing.

WoW's graphics are fairly poor. They have a good excuse though, since they wanted the game to be playable on most computers.

[DarkLinkClone]

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you One Beardless Bloke. HL2 has some amazing texture art, but overall the game looks and feels too flat. I believe Doom 3 is best looking game so far.


The lighting/shadows system in Doom 3 seems to make everything feel more dynamic and life like. The realistic shadows cast by objects gives the objects an extra sense of depth and presence. The shadows will morph in response to light sources like how real shadows seem to dance around us. Both and lights and shadows have a real since of volume.

In HL2 the lighting merely dynamically changes the shades on textures. Realistic shadows are non-existent in the game. Too often I see shadows overlapping through other objects. Other times the static shadows on the characters are completely facing wrong direction base on environment lights. HL2 still uses primitive light-maps to create fake shadows in maps.

Doom 3 uses normal-mapping on characters, which the gives the characters amazing 3D depth and detail. Despite the extremely low polygon counts on most characters, Doom 3 has most beautiful and detailed characters thus far. The effects of normal-mapping are truly expose when in full motion. The normal-maps will change with the environment lighting as if it was actual object with depth.

On the other hand HL2 merely depended on high resolution textures to make the characters more life like. These characters looked great in still and static environments, but when in motion the characters of HL2 looked very flat. This is because the textures provide no sense of depth with changes in the environment.

Doom 3 has extensive use of bump-mapping that gives the environment a more tactile feel. The walls looked as if they have actual bumps and grooves. The change in lighting will realistically reflect on the bump-maps.

Once again in HL2 relies on too many plain and beautiful textures to back up the environment. There are few cases of bump-maps, but they are horribly implemented and thus flat looking. The only thing that HL2 has that makes the environments dynamic is cube mapping. Cube-mapping does pretender reflection effects on 3D objects.

Doom 3 also has programmable shaders that are just as impressive as most of the DX9 shader effects in HL2. The glass in Doom 3 provided subtle distortion and heat generated waves or distortion.


HL2 is a very good looking game, but it relies too much on old effects that are just too static. I believe Doom 3 and FarCry are both better looking games with Doom 3 on top.

[Hell Knight]

But respect for the expections. Fe I think Blizzard made and make cool games. Mebbe not with the best graph, but the game is enjoyable. Btw finished The house of the dead in 20 mins with my friend(he did one level, after it 1 level mine, etcetc)

<font color="#345E81" size="1">[ February 18, 2005 12:45 PM: Message edited by: Hell Knight ]</font>

[One Classy Bloke]

In terms of how attractive the graphics are, I would go for Half Life 2. But if we include Farcry, i would say that game looks the best.

[Hell Knight]

For me far cry is the best. I always liked jungles and outer sides better, than inside horror.

[DarkLinkClone]

I believe artistic style and graphics are 2 separate categories. In terms of art, Farcry is probably on top. The jungles are lushes and open and the interiors were litter with detail all which makes Farcry a very pretty game. Behind it are HL2 and Doom3. HL2 has many dull looking areas especially in the last level. Most of the walls in HL are completely flat and boring. Doom3 provides extremely detail interiors more so than Farcry, but the repeating style gives an impression that all the rooms are the same.

[mrwiseman]

I consider visuals ("what I see") to be one single aspect, but it's of course made of technology and art, and I value both. However, I consider art more important than technology, and ultimately, I value the overall result, regardless of technology and art alone. That's why I consider some games graphics, despite simple, are better than these hundreds of "dark facility" FPSes.

[One Classy Bloke]

What are you doing looking at the walls?

[mrwiseman]

I value art and like beautifully crafted environments. That's one of the reasons why I still worship Grandia 2 despite having 5 year old graphics technically-wise.

[mrwiseman]

Ah, yes. I've seen pretty amazing screenshots of Farcry. I haven't read about its engine, and it's likely to be sensibly inferior to Doom 3, but graphics aren't just 902367 textures and 600 KB shaders, and this is where IMO Doom 3 fails. Regardless of how many amazing effects and realistic materials you use, dark ill future graphics with bizarre shaped monsters and ugly futuristic facilities will always be dark ill future graphics with bizarre shaped monsters and ugly futuristic facilities, and those are last in my list of goodness.