Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/ 2008-12-03T16:57:58-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/ http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/halogo.gif text/html 2004-08-15T04:49:56-05:00 Corvus Raven http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/?o=20#171664 85$ US would be my guess.. he lives in the US.. somewhere. <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile1.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":)" title=":)"><br /> <br /> (based purely on his profile) text/html 2004-08-15T00:23:14-05:00 Shadow_Ops_Airman1 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/?o=20#171574 85 dollars in what currency, USD? text/html 2004-08-14T23:37:41-05:00 Sean B http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#171569 I paid $85 for it a week before it came out, so don't feel too bad.<br /> text/html 2004-08-14T18:24:04-05:00 3-Oh-Beast http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#171494 I feel bad for those of you who paid 50 bucks for D3 and hate it, but quite frankly I think you need to lighten up. While the game may disillusion some compared to the hype, it is still a great game. A decent system with some tweaks of the config file can run this game on high graphics with more than enough fps. Combined with the great sound fx and the fact that this game WILL scare the crap out of anyone who plays it I think playing through this game will be immensly enjoyable for most people. And when you think about it, it really isn't &quot;just another fps.&quot; <br /> <br /> My only real problem with the game is that i paid 54,99 for it. A bit pricey but, that's <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.gamestop.com/">GameStop</a> in Virginia for ya.<br /> <br /> By the way, i loved Doom2 but Doom3 just smacks Doom2 around like a middle-aged inmate would smack around a smarmy 10 year old child.<br /> text/html 2004-08-14T02:15:54-05:00 Will Olson II http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#171254 Im playing it and it looks fine not the greatest thing ever but if you playing the game so you can stand around and count pixels you baught the game for the wrong reason. Its scary very scary someone in this thread even said ITS TOOOOOO SCARY well thats the point if you wasting time looking for all the rough spots your missing the point...and by the way the sound in the game is revolutionary I love the game I have to pee everytime Im done and streach cause Im so tense good job to ID even though its not the greatest looking thing ever.... text/html 2004-08-07T06:56:39-05:00 Michael A. http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158544 Wow NVIDIA's stock *is* going down... text/html 2004-08-07T06:05:52-05:00 Shadow_Ops_Airman1 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158532 UT2k4 and Skaarj text/html 2004-08-07T05:46:59-05:00 christian ruiz http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158520 I don't care about the graphics too much since i have a fx5200 but i am enjoying the game very very much. I like the story, the creativity and the monsters. I think it is like art on the terror side. I have played farc cry and it's such a stupid story and the sounds can't compare with doom 3's creepy sounds. Mayb far cry has realistic images or jus photos of beatiful spots should i say? Instead of creating and inventing facilities such the ones in doom 3. I repeart i don't care to have a sun shining while i kill unknown humans but i like the creations of the these horrible monsters invented from a fantastic brain. Its like art! I don't like a well draw of a sun i like a distorted sun that shines a black light!<br /> text/html 2004-08-07T05:43:35-05:00 Shadow_Ops_Airman1 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158516 uh Sean B my system will run Doom 3 Pretty Easily. text/html 2004-08-07T05:29:44-05:00 Brian Stewart http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158515 I agree.<br /> 2 thumbs down. text/html 2004-08-07T04:53:18-05:00 Sailendran Iswara Jothi http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158511 Hmmm, <br /> What should I say, I invested money in a good video card, The game play well definetely scary, I would give ID a thumbs up for that, as for the models I would say there could have been a slight improvement....As for the world maps, what were they thinking? <br /> When you actually take a closer look at world maps that there is nothing much to really flatter about. I would say that they could have spend some more time making it more realistic. I mean c'mon, you took so long to develop the game, spend a little more time on the rough spots. <br /> I would advice everybody to wait for Half Life 2 and then hope that it will be better. If what the guys say is true, that Nvidia is doing a payoff I would totally feel that this is the bad way to go about proving your video cards. <br /> <br /> Regards,<br /> Sailendran Iswara Jothi text/html 2004-08-07T04:18:34-05:00 Sean B http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158505 Doom II was better? Update your system so you can actually play the game.... then judge it.<br /> <br /> I believe this is ID soft's only game of this genre to have a consistent storyline, but even so, the entirety of the Doom series is lackluster in a substantial storyline.<br /> <br /> <br /> The reason you haven't seen a Diablo III is because Blizzard has been busy finishing World of Warcraft and Starcraft Ghost. Blizzard, unlike other developers such as Electronic Arts, only has ONE development team... which is why you'll never see a Warcraft, Starcraft, or Diablo game being released within a year of each other. text/html 2004-08-07T02:23:09-05:00 Shadow_Ops_Airman1 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158474 Doom 2 was probably better, i say there hasnt been a Diablo Game in long time has there, what was the last one made? text/html 2004-08-07T02:00:14-05:00 Lachlan Stuart http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158468 wow, you sure strike alot of technicalities there, I've no excuse for my bad english, but thats pretty irrelevant.<br /> <br /> Firstly, when I said polygons, I meant triangles, if you've coded Direct3D, you understand theres virtually no difference as geometry performance is based on the number of vertices rather than number of primitives, meaning triangle fans, strips, etc. generally require more overhead than they return in speed.<br /> <br /> OpenGl, however, takes a lot of work to get equivalent levels of vertex throughput, last I checked there was no way of transforming a whole vertex buffer before using an index buffer to make triangles, ensuring no vertex is transformed twice, but there may be a way if you dig deep enough...<br /> <br /> Pixel shaders, programs, register combiners, etc. all mean the same thing, though their capabilities are different, whether its DirectX or OpenGl, you still have to code special cases for older cards if you want to support them. Bumpmapping is no excuse or compensation for someone looking like their head was designed by a bored Geometry student with a ruler, if anything Bump Mapping should mean much greater polygon counts because it shifts most of the GPU's work from the Vertex to the Pixel pipelines, leaving the Vertex pipelines idle most of the time.<br /> <br /> &quot;Soft Shadows&quot; are basically just manipulation of stencil shadows, neither of which, if I remember correctly, weren't used in HL1, or any of the mods I played. They still require quite a bit of CPU time to calculate, compared to shadow maps, which are almost completely GPU dependant.<br /> <br /> But who really cares about the technical side? the fact of the matter is that the quality levels are so inconsistant, its comparable to a gold plated dog crap. Its nice and shiny, expensive, takes forever to actually design(you tried gold plating dung?), but when it comes down to it, it simply lacks the decency to be comparable to say the Venus de Milo, which, even though its only made of rock, is overall so expressive its one of the most valuable pieces of art out there. text/html 2004-08-07T01:15:19-05:00 Sean B http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/30323/#158448 Okay... first grab a dictionary. &quot;Proberly&quot; is not a word, &quot;patheticly&quot; is spelled &quot;pathetically&quot;<br /> Now that we've gotten that taken care of... let's move on to the technicality.<br /> <br /> <br /> Quote:&quot;What I find hard to believe is that if you look at a tangled mess of tubes hanging from the ceiling, you'll proberbly see half a thousand polygons, look at a sink or a toilet and you'll see similar, look at a zombie and you'll be thinking around 200-300...&quot;<br /> <br /> A half-thousand polygons? Try two. A toilet, three. And a sink one.<br /> The zombies' models are comprised of about 20 logical polygons, but it virtually appears to be in the tens of thousands. <br /> <br /> Ever heard of bump mapping?<br /> <br /> Quote:&quot;So, if the game has patheticly low detail and stupid enemies, why does it require such high system specs? Ill tell you why, because Carmack is a slave to the PC industry, ever since nVidia offered him a fat wad of cash to use the inferior Stencil Shadows(which run 2x as fast on nVidia than ATI cards) rather than Shadow Maps, he's been eating out of the hands of PC manufacturers.&quot;<br /> <br /> The code itself does not determine the system requirements. The graphical engine, however, does.<br /> <br /> The engine does not use stencil shadows, but rather soft shading. Stencil shadows have not been used since the original HalfLife engine. Soft shadows is actually an ATI developed technology, so if it runs slower on your card... that's saying a little more about ATI than most would like to hear.<br /> <br /> Before the Alpha leak, Carmack was actually catering toward ATI... so I wouldn't be suprised if a wad of money with Nvidia's name on it arrived in Carmack's mailbox.<br /> <br /> Quote:&quot;If he were instead to just mod Quake 3 Arena to have pixel shaders and develop a single player mode, he'd have a much faster, more detailed engine, and it would have been out years ago.&quot;<br /> <br /> Pixel shading is a DirectX algorithm. The Quake engine was written in OpenGL. DirectX 9 is not supported by the Radeon 8xxx or Geforce 4 series... which would make a lot of people who can't afford an FX or Radeon 9xxx, but want to play Doom III, very unhappy.