Print

[twistedsymphony]

It's too bad... Quake is really a (reflectively) dull game, having it be all shiny and plasticy just doesn't look right to me  

I've been waiting for this game for a long time too.. I played the first Quake on the PC over and over and over. Same with Quake II. I never played Quake III on the PC but I played it to DEATH on my Dreamcast  

They've been saying that Quake IV will be the single player of II with the multiplayer of III and a much more in-depth story overall. To be honest, from what I've heard, the single player sounds like a great game, and if the multiplayer is so much as exactly like Quake III that will be great too.

One of the biggest things about quake has always been the user mods. I hope they find some way to allow that stuff on the console without allowing cheaters... otherwise they'll find themselves in Halo2 territory  

Here's hoping that the graphics don't doom the title... and yes it IS a launch title.

[crobar]

WTF...
um skrew graphics quake one is fun as hell...
you guys are tools if you are  thinking graphics will make the game more fun...
insane realistic graphics dont mean your going to have a fun game...
i for one hope its fun....thats it.

[pingrr]

I may be one of the few hear but I plan on getting this game when I pick up my new system.

[twistedsymphony]

QUOTE(crobar @ Aug 4 2005, 08:55 AM)

WTF...
um skrew graphics quake one is fun as hell...
you guys are tools if you are  thinking graphics will make the game more fun...
insane realistic graphics dont mean your going to have a fun game...
i for one hope its fun....thats it.

While I agree that graphics are not the BE ALL of a game they certainly contribute to the over all experience.

Think of it this way... if a next gen fighting game came out and had the best game play, multiplayer option and best story ever in a fighting game. but looked like the original virtua fighter.... how much would you really want to play that game? You're right that graphics arn't everything, but they can and DO very easily make or break an otherwise fantastic game.

Doom 3 has been hailed for it's great graphics but I found the plastic surfaces just too distracting. No matter how much I wanted to play the game, see where the story went, see what everyone was raving about, the shininess just killed the atmosphere for me. I couldn't "get into it" like I could with other games because of the graphics.

Like I said... I can't wait for Quake IV but I hope that the graphics aren't so distracting that it ruins it for me like Doom 3 was ruined for me.

[miggidy]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Aug 4 2005, 09:27 AM)

Yes Prey looks better. They put in a upgraded color palette to give it a fresh look, and it shows.

Ah that explains it.
Too bad they aren't doing the same for this game.
I've always liked Quake over the Unreal games!

[Shawn_]

I think this will be cool. How many people actually ran Doom 3 at max settings? I don't even think there were graphics cards out that could handle it. I htink that if they tweak the engine some and what-not its going to look amazing.

Either way, it should be a fun game.

[deftonesmx17]

If it plays anything like DOOM3 then count me out........................oops nevermind, it is the DOOM3 engine which means another 100% non interactive world. Next-gen my ass, they promised fully interactiove worlds for all the consoles of this past generation. I didnt seem to get very many of those and...............lets continue to make the same shitty games and waste the power of the next-gen systems. :rolleyes:

[Jason9875]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Aug 3 2005, 05:33 PM)

its using the doom 3 engine, its going to look kinda poopy compared to any of the games using newer ones. Its still very crisp looking though, so that alone is a huige step forward.

No jaggies  :luv:

Prey atleast uses an upgraded color palette, where as quake 4 seems to look exactly like doom 3 did.

time for Carmack to make an engine that will actually give the 360 a work out huh?

 

The Doom 3 engine can bring ANY console/computer to its knees and make it explode if the designers wanted.

The main flaw in the Doom 3 engine (this maybe tweaked in Quake 4) was the fact that every texture also had a high quality bumpmap, along with a few other graphics, (I cannot remember if it had heightmaps, and or not..) which use a lot of memory, remember for ULTRA quality in Doom 3 it is recommended to have a video card with 512MB of onboard RAM.

And the unified lighting is also a hinderance since it limits the amount of polygons that are on scene.

Also if the Quake 4 designers wanted to make the 360 implode upon itself they could always enable relief mapping, if the xbox 360 even supports it.

[Deftech]

I disagree

the engine is inefficient and archaic compared to shit out now.

and if you think the top of the line video card for a pc can even come close to what the R500 can do....I guess Im wasting my time by replying.

please dont confuse pc's and consoles, dont lump them together.

whatever brings a pc to its knees, the console version made from the ground up will run it a LOT better.

quake 4 on 360 looks like old school shit, kinda sad to think doom 3/quake 4 looks old.

If it looked like it played different than doom 3, I might pick it up for $5.00, but no thanks. It doesnt even look like a quake in my opinion.

dont worry, itll only be another 7 years till carmack makes another engine, and by the time its released, itll only be used for 1 or 2 games and be outdated. bahaha

that guy was cool 6 years ago, an icon, now hes pretty much non existent. even the quakecons are a a joke.

 

Now prey on the other hand, they took it and added some new shit, not just the color palette, I think I remember reading that it doesnt even resemble the doom 3 engine anymore after what they did to it, and it shows, because it looks better than quake 4 and doom 3.

[Jason9875]

QUOTE

and if you think the top of the line video card for a pc can even come close to what the R500 can do....I guess Im wasting my time by replying.

Not a single one, but Dual 7800 GTXs can come close, and as for Relief mapping, it is currently a feature only on the 7800 GTX, and the 6xxx series. So like I said I wasn't sure if the new ATi GPU would even have support for it. And in case you don't know Relief mapping is kinda like bump mapping it just has more dramatic, and better looking results, along with making the game unplayable on the 6xxx series

QUOTE

the console version made from the ground up will run it a LOT better.

Yea when its optimized for the console it will run great!

But you misunderstood my point, which was the fact that the Doom 3 engine can indeed make the xbox 360 stutter, if someone wanted to enable everything it was capable of. (which some people seem to think that the game Doom 3 is exactly what the engine can do, which is completly false, they had to scrap items to get it to run on current computers.)

QUOTE

the engine is inefficient and archaic compared to shit out now.

you can't comare the Doom 3 engine to any other in terms of effecency because no other game engine (AFAIK) has a unified lighting system. If you moded other game engines to do the same all of them would run poorly compared to other games were certain items of pre-rendered shadows, and don't have to mess with doing advanced lighting calculations.

[Deftech]

ready for this one...

I will say its refreshing to have someone around that knows there way around video cards and other graphical talk. I was worried this would turn into a bitch fest, alas I am relieved.

you make good points.

I knew what relief mapping was but didnt hear that its exclusive to the geforce line. Interesting indeed.

and Im not talking about one card versus another in just pure power #'s, efficiency and how they go about doing those tricks is whats starting to matter a lot more lately, enter the R500. You can have 4 geforces with a fill rate of a gazillion per second for all I care, but if the tech doesnt move forward, that power is useless.

I dont see a doom 3 engine game slowing down the 360 for one simple reason, they dont have to account for the FSAA anymore. Its all done with the buffer and takes a HUGE load off the entire system, not to mention the bandwidth between the ati and the edram is just outrageous.

That is the ONE thing that will seperate the 360 and ps3 in my opinion. Being able to run fsaa/msaa with very little hit in performance is going to be a bigger deal than most people think, and I see cross platform games on the ps3 looking either a little jaggier but still running smooth, or they boost the AA and youll see a hit in system performamce.

Unified shaders is another thing I see being a big deal. Nvidia says they dislike it, but I guarantee they adopt it soon enough.

I could be very wrong, but thats where I stand as of now.

I also didnt know Relief mapping was harder to get running. theres got to be different ways to manipulate it so it can run more better, but Im not a dev so Im talking out my ass  

[Jason9875]

QUOTE

I knew what relief mapping was but didnt hear that its exclusive to the geforce line.

Im not exactly sure its exclusive to the Geforce line, it might be something like Ultra Shadow 2, or HDR, in which the ATi Radeon series (xX00) don't support, which if thats the case then the r500 will be able to do all that.

and as for the FSAA/MSAA there is no need to point out Full Screen AA, as to my knowledge there inst a video card in that could do AA and didn't do full screen AA.

QUOTE

I also didnt know Relief mapping was harder to get running.

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cg...ic;f=3;t=013411

I found the thread that mentioned it, said he got 50fps at 640x480 resolution, on a 6800 GT.

Maybe the r500 could run relief maps fairly well after all...

[Deftech]

QUOTE(Jason9875 @ Aug 5 2005, 02:49 AM)

and as for the FSAA/MSAA there is no need to point out Full Screen AA, as to my knowledge there inst a video card in that could do AA and didn't do full screen AA.

its used so some of these people here will recognize it easier. They know who they are  

ive had too many say wtf is AA...most sites mention "FSAA" and thats the term most know. you have to remember who youre dealing with at this site, members who confuse Aliasing with Geometrical shapes, and think Aliasing should turn a square into a circle  

[Deftech]

Atis shader methods get in the way it seems, so its an Nvidia thing. maybe this is why nvidia isnt using unified for the time being? maybe we are onto something  

[tNCecil]

How can you call the doom 3 engine maxed out? The Quake 3 engine was barely maxed out, with games like Jedi Academy still using it.