Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

HL2 V D3

Last response: in Video Games
Share
November 19, 2004 9:50:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no knew
ideas and graphically miles behind D3...

More about : hl2

Anonymous
November 19, 2004 9:50:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:50:37 +0000, Simon wrote:

> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...

Go away, troll boy.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951
Anonymous
November 19, 2004 1:43:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:50:37 -0000, "Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote in
alt.games.doom:

>dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no knew
>ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
You do know you are stupid, right ?

--
Gerner

Folk med stress bruger planlægningskalendere.
Folk der bruger planlægningskalendere får stress.
(denne signatur er beskyttet mod kommentarer).
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
November 19, 2004 3:15:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote:

>dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no knew
>ideas and graphically miles behind D3...

I just posted my own thoughts over on AGHL (in a similar HL2 V D3 thread).
Might as well copy them here for the sake of discussion:


There are some genuine high points in D3, especially the cavern levels
which would be missed by those who bailed out in mid-game. I won't argue
with the standard complaints about D3. Yes, it's repetitive and
claustrophobic. But, someone asked for thoughts comparing the HL2 and D3,
here's my take.

(I've played D3 a few times. I'm still in my first time through HL2.
Make what you will of that.)


Graphics: It's tough to compare an indoor engine (D3) vs. an outdoor
engine (HL2). HL2 is quite impressive in its visual scale - the beautiful
skies, water effects, and highly detailed textures. And who can argue
with FPS? I'm getting generally over 40 FPS at 1024x768 and everything
turned up high except AA. (that's using a low-end Nvidia 5200FX!)
Impressive. However, the detail seems more in the texturing than in the
polygon count. D3, despite its tight spaces, seems to have more to render
but at the cost of a substantially lower FPS on my system. Interestingly,
D3 has absolutely zero water effects. Presumably this left John Carmack
free to concentrate on light/shadow and atmospheric effects.

Physics: HL2 excels! In D3 I accidentally shot a notebook computer at
point blank (I thought I was clicking to activate it). The computer
slowly toppled backwards in slow motion as though I had sneezed on it. In
HL2 objects have a more fluid physics.


Sounds: Here I'll give a slight nod to D3. Its montage of sound weaves a
seemingly endless tapestry of machine hums, rhythms, air vents, and a
generally creepy ambiance. Some of it doesn't make sense mind you (baby
cries) but it creates a certain mood that works well.

HL2 succeeds well but on a somewhat different level. I really like that
they used many of the familiar sounds from HL1. Who among us hasn't
developed a Pavlovian response to the sound of a health station? HL3 also
weaves its own tapestry of sound - especially in the city. The occasional
use of music from HL1 was also a nice touch.


Story: Here HL2 wins hands down. In HL2, I feel as if I'm part of an
action/adventure movie. In D3, I'm playing a game. D3's story interrupts
the game whereas in HL2 the story moves the game along.

One moment in D3 I found quite amusing - the stasis chambers where there
are some "preserved" specimens of some of the monsters with "scientific"
info about them. For the imp, it said that scientists are trying to
understand how the imp generates fireballs in its hand. Here the game
makes a joke about its own premises (or lack thereof). Imps throw
fireballs. Who cares how it is possible? Doom is not about explanations.
Monsters...chainsaw...get busy. Although I don't *need* a story to enjoy
the game, but I'm blown away by how HL2 integrates the story with the game
(even more so than with HL1 and its expansions).


Monsters/Action: For sheer adrenaline factor, D3's monsters make my pulse
race even after the umpteenth time of appearing from behind the
inexplicable secret panels that UAC felt necessary to build into their
Mars base. I like the disorientation you experience when you get smacked.
So far, the adrenaline rush in HL2 comes more from moving action. The
whole airboat sequence was superb and kept me up until all hours of the
night. Finally shooting down the chopper was extremely satisfying.


Weapons: Too early to tell for me since I'm only part way through HL2. I
assume more weapons will be forthcoming. Both games offer weaponry
similar to the original versions plus some nice additions. The gravity
gun (HL2) is about as fun as it gets. By the same token, D3's soul cube
was a brilliant strategic addition. Both games seem to drop the ball on
grenades. D3's grenades seem to do little damage unless you actually hit
the monster with them - but at least you can carry 50 of 'em. So far I
have yet to succeed with a grenade in HL2 but at least I can throw them
farther and they don't annoyingly come rolling back to me.


Oh well. Just a few thoughts over a cup of coffee.


sda_mail Scott | Yields over 30 blasts or
@comcast.net Amspoker | 80 gentle honks per charge!
^ my email |
November 19, 2004 5:06:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote in message
news:419d97ca$0$545$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
You asked the same question in the Half-life newsgroup!!! GRRRRR!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.797 / Virus Database: 541 - Release Date: 15/11/2004
Anonymous
November 19, 2004 5:22:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote in message
news:419d97ca$0$545$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...


I case you haven't noticed yet, very few people are visiting this site
anymore. They have all gone over to the half-life2 forum where all action
is. D3 is a great game but HL2 is exceptional.


>
>
Anonymous
November 19, 2004 5:28:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

no, I think just the opposite - except for the graphics. I still think HL2
has better graphics, but D3 was great in this regard, too. The gameplay,
however, is no contest - HL2 is grossly better than D3 in this respect. The
storyline in both sux rocks, but I don't seem to mind.

To paraphrase something from "Finding Nemo":

"Just keep killing, just keep killing, just keep killing...."


"Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote in message
news:419d97ca$0$545$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
knew
> ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
>
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 3:08:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:22:08 GMT, "Allan Martin" <Allan@Ua-Corp.com> wrote in
alt.games.doom:

>
>"Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote in message
>news:419d97ca$0$545$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
>> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
>> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
>
>I case you haven't noticed yet, very few people are visiting this site
>anymore. They have all gone over to the half-life2 forum where all action
>is. D3 is a great game but HL2 is exceptional.
>
>
>>
>>
>
You do know you are stupid, right ?

--
Gerner

Folk med stress bruger planlægningskalendere.
Folk der bruger planlægningskalendere får stress.
(denne signatur er beskyttet mod kommentarer).
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 3:29:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

doom3 is about darkness and fear - a play on the original doom series -
half-life
exists because of the success of doom2 - and fair play it does exceed it in
many ways -
but its a mistake to compare the 2 games - doom3 is a nostalgia trip with
refined
methods, half-life and many others are more rewarding in different ways.
but yeah lets have a shoot out :)  doom freaks v halflife freaks on a Q2 CTF
level- hehe...


"Scott Amspoker" <see_sig@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:D ehsp0tcnm9j82b0fvrqihr8u05b9c3cag@4ax.com...
> "Simon" <sie@simplysimon.plus.com> wrote:
>
> >dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
knew
> >ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
> I just posted my own thoughts over on AGHL (in a similar HL2 V D3 thread).
> Might as well copy them here for the sake of discussion:
>
>
> There are some genuine high points in D3, especially the cavern levels
> which would be missed by those who bailed out in mid-game. I won't argue
> with the standard complaints about D3. Yes, it's repetitive and
> claustrophobic. But, someone asked for thoughts comparing the HL2 and D3,
> here's my take.
>
> (I've played D3 a few times. I'm still in my first time through HL2.
> Make what you will of that.)
>
>
> Graphics: It's tough to compare an indoor engine (D3) vs. an outdoor
> engine (HL2). HL2 is quite impressive in its visual scale - the beautiful
> skies, water effects, and highly detailed textures. And who can argue
> with FPS? I'm getting generally over 40 FPS at 1024x768 and everything
> turned up high except AA. (that's using a low-end Nvidia 5200FX!)
> Impressive. However, the detail seems more in the texturing than in the
> polygon count. D3, despite its tight spaces, seems to have more to render
> but at the cost of a substantially lower FPS on my system. Interestingly,
> D3 has absolutely zero water effects. Presumably this left John Carmack
> free to concentrate on light/shadow and atmospheric effects.
>
> Physics: HL2 excels! In D3 I accidentally shot a notebook computer at
> point blank (I thought I was clicking to activate it). The computer
> slowly toppled backwards in slow motion as though I had sneezed on it. In
> HL2 objects have a more fluid physics.
>
>
> Sounds: Here I'll give a slight nod to D3. Its montage of sound weaves a
> seemingly endless tapestry of machine hums, rhythms, air vents, and a
> generally creepy ambiance. Some of it doesn't make sense mind you (baby
> cries) but it creates a certain mood that works well.
>
> HL2 succeeds well but on a somewhat different level. I really like that
> they used many of the familiar sounds from HL1. Who among us hasn't
> developed a Pavlovian response to the sound of a health station? HL3 also
> weaves its own tapestry of sound - especially in the city. The occasional
> use of music from HL1 was also a nice touch.
>
>
> Story: Here HL2 wins hands down. In HL2, I feel as if I'm part of an
> action/adventure movie. In D3, I'm playing a game. D3's story interrupts
> the game whereas in HL2 the story moves the game along.
>
> One moment in D3 I found quite amusing - the stasis chambers where there
> are some "preserved" specimens of some of the monsters with "scientific"
> info about them. For the imp, it said that scientists are trying to
> understand how the imp generates fireballs in its hand. Here the game
> makes a joke about its own premises (or lack thereof). Imps throw
> fireballs. Who cares how it is possible? Doom is not about explanations.
> Monsters...chainsaw...get busy. Although I don't *need* a story to enjoy
> the game, but I'm blown away by how HL2 integrates the story with the game
> (even more so than with HL1 and its expansions).
>
>
> Monsters/Action: For sheer adrenaline factor, D3's monsters make my pulse
> race even after the umpteenth time of appearing from behind the
> inexplicable secret panels that UAC felt necessary to build into their
> Mars base. I like the disorientation you experience when you get smacked.
> So far, the adrenaline rush in HL2 comes more from moving action. The
> whole airboat sequence was superb and kept me up until all hours of the
> night. Finally shooting down the chopper was extremely satisfying.
>
>
> Weapons: Too early to tell for me since I'm only part way through HL2. I
> assume more weapons will be forthcoming. Both games offer weaponry
> similar to the original versions plus some nice additions. The gravity
> gun (HL2) is about as fun as it gets. By the same token, D3's soul cube
> was a brilliant strategic addition. Both games seem to drop the ball on
> grenades. D3's grenades seem to do little damage unless you actually hit
> the monster with them - but at least you can carry 50 of 'em. So far I
> have yet to succeed with a grenade in HL2 but at least I can throw them
> farther and they don't annoyingly come rolling back to me.
>
>
> Oh well. Just a few thoughts over a cup of coffee.
>
>
> sda_mail Scott | Yields over 30 blasts or
> @comcast.net Amspoker | 80 gentle honks per charge!
> ^ my email |
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 7:28:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:50:37 +0000, Simon wrote:

> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...

Here are the problems I have found with HL2 so far...

1. Too bright. Some of the graphics are even in the daytime. What was
valve thinking? I can hardly even get a good aim at a head crab without
the sun being in my eyes.

2. Wide open spaces. I'm agoraphobic and I find the wide open spaces along
with all the people completely terrifying. What happened to all the nice,
comfortable, small spaces of Doom3?

3. The flashlight. If it's so bright, what do I need a flashlight for?

4. No chainsaw. WTF?

5. The scientists in HL2 have nowhere near as much personality as the Far
Side scientists in Doom3. I mean, what this game needs is a good Alpha
Labs Edwards.

6. Please tell me HL2 has a hell level? Fyling bumblebee cherubs? Huge fat
man/walruses w boobs, who shoot rockets at you while singing bass?

7. Frame rate too high. There's a father of 3 living somewhere who works
for Alienware or Falcon Northwest, and the livelihood of his family
depends on selling new, fast hardware. If just anybody can play HL2,
where's the incentive to upgrade? Poor Tiny Tim won't be getting a new
Nintendo DS for Christmas.


Okay, I'll come clean. I haven't even played Half Life 2 yet. I've just
never been a troll before and wanted to see how the other half lives. Hope
someone got some fun out of my post.
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 2:34:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Stærk Tobak wrote:
>
> You do know you are stupid, right ?

Har du røget for meget stærk tobak dit fjols.

/Pwh
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 5:07:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> > dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
> > knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
> Here are the problems I have found with HL2 so far...
>
> 1. Too bright. Some of the graphics are even in the daytime. What was
> valve thinking? I can hardly even get a good aim at a head crab without
> the sun being in my eyes.
>
> 2. Wide open spaces. I'm agoraphobic and I find the wide open spaces along
> with all the people completely terrifying. What happened to all the nice,
> comfortable, small spaces of Doom3?
>
> 3. The flashlight. If it's so bright, what do I need a flashlight for?
>
> 4. No chainsaw. WTF?
>
> 5. The scientists in HL2 have nowhere near as much personality as the Far
> Side scientists in Doom3. I mean, what this game needs is a good Alpha
> Labs Edwards.
>
> 6. Please tell me HL2 has a hell level? Fyling bumblebee cherubs? Huge fat
> man/walruses w boobs, who shoot rockets at you while singing bass?
>
> 7. Frame rate too high. There's a father of 3 living somewhere who works
> for Alienware or Falcon Northwest, and the livelihood of his family
> depends on selling new, fast hardware. If just anybody can play HL2,
> where's the incentive to upgrade? Poor Tiny Tim won't be getting a new
> Nintendo DS for Christmas.
>
>
> Okay, I'll come clean. I haven't even played Half Life 2 yet. I've just
> never been a troll before and wanted to see how the other half lives. Hope
> someone got some fun out of my post.

I got some fun.
Sorry for your try, but this is not a trolling post, just cliver satiric.
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 5:12:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Stærk Tobak wrote:
> Ohjah ? Now I will stay to hell freezes over. Master satan.


--------------------------
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please don't |
/ O O\__ feed |
/ \ the trolls |
/ \ \ |
/ _ \ \ ----------------------
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | __||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | /| | --|
| | |// |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ // |
/ _ \\ _ // | /
* / \_ /- | - | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
November 20, 2004 9:19:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

some interesting funny comments but still my quote stands..it anit no huge
leap in any aspects...and the monsters are old hat to be honest..,compared
to d3 graphically normal
"G Neri" <nospam@spam.no> wrote in message
news:RcInd.366795$35.16577410@news4.tin.it...
>> > dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
>> > knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>>
>> Here are the problems I have found with HL2 so far...
>>
>> 1. Too bright. Some of the graphics are even in the daytime. What was
>> valve thinking? I can hardly even get a good aim at a head crab without
>> the sun being in my eyes.
>>
>> 2. Wide open spaces. I'm agoraphobic and I find the wide open spaces
>> along
>> with all the people completely terrifying. What happened to all the nice,
>> comfortable, small spaces of Doom3?
>>
>> 3. The flashlight. If it's so bright, what do I need a flashlight for?
>>
>> 4. No chainsaw. WTF?
>>
>> 5. The scientists in HL2 have nowhere near as much personality as the Far
>> Side scientists in Doom3. I mean, what this game needs is a good Alpha
>> Labs Edwards.
>>
>> 6. Please tell me HL2 has a hell level? Fyling bumblebee cherubs? Huge
>> fat
>> man/walruses w boobs, who shoot rockets at you while singing bass?
>>
>> 7. Frame rate too high. There's a father of 3 living somewhere who works
>> for Alienware or Falcon Northwest, and the livelihood of his family
>> depends on selling new, fast hardware. If just anybody can play HL2,
>> where's the incentive to upgrade? Poor Tiny Tim won't be getting a new
>> Nintendo DS for Christmas.
>>
>>
>> Okay, I'll come clean. I haven't even played Half Life 2 yet. I've just
>> never been a troll before and wanted to see how the other half lives.
>> Hope
>> someone got some fun out of my post.
>
> I got some fun.
> Sorry for your try, but this is not a trolling post, just cliver satiric.
>
>
Anonymous
November 20, 2004 10:04:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:34:24 +0100, "Pwh" <deterikkegodtatvide@tdcadsl.dk> wrote
in alt.games.doom:

>Stærk Tobak wrote:
>>
>> You do know you are stupid, right ?
>
>Har du røget for meget stærk tobak dit fjols.
>
>/Pwh
>
Ah. another one asks me to stay.
ok.

--
Gerner

Folk med stress bruger planlægningskalendere.
Folk der bruger planlægningskalendere får stress.
(denne signatur er beskyttet mod kommentarer).
Anonymous
November 21, 2004 12:28:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"orison" <orison@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:p an.2004.11.20.09.28.44.587397@mindspring.com...
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:50:37 +0000, Simon wrote:
>
>> dont you find d3 better than HL2..HL2 seems all ordinary to me with no
>> knew ideas and graphically miles behind D3...
>
> Here are the problems I have found with HL2 so far...
>
> 1. Too bright. Some of the graphics are even in the daytime. What was
> valve thinking? I can hardly even get a good aim at a head crab without
> the sun being in my eyes.
>
> 2. Wide open spaces. I'm agoraphobic and I find the wide open spaces along
> with all the people completely terrifying. What happened to all the nice,
> comfortable, small spaces of Doom3?
Then it sounds like HL2 is the game for me. D3 was way too dark to the
point you couldn't see anything you're shooting at. And it was way too
closed in and claustrophobic. Give me some brightness and wide open spaces
any day.
cheers
Bill
Anonymous
November 24, 2004 6:23:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote:

>I would hardly call it nostalgia. Doom 3 reminded me nothing of the original
>game.

Just curious. What would have reminded you of the original?


sda_mail Scott | Yields over 30 blasts or
@comcast.net Amspoker | 80 gentle honks per charge!
^ my email |
Anonymous
November 24, 2004 11:44:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> > doom3 is about darkness and fear - a play on the original doom series -
> > half-life exists because of the success of doom2 - and fair play it does
> > exceed it in many ways - but its a mistake to compare the 2 games -
> > doom3 is a nostalgia trip with refined methods
>
> I would hardly call it nostalgia. Doom 3 reminded me nothing of the
original
> game.

hem... the name?
Anonymous
November 25, 2004 3:14:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Scott Amspoker" <see_sig@nospam.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:752aq052o0m0n11tntajijbh7mju61ak8q@4ax.com...
> Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote:
>
> >I would hardly call it nostalgia. Doom 3 reminded me nothing of the
original
> >game.
>
> Just curious. What would have reminded you of the original?

maybe, large open space , with thousands of monster and frenetic gameplay...
rally far from D3
!