Slashdot Mirror
Doom 3 vs. Half Life 2
Thanks to Laurie W, who writes "Sudhain.com has a great comparison of D3 vs. HL2 (funny, too)." From the article: "Since Half Life 2 was released this week, I thought it'd make a good time to take the two games head to head and see which came out on top. I've spent a few hours in the beginning of each, playing through the first few levels. Although I haven't completed either, I've spent enough time in each (I think) to develop a feel for what the later sections of each game will be like. Given that each has been fairly consistent thus far, it'd take a major shift for my opinion of either to change significantly."
Anyone who has played the later levels in D3, especially the Hell levels, will know that the game gets drastically better near the end. I found the first levels of D3 to be monotonous and boring. This article is like comparing apples and oranges with the added insult of not even removing the skins.
If you are going to review games, at least finish them. You never know how much an ending can ruin a game for you. It happens in movies too. Remember AI and the new Planet of the Apes? If AI ended earlier instead of the whole weird alien thing and if Planet of the Apes didn't end in such a ridiculous way, those would have been decent movies. This guy is just rushing off a review before they become irrelevant...which really, they already are.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
All I have to say is my out-of-box experience with HL2 has been smooth overall. After 4 months, my Doom III is still virtually unplayable with a ton of white spots. My ATI Radeon 9800 pro 128MB has been a total disappointment for Doom III after a million different catalyst drivers.
Considering that Half Life 2 changes incredibly when you get the physics gun (and takes a complete flip turn in the last two levels), I wouldn't say that was an accurate statement. Oh, and after the first couple of hours of Doom 3, it plummets in quality. Scripted scares are at a minimum, replaced by identical looking rooms and repetetive enemy spawns. One of those unfortunate cases where the sample doesn't represent the overall quality.
Doom 3:
- dark
- repetetive
- nice shadows LOL
Half-Life 2:
- Physics = fun
- facial expressions 'R' Da Bomb
- nice water
So, what else is new?
Since the server *might* get slashdotted and since the article is spread over 6 pages and since some of youz cannot access 1337 gamerz pagez at workzzor here is the article.
:(
...has surpassed our expectations in every sense - its high-quality graphics, ground-breaking physics and immersive first-person shooter gameplay set a new standard for PC action games"..."Half-Life 2 will go down as one of the best-selling PC titles, and we are thrilled to deliver this ground-breaking title to the worldwide gaming community this fall."
*Note* All the pictures (which are really pretty) are not here, sorry
OK TFA!!
I have a confession to make. While I've benchmarked it and tested it, until the past few days, I haven't ever sat down and really played Doom 3. Oh I'd run through the first few minutes of it, but life and a hectic schedule had gotten in the way of me spending much time in the game, and since I didn't want to spoil my impression, I haven't even read any of the reviews. Since Half Life 2 was released this week, I thought it'd make a good time to take the two games head to head and see which came out on top. I've spent a few hours in the beginning of each, playing through the first few levels. Although I haven't completed either, I've spent enough time in each (I think) to develop a feel for what the later sections of each game will be like. Given that each has been fairly consistent thus far, it'd take a major shift for my opinion of either to change significantly. There are games that've done this (the first half of Jedi Knight II feels like a Star Wars-themed FPS, the post-light-saber-acquisition portion of the game is amazing), but they tend to be the exception rather than the rule.
Comparing the Hype® Drive:
According to Vivendi, Half Life 2:
The PR machine continues:
"In 2004, Half-Life 2 will take the suspense, challenge and visceral charge of the original to new heights of realism and responsiveness. Half-Life 2 opens the door to a world where the player's presence affects everything around him, from the physical environments to the behaviors - even the emotions - of both friends and enemies."
That's not actually too bad, though the cynical part of me is tempted to distil this into: "Its pretty and the enemies actually fire back." And couldn't "ground-breaking physics" be seen as some sort of pun and / or construction simulator?
So how's Doom 3 sound, in comparison?
"A sci-fi horror masterpiece, DOOM 3's dramatic storyline, pulse-pounding action, incredible graphics, and ground-breaking technology combine to draw you into the most frightening and gripping first-person gaming experience ever created..."DOOM 3 is a videogame experience unlike any before it. From the cinema quality visuals and the incredible 5.1 sound, to the terrifying atmosphere and hyper-realistic environments, the whole game screams 'interactive horror film!' Add in the most ferocious line up of demons Hell has ever brought to bear, and you have an experience so intense that you'll need to keep your heart medicine handy."
I could be wrong, but I'm thinking John Carmack did *not* write this PR. Doom 3 easily wins the 'Hype® Drive" portion of the comparison, with incredible use of such words as "masterpiece", hyper-realistic", and even the daring exclamation point. I'm not sure I want to play a hyper-realistic game (it sounds like a game written from the viewpoint of an overactive eight-year-old).
Bring on the beta blockers--I'm ready for Doom.
Prior to either game's release, there were readers and enthusiasts commenting that Doom 3 would be the pretty game, while Half Life 2 would have the good story. Just from the screenshots I'd seen and from what John Carmack had said about the game, I was convinced this wasn't going to be the case. Doom 3, I was sure, would break id's record of offering excellent visuals with mediocre-to-no storylines. Based on the PR copy, Doom 3 certainly seems t
Having completed both games, I'd have to aggree with the article's author. D3 just gets plain old monotonous towards the end. Both are pretty much rails but the vehicles, gravity gun and physics are fantastic.
Doom 3: Runs under linux.
Halflife 2: Does not.
Has anyone noticed the hl2 banner running in the background? why Im not surprised HL2 came on top?
anyway, besides the points already mentioned the article basically boils down to: "doom 3 has this BUT hl2 has THIS instead!"
Besides isnt a bit futile to see another article mentioning Doom 3 is dark? news flash: it was made like that on purpose AND not all areas are dark or repetitive. (specially the last ones) I remember the first time I played I was so psyched a half hour later I shot a pipe which barely resembled a human figure, dark areas were MEANT to be dark DOOM3 is an HORROR game.
I used the "duct tape" mod for a while and then I realized it really detracted a bit from the fear and turned into a regular action shooter, PLAY IT like it is, you wont regret it, trust me.
If you want an ACTION game go get HL2 instead they are different generes, arent we mature enough to recognize that not all fps are the same just because they have the same perspective?
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here
Yes, but H2 wins for multiplayer.
Doom 3 multiplayer: oldschool DM, nuttin' else
HL2 multiplayer: CS. Bleah.
Halo 2 multiplayer: The best Co-Op mode I've ever seen, plus the tried and true mix&match CTF/whatever with vehicles.
No contest - and I don't even have an X-Box.
I am one of those suckers that basicly built a new P4 system to support Doom3 prior to its release. Actually I got doom3 for free when I purchased my nVidia 6800 GT board which is the one recommended by ID for Doom3. So Doom3 works pretty good for me, with minimal technical glitches, and smooth level transition. The graphics are exceptional in illuminated or dark environments. I haved beat Doom3 a few times as I go up the lader of difficulty. I'm half way through nightmare level, but I've put that on hold as I have purchased HalfLife-2, and Halo-2. I beat Halo-2 in a day, don't even bother.
Technically speaking HL2 is a nightmare. Installing the game requires 5 disc's which scares me. Doom3 uses 3 discs though, and new games tend to have more, so it isn't a major bitch. The major bitches include a few things like the product registration. Firstly the product registration is insane, and I have never experienced a more overtly anoying process than this. Force feeding me steam is not good taste, although I used to endorse it back when I could play the original HalfLife for free. Anyways, Valve installed Steam, and steam took forever to download, and decipher some files. I don't mind a game contacting the mother ship before I play, but this was horendous. Moving on in the list of major bitches, the level transition takes forever, and does't indicate any progress. The only what I know my computer isn't locked up is by pressing the num-lock or tab key, and seeing the lights. Other not so major of a bitch issues include a few visual glitches durring fast movement or rapid change of Freeman's view/perspective, especially durring combat.
I don't seem to recal any moment where I drove a vehicle in doom3, althought I keep thinking that I'm forgeting something? Anyways, HalfLife-2 has some great outdoor areas. The problem is having a design that works for outdoor areas means either having really huge outdoor maps, or have anoying outdoor level transitions. Sorta like hitting an invisible wall that causes an annoying 2 minute level transition. HalfLife-2 actually has both huge outdoor maps, but also long map changes once you venture off the edge of a map. I don't seem to recal Doom-3 having any outdoor areas aside from the ocassional skybox map on the surface of mars where you quickly leave for a finite Ox2 supply. In a Weird way I kinda percieve Domm-3 story line to be very similare to the original HalfLife storyline, athough the ID people seem to claim that they are just retelling the original Doom story, just different. I seem to recal some physics in Doom3, but it was realistinc, and minimal. In HL2 I can pick things up, thrown them, put them down. Valve takes it to the next level with a gravity gun that you only get once you get beyond the first few levels (further than the guy doing thsi review has got to). THE gravity gun lets you move heavy objects, and repel smaller objects at high-velocity.
My conclusion is Doom3 has a technically better game play, less fuss, more fun. HL2 has equally impressive graphics, better use of physics, and better interactivity with the world environment.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
I'm too lazy to play through the whole of the games (even in god mode) to find out what they're really like, so I'll play through a couple levels and think I'm smart enough to extrapolate the rest.
pc game developers are externalizing the cost of producing multiplayer elements to the modding community. the multiplayer versions will come, and they will be bad-ass, and nobody will get paid. maybe someone will get a job.
a small, dedicated crew of xbox hackers will have moderate success mucking with halo2, but will receive the opposite of the encouragement the pc scene sees, due to ms's business model for the xbox and evident goal of using the xbox as a springboard for trusted computing.
(ps, my kingdom for a hl2 reincarnation of creeper rune CTF. mmm new physics on a grappling hook.)
Well, if we're gonna talk mods, then UT2k4 already won. Too bad it doesn't have any players. I thought we were discussing out-of-the-box gameplay.
I have to agree with anyone who read the article and felt like it was very poor journalism. First of all, right from the start the author mentions that he only played a little bit of each game. I think he said Alpha Labs 3 is as far as he played in Doom 3, that's what, 15% into the game? This is no more useful to me than the forum and comments flames from jaded gamers who spam their opinion all over the place after playing through just the intro to a game. If it was a good article, I think first of all he would have played through both games so that he could actually tell us which one he actually likes better than the other, not which one he thinks he may like better than the other, and instead of just saying one is better than the other, he could recommend one or the other to the reader based on their preferences. These are just some basics of writing review/opinion pieces. This guy makes himself sound like an ass.
What would I have said? Well, I think most people will enjoy both games. As for casual gamers or people who are new to FPS games, I would say Doom 3. HL2 has some puzzles and concepts that any FPS nut will breeze by, but someone who hasn't been playing these games all that long will find themselves frustrated. For instance, I was watching my girlfriend play HL2 and she couldn't get past the train yard, because she is not coordinated enough to time the jump from the train top over the fence to get to the next part, she would have been stuck there for ages if I wasn't there to take over and do the jump for her. Some of the puzzles will confuse people who didn't already have a good idea about how the game was going to work as far as physics puzzles go. Doom 3 is mostly just a pretty frag-fest, my girlfriend has gotten much farther in Doom 3 than she can get in HL2 without my help.
Hardcore gamers are going to choose one or the other based on what kind of game they like to play. HL2 has more variety in it's gameplay, with more puzzles and more ways to dispatch enemies (knocking out platforms they are standing on, using objects in the world, etc.) where as Doom 3 is point, click and kill and focuses on little else other than keeping the situation tense at all times. I really like both, and luckily I do not have to choose one or the other. If you like killing everything in sight and being a bad-ass, maybe Doom 3 is your cup of tea. If you like to explore and are looking for more than just brainless action, then maybe you will get your kicks out of HL2. I say get 'em both, and maybe toss in an Xbox and Halo 2 for good measure.
I think it's obvious to everyone that you should release a review until you've played the entire thing. However, it is a good idea to catalog your impressions during the game.
As someone who has played both games twice in about the same length of time, let me offer my "four" cents.
Instead of comparing "apples to oranges", I'll just compare individual feelings about each game.
It's okay, no spoilers.
oom 3 gave me a stronger and more consistent emotional response. I felt like I was going to die around every corner (except about an hour before you go to hell because the jump scenes started getting a little old). Half-Life gave me a wider range of emotions from excitement, fear, compation torwards NPCs, and that warm fuzzy feeling that you get when you open up a big 'ol can of ownage.
Doom 3 was very specific about gameplay; shoot, run, poop yourself. Half-Life 2 had a wider range of gameplay elements from squad/bug tactics, vehicular battles, puzzles, etc.
To me Doom 3 felt like it went deeper in the story than Half-Life 2 did. You pretty much got some dialog out of every important person on the Mars base while in Half-Life 2, even though the quality and entertainment value of each cutscene was better, it still left with gapping holes in the story. I had to go through every speach sample while talking to those 3 armed aliens to at least get an idea about what happened between Half-Life 1 to present. And at the end--again, more gapping holes left in the storry. Not to say that the story is flawed, because it is great, there's just some things that have not been explained that I really felt entitled to know. I can forgive cliffhanger endings, but not ever knowing what happened between the two games and not really knowing the connection kind of bugs me. I picked up a few more bits playing through the second time, but still the answers don't seem to be there.
HL2 had faster pacing but there was a portion of the game (late C17 stage) where there was about 2 hours of the same type of gameplay. That almost ruined the beautiful pacing up until that point but the last stage made it up to me. Doom 3 had pretty consistant pacing, or consistantly monotonous, but being able to get closer and closer to the horrible truth and understand more about what happened made it worth it. I never once got let down by a lack of scary scenes or wimpier monsters. It was consistent.
Overall, Doom 3 is more refined in what it tried to do. And for that it's worth even a third play. Half-Life 2 was more fun in that you got a wider range of gameplay. The physics engine was mainly eye candy and was used for puzzles, which was very successful.
And as far as graphics, who says that the Doom 3 engine can't do as good water as Half-Life 2? Are there any rivers or lakes on Mars? That's why there isn't any. Both engines are capable of it. It's just a fragment shader. The main difference I see is character AI in HL2 and shadowing in Doom 3.
Just play both games. Both are very good and are worth your time and money. HL2 might get more replay value out of me thanks to Counter-Strike:Source. Either way I'm not going to let baises or hatred for anti piracy measures to keep me from enjoying both of these titles.
HELLOOO?!? Barren wasteland? No humans left? This is obviously the future.
HELLOOO?!? The movie was about a new trend in creating intelligent robots. Maybe these robots continued on after the humans died?! Maybe that's slightly more plausible than fucking aliens! Idiots.
I never saw it in the theatre, but my mom was completely appauled at how everyone thought they were aliens at the end. We are both extremely unimpressed with the ambient stupidity. But I thought slashdot readers were smarter than that.
Finally, A.I. was an excellent fucking movie, and is totally underrated. It was not a sci-fi movie so much as a sci-fi fairy tale. It started out a bit more "normal" but became much more "fairy-tale like" by the end.
I think the only mistake was not making it more obvious, sooner and up front, that this was a (almost prototypical) fairy tale and not a hollywood "blockbuster" like Independence Day.
The extra ending made the movie much more sad, more poignant (though I can't spell the word), and more rememberable.
Sure they could have ended it with him sunk in the ocean.
But even sadder than that is to let the viewer know that yes, he sat in the ocean for no less than 1000 yrs.
Even sadder than that is the fact that he is discovered and eventually "re-integrated" back into a "society", but that his fellow beings have evolved so much that he doesn't really belong.
Even sadder than that is that they can recreate his mother, but only for a day.
Even sadder than that is knowing that after 1000 years, he finally found his happiness, only to have it taken away within 24 hours. That is fucking tragic, and it appears it was lost on everyone but me.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
...I immensely enjoyed Doom3. I think it's the best engine on earth. And even though this guy picks Half-Life 2 as his preferred game, I consider this article to be quite fair.
I still won't be purchasing Half-Life 2 because I dislike Valve's method of dealing with their community, and dislike Sierra's C&D letters. But I'm not going to try to stop anyone else from buying Half-Life 2 because in the end, video-games are all about entertainment. If HL2 entertains you more than D3 then you owe it to yourself to buy it.
You'd be a fool, however, if you didn't check back on Doom3 in a few months to a year when we've got our mods out.
UT2k4 is by far the most moddable, but HL has developed the "mod stereotype" - people think of it as the ultimate moddable engine because of the success of CS and TF and the way that Valve supports its modders (DE has cought up on that issue).
So for most moddable, I insist that UT2k4 will remain - but HL2 will have more mods because of its popular perception as "the platform to mod".
Because one of these games will get the better mods. I'm hoping it's D3 so that Linux users can run the popular mods natively.
UT uses a Java-like embedded language with a full OOP class tree to work with. Also, UT's tri-paradigm mapping system (BSP+mapmodel+landscape) is very easy to use and allow mappers to work in whatever way feels most comfortable to them.
Plus, UT is most conducive to small mods - UT mods don't have to be TCs, as they're non exclusive - you can make a mod that replaces one vehicle in Onslaught, and another guy can make a mod that replaces a different vehicle in ONS, and a third guy replaces some weapons, and the server can use all three of those mods at once.
DE has gotten hardcore about supporting their mod teams, including a million-dollar-grand-prize contest called "Make Something Unreal" to encourage them.
I expect similar reactions from Half-Life, but Valve has always been far more C++ -oriented, which, while I find is better for experienced programmers, is worse for newer coders. As I understand it though, HL2 mods work like HL1 in that they are completely exculsive to each other.
Id, of course, has fallen far behind in cultivating their mod community. Carmack's apis are often inscrutable, and I don't know that Id has any interest in the kind of epic mod conferences and contests the other two have.
I agree with the previous poster, I don't think Doom 3 was 'Doom Redux' at all.
The origional Doom games were much faster over all, even the 'slower' bits were much faster than the fastest parts of Doom 3, there were very dark sections in Doom but they were used sparingly to great effect (I didn't like them all that much, but they worked well because they were infrequent), not constantly, to the degree of invoking boredom and frustration as in Doom 3.
Doom 3 relied on tight indoor areas for the most part, I was greatly releaved when I game to nice open indoor areas in the game - the origional games were NEVER as horribly restrictive and small. In contrast, Doom 1 & 2 had many large open areas (indoor and outdoor) too.
I also think Doom 3 was survival horror - the whole concept of torch OR weapon, the rediclously dark environment, the many staged events, the limited 8 clip shotgun just scream survial horror to m (rather than mindless blasting fun).
While there were many traps in the origional game it almost never just open a wall behind you and had really nasty things fall out on top of you, you could almost always see them in front of you, or they would open up elsewhere on the level. Doom 3 was cheap in that reguard (also in the manner in which things would just 'popup' in front of you due to lack of proper spawn points, that's just really lazy design).
I wish that Doom 3 had been a continuation of the Doom series, but it's just no so IMO. I don't mind variation and thought the addition of PDA's and terminals was a good idea, but the game didn't feel like a spiritual sucessor even remotely to me. I think the likes of Serious Sam has gameplay that's closer to the origional Doom series as I remember it.