Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Doom 3 vs. Source: Comparing Engines

Posted by Zonk on from the apples-and-apples dept.

Tom V. writes "DevMaster.net has an article that outlines some of the technical differences between Half-life 2's Source and Doom 3 engines from various game development aspects such as graphics, A.I., physics, networking, etc. According to the author, the winner is the Source engine based on its 'completeness' as a game development package. However, in terms of graphics, the clear winner is Doom 3."

2 of 144 comments (clear)

  1. Completeness? by ftgow · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    My ass. The source engine is DirectX garbage. Doom 3 is a efficent, cross platform OpenGL platform with its OWN physics engine, not just the latest Havok setup. It will take years, but Carmack will release the Doom engine as open source, while Source will remain closed, and misused.

  2. Error in first paragraph, should I stop reading? by zhevek · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    "Even more ironic is that Half-Life used the Quake 2 licensed engine from id." That's wrong. The original Half-Life used a modified version of the Quake engine, not the Quake 2 engine.

    Should I bother to finish the article?