What looks best, Halo 2, HL2 or Doom 3

[Nissian X]

All these games are commonly mentioned in the same breath if you were talking about upcoming games that are going to blow you away in terms of graphical aspects. Ninja Gaiden is another one, but I didn't include it for a couple reasons, one being all these games are going to be released at roughly the same time, or at least a fair bit after NG, secondly, four sets of pics is just too much loading time.
Halo 2

http://halo.bungie.net/images/site/halo/screenshots/halo2/h2_e3_08.jpg

http://halo.bungie.net/images/site/halo/screenshots/scrn_132.jpg

Doom 3

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=92811&game_id=91&gallery=0&picOrder=0

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=92813&game_id=91&gallery=0&picOrder=0

Half Life 2

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137011&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137010&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

[Deathstroke]

Resident Evil 4 does.... look better I mean. But since it isn't one of the choices, I'll go with Doom 3.

[Bob-the-Fish]

I'd go with Half Life 2. That concrete looks so freakin sweet!

Doom's nice and crisp, but the screenshots look like what survival horror has been doing for a few years now. It looks good, but I've seen enough mutants and blood stained bathrooms thanks.

As for Halo, does the Master Chief just look wrong to anyone else? He's to bumpy and scrawny looking. Nice graphics, he just doesn't look as bad@$$ as he used to for some reason.

["The Game"Evolution]

All these games are commonly mentioned in the same breath if you were talking about upcoming games that are going to blow you away in terms of graphical aspects. Ninja Gaiden is another one, but I didn't include it for a couple reasons, one being all these games are going to be released at roughly the same time, or at least a fair bit after NG, secondly, four sets of pics is just too much loading time.
Halo 2

http://halo.bungie.net/images/site/halo/screenshots/halo2/h2_e3_08.jpg

http://halo.bungie.net/images/site/halo/screenshots/scrn_132.jpg

Doom 3

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=92811&game_id=91&gallery=0&picOrder=0

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=92813&game_id=91&gallery=0&picOrder=0

Half Life 2

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137011&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137010&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

All of them looks great.I plan to own each game anyway.

[joquito]

I'd go with Half Life 2. That concrete looks so freakin sweet!

Doom's nice and crisp, but the screenshots look like what survival horror has been doing for a few years now. It looks good, but I've seen enough mutants and blood stained bathrooms thanks.

As for Halo, does the Master Chief just look wrong to anyone else? He's to bumpy and scrawny looking. Nice graphics, he just doesn't look as bad@$$ as he used to for some reason.


Doom is nice but darkness can cover alot of flaws. Half-Life 2 gets my vote.

I'm trying to hold off on upgrading my videocard until I these games arrive.

[Hieremias]

The Doom 3 screenshots look best, and Doom 3 will have the best implementation of textures. There's some really cool technology being used in the Doom 3 engine, it's way beyond anything that's been done before.

But Half-Life 2 is going to look better in action, with its huge sprawling environments, realistic physics, realistic facial expressions and skeletal animation system. So it gets my vote.

As you can see in the screenshots, Halo 2 has good lighting but suffers from poor texture quality--but that's a limitation of the hardware, not the game itself, so it's not really fair to put it in competition with the other two.

[Tappy_Tibbons]

1. DOOM 3...no contest. ID has a lot of secrets up their sleeves.

2. Halo 2 - looking SWEET

3. Half Life 2 - not very impressed at all

[Nissian X]

If I were to vote, overall, Halo 2 looks best, not by far though, as far as I'm concerned, from what I see through the screens of all these games, is that Doom 3 and Halo 2 are the competetors, I'm not impressed at all with the visuals of HL2. Look more carefully at the Halo 2 screens and Doom 3, Halo 2 has more and more detailed lighting effects.

And the marines in Halo 2 are vastly improved, as is MC. And Hiremias, why do you say that you can't compare Halo 2 with Doom 3 when lots of sites see Halo 2 as the best looking game as opposed to Doom 3, Halo 2 is a very good competor to Doom 3 when is comes to graphics.

Another thing, Doom 3, is kinda like RE:4 in terms of gameplay, theres never much going on simutaneously, you know in Halo 2 theres gonna be a full fledged war going on 80% percent of the time, and your (MC) is smack down in the middle of it, more effects, no framerate drop, more things happening, = better graphics.

[Hieremias]

If I were to vote, overall, Halo 2 looks best, not by far though, as far as I'm concerned, from what I see through the screens of all these games, is that Doom 3 and Halo 2 are the competetors, I'm not impressed at all with the visuals of HL2. Look more carefully at the Halo 2 screens and Doom 3, Halo 2 has more and more detailed lighting effects.

And the marines in Halo 2 are vastly improved, as is MC. And Hiremias, why do you say that you can't compare Halo 2 with Doom 3 when lots of sites see Halo 2 as the best looking game as opposed to Doom 3, Halo 2 is a very good competor to Doom 3 when is comes to graphics.

Another thing, Doom 3, is kinda like RE:4 in terms of gameplay, theres never much going on simutaneously, you know in Halo 2 theres gonna be a full fledged war going on 80% percent of the time, and your (MC) is smack down in the middle of it, more effects, no framerate drop, more things happening, = better graphics.

It's not really fair to compare Halo 2 to the others because it's dealing with far bigger hardware constraints, particularly in the amount of video memory. As a result Halo 2 will not have anywhere near the detailed textures of the other two. It's not a knock against the game, it's a simple limitation imposed by the Xbox itself. It'd be as if it's running a race with a weight tied to its ankles. Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 are the far better-looking games but they have a lot more resources to work with. (The fact that Halo 2 can still look so impressive shows the programmers are pretty resourceful to use what they have to its fullest potential.)

By the way, those particular screenshots of Half-Life 2 are about the worst you could have chosen. Show some in the downtown of City 17, ie some of the scenes shown in the E3 demo movie. Judging by the screenshots alone I'd put Doom 3 on top, then Half-Life 2, then Halo 2. But when seeing Half-Life 2 in action, its amazing physics engine and extremely advanced muscular facial routines (the characters' faces look amazingly realistic when speaking and conveying emotion), I have to give the nod to Half-Life 2. Doom 3 is no slouch, but Half-Life 2 will be a visual feast.

Halo 2 is only a contender if you don't consider the texture quality. That's natural for console gamers, because console games have never had good textures (due to the video memory constraints, and the fact that high-res textures would just be wasted on a normal TV screen anyway). Console graphical achievements are in fluid animation and, lately, nifty lighting techniques. You have to play a texture-rich game, like Mafia or Max Payne 2 or the upcoming Painkiller or Doom 3, on the PC to appreciate the impact.

Look at those shots of Halo 2. The lighting is cool, certainly, but look at the textures on the deck plating, the walls and floor of the hangar. It's plain and boring. A lot of console games try to cover up the poor textures by making surfaces semi-shiny, and that sometimes works to a limited degree. It's also one reason why a higher percentage of console games are "cartoony" in nature, because then you don't have to worry about texture quality (colours and high poly count are what you're after). But these pale in comparison to a true texture-rich PC game.

The overwhelming majority of console gamers play on regular TVs, not HDTVs. As long as that's the case console game developers are not going to waste time making hi-res textures <i>even if the particular console system can handle it</i>, because it'd just be wasted.

And ignoring the techology, from an artistic point of view Halo 2 looks pretty boring. The original wasn't much to look at either. After seeing the E3 demo movie of Half-Life 2 I'll also have to give it the nod in the artistic department. Those two screenshots you posted don't do it justice.

[Renzatic Gear]

Actually Doom 3 has the more detailed lighting..it just doesn't go overboard with the different colors, instead sticking to the good ole Id standards of brown and loads of it.

The biggest difference between the 2 is that while Halo 2 uses the stencil shaded shadows for the characters, it doesn't use em for the enviroments. Doom 3 uses it for everything, if you've played the alpha you'll realise how big a difference seeing this game in motion actually makes.

That scene in the bathroom with the pinky for instance, there isn't a steady source of light just shining down in one place. Right above it is a flourscent light that's swaying back and forth casting half the room in total darkness at any given time...makes for some really awesome looking shadows that constantly grow, twist around, and shrink away from you when the light moves.

lol, and those are really old Doom 3 shots, too. There are much better ones out now.

edit: Of course Half-Life 2, while not being in the same league as Doom 3 and Halo 2, isn't a bad looking game in it's own right.

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137021&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

http://www.gamescreenshots.com/fullpic.asp?category=pc&pic_id=137019&game_id=1001&gallery=0&picOrder=0

I can't see how Tappy can call those graphics crap...

[Nissian X]

It's not really fair to compare Halo 2 to the others because it's dealing with far bigger hardware constraints, particularly in the amount of video memory. As a result Halo 2 will not have anywhere near the detailed textures of the other two. It's not a knock against the game, it's a simple limitation imposed by the Xbox itself. It'd be as if it's running a race with a weight tied to its ankles. Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 are the far better-looking games but they have a lot more resources to work with. (The fact that Halo 2 can still look so impressive shows the programmers are pretty resourceful to use what they have to its fullest potential.)

By the way, those particular screenshots of Half-Life 2 are about the worst you could have chosen. Show some in the downtown of City 17, ie some of the scenes shown in the E3 demo movie. Judging by the screenshots alone I'd put Doom 3 on top, then Half-Life 2, then Halo 2. But when seeing Half-Life 2 in action, its amazing physics engine and extremely advanced muscular facial routines (the characters' faces look amazingly realistic when speaking and conveying emotion), I have to give the nod to Half-Life 2. Doom 3 is no slouch, but Half-Life 2 will be a visual feast.

Halo 2 is only a contender if you don't consider the texture quality. That's natural for console gamers, because console games have never had good textures (due to the video memory constraints, and the fact that high-res textures would just be wasted on a normal TV screen anyway). Console graphical achievements are in fluid animation and, lately, nifty lighting techniques. You have to play a texture-rich game, like Mafia or Max Payne 2 or the upcoming Painkiller or Doom 3, on the PC to appreciate the impact.

Look at those shots of Halo 2. The lighting is cool, certainly, but look at the textures on the deck plating, the walls and floor of the hangar. It's plain and boring. A lot of console games try to cover up the poor textures by making surfaces semi-shiny, and that sometimes works to a limited degree. It's also one reason why a higher percentage of console games are "cartoony" in nature, because then you don't have to worry about texture quality (colours and high poly count are what you're after). But these pale in comparison to a true texture-rich PC game.

The overwhelming majority of console gamers play on regular TVs, not HDTVs. As long as that's the case console game developers are not going to waste time making hi-res textures <i>even if the particular console system can handle it</i>, because it'd just be wasted.

And ignoring the techology, from an artistic point of view Halo 2 looks pretty boring. The original wasn't much to look at either. After seeing the E3 demo movie of Half-Life 2 I'll also have to give it the nod in the artistic department. Those two screenshots you posted don't do it justice.

Ha! I noticed you manged to sidestep my whole " Halo 2 has more going on simutaneously" point. Nice one.

Anyway, Half- Life 2 is by far the bland one out of the three. You say: . But when seeing Half-Life 2 in action, its amazing physics engine and extremely advanced muscular facial routines.....

Well sure, seeing a game in action makes all the difference. I can probably pick out a bunch a crap about seeing Halo 2 in action. We're looking at strictly screens here.

If you look at the textures on MC and the marines, the textures are amazing, in a word.
As far as the hanger, walls and floors, with poor texturing, well, as far as I'm concerned, you can't really analyize them properly just through screens.

I remember looking at Halo screens and not being impressed by that stuff either, but when playing the game, I found them extremely realistic. Anyone who plays a lot of Halo knows what I'm talking about. I'm assuming Halo 2 will excel at those things as well.

When comparing Halo 2 and Doom 3, Halo 2 will look more realistic for a couple of reasons. I've seen the physics for Halo 2, and their gonna be extremely hard to beat.

Secondly, the models in Doom 3, look to silky and smooth to be realistic. They look like
they can't be hurt, scratched, or weathered, you know? too creamy looking. When you take a look at Halo and Halo 2, the soldiers and MC look more rugged, like they've been shot a few times, you can see wringles in their clothes, basically, more realistic. Doom 3's models remind me of the one found in Timesplitters 2, better, but same style.

[Renzatic Gear]

Big Demon: This lotion I use makes my skin feel SO silky smooth! You go girl!
http://users.chartertn.net/greymatt/Doom3_1.jpg

Zombies: OIL OF OLAYYYYY! OIL OF OLAYYYYY!
http://users.chartertn.net/greymatt/Doom3_2.jpg

Master Chef: DEEP WOODS OFF IS ALL I USE!
http://users.chartertn.net/greymatt/Halo2.jpg

[Hieremias]

Ha! I noticed you manged to sidestep my whole " Halo 2 has more going on simutaneously" point. Nice one.

Not really, I just wasn't aware this was the be-all and end-all of graphical wizardry. Hell, if having lots of crap happening on the screen is your wet dream, play Serious Sam. It has a hundred times more going on at once than any of these three titles ever will.

Since Doom 3 is about creating a foreboding atmosphere in dark, confined quarters, criticising it for not having lots of stuff happening at once is pretty stupid. There are plenty of arcade games and cartoony platformers for that. I thought the discussion was about which game will LOOK best, not which will have the most crap flitting around the screen at once. ONE of those beasts in Doom 3 looks better than a hundred of the cartoon grunts in Halo dancing around and giving off chirpy little sound bytes.

If you look at the textures on MC and the marines, the textures are amazing, in a word. As far as the hanger, walls and floors, with poor texturing, well, as far as I'm concerned, you can't really analyize them properly just through screens.

Well no, they aren't all that amazing. I don't know how else to address this. Compared to the character models in Doom 3, Half-Life 2, or Max Payne 2, the character models in Halo 2 are quite average. They're quite good for a console game, I'll give it that.

The background textures in Halo 2 are crap compared to Doom 3 or Half-Life 2. "You can't really analyze them" is nonsense, just look at them. The PC games have this one hands-down. If you're trying to argue otherwise then you either aren't looking at the shots, or your console-adapted eyes don't actually know what to look for.

Halo 2 will have good lighting technology and lots of fluid movement. It is not a bad-looking game by any means. But comparing it to Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 isn't being fair to it at all, it's being forced to run on inferior hardware and vastly inferior display screens. It just doesn't compete.

[Tappy_Tibbons]

Man, Half Life 2 looks ok for what it is but I can't say that it looks any better than Halo 2 or Doom 3. One day when all games are out we'll decide but I think that Halo 2 will be the funnest and have the best AI, Doom 3 will look the best and have the most tension, and Half-Life 2 will have a more cinematic feel and tons of awesome mods.

Should I hold out for an optical bus CPU or just stick to the old silicon?

[Nissian X]

Not really, I just wasn't aware this was the be-all and end-all of graphical wizardry. Hell, if having lots of crap happening on the screen is your wet dream, play Serious Sam. It has a hundred times more going on at once than any of these three titles ever will.

Since Doom 3 is about creating a foreboding atmosphere in dark, confined quarters, criticising it for not having lots of stuff happening at once is pretty stupid. There are plenty of arcade games and cartoony platformers for that. I thought the discussion was about which game will LOOK best, not which will have the most crap flitting around the screen at once. ONE of those beasts in Doom 3 looks better than a hundred of the cartoon grunts in Halo dancing around and giving off chirpy little sound bytes.



Well no, they aren't all that amazing. I don't know how else to address this. Compared to the character models in Doom 3, Half-Life 2, or Max Payne 2, the character models in Halo 2 are quite average. They're quite good for a console game, I'll give it that.

The background textures in Halo 2 are crap compared to Doom 3 or Half-Life 2. "You can't really analyze them" is nonsense, just look at them. The PC games have this one hands-down. If you're trying to argue otherwise then you either aren't looking at the shots, or your console-adapted eyes don't actually know what to look for.

Halo 2 will have good lighting technology and lots of fluid movement. It is not a bad-looking game by any means. But comparing it to Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 isn't being fair to it at all, it's being forced to run on inferior hardware and vastly inferior display screens. It just doesn't compete.

Console adapted eyes! I play almost as much PC games as I do console.

Well no, they aren't all that amazing. I don't know how else to address this. Compared to the character models in Doom 3, Half-Life 2, or Max Payne 2, the character models in Halo 2 are quite average

Ha! wrong again, HL2 and Max Payne compare with eachother, Halo 2 will compete with Doom 3, don't you see it yet? or maybe your PC adapted eyes are playing tricks on you? DUH!
Don't even think about bringing up the Hardware mumbo jumbo. Not only is Doom 3 coming to the Xbox but it's designed to run on fairly average PC's.
If it's devlopers designed it to run on a top of the line PC's (like you said), they wouldn't
make much of a profit because not enough people have top of the line comps, chew on that one for a while.

Overall, Halo 2 beats HL 2 and Max Payne, with ease, the competition is still between Halo 2 and Doom 3 is still, what looks better? to truly find out I guess we'll have to wait until they both come out.

[mandark]

Console adapted eyes! I play almost as much PC games as I do console.



Ha! wrong again, HL2 and Max Payne compare with eachother, Halo 2 will compete with Doom 3, don't you see it yet? or maybe your PC adapted eyes are playing tricks on you? DUH!
Don't even think about bringing up the Hardware mumbo jumbo. Not only is Doom 3 coming to the Xbox but it's designed to run on fairly average PC's.
If it's devlopers designed it to run on a top of the line PC's (like you said), they wouldn't
make much of a profit because not enough people have top of the line comps, chew on that one for a while.

Overall, Halo 2 beats HL 2 and Max Payne, with ease, the competition is still between Halo 2 and Doom 3 is still, what looks better? to truly find out I guess we'll have to wait until they both come out.

Sorry to break it to you Nissian X but Halo2 is not even in the same league as Half Life 2 and Doom III graphics wise. What you fail to understand is that what we have seen of Half Life 2 is only in its Alpha stages of its development. On the other hand the videos being released for Halo2 is most likely as near as you can get to the final product.

The hardware issue is also not "mumbo jumbo" as you refer to it. Just because Doom3 is being released for the X-box doesn't mean the PC version is not going to be better. Since you claim to play as much PC games as consoles you should KNOW that PC games can be tweaked manually to run faster on lower end computers. You know those High, Medium, and Low settings found in the Options menus in almost all the games being released nowadays? Those are what I'm reffering to.

In other words a high end PC with a Radeon9800 Pro can run DoomIII with High details turned on while a lower end PC running, lets say a pentium 733 with a GeForce 3 will probably have to be set to medium settings. You know what I mean?

[Renzatic Gear]

This is a good example of what he means...

Lowest detail settings you can go...probably runs on just about any computer:
http://users.chartertn.net/greymatt/2k4_LR.jpg

Highest you can go:
http://users.chartertn.net/greymatt/2k4_HR.jpg

Man, everytime there's an Xbox vs. PC war the thread gets filled with pictures...we're all graphics sluts here!

[mandark]

Here is a better example RG.

[Renzatic Gear]

What the hell is a vindaloo anyway?

[mandark]

What the hell is a vindaloo anyway?

Its a dish that originated from India. A very spicy curry. I got the quote from a British show, Red Dwarf.

[Nissian X]

Sorry to break it to you Nissian X but Halo2 is not even in the same league as Half Life 2 and Doom III graphics wise. What you fail to understand is that what we have seen of Half Life 2 is only in its Alpha stages of its development.On the other hand the videos being released for Halo2 is most likely as near as you can get to the final product.

The hardware issue is also not "mumbo jumbo" as you refer to it. Just because Doom3 is being released for the X-box doesn't mean the PC version is not going to be better. Since you claim to play as much PC games as consoles you should KNOW that PC games can be tweaked manually to run faster on lower end computers. You know those High, Medium, and Low settings found in the Options menus in almost all the games being released nowadays? Those are what I'm reffering to.

In other words a high end PC with a Radeon9800 Pro can run DoomIII with High details turned on while a lower end PC running, lets say a pentium 733 with a GeForce 3 will probably have to be set to medium settings. You know what I mean?

I'm sorry to break it to you mandark, but your more than half wrong.
Halo 2, HL2 and Doom 3 are ALL in the same league. You and Hiremias can say other wise, but if you take a look around some sites, you'll quickly realize that your wrong at least about that.

What you fail to understand is that what we have seen of Half Life 2 is only in its Alpha stages of its development
I'm pretty sure if Valve decides to put together a 20 minute long video, they wouldn't just show the game at its "Alpha Stages". Stop finding exuses for the game's inferior graphical aspects.
I'll determine for myself when I'm playing doom on my PC and playing Halo 2 on my Xbox right beside me, what adds up to the better looking game. Theres more then just lighting and models and textures, you know.

[T.Tashi]

Resident Evil 4 does.... look better I mean. But since it isn't one of the choices, I'll go with Doom 3.
Capcom's skills with GC hardware is greatly underestimated.

[Renzatic Gear]

I can't believe we're all leaving out STALKER...in my opinion it's the most graphically impressive of the next gen bunch.

And it's got so much more going for it than just standard FPS gameplay (as cool as it is, I like to branch out)

[joquito]

With the criteria we are using to judge, many games are being left out. Many have mentioned this already. I could easily say that MYST beats all these games if I put up a screen shot. We have to take into account motion to fairly compare these games. I still stick with Half Life 2. It has the best textures and its moving characters look like they are part of the image and not just superimposed. That can be seen just from the screen shots.

[Hieremias]

I can't believe we're all leaving out STALKER...in my opinion it's the most graphically impressive of the next gen bunch.

And it's got so much more going for it than just standard FPS gameplay (as cool as it is, I like to branch out)

For technical achievements STALKER is the best-looking title for 2004. I'm really, really excited about it. The environments are just mind-blowing.

But from an artistic standpoint, meh, it's not all that impressive. The character models are pretty bad and some of the monsters we've seen look pretty silly. The gun models aren't great.

STALKER is going to be like Morrowind in that regard. Amazing jaw-dropping environments, crappy character and weapon models. Morrowind has user-made mods that enormously improve the characters, dunno if STALKER will support that.

[mandark]

For technical achievements STALKER is the best-looking title for 2004. I'm really, really excited about it. The environments are just mind-blowing.

But from an artistic standpoint, meh, it's not all that impressive. The character models are pretty bad and some of the monsters we've seen look pretty silly. The gun models aren't great.

STALKER is going to be like Morrowind in that regard. Amazing jaw-dropping environments, crappy character and weapon models. Morrowind has user-made mods that enormously improve the characters, dunno if STALKER will support that.

How about FarCry. After playing the demo I'm actually more excited about that game other that Half Life 2. Vast, lush environments allowing for realistic sniper kill shots. Cool.

[Glockstar]

How about FarCry. After playing the demo I'm actually more excited about that game other that Half Life 2. Vast, lush environments allowing for realistic sniper kill shots. Cool.

Uh oh...

You gotta watch what you say, mandark... geez!
Don't you know that a lot of the PC gamers around here get all upset when you talk about PC-XBox games?!?

Well, now you've gone and done it. So... let's just get it out of the way then, shall we? Get it all out, right now...
'FarCry... another crap game because of that confounded XBox! Stoopid meddling XBox! I hate you XBox! I hate you! And... I wish you were never even born! :mad: WAAAH!'

[mandark]

I'm sorry to break it to you mandark, but your more than half wrong.
Halo 2, HL2 and Doom 3 are ALL in the same league. You and Hiremias can say other wise, but if you take a look around some sites, you'll quickly realize that your wrong at least about that.


I'm pretty sure if Valve decides to put together a 20 minute long video, they wouldn't just show the game at its "Alpha Stages". Stop finding exuses for the game's inferior graphical aspects.
I'll determine for myself when I'm playing doom on my PC and playing Halo 2 on my Xbox right beside me, what adds up to the better looking game. Theres more then just lighting and models and textures, you know.

If you can be more specific how I am more than half wrong then I'll happilly rebutte your claims. Otherwise, it seems like you are just running out of reasons as to why Halo2 could be better graphically than Half Life 2. If you don't agree then look around some sites to quickly realize that you are wrong about most of things. LOL.

Seriously though You are the one who started this whole thread comparing the three games graphically. And based on all the screen shots, other poster's reasonings and the votes, BTW, Halo 2 is clearly beaten by Doom III and HL2 whether you agree or not.

[mandark]

Uh oh...

You gotta watch what you say, mandark... geez!
Don't you know that a lot of the PC gamers around here get all upset when you talk about PC-XBox games?!?

Well, now you've gone and done it. So... let's just get it out of the way then, shall we? Get it all out, right now...
'FarCry... another crap game because of that confounded XBox! Stoopid meddling XBox! I hate you XBox! I hate you! And... I wish you were never even born! :mad: WAAAH!'

Actually, Glockstar, most PC gamers including myself feel pretty good about FarCry. I just hope the developers don't screw it up, dumb it down for the sake of the X-box

[Hieremias]

Uh oh...

You gotta watch what you say, mandark... geez!
Don't you know that a lot of the PC gamers around here get all upset when you talk about PC-XBox games?!?

Well, now you've gone and done it. So... let's just get it out of the way then, shall we? Get it all out, right now...
'FarCry... another crap game because of that confounded XBox! Stoopid meddling XBox! I hate you XBox! I hate you! And... I wish you were never even born! :mad: WAAAH!'
I don't have a problem with PC-Xbox games so long as the PC version isn't dumbed down. Far Cry looks pretty cool. (And I wasn't even aware it was coming to the Xbox.)

And mandark, Far Cry looks like a great shooter but I don't see it holding a candle to the other big 3 (Doom 3, Half-Life 2, or STALKER). The graphics are nice, lots of polys and huge environments. But it gets a little too bright after a while, and the enemy AI in the demo is not as great as they were hyping it.

Doom 3 is going to have its bone-crunching atmosphere, Half-Life 2 will have amazing physics and wicked AI, and STALKER will have jaw-dropping environments in a huge world with a non-linear plot. Far Cry doesn't really have anything that competes with those.

But it'll certainly be a good distraction until those other games are released.

[no.1gamer]

I think that Doom 3 will "look" the best of the 3 games. But to tell you the truth I'm getting sick of hearing about this game. It was announced years ago. Does that mean we can expect low system requirements? Will the gameplay consist of "find the key" and "shoot everything that moves?"

Half Life 2 will be the best game of the 3 when all said and done. The graphics in the original Half Life wasn't the reason it was so great.

Halo 2 will "look" good for what it is. That's a game running on 3 year old technology. I'm surprised somebody voted for it actually. This will also be a great game overall. But Doom 3 and Halo 2 can't hold a candle to all that is Half Life 2.

But as far as graphics according to the screenshots goes. Doom 3 "looks" the best, then Half Life 2 and finally Halo.

Resident Evil 4 shouldn't be brought in the mix becuase it isn't a FPS. RE4 does "look" pretty sweet though.

[Nissian X]

I think that Doom 3 will "look" the best of the 3 games. But to tell you the truth I'm getting sick of hearing about this game. It was announced years ago. Does that mean we can expect low system requirements? Will the gameplay consist of "find the key" and "shoot everything that moves?"

Half Life 2 will be the best game of the 3 when all said and done. The graphics in the original Half Life wasn't the reason it was so great.

Halo 2 will "look" good for what it is. That's a game running on 3 year old technology. I'm surprised somebody voted for it actually. This will also be a great game overall. But Doom 3 and Halo 2 can't hold a candle to all that is Half Life 2.

But as far as graphics according to the screenshots goes. Doom 3 "looks" the best, then Half Life 2 and finally Halo.

Resident Evil 4 shouldn't be brought in the mix becuase it isn't a FPS. RE4 does "look" pretty sweet though.

Gamer, don't you owe me a Warcraft:FT game, still?

[Deathstroke]

OMG, Halo 2 has two votes. This forums X-bottedness has doubled.

[Nissian X]

I think that Doom 3 will "look" the best of the 3 games. But to tell you the truth I'm getting sick of hearing about this game. It was announced years ago. Does that mean we can expect low system requirements? Will the gameplay consist of "find the key" and "shoot everything that moves?"

Half Life 2 will be the best game of the 3 when all said and done. The graphics in the original Half Life wasn't the reason it was so great.

Halo 2 will "look" good for what it is. That's a game running on 3 year old technology. I'm surprised somebody voted for it actually. This will also be a great game overall. But Doom 3 and Halo 2 can't hold a candle to all that is Half Life 2.

But as far as graphics according to the screenshots goes. Doom 3 "looks" the best, then Half Life 2 and finally Halo.

Resident Evil 4 shouldn't be brought in the mix becuase it isn't a FPS. RE4 does "look" pretty sweet though.

GC also has 3 year old technology, not even as good as Xbox's, did we count out RE:4? no, I just totally forgot about it, and didn't put it in, I'll gladly put it in now if you guys wish, I know that RE:4 will look good, I had the first one for GC and the graphics were breathtakeing.

I was just playing Halo, Assault on the Control room, and I'm still quite impressed with the graphics. The floors and walls look ridiculously smooth and real. Like I said before, and I think it was Mandark who disagreed with me, is that you need an in game perspective to really see how great this game looks, chances are its the same with Halo 2. As far as I'm concerned Doom 3 and Halo 2 has it's own league of graphics and animation.

Look at Halo, it's deffinately known for it's awesome physics and animation as well. Getting in and out of vehicles, realistic character models, very nice shadowing, people who played the game front and back will know what I'm talking about. Halo 2 WILL compete with Doom 3 for best looking game, mark my words.

[no.1gamer]

Gamer, don't you owe me a Warcraft:FT game, still?

Whaxx?!?! I was wondering who was using this alias. Yea, I still play Warcraft 3 TFT all the time. I haven't seen you online lately though. Do you not use the name Whaxx on Battle.net either?

[Hieremias]

Look at Halo, it's deffinately known for it's awesome physics and animation as well. Getting in and out of vehicles, realistic character models, very nice shadowing, people who played the game front and back will know what I'm talking about. Halo 2 WILL compete with Doom 3 for best looking game, mark my words.

Halo doesn't have anything CLOSE to the physics system found in Max Payne 2 or Half-Life 2, nor will its sequel. Having realistic physics for the bodies and vehicles is one thing; having an environment FULL of objects that can be manipulated realistically is something else entirely. If you've not played Max Payne 2 then you don't know what I'm talking about. Rooms are full of stacks of crates, shelves, paint cans, boxes, and tons of other crap that can be shot, tossed around, and blown around the room with grenades. When the environment is interactive it plays a significant role in the tactics, and moreover just looks really cool. Halo has nothing to compare, I have played it, the environments are completely barren of anything that can be manipulated.

Judging by the screenshots I'd say Halo 2 isn't going to be different. Watch the E3 video of Half-Life 2 and you'll see how they're using interactive environments as part of the game. You can rip radiators off walls and throw them at guys, you can barricade doorways by sliding a table in front of it. Halo 2 won't have anything to compare to this.

I do definitely think you're being blinded by the hype. The screenshots for Halo 2 just don't even come close to putting it in competition with Half-Life 2. Heck, the fact that you think the first Halo had good graphics shows you don't particularly have a discerning pallate.

[Nissian X]

Halo doesn't have anything CLOSE to the physics system found in Max Payne 2 or Half-Life 2, nor will its sequel. Having realistic physics for the bodies and vehicles is one thing; having an environment FULL of objects that can be manipulated realistically is something else entirely. If you've not played Max Payne 2 then you don't know what I'm talking about. Rooms are full of stacks of crates, shelves, paint cans, boxes, and tons of other crap that can be shot, tossed around, and blown around the room with grenades. When the environment is interactive it plays a significant role in the tactics, and moreover just looks really cool. Halo has nothing to compare, I have played it, the environments are completely barren of anything that can be manipulated.

Judging by the screenshots I'd say Halo 2 isn't going to be different. Watch the E3 video of Half-Life 2 and you'll see how they're using interactive environments as part of the game. You can rip radiators off walls and throw them at guys, you can barricade doorways by sliding a table in front of it. Halo 2 won't have anything to compare to this.

I do definitely think you're being blinded by the hype. The screenshots for Halo 2 just don't even come close to putting it in competition with Half-Life 2. Heck, the fact that you think the first Halo had good graphics shows you don't particularly have a discerning pallate.


Well, I can't argue that in Halo or Halo 2, you can't pick stuff up and throw it around, because you can't, just not one of the things that bungie wanted to do with the Halo series.
However being able to do that, and physics are two totally different sujects, well kind of, if the objects that you throw around, have a realistic effect, or bounce off and disrupt other objects that they hit when thrown, that could be concidered good physics. Which is what I think you were getting at.
But I do think that Halo has an excellent physics system, like walking, handling thier weapons, watching MC reload each time, crouching, fireing, while crouching while walking.
Especially with vehicles as well.
And I do think that Halo is still the overall best looking FPS to date.

[Tappy_Tibbons]

Quake 4 will OWN ALL! MUAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!

[Renzatic Gear]

You know that Quake IV is primarily gonna be a singleplayer game sorta like the original Quake, right Tappy? Also, it's being developed by Raven using the Doom 3 engine..it's not an inhouse game.

I still think it's gonna be pretty alright, but I don't think you're gonna get what you're expecting.

[mandark]

You know that Quake IV is primarily gonna be a singleplayer game sorta like the original Quake, right Tappy? Also, it's being developed by Raven using the Doom 3 engine..it's not an inhouse game.

I still think it's gonna be pretty alright, but I don't think you're gonna get what you're expecting.

Which means Quake IV will most likely not be released until months after Doom III hits the shelves. No way ID will let someone else use their Doom III engine just so they can compete with them directly.