This thread is a community project I'm interested in starting in responce to all these "HL2 can do this" posts.

So, have you found something in a game that you don't think Doom 3 can match?

Post a screenshot. Describe it. Ect...

I'll try to prove to you that Doom 3 is just as capable. Anyone interested in lending me a hand is welcome.

I would like everything to be custom made however so that the resulting testmaps, ect... can be released for all to see firsthand running on their system.

I suppose the first suggestion is to make a sunny, well-lit outdoors area. With a stream of water running through it.

Try this

@bugmenot: Sure that's fine but give me a picture or a series of pictures so I'm not running blind creating a bunch of assets. It doesn't have to be a screenshot from a game. It could be a picture from National Geographic for all I care.

I don't want to spend a week or two working on something only to have people come back and say. Oh but that's not as bright as what I was expecting or there isn't enough vegetation.

@idiom: Ha ha. Okay, Unreal 3 isn't even out yet.

Although if you're serious I'll put in the effort if you can convince some others to help me because I sure as hell am not going to do that all by my lonesome.

Oh and on a side note, I remember reading somewhere a few months ago that the latest build of Unreal 3 ran a good 2 or 3 fps on a top o' the line system.

d3 supports vfp files which can add support for HDR and any other fancy effects, even lightmaps, you just need to know your shit, D3 can outdo hl2 anyday of the week.

Z

this is an excellent idea for a test map

vegetation and water?
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Half Life 2'ish Euro looking arch. tech
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Ultimatly, id love to see d3 do convincing outdoor areas - nothing huge, just realistic outdoor lighting. I just finished HL2 yesterday, and despite carmacks engine tech being uber advanced and future proof, im afraid HL2 wins hands down for gameplay. i dont like to admit the very boring "id's games are engine techdemos" comment but i feel myself thinking it from time to time.

That being said, theres also some occasional really hideous texture / map work in HL2 (rubble textures anyone?) that im sure iD wouldnt have dared let get through to final QC.

anyhow, this is an excellent idea to change the minds of the non-believers

if in fact it can be achieved. Im hoping so.

faultline
(back to lurking)

How about creating a scene simular to this:
http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/22.jpg

Or, recreating a battle from the canals where there are combines on a structure that you have to blow up with some explosive barrels at the base of it. Complete with bright shiny daytime lighting and high res textures would be sweet. No screen shot, sorry. A good fun battle, with daytime outside lighting would go a long way in my opinion. It wouldn't hurt to include some features that the D3 engine can do that source can't.

Or, something like this battle scene:
http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/01.jpg

btw, I can do a bit of mapping if you need rich

great idea to show that D3engine > HL2engine .
It is very possible to create same(or even better) areas like HL2 .

But i think its not possible without chagning some bits in the shaders or something.

I think the biggest problem here is that HL2 has precomputed radiosity and Doom 3 has.. dark. I suppose with a bunch of non-shadow, non-specular lights you could achieve the same effect, but it takes much more effort.

And those radiosity effects become very visible in gameplay.

I'm not quite sure what you guys are trying to accomplish here.

Rendering a halflife2 scene with the Doom3 engine is sort of cool, but is it actually playable?

No doubt Doom3 has better lighting, but at a cost in frame rates.

I'm not sure which engine I prefer.. I definitely had more 'fun' with HL2... Doom3 was boring until the ending levels... HL2 became silly during the end levels.

If only comparing how a screenshot scene looks.. then Doom3 wins, cuz these screenies look incredible... but on that token, 3D Studio, or any other professional 3D gfx app wins, but it's not much of a game, is it?

Take any of those scenes, toss in at *least* 4-5 baddies.. and then see which one comes out on top. We're talking about a 'game' engine, right? Not a highrez slide show.

ede wrote:

Rendering a halflife2 scene with the Doom3 engine is sort of cool, but is it actually playable?

We're doing it just for fun and for the "sort of cool" thing.

It is cool.. the screenshots look great..

but are we trying to see how the game would 'play', or just look?

I'm eager to see what the Doom3 engine can do.. as a game, not just as a renderer. Doom3 was sort of neat, the mobs looked awesome, but the game's content left me a little short.. I keep hearing that it can do nice outdoor stuff.. but the very brief display of this ability in the game didn't sell that for me, especially since there were no mobs outside (if I recall correctly).

Anyways, neat idea regardless..

I'd be interested to see how the timelines compare as well.

I'll wager a lot of HL2 stuff can be accomplished in D3, but which is faster to develop, and how much faster?

From working with D3 and the SDK in the last few weeks, I've found development to take far longer than it really ought to. Accomplishing seemingly simple tasks can take a while just because they don't fit into what Doom 3 can do out of the box. So I'm very interested to see how HL2 compares on this score.

ede wrote:

I keep hearing that it can do nice outdoor stuff.. but the very brief display of this ability in the game didn't sell that for me, especially since there were no mobs outside (if I recall correctly).

http://pwp.netcabo.pt/Tobril/d3_outdoor_test2.jpg

Fun facts:

- The map has one of those big (by itself) outdoor meshes and I cloned it 8 times.
- It takes rougly 10 mins walking to the back of the map.
- Red arrow points to the Rover (for scale).
- Draw distance is as big or even bigger than FarCry (for instance, a zombie standing on top of the the last tower would be the size of about 4 pixels on screen).
- Bigass light with "clouds" material (I'm making a huge outdoors map in the middle of a martian sandstorm).
- Polycounts close to 100k per frame in that shot (which is about 2 months old). My newer stuff has higher polycounts per frame than a regular outdoor FarCry frame.
- I disabled the fps_lock, notice the framerate. EDIT: 1024 @ High Quality (I have a 9800 Pro 128mb)

Rich: if you need any help, count me in.

a nice looking outdoor map right here

http://fpscentral.ampednews.com/?game=9 ... ws&id=8189

still dark, but hey. the sniper concept is pretty nice too.

Okay, so far I've got a city and forest.

City
http://www.planethalflife.com/screensho ... ots/22.jpg
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Forest
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Now I'm leaning towards doing a city first since it would probably take less work and there are only a few of us interested in contributing at the moment.

But first we need to decide on what the goal here is. I'm hearing talk about high res textures but I'll say right off the bat that if we go with high res textures then we won't be able to bother with bump or specular maps because you have to make a trade off in order to make the best use of texture memory.

I'd prefer we go with what Doom 3 has to offer rather than try and turn Doom 3 into Half-Life 2 by writing a lightmap shader and increasing texture resolution.

The whole point of this project is to prove what the engine is capable of. In that sense, I'd have to say that the biggest strength the engine has is in it's lighting and in order to take full advantage of it we will need specular and bumpmaps.

We could still go with high res textures but then your going to have to reduce the size of the map to try and minimize the amount of texture memory being used.

Another thing we'll need to settle on is how big this city map needs to be to prove a point. This I'm not sure on and would appriciate input.

I was thinking that maybe we pick a cubic mile road map and a topology map and combine the two to form the basic layout of the testmap. This is mainly to reduce the amount of work involved but you also need to consider that realistically no one is going to make a playable map that is miles long. We can still fake the appearance of a huge city by surrounding the playable area with less detailed buildings in the distance.

It should be simple enough. We just model the topology map and then apply the road map as a texture to the topology map and that should serve well as a backdrop in DoomEdit for mapping a rough layout.

Anyway, when I get some free time later today, I'm currently babysitting my nephew, I'll start posting reference pictures and screens of test buildings and such.

Then we'll all settle on assets or ideas that we like and start piecing together a map.

Maybe those interested can choose a block on the road map and go to town? I dunno. It depends on how many people are interested.

couples of early images of something I was working on here

http://paintaa1.miniserver.com/images/flyer1.jpg
http://paintaa1.miniserver.com/images/concept.jpg

not very impressive, but a little different to stock doom3

I'm working on something a little more advanced now

EDIT: oops just re-read starting post again - sorry this isn't quite on topic

A city scene like that is definately a challenge !
How close do you want to get to that level of detail rich ? - all the way ? :shock:

If you can pull that off, wow, it'll be incredible - the texturing will be the bulk of the work. There must be 60 basic textures in that scene that I can spot offhand.

Most of the level geometry can be done with standard brushes and patch meshes.

Also, to get a fair comparison you'd have to drop in about 15 monster/filler models and in addition, have a fair whack of physics objects.

I'm sure it's possible with decent frame rates - but there's one thing that you may not be able to do without some "faking" - and that's the soft shadows from the architecture ?

@Rroff: Nice shots. IMHO, I think those shots are somewhat on topic.

@bb_matt: I'd like to try going all the way but it's going to take a considerable amount of work.

One thing I don't want to do is copy those screens. The goal is to do something similar but I don't want people to see the final result and think "Oh, that looks like HL2."

What I'd like to do that the folks at Valve didn't is create detail using geometry as opposed to using high resolution textures. If you look at the windows on the buildings in those screens you'll see that it's just a repeating texture.

That's fine for buildings in the distance but I think it's kinda odd to do that in an area where the player is in close proximity to the faces of these buildings. I dunno. I just thought it was kinda lame.

As far as soft shadows go I'm not too sure about how to do that. I'm thinking perhaps you could use custom light shaders for some areas and decals for others but it's not something I have a plan worked out for yet.

But for now I'm just going to tackle each issue as I go.

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

efx wrote:

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

That's right

The PCAction always writes such joke comments under screenshots.

Having bink video support would be nice. ( http://www.radgametools.com ) Most games out there use it, games using the unreal engine for example. but then again who lets you put a roq on a gui :lol:

none other than id.

anyone knows how to work with pixel shaders on D3?

something like a glass with refraction

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

efx wrote:

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

That's right

The PCAction always writes such joke comments under screenshots.

Having bink video support would be nice. ( http://www.radgametools.com ) Most games out there use it, games using the unreal engine for example. but then again who lets you put a roq on a gui :lol:

none other than id.

anyone knows how to work with pixel shaders on D3?

something like a glass with refraction

This thread is a community project I'm interested in starting in responce to all these "HL2 can do this" posts.

So, have you found something in a game that you don't think Doom 3 can match?

Post a screenshot. Describe it. Ect...

I'll try to prove to you that Doom 3 is just as capable. Anyone interested in lending me a hand is welcome.

I would like everything to be custom made however so that the resulting testmaps, ect... can be released for all to see firsthand running on their system.

I suppose the first suggestion is to make a sunny, well-lit outdoors area. With a stream of water running through it.

Try this

@bugmenot: Sure that's fine but give me a picture or a series of pictures so I'm not running blind creating a bunch of assets. It doesn't have to be a screenshot from a game. It could be a picture from National Geographic for all I care.

I don't want to spend a week or two working on something only to have people come back and say. Oh but that's not as bright as what I was expecting or there isn't enough vegetation.

@idiom: Ha ha. Okay, Unreal 3 isn't even out yet.

Although if you're serious I'll put in the effort if you can convince some others to help me because I sure as hell am not going to do that all by my lonesome.

Oh and on a side note, I remember reading somewhere a few months ago that the latest build of Unreal 3 ran a good 2 or 3 fps on a top o' the line system.

d3 supports vfp files which can add support for HDR and any other fancy effects, even lightmaps, you just need to know your shit, D3 can outdo hl2 anyday of the week.

Z

this is an excellent idea for a test map

vegetation and water?
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Half Life 2'ish Euro looking arch. tech
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Ultimatly, id love to see d3 do convincing outdoor areas - nothing huge, just realistic outdoor lighting. I just finished HL2 yesterday, and despite carmacks engine tech being uber advanced and future proof, im afraid HL2 wins hands down for gameplay. i dont like to admit the very boring "id's games are engine techdemos" comment but i feel myself thinking it from time to time.

That being said, theres also some occasional really hideous texture / map work in HL2 (rubble textures anyone?) that im sure iD wouldnt have dared let get through to final QC.

anyhow, this is an excellent idea to change the minds of the non-believers

if in fact it can be achieved. Im hoping so.

faultline
(back to lurking)

How about creating a scene simular to this:
http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/22.jpg

Or, recreating a battle from the canals where there are combines on a structure that you have to blow up with some explosive barrels at the base of it. Complete with bright shiny daytime lighting and high res textures would be sweet. No screen shot, sorry. A good fun battle, with daytime outside lighting would go a long way in my opinion. It wouldn't hurt to include some features that the D3 engine can do that source can't.

Or, something like this battle scene:
http://www.planethalflife.com/screenshot.asp?src=/half-life2/screenshots/01.jpg

btw, I can do a bit of mapping if you need rich

great idea to show that D3engine > HL2engine .
It is very possible to create same(or even better) areas like HL2 .

But i think its not possible without chagning some bits in the shaders or something.

I think the biggest problem here is that HL2 has precomputed radiosity and Doom 3 has.. dark. I suppose with a bunch of non-shadow, non-specular lights you could achieve the same effect, but it takes much more effort.

And those radiosity effects become very visible in gameplay.

I'm not quite sure what you guys are trying to accomplish here.

Rendering a halflife2 scene with the Doom3 engine is sort of cool, but is it actually playable?

No doubt Doom3 has better lighting, but at a cost in frame rates.

I'm not sure which engine I prefer.. I definitely had more 'fun' with HL2... Doom3 was boring until the ending levels... HL2 became silly during the end levels.

If only comparing how a screenshot scene looks.. then Doom3 wins, cuz these screenies look incredible... but on that token, 3D Studio, or any other professional 3D gfx app wins, but it's not much of a game, is it?

Take any of those scenes, toss in at *least* 4-5 baddies.. and then see which one comes out on top. We're talking about a 'game' engine, right? Not a highrez slide show.

ede wrote:

Rendering a halflife2 scene with the Doom3 engine is sort of cool, but is it actually playable?

We're doing it just for fun and for the "sort of cool" thing.

It is cool.. the screenshots look great..

but are we trying to see how the game would 'play', or just look?

I'm eager to see what the Doom3 engine can do.. as a game, not just as a renderer. Doom3 was sort of neat, the mobs looked awesome, but the game's content left me a little short.. I keep hearing that it can do nice outdoor stuff.. but the very brief display of this ability in the game didn't sell that for me, especially since there were no mobs outside (if I recall correctly).

Anyways, neat idea regardless..

I'd be interested to see how the timelines compare as well.

I'll wager a lot of HL2 stuff can be accomplished in D3, but which is faster to develop, and how much faster?

From working with D3 and the SDK in the last few weeks, I've found development to take far longer than it really ought to. Accomplishing seemingly simple tasks can take a while just because they don't fit into what Doom 3 can do out of the box. So I'm very interested to see how HL2 compares on this score.

ede wrote:

I keep hearing that it can do nice outdoor stuff.. but the very brief display of this ability in the game didn't sell that for me, especially since there were no mobs outside (if I recall correctly).

http://pwp.netcabo.pt/Tobril/d3_outdoor_test2.jpg

Fun facts:

- The map has one of those big (by itself) outdoor meshes and I cloned it 8 times.
- It takes rougly 10 mins walking to the back of the map.
- Red arrow points to the Rover (for scale).
- Draw distance is as big or even bigger than FarCry (for instance, a zombie standing on top of the the last tower would be the size of about 4 pixels on screen).
- Bigass light with "clouds" material (I'm making a huge outdoors map in the middle of a martian sandstorm).
- Polycounts close to 100k per frame in that shot (which is about 2 months old). My newer stuff has higher polycounts per frame than a regular outdoor FarCry frame.
- I disabled the fps_lock, notice the framerate. EDIT: 1024 @ High Quality (I have a 9800 Pro 128mb)

Rich: if you need any help, count me in.

a nice looking outdoor map right here

http://fpscentral.ampednews.com/?game=9 ... ws&id=8189

still dark, but hey. the sniper concept is pretty nice too.

Okay, so far I've got a city and forest.

City
http://www.planethalflife.com/screensho ... ots/22.jpg
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Forest
http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/ ... medium.jpg

Now I'm leaning towards doing a city first since it would probably take less work and there are only a few of us interested in contributing at the moment.

But first we need to decide on what the goal here is. I'm hearing talk about high res textures but I'll say right off the bat that if we go with high res textures then we won't be able to bother with bump or specular maps because you have to make a trade off in order to make the best use of texture memory.

I'd prefer we go with what Doom 3 has to offer rather than try and turn Doom 3 into Half-Life 2 by writing a lightmap shader and increasing texture resolution.

The whole point of this project is to prove what the engine is capable of. In that sense, I'd have to say that the biggest strength the engine has is in it's lighting and in order to take full advantage of it we will need specular and bumpmaps.

We could still go with high res textures but then your going to have to reduce the size of the map to try and minimize the amount of texture memory being used.

Another thing we'll need to settle on is how big this city map needs to be to prove a point. This I'm not sure on and would appriciate input.

I was thinking that maybe we pick a cubic mile road map and a topology map and combine the two to form the basic layout of the testmap. This is mainly to reduce the amount of work involved but you also need to consider that realistically no one is going to make a playable map that is miles long. We can still fake the appearance of a huge city by surrounding the playable area with less detailed buildings in the distance.

It should be simple enough. We just model the topology map and then apply the road map as a texture to the topology map and that should serve well as a backdrop in DoomEdit for mapping a rough layout.

Anyway, when I get some free time later today, I'm currently babysitting my nephew, I'll start posting reference pictures and screens of test buildings and such.

Then we'll all settle on assets or ideas that we like and start piecing together a map.

Maybe those interested can choose a block on the road map and go to town? I dunno. It depends on how many people are interested.

couples of early images of something I was working on here

http://paintaa1.miniserver.com/images/flyer1.jpg
http://paintaa1.miniserver.com/images/concept.jpg

not very impressive, but a little different to stock doom3

I'm working on something a little more advanced now

EDIT: oops just re-read starting post again - sorry this isn't quite on topic

A city scene like that is definately a challenge !
How close do you want to get to that level of detail rich ? - all the way ? :shock:

If you can pull that off, wow, it'll be incredible - the texturing will be the bulk of the work. There must be 60 basic textures in that scene that I can spot offhand.

Most of the level geometry can be done with standard brushes and patch meshes.

Also, to get a fair comparison you'd have to drop in about 15 monster/filler models and in addition, have a fair whack of physics objects.

I'm sure it's possible with decent frame rates - but there's one thing that you may not be able to do without some "faking" - and that's the soft shadows from the architecture ?

@Rroff: Nice shots. IMHO, I think those shots are somewhat on topic.

@bb_matt: I'd like to try going all the way but it's going to take a considerable amount of work.

One thing I don't want to do is copy those screens. The goal is to do something similar but I don't want people to see the final result and think "Oh, that looks like HL2."

What I'd like to do that the folks at Valve didn't is create detail using geometry as opposed to using high resolution textures. If you look at the windows on the buildings in those screens you'll see that it's just a repeating texture.

That's fine for buildings in the distance but I think it's kinda odd to do that in an area where the player is in close proximity to the faces of these buildings. I dunno. I just thought it was kinda lame.

As far as soft shadows go I'm not too sure about how to do that. I'm thinking perhaps you could use custom light shaders for some areas and decals for others but it's not something I have a plan worked out for yet.

But for now I'm just going to tackle each issue as I go.

Bauul wrote:

Rayne wrote:

Another way to try is the use of a "render view" definition like the Security camera does, and that will be cool... The problem is that this method imply a map needs to be loaded when the engine starts. Maybe you can add a command in the SDK so the engine wil open an "intro.map" as soon as it is launched, where you have the map, a gui overlay for menu, maybe a md5camera that goes on a fly by on the map etc... Will be cool to experiment

That's how I thought you could do it, after all HL2 loads a map just for the title screen. Although the current d3 title gui loads a model and adds a light source to it, would it be possible just to expand on that? I didn't think a straight GUI can have models in it, so the current title gui must load it from somewhere.

That's why it takes THIRTY MINUTES (!!!) to load the main menu ín hl2 on some computer... It's fucking stupid that they didn't optimize that more. Just dropping that info.

iceheart wrote:

That's why it takes THIRTY MINUTES (!!!) to load the main menu ín hl2 on some computer... It's fucking stupid that they didn't optimize that more. Just dropping that info.

yup, unbelievably system hoggy for just a menu. They could have at least used a video like FarCry did.

So, you can just record a Roq file, and make the gui play it in background..

Rayne wrote:

So, you can just record a Roq file, and make the gui play it in background..

Technically yes, although the res won't be so good. although, we could make just a 4 second looping video where just a few things moved, like a sign swinging or cables swaying. Then make it super hi res, like 1024x768 or something, and it wouldn't eat up too much space only being 4 seconds long.

You could put some kind of animated transparent texture, like grime and stuff over it to hide the low res too. That'd look cool.

Hello I'm a fan of the D3CDIT project i have some materials i want to share with you like buildings bars ect. well in other words i'm making a new euro in specific words other downtown i found your progress using winar and i saw the constructions that people send you so i will like to send you a block to continue your project if you will give me your e-mai
i will send you the knews and screenshots and share with you 'cause i found your models textures and materials to help you to continue to end your Doom 3 can do it project......

elroacho wrote:

i tried to hack a skyportal with a security cam pointing at a sky model and displaying it on a gui, kinda what your trying to do. it looks like muck because of the 640x480 limit. i would wait for the 1.3 patch and a proper skyportal.

I'm really eager to see the sky portal in D3. It's just that the six texture skybox plain suxx.

Ello,

I've been following this project from the start, and not having a copy of Doom 3 withheld me from participating.
Now I've finally bought it, I am wondering if the few spots left in the city still need to be filled.

I am currently working on creating a city myself (well, experimenting with the engine anyways), and I wondered if you people could use one of the buildings used in my map.
Also, has anyone been experimenting with larger cities/citytypes yet ?
I am trying if it's be feasible to create a city/citypart that serves as a map for a mod I am planning (for either Q4 or QW:ET), so any tips/experiences are welcome.

i have not been following this mod at all but heard of it.
could someone send me a link so i can download the map.
i'm too lazy to search the entire thread.
my email is hamatt@optusnet.com.au
i would be grateful if someone could send me a link.

@whatthe:

You know what's sad. Even if reading this thread was too much work for you, searching with google using the keywords "D3CDIT" and "download" turns up links to places where the testmap can be downloaded.

No offense, but sometimes I'm astounded at how resourceful you guys can be.

@NoSoup4U:

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I'm pretty sure everyone who was working on the project has given up.

The problem is that build 4 runs terrible because it's not optimized and it's layout makes it very difficult to optimize.

As a community project, D3CDIT is only dead when the community as a whole has given up on it.

I'm getting far too many emails from individuals who want to do something for the project to be dead.

All you guys need to do is start discussing ways to continue and I created a thread for just that purpose. So get to it...

http://www.doom3world.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=100445

As a reminder: The D3CDIT project is an idea - it's not only this single map!

Many forums got it blatantly wrong and advertised it as some sort of mod which it never was - it was and is a project to do something unusual with the Doom3 engine.

Rebuilding the Trafalgar Square is one idea of many, but it got associated as the sole purpose of the project.

If someone comes up with a nice 1fps render of a forrested landscape it also belongs here just as a very high resolution skinned ingame model with 20k tris.

i actualy agree with you though, i would love to see forest's done in DOOM3 just to see it done, and this project is perfect for it, i think its not a mod more of a project base to create the most kickass stuff

I think properly reconstructing the square, more accurately as well perhaps, with some possible structural changes to allow for better optimization, would improve the performance and coherence of the map. Honestly, someone should get a picture of the street layout and make a scale map of it...

Also I think there were quite a number of light leaks in the map, and it would be prudent to try to avoid those as much as possible (of course).

One thing I have to say though, is no matter what, I'm quite impressed considering the amount of brushwork in the map, and how much has been done in terms of lighting. You just wouldn't (and couldn't really) see that with an HL2 map.

hey, guys very nice work youve got going here im currently makeing a mod that has a lot of out door scens and was wondering maybe if i could barrow some of your textures because i have no way of makeing my own if not its ok ill have to make due with what i have which is the normall d3 textures but it would be a great help if i could barrow some of the textures

when i try to run the testbuild mod, it loads for a second, then goes to the opengl console and says wrong game DLL API version....whats this mean?

It's a compatability problem.

Build 4 uses a modified game DLL compiled using the 1.1 SDK.

The build works fine with Doom 3 v1.1 but will be incompatable with newer versions.

Unfortunately, things will stay that way unless someone revives the project.

well this might help revive this project here is something that guys could help me with i am trying to figure out how to make a completly destructable landscape so you could blow buildings up and such. i know a way to do this but it creates so much tris you get a max of 8fps and thats just standing there in a test map with a wall i block think and as tall as the player. so i obviusly need to find a better way of doing this. is there anyway to implement this in to the project or something like that because i could really use the help

OK guys...Try making something like this with the same lighting and stuff that looks similiar to this:

http://www.unreel.co.uk/reviews/r/Resident_Evil/co1.jpg

This project is pretty much discontinued, the last post was in july!
Christ on a stick! :shock:

I think it's clearly proved that D3CDIT, now let's keep on waiting for Quake Wars!

Spectro wrote:

This project is pretty much discontinued, the last post was in july!

And they were so eager to show what Doom 3 could do. Maybe it because the Doom 3 technology SUCKS!!! :shock:

just because it doens't look photoreal doesn't mean it can't look good, we have all gotten very picky with graphics

and lighting and texturing and modelspolycounts to the point that we have forgoten why we like games and there art style graphics

instead we have wanted just a simulation of the world

whatthe wrote:

Spectro wrote:

This project is pretty much discontinued, the last post was in july!

And they were so eager to show what Doom 3 could do. Maybe it because the Doom 3 technology SUCKS!!! :shock:

Stop wasting bandwidth.

@~runaway~: the engine is capable of that (might not run very well at all), but you're probably out of luck just running off suggestions like that. Look around at old posts, there tons of "can you make this" posts, and almost all of them were ignored.

If we can code light bloom into the engine, couldn't we code static light stuff? It woudln't be PARTICULARLY good, but it'd work for outside stuff.

Slinky wrote:

If we can code light bloom into the engine, couldn't we code static light stuff? It woudln't be PARTICULARLY good, but it'd work for outside stuff.

No, the bloom that's been "coded" in is either Pixel Shader work or a simple bloom material over the entire screen. The actual code we'd need is tucked away deep in the binary.

whatthe wrote:

Spectro wrote:

This project is pretty much discontinued, the last post was in july!

And they were so eager to show what Doom 3 could do. Maybe it because the Doom 3 technology SUCKS!!! :shock:

Well, please consider posting elsewhere or substantiate your claim - otherwise it's simply mindless trolling and therefore way below the threshold of this board.

Let's compare the Doom 3 Technology to Half-Life 2's, From what i've seen of pictures and video of ET: Quake Wars and playing Half-Life 2, it's obvious which one wins.

Oh yeah I know Quake Wars totally kicks its ass!

http://www.quakewars.at/quakewars/etqw_gamestar_002.jpg
http://www.quakewars.at/quakewars/pc_ac ... ew_003.jpg

And amazingly it's all pre-alpha!

whatthe wrote:

Let's compare the Doom 3 Technology to Half-Life 2's, From what i've seen of pictures and video of ET: Quake Wars and playing Half-Life 2, it's obvious which one wins.

Lol, every time I play HL2 nowadays I just cringe at the lighting system, guess I've just grown too used to proper lighting.

it's a sad sad day when people have modded the Q1 engine to do RT in adition to lightmaps & some game still use the same shadow techniques from Q2.

*beams!* Quake Wars is neat. They used UTD's motion capture lab to do a lot of animation and it's lookin' pretty good.

i love the jungle areas they look breath taking

Hey guys im new to this site but,i like it already.whatthe shut a f*** up.i began working on my mod,that will take place mostly in outside world of doom.i know its going tobe tricky,but its not imposible to do it.monsters and other zombie characters will spawn only in rooms, inside the facilities and stuff.in this mod u wont interact with zombies and other models as much as in original doom and other mods,but ul have to primaraly conflict with nature of mars terrain and survive thrue stages and save the humans that r located in some facillity that is hiden from evil,but not for long.as soon i will finish first map il upload it for u to try it.thanks

You've resurrected an ancient topic. While that's all well and good, please do not tell other members to stfu, even ones that make outrageous claims and don't back up their statements. Try to treat people with respect, as the last thing we want to see is a flame war between you and this whatthe person.

That said, hope to see your map and mod idea come to life. Sounds neat.

Thanks.

- Goliath

ok i shall not do this mistake once again,to argue with other members of this site.thank u very much

ok this mite sound ridicilouis but do u know where Slovenia is?if u r not from Evropa offcourse?

r u the one who posts the videos& stuff on the site.if u r the ONE,lol u r god to me man.Keep it coming on man.yeah.

baassboster wrote:

ok this mite sound ridicilouis but do u know where Slovenia is?if u r not from Evropa offcourse?

Might I ask what that has to do with anything? It might do you some good to get an idea of how we treat each other here before you try and start flamewars.

did u find ur secret?stop asking me sily questions

efx.what?http://www.internetdj.com/artists.php?op=show&id=38071

Mblackwell wrote:

Oh yeah I know Quake Wars totally kicks its ass!

And amazingly it's all pre-alpha!

Who is Wald Disney?

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

efx wrote:

It kind of becomes a joke if my German isn't as rusty as I think it is as Wald means forest in German.. Don't kill me if I'm wrong though

That's right

The PCAction always writes such joke comments under screenshots.

Having bink video support would be nice. ( http://www.radgametools.com ) Most games out there use it, games using the unreal engine for example. but then again who lets you put a roq on a gui :lol: