View Full Version : Doom3 Graphically better then FarCry?

07-30-04, 12:03 AM
Will Doom 3 be graphically better then Farcry. I know Kyle at [H] said it would blow away anything we have seen but was he talking about gameplay or the graphics? I play Farcry with all settings maxed 1024 and I dunno how much better Doom3 can look.

07-30-04, 12:21 AM
How do you think we can tell & we didnt play the game yet ??

07-30-04, 12:23 AM
Graphics, atmosphere, sound.... a lil JC magic

07-30-04, 02:23 AM
If doom3 isn't as bug ridden as Farcry, and looks good on low settings (unlike FC), then Yes!
I'd say Doom3 would be superior!

07-30-04, 04:21 AM
Put it this way... Doom 3 looks like it has been put through a CG filter (the filter that movies like Shrek and Finding Nemo use to make the graphics look so good). Farcry on the otherhand doesn't.

07-30-04, 06:52 AM
Of course it's going to look better. Hell, the leaked alpha looked better than Far Cry, and that's two years old. The finished product is going to whoop Far Cry's ass. And run a whole lot better too.

07-30-04, 08:40 AM
From the G4 techtv videos I'd say yes :)

I mean it looks like a freakin CG movie!

07-30-04, 09:03 AM
Doom 3 will spank Farcry, without a doubt. I keep going back to the [H]ardOCP D3 Hardware guide and shaking my head. I mean, I knew Carmack was a genius before, but this is just freaking ridiculous. A game that looks like it spent the last six years rendering at Pixar at 640x480 and runs well on a GF3 P4 1.5Ghz... it's almost unbelieveable. If you'd told me that six months ago, I would have run up the BS flag.

We are, without a doubt, looking at the most technologically advanced and polish game that has ever come out, period. And it's going to be in my hands on friggin' Monday night. :drooling: :drooling:

07-30-04, 09:07 AM
mind you, Far cry isn't bad man...just Doom III is...Doom III

I like stating the obvious

07-30-04, 09:12 AM
doom 3 got outdoor sence or not?
also i never seem to see water graphics from doom3 too
so it is very hard to compare also

07-30-04, 09:25 AM
I just like teh details afforded on the models by using bump mapping....on Doom III and Far Cry! :D

07-30-04, 09:39 AM
I just like teh details afforded on the models by using bump mapping....

Yea I've always wondered why more games don't use bumpmapping, it makes the texture look so much more sweet.

07-30-04, 09:48 AM
Yea I've always wondered why more games don't use bumpmapping, it makes the texture look so much more sweet.

I know what u mean Juice..

Details as the bumpiness of a rock/granite wall...or the rivets on a metal floor. Those should be standard by now I think.

07-30-04, 09:52 AM
Oh they will be... give it time... :)

07-30-04, 10:02 AM
Those should be standard by now I think.

Yea especially considering NV really started pushing it at the GF3 launch.

Overall the best thing about Doom3 is that it will truely set a new standard for the rest of the game industry to follow. Evidence of this is already apparent w/ the delay of Stalker & Valve's attempts to reignite the hype for HL2 w/ talks of a closer release date. Also by looking at the D3 benchmarks it proves that its still possible to build a technological advanced game that can run as good as it looks on today's hardware.

Funny thing is in a couple years we're prolly gonna go through the same cycle again with the U3 engine, talking about incredible :cool:

07-30-04, 10:28 AM
U3.... drooooooooollllllllll :drooling:

07-30-04, 10:52 AM
Well, "better" is a relative term. Doom 3 definatly looks better as far as actual graphic quality goes, but Farcry has some very impressively huge environments and some nice effects (such as displacement and offset mapping, I don't think the D3 engine even supports that). Both look spectacular in their own ways, but as with most of ID's engines Doom 3 manages to look very good even on low-end hardware (which is strange considering most engines that look good on high-end machines either look or run like total crap when scaled down to low-end hardware).

But yes, the Unreal Engine 3 looks unbelievably spectacular in every way...though I just don't think it will perform quite as good as Doom 3 :p

07-30-04, 01:17 PM
mind you, Far cry isn't bad man...just Doom III is...Doom III

I like stating the obvious

I am so sick of that tautology. :D

07-30-04, 03:32 PM
the foliage in Far Cry is what stands out in my mind..

I don't think Doom III will have any foliage.. then again, its probably mostly indoors anyways...unless there's a room full of potted plants or something.. lol

07-30-04, 03:50 PM
Yeah, the two engines were obviously designed with different priorites in mind. Farcry concentrated on outdoor areas and effects that benefited that (i.e. large environments and foliage rendering) whereas Doom 3 was designed to exploit the small environments and close-quarters encounters that are standard in ID's games. Imagine how much of the character detail from Doom 3 would be unnoticable if the enemies were fought at the distance most of the encounters in Farcry are handled from.

07-31-04, 10:35 AM
i think that while far cry may use more advanced technology, doom creates a much immersive atmosphere. id knows from experience that gameplay takes precedence over shiny window dressing, though they do both very well.

07-31-04, 07:10 PM
I just want to say I agree with MajorTom's comment 110% :thumbsup:

07-31-04, 07:24 PM
FarCry doesnt use more advanced tech.

08-02-04, 01:50 AM
Sounds like Doom 3 is going to be much like Chronicles of Riddick (obvious differences of course). Both do all indoor environments, *spoiler* have friendly npc's that you can talk to */spoiler*, same type of atmosphere, realistic lighting & bumpmapping, etc. I might be completely wrong. Guess I'll find out tomorrow. :)