NVIDIA designated the "official" card of Doom 3.

[DarkStar]

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nzone_doom3_home.html

Sorta near the bottom of the page:

"NVIDIA is pleased to announce that id Software recommends the GeForce FX family of graphics processing units for DOOM 3. The rich feature set and programmability of GeForce FX GPUs enable the griping world of DOOM 3 to come to life with real-time dynamic lighting and shadow, while raw horsepower delivers non-stop multi-player action at lightning-fast frame rates. Look for this sticker on video cards equipped with a GeForce FX GPU, and witness the mind-blowing detail of the DOOM 3 experience - the way it's meant to be played."

[FortisVir]

well this is interesting

Half Life 2 vs. Doom 3.

ATI vs. Nvidia.

[Cutey_Kaite]

the battle is on

[Stigmata]

I believe that is high-grade bullsh*t. We all know Nvidia's DX9 architecture is horrible compared to ATI's. However, their new cards might actually show some change, but until then.... GO ATI!

[Shuzer]

I believe that is high-grade bullsh*t. We all know Nvidia's DX9 architecture is horrible compared to ATI's. However, their new cards might actually show some change, but until then.... GO ATI!

Doom 3 isn't DX9 :|

[Letters]

Sure id may recommend Nvidia... they may also recommend ATI! Who said recommendations are exclusive? Generally, having an ATI or Nvidia card is a good idea...

[DarkStar]

Sure id may recommend Nvidia... they may also recommend ATI! Who said recommendations are exclusive? Generally, having an ATI or Nvidia card is a good idea...

I got the impression from this announcement that they seem to be siding with NVIDIA on this one. If you're reccomending both, what's the point of saying anything? And if you plan on reccomending both, why NVIDIA today and not ATI?

[DarkStar]

Doom 3 isn't DX9 :|

Really? I didn't know that.

[Letters]

I got the impression from this announcement that they seem to be siding with NVIDIA on this one. If you're reccomending both, what's the point of saying anything? And if you plan on reccomending both, why NVIDIA today and not ATI?
It's on an Nvidia site, no? Why the Hell would they include what Id says about ATI?

[Stigmata]

Doom 3 isn't DX9 :|Are you sure? It seems like it would probably use DX9.

[DarkStar]

It's on an Nvidia site, no? Why the Hell would they include what Id says about ATI?

Well, I assume if they were going to be reccomending both, then they would have given each manufacturer the news at the same time. And we would have subsequently heard something from ATI on this matter today as well.

Plus, I think this was actually a press release that they gave to a bunch of media outlets as well, not just the folks at NVIDIA.

[Letters]

Doesn't look quoted to me... that's just THEIR WORDING of it... :upstare:

It's a very general statement that shouldn't be taken seriously... at all.

[Pitbul]

Are you sure? It seems like it would probably use DX9.


its a OpenGL game genius. :rolleyes:

[OCybrManO]

OpenGL or D3D doesn't matter... nVidia's FX cards have poor shader performance. Both OpenGL and D3D can use shaders. The FX cards are slower in both when shaders are involved.

All that statement says is that id Software can be paid to say anything... and nVidia is willing to pay whatever it takes to get them to say it.

[DarkStar]

All that statement says is that id Software can be paid to say anything... and nVidia is willing to pay whatever it takes to get them to say it.

This seems to me the most likely explanation to me.

Basically I see it like this:

1. NVIDIA really got their act together and improved their shader performance (not likely)
2. NVIDIA paid id to say these wonderful things about their company (most likely)
3. NVIDIA totally went behind id's back on this one and are just waiting to see if they can get away with it (this would be sort of funny)

[dawdler]

The fun part will be to run a game benchmark through the standard opengl rendering paths, and see which one comes out on top :)

Sidenote: DX9 is more than rendering. KOTOR requires DX9 installed too, but its an OpenGL 1.4 engine. Its just a crummy way of saying "Yeah, even though we use this awesome independant multiplatform rendering engine, we are too lazy to port it to Linux or similar, so we just use something small from DX9 and voila! Its a Windows game".

[Brian Damage]

Yes, DX9 is more than just graphics.

[cadaver]

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is nvidia optimised too, but GSC say`s it will be little difference in performance between geforce/radeon. about 5 fps or something, if any at all.

DOOM III : id says geforce have much more stable drivers. the fps will also be capped on 60 = max 60 fps.

[Gorgon]

So we know that Nvidia is 5fps more. What about the IMAGE QUALITY?

Who will win the race in this aspect?

[thenerdguy]

If I remember correctly ATI leaked some stuff about DOOM III and Id told them to Freak off. Nvidia has allways been better at OpenGL than ATI cards have. Its just the simple truth.

Its like my 5900Ultra 256Mb card owning my friends 9800Pro at quake III in linux. :)

[dawdler]

If I remember correctly ATI leaked some stuff about DOOM III and Id told them to Freak off. Nvidia has allways been better at OpenGL than ATI cards have. Its just the simple truth.

Its like my 5900Ultra 256Mb card owning my friends 9800Pro at quake III in linux. :)
ATI actually didnt leak "stuff". It was ATI that leaked the alpha :)

[Maxi]

Not ATI, a person who WORKED for ati...

[Gorgon]

With Id Software's upcoming Doom3 title looming on the not so distant horizon, we've been taking a sincere interest in Id's new game engine. Since it will obviously become a definitive tool in our benchmarking test suite, for next generation graphics products and related articles, we were also more than interested when our colleagues at Anandtech posted preliminary benchmark figures in their GeForce FX 5900 Ultra launch article. The scores represented here showed a significant lead for both the NV35 and NV30, versus ATi's Radeon 9700 and 9800 products. It piqued our interest for sure and we decided to ask NVIDIA what they felt may be attributing to the GeForce FX's obvious strength, at least currently, with Doom3.

The answer we got from Senior PR Manager, Brian Burke, was "UltraShadow"... It seems that Doom3's advanced lighting and shadowing effects place a heavy load on the graphics pipeline and NVIDIA feels that UltraShadow technology is a clear advantage in their architecture, versus other products on the market. We conducted a quick Q&A with Brian, on the topic of UltraShadow and Doom3, as well as its relative impact on performance in next generation game titles, that will also utilize the Doom3 engine. Before you dig in here, we suggest taking a look at NVIDIA's UltraShadow Tech Brief, if you need a refresher course on the technology.

That was from the INQ.com news

Here is the information concerning UltraShadow ....:

If UltraShadow technology is a "hardware assist" feature that programmers at Id have taken advantage of, in what way does the hardware architecture actually enhance the capabilities of this method of "Z-Cull" for shadows? Is there some sort of programmable register or mechanism within the chip that allows the developer to define their clip plane parameters? Is there a memory buffer for caching of this information, with respect to what is and is not supposed to be processed? Can you define better for us how your chip differs from a hardware perspective, versus ATi, in this regard?
We modified our GPU architecture to be able to process depth bounds methods. These methods are called by the "depth_bounds" API which we presented to developers @ GDC. When invoked, these methods provide the information necessary for our GPU's with UltraShadow to cull out shadow pixels beyond the constraints set by depth bounds. It involved modifications to several units within our GPU's.

This technology is currently patent pending by NVIDIA, and as such, so it would be difficult for ATI to provide the same benefit without violating NVIDIA IP. This technology is over and above such advances as 2-sided stencil, and clip planes, which both ATI R3xx GPU's and NVIDIA GeForce FX GPU's support. The benefit depends on the scene and # of lights, but can be up to 30% in some cases.

Source : hardocp, warp2search and xbitlabs

Does it mean that NVIDIA only advantage iS US Technology? :dozey:

[dawdler]

Not ATI, a person who WORKED for ati...
Thus ATI. Any person that works for the company, represents the company.

And no, Ultrashadow is obviously not the only advantage the Geforce have. There is so much you can tune for optimum performance on the Geforce, compared to the standard path.

Btw, Ultrashadow is also just usable in OpenGL rendering, making it less than usefull...

[thenerdguy]

Thus ATI. Any person that works for the company, represents the company.

And no, Ultrashadow is obviously not the only advantage the Geforce have. There is so much you can tune for optimum performance on the Geforce, compared to the standard path.

Btw, Ultrashadow is also just usable in OpenGL rendering, making it less than usefull...

What do you mean less than usefull???? i find it very usefull. :)

[dawdler]

What do you mean less than usefull???? i find it very usefull. :)
How many upcoming big games are OpenGL? How many upcoming games actually use this Ultrashadow in OpenGL?

Think on it.

[A2597]

in general, ATI and NVidia BOTH have good OpenGL proformance...though IMO ATI has a bit more power in their cards

[Axyon]

I predict this'll be the same old story; even though nVidia got John Carmack twizzled around their little finger, the game will run equally as well (if not better) on ATi cards.

[ComradeBadger]

You have to remember that nVidia cards went with 32-bit shaders for their FX cards. ATi went with Microsoft's requirement of 24-bit shaders. Look who's in who's pocket now ;)

Just to point out, I have an ATi card thrumming in my PC. I'm no fanboy :)

[cadaver]

How many upcoming big games are OpenGL? How many upcoming games actually use this Ultrashadow in OpenGL?

Think on it.

well...alot of future games are probably going to use the doom3 engine :cheers:

[thenerdguy]

Yeah but how many direct x games will be ported over to linux?????? Its good for thoes of us that use linux. :)

[dawdler]

in general, ATI and NVidia BOTH have good OpenGL proformance...though IMO ATI has a bit more power in their cards
That wasnt the issue. The point was that Ultrashadow is only supported under OpenGL, meaning you cant use it under DirectX.

well...alot of future games are probably going to use the doom3 engine
By the looks of it, the Doom III engine is quickly becoming obsolete, and something of the past. In the future you want Far Cry style engines to compete, not Quake style.

You have to remember that nVidia cards went with 32-bit shaders for their FX cards. ATi went with Microsoft's requirement of 24-bit shaders. Look who's in who's pocket now
Meaning exactly nothing. They couldnt run a game with full use of 32 bit shaders even if their lives depended on it. I honestly doubt the future games will tax the card *less* than current.

EDIT: Btw, here http://members.shaw.ca/spiritwalker/pics/dx9diff.html anyone can see what the high-definition-ultra-high-quality-RULEZ-ALLZ 32 bit shaders do in practice for modern gaming. Ie they revert to FX12.

[Arno]

By the looks of it, the Doom III engine is quickly becoming obsolete, and something of the past. In the future you want Far Cry style engines to compete, not Quake style.
At the moment, Far Cry is the only game being developed on the CryTek engine, whereas several games are being developed on the Doom3 engine. The CryTek engine can produce nice graphics, but stability, performance and customisability are also important factors for game developers.

[thenerdguy]

Well ill stick with nvidia and opengl,
So your saying that the man who created spome of the most used game engines of all time so far is wrong to use opengl??

[Farrowlesparrow]

Meh Im not exaclt in the know aobut this but OpenGl doesnt seem quite so....verstatile is the only word i can think of.

I think the DOom 3 engine, when it was first seen was undoubtedly the best, however people here are right, other engines are beinging to surface the rival and poossibly surpass the Doom 3 engine. Ok so Crytects enging may not seem the most stable but think about the time thats gone ino developing doom 3.

Anyway time for starget, see you all in an hour.

[dawdler]

Meh Im not exaclt in the know aobut this but OpenGl doesnt seem quite so....verstatile is the only word i can think of.
Lol, its DX that's not versetile :)
OpenGL is theoreticly the best when it comes to versatility. But DX is definetly biggest.

Anyway, when I said Far Cry style, I didnt mean Far Cry specificly. I meant expansive engines, large terrains, advanced lodding and a foilage engine, etc etc... Example: Can you alter Doom 3 levels dynamicly ingame?

[Pauly]

u guys never knew that?? what hole have u been living under?

[harrys]

Lol, its DX that's not versetile :)
Can you alter Doom 3 levels dynamicly ingame?
Yes you can alter the level dynamically in doom3 engine. Infact so far its the only engine which can do that because of new map file format is no longer involvles bsp compilation and everything in D3 engine could be setup as dynamic. Because of static lighting you can't alter the map HL2 or Far cry engine.

[csmighty1]

I'll stick with ATI...or nVidia? oh god! i'm so confused!

[Styloid]

Yes you can alter the level dynamically in doom3 engine. Infact so far its the only engine which can do that because of new map file format is no longer involvles bsp compilation and everything in D3 engine could be setup as dynamic. Because of static lighting you can't alter the map HL2 or Far cry engine.

have you seen the CryTek engine videos? You can play the game while you build the map. Anyways, Doom3 still needs to compile collision maps.

[Stigmata]

How many upcoming big games are OpenGL? How many upcoming games actually use this Ultrashadow in OpenGL?

Think on it.Doom 3. Quake IV.

[SubKamran]

We'll see id...we'll see... :D

Here's how I'll determine what gfx card to buy next:

How many games does the card perform over the competitor?
Image quality.

If ATi sacrifices some FPS in DOOM 3 but works better than Nivida in other newer games, I'm going with ATI because I'd get the most bang for my buck.

[dawdler]

Doom 3. Quake IV.
Oooooooooh, two FPS shooters... I'm amazed. Yeah, you convinced me, OpenGL is the future :rolleyes:

How many games does the card perform over the competitor?
Image quality.
Check out the link I gave ( http://members.shaw.ca/spiritwalker/pics/dx9diff.html ). Note the difference in the image, then check out fps, its pathetic on Nvidias side lol... (and no, not the garbled Fraps fps, that would be amazing eh, Far Cry at 250 fps! ;))

[Maskirovka]

honestly, i'd rather more games were made with opengl since i'd rather microsoft not have the OS monopoly AND the DX monopoly...even if opengl was worse :P

everyone relying on directx just allows microsoft to do whatever it wants with longhorn and copy protection and everything else...dx10 = longhorn only, anyone?

but if id software is gonna be the only ones making ogl games...then so be it...let microsoft rule...because i'm not buying a vid card based on one company's games...valve or id.

[harrys]

Oooooooooh, two FPS shooters... I'm amazed. Yeah, you convinced me, OpenGL is the future :rolleyes:


Check out the link I gave ( http://members.shaw.ca/spiritwalker/pics/dx9diff.html ). Note the difference in the image, then check out fps, its pathetic on Nvidias side lol... (and no, not the garbled Fraps fps, that would be amazing eh, Far Cry at 250 fps! ;))

If OpenGL is not the future, i wonder why this OpenGL based game screenshot looks 1000 times better than DX9 screenshot you posted:

http://www.doom3.com/getdesktop.asp?num=3&size=sm

[dawdler]

If OpenGL is not the future, i wonder why this OpenGL based game screenshot looks 1000 times better than DX9 screenshot you posted:

http://www.doom3.com/getdesktop.asp?num=3&size=sm
Maybe because the shot I posted was an ingame screen from Far Cry (I think) without any aim of being fancy, not concept art :rolleyes:

[crabcakes66]

Its like my 5900Ultra 256Mb card owning my friends 9800Pro at quake III in linux. :)


:rolling: i love it when people bring that up......



ATI=300fps Nvidia=380fps

WOW!!!!! :upstare:

[mortiz]

Considering DX9 is being developed by the mighty microsoft I think OpenGL has done well to stay close to DX9 in quality.

Personally I prefer OpenGL, it generally works better on my system with hardly any visible image quality reduction.

[Venmoch]

Seriously all you people boasting about "super fast framerates" are the ones kidding yourselves, whats the point going at 300 fps when you can only visually see a maximum of 30-60?

[thenerdguy]

:rolling: i love it when people bring that up......



ATI=300fps Nvidia=380fps

WOW!!!!! :upstare:

No its like my 5900 ultra at 1600x1200 with AA and AF at 8X getting around 450 fps and my friends 9800pro with the same settings and only getting 180 fps and very crappy image quailty and no lighting and no shadow and no water effects at all.

Ill bring it up every time. Nvidia is better in linux. OpenGl works better with Nvidia. Its that simple.

[dawdler]

Personally I prefer OpenGL, it generally works better on my system with hardly any visible image quality reduction.
You know, that doesnt make sense. At all.

Quality reduction compared to what?! When it comes to D3D, both Nvidia [when following specs without haxing the image] and ATI [when it doesnt suffer gamma error] comes pretty close to the reference rasterizer. You cant get any more accurate image quality than that.

Nvidia is better in linux. OpenGl works better with Nvidia.
So one could also say it... Ati is better in Windows. DirecX works better with ATI. Which weighs the most? :E

Sidenote: Read every review on the net, the differences are far smaller than that even in the 300+ range... Usually around +-40 fps. In actually *playable* conditions, we are talking +- 10 fps or less.

Sidenote: We are going offtopic, so... DOOM III SUXXORZ!!! HL2 RULEZZ JOOOOOO!!!!

[thenerdguy]

WOW this from a mod.

(Why am i even bothering to argue with a mod on a hl2 fanboy site?)

O and its not only on quake III its also UT UT2003/4 too. :) yas directx 9 works better with ati, but from what the rumors are saying the next version will work better with nvidia, (Plus they say that the next nvidia card will own ati, I dont know but i think its a cool rumor)


OK this is the last post from me on this.

[Gorgon]

Check this Up:

http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/categories/products/deptpage.asp?wherefrom=search&searchword=doom%20III

[Maskirovka]

Seriously all you people boasting about "super fast framerates" are the ones kidding yourselves, whats the point going at 300 fps when you can only visually see a maximum of 30-60?


uh oh...not another incredibly misinformed person about the human eye and framerates....

you can see the difference between 60fps and 100fps...especially if that's the average framerate...

and you can see the difference between 100fps and 200fps...our eyes perceive the world continuously...not in frames, so any framerate is visible...but the point where you can't tell the difference is much higher than 30-60fps...though i do agree that there is a point where it doesn't effectively matter to your eye.

but your eye can see blips that last 1/200th of a second (proven by tests on figher pilots identifying enemy planes/vehicles)

check this article out:
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html

and there are non-visual reasons why you would want to have a fast framerate...has to do with how the game updates your position, when you fired, etc...just do some searching on google...you'll get it.

[harrys]

Maybe because the shot I posted was an ingame screen from Far Cry (I think) without any aim of being fancy, not concept art :rolleyes:

its an in-game screenshot, not concept art lol. :D
and so is this one.
http://www.planetdoom.com/images/image.asp?screenshots/official/15l.jpg

I love when people say the D3 screenshots are concept art, it just shows how good it looks :thumbs:

[Maskirovka]

sure doom3 will look nice...but will it be fun? that's the question.

i say...not really....though it'll be cool to run around and shoot pretty things.

[Arno]

Maybe because the shot I posted was an ingame screen from Far Cry (I think) without any aim of being fancy, not concept art :rolleyes:
The fact that you mistakenly identified an ingame Doom3 screenshots as concept art proves that the Doom3 engine indeed supports very high quality graphics. :cheese:

[dawdler]

its an in-game screenshot, not concept art lol. :D
and so is this one.
http://www.planetdoom.com/images/image.asp?screenshots/official/15l.jpg

I love when people say the D3 screenshots are concept art, it just shows how good it looks :thumbs:
They are concept, they arent a picture of someone *playing*.

Take a look at my originally image.

Then take a look at this image: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1246.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1243.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1249.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1245.jpg

Then take a look at your Doom III image.

All my screenshots listed here (edit: maybe except the truck, that's borderline) and the Doom III are purely high quality showoffs, preset shoots, thus more concept than ingame shot. Except the first link I posted, which was an ingame image to show the difference of Nvidia rendering and ATI rendering in Far Cry, not something to showoff the game, showoff the engine, or even showoff DX9.

Edit: this one, http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1233.jpg , is probably the better comparison, cause its the same type of scene setup as your Doom III image. And guess what: Its prettier! :P

[harrys]

They are concept, they arent a picture of someone *playing*.

Take a look at my originally image.

Then take a look at this image: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1246.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1243.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1249.jpg
Or this: http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1245.jpg

Then take a look at your Doom III image.

All my screenshots listed here (edit: maybe except the truck, that's borderline) and the Doom III are purely high quality showoffs, preset shoots, thus more concept than ingame shot. Except the first link I posted, which was an ingame image to show the difference of Nvidia rendering and ATI rendering in Far Cry, not something to showoff the game, showoff the engine, or even showoff DX9.

Again, you are fooling yourself if you thnk D3 screenshots are concept art (anyone who had played leaked alpah will tell u that).

Take a look at these *in-game* screenshots from different angle.

http://www.doom3.com/images/screenshots/02.jpg
http://www.doom3.com/images/screenshots/03.jpg
http://www.doom3.com/images/screenshots/01.jpg
http://www.doom3.com/images/screenshots/04.jpg

Now compare with your DX9 game. The character models and in door environments in screenshots you posted looks pathetic compared do this OpenGL game.

[Maskirovka]

it's carmack's work, not the greatness of opengl, that make doom3 look great....

if carmack and id were developing for directx, they'd make an engine that looks just as good...

and i think the "show off" screens from both games look great....doom has nice shadows and the crytek engine has great looking foliage....the thing is...all of the screens you guys posted are show off screens...who cares if they bothered to render a weapon in one of the doom3 screens...it's not going to look that good when you play it....far cry or doom 3.

[harrys]

sure doom3 will look nice...but will it be fun? that's the question.

i say...not really....though it'll be cool to run around and shoot pretty things.

OMG!! yeah. I will be able to run and shoot stuff for first time in game :O
I hope HL2 also implements that feature, it will be awesome:O

[Maskirovka]

lol....well put :P

[harrys]

it's carmack's work, not the greatness of opengl, that make doom3 look great....

if carmack and id were developing for directx, they'd make an engine that looks just as good...

and i think the "show off" screens from both games look great....doom has nice shadows and the crytek engine has great looking foliage....the thing is...all of the screens you guys posted are show off screens...who cares if they bothered to render a weapon in one of the doom3 screens...it's not going to look that good when you play it....far cry or doom 3.

you're right. thats what I was trying to prove, oppose to some people who think just because a game uses DirectX9 magically produces better output. Hardware makes bigger difference not API. API is only layer which talks to hardware and to use its features with set instructions. For example , If graphics card doesn't support Pixel Shaders technology, Doom3 or FarCry may look totally different games.

[Arno]

They are concept, they arent a picture of someone *playing*.


concept

n : an abstract or general idea inferred or derived from specific instances

"Concept art" is used in the planning stage of game development, to give the artists an idea about the theme of the game and to aid them in creating the actual game art. The screenshots you showed all show actual game content. None of it can be regarded as concept, because everything seen in those screenshots will appear in the commercial product. It could very well be possible that they represent actual ingame cinematic sequences.

[clarky003]

by the time HL2 comes out, the Nvidia cards will beable to perform better with shader based operations, so how come peeps are saying that its ATI vs Nvidia, come the time it'll be completely different

[Axyon]

by the time HL2 comes out, the Nvidia cards will beable to perform better with shader based operations, so how come peeps are saying that its ATI vs Nvidia, come the time it'll be completely different

Will they now? Okay then, I'm just glad you can see into the future, because without you, I would have thought that ATi will have released their new cards as well, indicating that it will still be an ATi vs. nVidia situation...

[dawdler]

concept

n : an abstract or general idea inferred or derived from specific instances

"Concept art" is used in the planning stage of game development, to give the artists an idea about the theme of the game and to aid them in creating the actual game art. The screenshots you showed all show actual game content. None of it can be regarded as concept, because everything seen in those screenshots will appear in the commercial product. It could very well be possible that they represent actual ingame cinematic sequences.
Concept art is also something that gives the player an idea of the theme of the game, I consider it fairly similar when we are talking about a 3D image, ingame or no.

Maybe I used wrong wordings with saying "concept art"... Hm... How about super-high-quality-situational-footage-from-3rd-person-camera-and-not-player-staged-by-the-developer-whether-ingame-cinematic-or-no-with-the-purpose-of-only-looking-good-and-sell-the-game-or-possibly-with-the-purpose-of-displaying-fancy-things-like-normal-mapping-and-pixelshaders?

[Arno]

Maybe I used wrong wordings with saying "concept art"... Hm... How about super-high-quality-situational-footage-from-3rd-person-camera-and-not-player-staged-by-the-developer-whether-ingame-cinematic-or-no-with-the-purpose-of-only-looking-good-and-sell-the-game-or-possibly-with-the-purpose-of-displaying-fancy-things-like-normal-mapping-and-pixelshaders?
That seems like a pretty accurate description! :E

[Sorze]

I hate to be the guy that says this (there always is one), but you leave me no choice.. :sleep:


How the hell can you compare these games graphically!??
I think you understand which on is which by these descriptions...

One is set in a lush, tropical landscape, and has somethine like a 2km drawdistance.

One is set in tight, claustrophobic, (mostly) indoor environments, but uses sophisticated realtime lighting and shadows.


It's like comparing apples and pineapples (or something....)!



If they switched places, we would truly know which engine is best... (And for that, I think Far Cry would come out on top, since there is still no pics of wide open terrain in the Doom3 engine, but Far Cry does indoors just fine)

[Maskirovka]

well pur sorze...i wonder what the doom3 engine would do with 1km+ distances?

[harrys]

well pur sorze...i wonder what the doom3 engine would do with 1km+ distances?
may be because the game doesn't have vehicles to drive around 1 km distances?

Draw distance is accomplished by LOD (Level of Detail setting) , its a common trick already used by other game engines like serious sam.

The question is, can Far Cry engine display objects more than 200 ft away without loosing LOD?
take a look at this far cry screenshot:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/farcry/screens.html?page=233

Notice the trees on far back in middle and on right side of screen and how some objects start to disappear. :E

[dawdler]

may be because the game doesn't have vehicles to drive around 1 km distances?

Draw distance is accomplished by LOD (Level of Detail setting) , its a common trick already used by other game engines like serious sam.

The question is, can Far Cry engine display objects more than 200 ft away without loosing LOD?
take a look at this far cry screenshot:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/farcry/screens.html?page=233

Notice the trees on far back in middle and on right side of screen and how some objects start to disappear. :E
Well that's how the game is design. If you ask *CAN* it display them, then the answer is most likely yes, there is always a setting to move the lod distance or override it (at least you can do it in OFP, that's heavily lodded). Wether you *WANT* to play with such massive polycounts is another matter...

At any rate, they are *not* that different. Here's indoor shots from their page:
http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1242.jpg
http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1224.jpg
http://www.crytek.com/screenshots/index.php?sx=xisle&px=1232.jpg
Both still do pretty advanced enviroment indoors. Doom III is better at it, but lack outdoor enviroment. I consider Far Cry a *much* more balanced engine, that's why I said that this is what most people want for future engines, not Doom III (aka fancy Quake) style engines.

[ComradeBadger]

The Doom III engine is being used for Quake IV which has been said to include vechiles and huge outdoor enviroments.

:)

[dawdler]

The Doom III engine is being used for Quake IV which has been said to include vechiles and huge outdoor enviroments.

:)
So when will we see Quake IV? By the time we have the R500 we could probably run the Doom III engine with 1600x1200/6xAA/16xAF at 100+ fps. Outdoors levels and vehicle physics are easy to squeeze in then.

[Arno]

So when will we see Quake IV? By the time we have the R500 we could probably run the Doom III engine with 1600x1200/6xAA/16xAF at 100+ fps. Outdoors levels and vehicle physics are easy to squeeze in then.
It's the same scenario as with the Quake3 engine. Q3A was originally pretty much restricted to small, mainly indoor maps. When the hardware advanced, bigger areas could be rendered. This resulted in the terrain maps from Team Arena and RTCW.

No doubt that after a few years the Doom3 engine will also render large outdoor areas.

[thehunter1320]

"we b3tter than ATi... cause we had a l33t fan contest! and we do teh 'teh way it's meant to be played!'!!!" Whoppde-****ing-do... :hmph:

doesn't mean that Nvidia will have ANY performace boost when running games on teh D3 engine

[ComradeBadger]

Listen. ATi make mistakes too you know. They're a company, they make mistakes.

[marksmanHL2 :)]

Only reason I have ever supported ATI over NVIDIA is because they offered the same of better for far cheaper for a fair while....

[harrys]

It's the same scenario as with the Quake3 engine. Q3A was originally pretty much restricted to small, mainly indoor maps. When the hardware advanced, bigger areas could be rendered. This resulted in the terrain maps from Team Arena and RTCW.

No doubt that after a few years the Doom3 engine will also render large outdoor areas.

There aren't any D3 screens that shows outdoor environments except this one:
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/2/0,1311,sz=1&i=29585,00.jpg
Which indicates that engine can render outdoor environments, but may not as huge as far cry environments.

[clarky003]

Will they now? Okay then, I'm just glad you can see into the future, because without you, I would have thought that ATi will have released their new cards as well, indicating that it will still be an ATi vs. nVidia situation

lol, I never said they wouldnt, silly :P, god damn Sarcasticness , perdantic... rant rant. :)

[Top Secret]

There aren't any D3 screens that shows outdoor environments except this one:
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com...&i=29585,00.jpg
Which indicates that engine can render outdoor environments, but may not as huge as far cry environments.

Also, in the Doom 3 trailer, there is that small section with the tram moving out-doors.

[crabcakes66]

No its like my 5900 ultra at 1600x1200 with AA and AF at 8X getting around 450 fps and my friends 9800pro with the same settings and only getting 180 fps and very crappy image quailty and no lighting and no shadow and no water effects at all.

Ill bring it up every time. Nvidia is better in linux. OpenGl works better with Nvidia. Its that simple.


....not quite ..but you sound like a fanboy so no arguments from me.

[jonbob]

....not quite ..but you sound like a fanboy so no arguments from me.

He's sort of right you know. Up to now nvidia have always provided better linux support. I don't own an FX so I can't support his other claim, but OpenGL performance was never a problem with my old GF4 card.

[thenerdguy]

....not quite ..but you sound like a fanboy so no arguments from me.

Havnt you figured it out yet? Ive told you all about a million times that im a justified fanboy of nvidia. Naimly because of the better opengl support. :) If ati would get better at open gl then i would like them more but they seem to like the directx crap.

[dawdler]

Havnt you figured it out yet? Ive told you all about a million times that im a justified fanboy of nvidia. Naimly because of the better opengl support. :) If ati would get better at open gl then i would like them more but they seem to like the directx crap.
How about actually reading what I said earlier? ATI is within +-10 (yes, both under AND over) FPS in any OpenGL game if you count *playable* settings (for example 12x9 at 4xAA/8xAF). Just check any review.

I cant find it now, but the really fun thing is that ATI is tested to be 2 TIMES faster in UT2K3 OpenGL :p

Besides I dont like to compare cards like that anyway. I like to see low, average and max fps. ATI can often pull twice the FX low FPS in games, even if average ends up fairly equal.

[Mr. Redundant]

Havnt you figured it out yet? Ive told you all about a million times that im a justified fanboy of nvidia. Naimly because of the better opengl support. :) If ati would get better at open gl then i would like them more but they seem to like the directx crap.

thats what I used to think before I got my radeon, hehe I remember thinking, Lols lols ATI = DX and all my fave games = opengl, therefore ATI = teh lose.

however after informing myself, (reading reviews, tech specs, fps comparisons, and trying the card out, as well as Nvidias fx 5800ultra) I found that the ATI card was everything I could hope for and more.

:D you just have to try one to understand it's power, I hate my bro's fx5200, and I sold my 5800fx Ultra. ATI has not let me down once since my purchase.

[A2597]

farcry and doom3 looks almost identical IMHO. both look very good.

I want more HL2 screenies though...

[thenerdguy]

UMmmm your still not understanding me. PURE OPENGL! Linux, baby. Ut2003/4 in windows isnt pure opnegl, it still uses dx. In linux there is no directx.

[dawdler]

UMmmm your still not understanding me. PURE OPENGL! Linux, baby. Ut2003/4 in windows isnt pure opnegl, it still uses dx. In linux there is no directx.
Well if you got Savage, benchmark that in a certain spot (include picture) with some varius settings (ie 10x7 without AA/AF, with, max/low settings/whatever) and we could always test it. Its available both as linux and windows version, using OpenGL. Dont think Savage has ever been benchmarked, so I dont know what the differences are.

And of course its pure OpenGL, its hard to render in OpenGL mode if you dont use pure OpenGL (would be impressive to see a hybrid DX9/OpenGL renderer). The other DX code wouldnt affect framerate. This is not counting a sucky OpenGL driver path though.

[crabcakes66]

Havnt you figured it out yet? Ive told you all about a million times that im a justified fanboy of nvidia. Naimly because of the better opengl support. :) If ati would get better at open gl then i would like them more but they seem to like the directx crap.

Im not big on linux/mac so opengl is secondary to me, since most of what I play is DX running on my almighty windows box. :naughty:

But seriously the gap is nowhere near that much. IQ is a moot point with q3 so i doubt there is anything aproaching a noticable differance.

Like i said. Who care if your pushing 4000fps with max setting or 5000 fps with max settings? :dozey: