Sorry your browser is not supported!

This is probably as good an example of Hl2's physics, as you can get. This trebuchet is completely un-scripted, the force that lifts the buggy into the air is all done using the physics engine....





Uh oh! Look at the ugly tiled water......



This is one of Hl2's down points, for me.

Hmm... do you have the .map of it?
I've not actually tried any HL2 development yet, cause i don't have the SDK (which is annoying); but I'd like to have a go at remaking in Doom3, after all I've applied for a job at splash damage an i need to know Doom3 a lil better for what i'll be working on.

Will need to wait until tonite though given I'm working on something else right now. I'm trying to think of how unscripted that could possibly be, because surely you need to script the attachment and everything?

While the weight and such would easily lift based on the physics engine and fling the buggy into the next county; you still need alot of scripting to set everything up, no? you can't just create an object and it automatically determins weight... can you?

Hmm, actually that's not a bad idea. Making a material engine capable of calculating weight based on what material it is... hmm
:: runs off to work more on his own project ::

Forgive me if something similar was already posted, I skimmed most of the thread.

If the original point of this discussion was to compare the guts of both engines, why has there really only been a discussion on the art? Well there was talk about the physics and real-time lighting too. But really all the textures, shaders, etc are more art than programming. And yes I know shaders are programmed however HLSL is a very simple language, so you really need an artist with programming skills to make good looking shaders. And I know the engine has to be able to handle the art, however you guys are still looking too superficial when it comes to the graphics.

Dont any of you remember how horrible Doom 3 ran on even a top-end machine? That should be a sign right there that the engine doesnt hold up to HL2. HL2 was able to run on much lower-end machines, plus it ran a lot faster than Doom 3 did on top-end machines. That means from a programming point of view, Doom 3 is horribly inefficient.

Really I think both engines can handle about the same graphics. But the art is really the main difference on a superficial level, HL2 artists are just better. But when you get into the guts, HL2 is far more efficient than Doom 3 which means it wins in my opinion.