there are two games on Xbox: Riddick and Doom3 that look like the PC Doom3 version. and it was amazing to experience such graphics on a console (just got an Xbox). of course, these two games could be the only exception. my question is how close is the two versions of Doom3 for both Xbox and PC, respectively?
Doom3 graphics on Xbox/PC
- Thread starter Legend
- Start date
They are somewhat comparable to Doom 3 on the PC. They resolution is much lower and so is the detail. I think the Xbox version of Doom 3 uses less lights but I can be mistaken afterall I have not followed the development of th egame for at least four months. Framerate is also probably a lot less than what a good PC can handle at higher resolutions.
These games are good graphically, but they look muhc better on the good PC's due to the brute horsepower usually.
These games are good graphically, but they look muhc better on the good PC's due to the brute horsepower usually.
Iron Tiger
Regular
Vicarious Visions (the guys behind the port) have said they were able to keep all the effects intact, though they had to do some of them differently. They also had to rework and truncate some of the levels because of the Xbox's incredibly restrictive amount of RAM. But I think they've done a remarkable job with the game, nonetheless. They managed to get 2 player co-op in, and altered the story and cutscenes a bit to work in the second player. The lighting looks pretty good, and even though the texture resolution is terrible, the game still looks very much like Doom 3, and appears to be smooth enough to be enjoyable (well, as enjoyable as a game like Doom 3 can be).
Co-op would have been a nice option for the PC version.
The Xbox version of Doom 3 runs with a highly modified engine, since the original was a pure CPU hog and seeing the Xbox CPU being a mere Celeron Mobile 733, VV had to work a lot on the engine.
I remenber that VV wanted to use the Vertex Shader to render the volume shadow, I don't know if they could implement it or not, though.
Bump Mapping makes texels more apparent, that's why people were complaining about "low-rez" textures.
And, yeah, I know you were kidding. But I had to defend one of the only positive thing of Doom 3.
I remenber that VV wanted to use the Vertex Shader to render the volume shadow, I don't know if they could implement it or not, though.
Most textures in Doom 3 were 256x256 (for the color and the normal map) and some were 512x512, and they all were quite varied and different to boot.incurable said:Which is quite an achievement, considering the texture quality of the original.
Bump Mapping makes texels more apparent, that's why people were complaining about "low-rez" textures.
And, yeah, I know you were kidding. But I had to defend one of the only positive thing of Doom 3.
Vysez said:
Really.... I didn't hear anything technical from VV... But it'd be my guess at what they had to do.
incurable said:
I wonder how low the res goes for the Cyberdemon. That thing used a 2kx2k map on PC. Then again, that level is really small. They could skimp on other things to make it closer to the PC res. And then there's the Sabaoth and Vagary (1kx1k)....
Overall, I think they did do a pretty awesome job. Even, the normal maps don't seem to show the same artifacting (comparing to medium quality on PC). Then again, it might be the low resolution hiding that? I thought medium looked horrid with the texture aliasing, but it seems it's not there in the xbox screenshots (just low res-ness).
Alstrong said:
Just wondering, isn't a 2kx2k map the max texture res current video cards can support? If so, couldn't they just get around it by putting multiple 2kx2k textures on a single character, like the original deus ex did?(I think it had like 5 256x256 texture maps per character)
I agree, VV did a fantastic job with this Xbox version of Doom 3.Alstrong said:
IIRC, nvidia cards can handle 4096x textures. I'm not sure about latest Ati cards.Fox5 said:
Of course they can, but why would they want textures higher than 2k on actual PCs? As I said, Doom 3, like HL² BTW, do a really good job with, mainly, textures of 512x512px.Fox5 said:
And the "problem", if we can call it like that, with the new games, unlike Deus EX for instance, is that each surface needs, at least, a color map, an height map, and a specular map making the amount of RAM an issue.
the xbox version of doom3 holds up pretty well, considering the limitations of the hardware it's running on. the differences i noticed were...
- lower texture detail
somewhat sloppier physics
no dynamic shadows on the flashlight or imp fireballs
hacked up and/or truncated levels
less hitching when firing a new weapon or going through doorways
no "coke bottle wobble" shader on the glass
BOOMEXPLODE
Regular
FPS style games always need really high resolution textures, because of the first person perspective, the player camera is always right up against everything and the individual texels become obvious. It's amazing that X-Box could do a decent port of the game, considering how outdated it's hardware is compared to the bleeding edge.
Riddlewire
Regular
I just got it last week.
I'm not gonna bother debating technical limitations with anyone. Ultimately, that's only important to people who want nothing more than to win an argument.
Here are the key questions:
Does it look good? Hell yes! F'n incredible!
Does it look like a high end PC game? Absolutely.
Are there any performance problems? Nope. Zero. Amazing framerate.
Does it look exactly like the PC version? No, it's running at a lower resolution.
Will anybody notice that while they're playing the game? Yes. Jerks who hate Microsoft for any and all reasons.
Is it a good game? Eh, it's ok. Not worth $50, though.
I'm not gonna bother debating technical limitations with anyone. Ultimately, that's only important to people who want nothing more than to win an argument.
Here are the key questions:
Does it look good? Hell yes! F'n incredible!
Does it look like a high end PC game? Absolutely.
Are there any performance problems? Nope. Zero. Amazing framerate.
Does it look exactly like the PC version? No, it's running at a lower resolution.
Will anybody notice that while they're playing the game? Yes. Jerks who hate Microsoft for any and all reasons.
Is it a good game? Eh, it's ok. Not worth $50, though.
mckmas8808
Legend
This is very important to understand. See Sony said that when the PS1 was released the technology was 6 years behind the IBM 86 model, when the PS2 was released the technology was 3 years behind the IBM 86 model, and they said when the PS3 will be released the technology should be the same if not a few months ahead of the future IBM 86.
Considering the Xbox can make games like Doom3 and possibly Half-Life 2 looks comparable to current PC tech, next-gen systems should blow the PC out of the water. The console technology has fully caught up. Never has a console system 3 years old have been able to reproduce a great PC game like now.
We have great days ahead of us guys. Great days.
________
Buy easy vape
Considering the Xbox can make games like Doom3 and possibly Half-Life 2 looks comparable to current PC tech, next-gen systems should blow the PC out of the water. The console technology has fully caught up. Never has a console system 3 years old have been able to reproduce a great PC game like now.
We have great days ahead of us guys. Great days.
________
Buy easy vape
Last edited by a moderator:
mckmas8808 said:This is very important to understand. See Sony said that when the PS1 was released the technology was 6 years behind the IBM 86 model, when the PS2 was released the technology was 3 years behind the IBM 86 model, and they said when the PS3 will be released the technology should be the same if not a few months ahead of the future IBM 86.
Considering the Xbox can make games like Doom3 and possibly Half-Life 2 looks comparable to current PC tech, next-gen systems should blow the PC out of the water. The console technology has fully caught up. Never has a console system 3 years old have been able to reproduce a great PC game like now.
We have great days ahead of us guys. Great days.
Actually, Sony just said that the clock speed of the PS1 CPU was 6 years behind the top x86 at the time of release, and that PS2 CPU was 3 years behind at the time. Just clockspeed.
Even if consoles take over the clockspeed crown, that doesn't mean much. It's just clockspeed.
Refreshment
Regular
Well as obvious as this is, as the systems get more powerful you can add more details. Its up to a point that people have a hard time noting small effects.
For example i havent seen "self shadowing" in the console version. The great thing about Doom 3 and its engine are the amazing lighting effects, wich are absent in the console version. Still is amazing watching the game run on XBOX.
They also cut the introductiory map, IIRC
For example i havent seen "self shadowing" in the console version. The great thing about Doom 3 and its engine are the amazing lighting effects, wich are absent in the console version. Still is amazing watching the game run on XBOX.
They also cut the introductiory map, IIRC
