Yes, another Doom 3 vs UT2K3 thread

[Fredrik]

vahagn said:

err, we're on Mars in this game, not Earth... maybe there's less gravity therefore the zombie would fly backwards after getting blasted.

Gravity doesn't effect horizontal motion.

dsm said:

It can prevent you from being thrown backwards by considerably reducing the kickback.

First you'd have to explain how to get the weapon to fire bullets that either fly at a hundred times the speed of sound (well that wouldn't work anyway as they'd go straight through anything they'd hit unless the air friction'd vaporize them first) OR weigh several kilos (wouldn't be a personal close-combat weapon then, would it?). And even then, you couldn't invent a hand-held device that would be able to reduce such a force significantly.

[Joe Doom]

Do you think someone would be knocked back hard if they got shot while wearing body armor?

[Krezy Man]

It would hurt like hell, but I'm sure the force of the round wouldn't "knock" anyone back more than a couple of steps...

[Lengis]

dsm said:

Earth to Shaviro, Earth to Shaviro (:-P), Doom 3 takes place in the future! You won't have any idea whether a shotgun works exactly like a modern shotgun or if its a lot more advanced in its firing system so that it's much more powerful.

We all played Doom 1 man. The shotgun in that game seemed pretty standard to me. *rolleyes*

[Fredrik]

And Doom 1 has realistic physics!

[Kinsie]

Meanwhile, back on topic...

Alientank said:

1) Does UT2K3 have better graphics. What I mean by that is more detailed environments then Doom 3 as well as models.

2) Do we know if Doom 3 has a physics engine yet? I heard mention that there would be one.

3) Does UT2K3 have the shadowing, bumpmapping and lighting effects that Doom 3 has?

UT uses less graphical effects so it can handle more action on the screen. Doom 3 uses tenser, cramped "survival-horror" style action, so they can afford to do more with the graphics. Mind you, UT2003 has some nice graphics, especially in some of the usermaps.

[dsm]

Lengis said:

We all played Doom 1 man. The shotgun in that game seemed pretty standard to me. *rolleyes*

Standard for a game, too powerful compared to real life shotties *rollseyes*
I'm talking about games compared to real life mate, not Doom compared to other games.

[chilvence]

Hm. Its gonna be no good if the shotgun in Doom 3 isnt at least a little "performance enhanced", like someone else said it just feels good to watch zombies fly backwards when theyre hit. Especially if they flip over handrails or thud in to walls :)

If the mainstay weapon (shotgun) doesnt do anything more that make zombies fall at their feet then why even bother having a physics engine?

About body armor, If you get hit wearing stuff like kevlar which is quite thin and close to the skin I guess it hurts. But what about the 50 kilo rigid steel waistcoats that Doom marines wear? Surely youd just hear a loud clang and feel nothing more that a dull thud if you got shot.

[dsm]

chilvence said:

Hm. Its gonna be no good if the shotgun in Doom 3 isnt at least a little "performance enhanced", like someone else said it just feels good to watch zombies fly backwards when theyre hit. Especially if they flip over handrails or thud in to walls :)

If the mainstay weapon (shotgun) doesnt do anything more that make zombies fall at their feet then why even bother having a physics engine?

...Which has pretty much been my point throughout this entire thread (but I have a way of getting into stupid discussion that lead me away from the actual topic, sorry everyone), well said chilvence. I don't give a shit about whether it's realistic or not.

Pretty much every shotgun in any game after Doom lost that precious flavour that the original Doom shotgun had because they didn't really seem to have the powerful effect of hurling enemies back. Let's see this return in Doom 3. Realistic or not, it greatly enhances the feel of the shotgun and makes it one of the coolest weapons to use.