But at this point we don't have enough info to say that one engine is "better" than the other. We will probably see how well Valve can coax their engine into producing similar situations at different points in Halflife 2, and surely there will be Doom III engine licensees who will create games with a slightly (for lack of a better word) happier feel. Our initial impression of Doom III wasn't that it was any less real or vivid (we still got that warm, squishy, HD feeling inside), but that it was real in a dark, dirty, and atmospheric way. So far, the scenes we've seen rendered with Source show us that the engine is very good at producing crisp, clear images. Clean like listening to an undistorted guitar after hearing some intensely heavy rock, or the feeling of looking at an HDTV next to an old UHF box. We've only got a test room and a sandy CS level to test the Source on, so we really haven't seen all that it has to offer, but our first impression of the engine is that it is very "clean".
In taking a look at the source engine test level supplied with CS:Source Beta, one of the first things we noticed was a difference in feeling between Source and id Software's latest engine. The opening of the Video Stress Test benchmark Finally, the crux of the matter, what do our observations reveal about the upcoming Halflife 2 title? Next, there's Counterstrike and how that franchise fits into the equation. First, there's the fact that the game is based on the Source engine and has a built in graphics stress test to push hardware to its limits and beyond. There are really three important components to address when looking at the beta version of Counterstrike: Source. Before we take a look at the numbers, we have to know what we are dealing with.
0 kommentar(er)
